Revealing the Jet Structure of GRB 030329 with High-Resolution Multicolor Photometry

Gorosabel, J.; Castro-Tirado, A. J.; Ramírez-Ruiz, E.; Granot, Jonathan; Caon, N.; Cairós, L. M.; Rubio-Herrera, E.; Guziy, S.; Postigo, A. de Ugarte; Jelínek, M.

doi:10.1086/503831

Cited by 22 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(65 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since most of these observations were obtained at the same telescope, and have been reduced in the same way against the same local standards, we do not believe this is purely an instrumental effect. Although the statistical significance is rather low in our lightcurve, we note that similar jittering has been observed previously in GRBs, both in long GRBs (e.g., Gorosabel et al 2006;Matheson et al 2003) and in short GRBs (Hjorth et al 2007), and can be interpreted in terms of variations in the surrounding circumburst medium or as due to prolonged activity of the central engine. Similar explanations can thus be put forward also for this XRF.…”

Section: Wiggles Bumps Humps and Jittersupporting

confidence: 87%

The nature of the X-ray flash of August 24 2005

Sollerman

Fynbo

Gorosabel

et al. 2007

A&A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims. Our aim is to investigate the nature of the X-Ray Flash (XRF) of August 24, 2005. Methods. We present comprehensive photometric R-band observations of the fading optical afterglow of XRF 050824, from 11 min to 104 days after the burst. In addition we present observations taken during the first day in the BRIK bands and two epochs of spectroscopy. We also analyse available X-ray data. Results. The R-band lightcurve of the afterglow resembles the lightcurves of long duration Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs), i.e., a powerlaw, albeit with a rather shallow slope of α = 0.6 (F ν ∝ t −α ). Our late R-band images reveal the host galaxy. The rest-frame B-band luminosity is ∼0.5 L * . The star-formation rate as determined from the [O II] emission line is ∼1.8 M yr −1 . When accounting for the host contribution, the slope is α = 0.65 ± 0.01 and a break in the lightcurve is suggested. A potential lightcurve bump at 2 weeks can be interpreted as a supernova only if this is a supernova with a fast rise and a fast decay. However, the overall fit still shows excess scatter in the lightcurve in the form of wiggles and bumps. The flat lightcurves in the optical and X-rays could be explained by a continuous energy injection scenario, with an on-axis viewing angle and a wide jet opening angle (θ j > ∼ 10• ). If the energy injections are episodic this could potentially help explain the bumps and wiggles. Spectroscopy of the afterglow gives a redshift of z = 0.828 ± 0.005 from both absorption and emission lines. The spectral energy distribution (SED) of the afterglow has a power-law (F ν ∝ ν −β ) shape with slope β = 0.56 ± 0.04. This can be compared to the X-ray spectral index which is β X = 1.0 ± 0.1. The curvature of the SED constrains the dust reddening towards the burst to A v < 0.5 mag.

show abstract

Section: Wiggles Bumps Humps and Jittersupporting

confidence: 87%

The nature of the X-ray flash of August 24 2005

Sollerman

Fynbo

Gorosabel

et al. 2007

A&A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For GRB 030329, we derive E k;iso (t X ) % 5 ; 10 52 À1 X;À2 ergs. This estimate is comparable to that from the broadband spectrum at t % 10 days (E k;iso $ 5 ; 10 52 ergs for a uniform density and $10 52 ergs for a wind; Granot et al 2005), assuming negligible lateral expansion of the jet (Gorosabel et al 2006). For rapid lateral expansion, the inferred value of E k;iso (10 days) is lower ($1:6 ; 10 51 Y5 ; 10 51 ergs; Berger et al 2003;Granot et al 2005), but should correspond to a similar E k,iso before the jet break time (t j % 0:5 days) for a comparable initial half-opening angle.…”

Section: Kinetic Energy Contentsupporting

confidence: 67%

“…Finally, in Figure 23, we compare the collimation-corrected total emitted energy in -ray (E ) and supernova kinetic energy estimates (E k ) of these four SN-GRB events with regular GRBs and other broad-lined (1998bw-like) SNe without GRBs. For GRB 030329, we used the jet angle estimate of j $ 0:083Y0.14 rad (Gorosabel et al 2006). For the other three events, the isotropicequivalent emitted energy, E ,iso , was used as an upper limit, as there was no observational evidence of jet breaks for these events.…”

Section: Energy Inventory: Subrelativistic Formmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prompt and Afterglow Emission Properties of Gamma-Ray Bursts with Spectroscopically Identified Supernovae

Kaneko¹,

Ramirez-Ruiz²,

Granot³

et al. 2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a detailed spectral analysis of the prompt and afterglow emission of four nearby long-soft gamma-ray bursts (GRBs 980425, 030329, 031203, and 060218) that were spectroscopically found to be associated with Type Ic supernovae and compare them to the general GRB population. For each event, we investigate the spectral and luminosity evolution and estimate the total energy budget based on broadband observations. The observational inventory for these events has become rich enough to allow estimates of their energy content in relativistic and subrelativistic form. The result is a global portrait of the effects of the physical processes responsible for producing long-soft GRBs. In particular, we find that the values of the energy released in mildly relativistic outflows appears to have a significantly smaller scatter than those found in highly relativistic ejecta. This is consistent with a picture in which the energy released inside the progenitor star is roughly standard, while the fraction of that energy that ends up in highly relativistic ejecta outside the star can vary dramatically between different events.

show abstract

“…In the pre-Swift era, several cases of jet break have been observed in the optical band at several days after the GRB trigger (e.g., Rhoads 1999;Sari et al 1999;Halpern et al 2000;Huang et al 2000;Bloom et al 2001;Frail et al 2001;Jaunsen et al 2001;Wei & Lu 2002;Wu et al 2004;Gao & Wei 2005;Panaitescu 2005a;Starling et al 2005;Yonetoku et al 2005;Gorosabel et al 2006;Zeh et al 2006;Liang et al 2008). However, the achromatic behavior of the break, a prediction of the jet model, could not be confirmed with the optical data only.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gamma-Ray Burst Jet Breaks Revisited

Wang

Zhang

Liang

et al. 2018

ApJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gamma-ray Burst (GRB) collimation has been inferred with the observations of achromatic steepening in GRB light curves, known as jet breaks. Identifying a jet break from a GRB afterglow light curve allows a measurement of the jet opening angle and true energetics of GRBs. In this paper, we re-investigate this problem using a large sample of GRBs that have an optical jet break that is consistent with being achromatic in the X-ray band. Our sample includes 99 GRBs from 1997 February to 2015 March that have optical and, for Swift GRBs, X-ray light curves that are consistent with the jet break interpretation. Out of the 99 GRBs we have studied, 55 GRBs are found to have temporal and spectral behaviors both before and after the break, consistent with the theoretical predictions of the jet break models, respectively. These include 53 long/soft (Type II) and 2 short/hard (Type I) GRBs. Only 1 GRB is classified as the candidate of a jet break with energy injection. Another 41 and 3 GRBs are classified as the candidates with the lower and upper limits of the jet break time, respectively. Most jet breaks occur at 90 ks, with a typical opening angle θ j =(2.5 ± 1.0)°. This gives a typical beaming correction factor-f 1000for Type II GRBs, suggesting an even higher total GRB event rate density in the universe. Both isotropic and jetcorrected energies have a wide span in their distributions: log(E γ,iso /erg)=53.11 with σ=0.84; log(E K,iso /erg)=54.82 with σ=0.56; log(E γ /erg)=49.54 with σ=1.29; and log(E K /erg)=51.33 with σ=0.58. We also investigate several empirical correlations (Amati, Frail, Ghirlanda, and Liang-Zhang) previously discussed in the literature. We find that in general most of these relations are less tight than before. The existence of early jet breaks and hence small opening angle jets, which were detected in the Swfit era, is most likely the source of scatter. If one limits the sample to jet breaks later than 10 4 s, the Liang-Zhang relation remains tight and the Ghirlanda relation still exists. These relations are derived from Type II GRBs, and Type I GRBs usually deviate from them.

show abstract

Revealing the Jet Structure of GRB 030329 with High-Resolution Multicolor Photometry

Cited by 22 publications

References 46 publications

The nature of the X-ray flash of August 24 2005

The nature of the X-ray flash of August 24 2005

Prompt and Afterglow Emission Properties of Gamma-Ray Bursts with Spectroscopically Identified Supernovae

Gamma-Ray Burst Jet Breaks Revisited

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About