Soft X-ray results from the Wisconsin experiment on OSO-8

Bunner, A. N.

doi:10.1086/155902

Cited by 28 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The internal background of the three detector of the Wisconsin experiment on board OSO-8. 8 The CH4 filled gas proportional counter shows a larger residual background with respect to Ne-CO2 filled detector. This is unexpected because of its smaller number of electrons per molecule.…”

Section: The Very Difficult Measurement Of Sgrb2: a Faint Extended Momentioning

confidence: 94%

The background of the gas pixel detector and its impact on imaging X-ray polarimetry

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The background of the Gas Pixel Detector is expected to be negligible for polarimetry of point sources due to the intrinsic low atomic number and density of the He-DME mixtures and to its imaging properties. Also the background for extended sources is expected to be negligible at least down to the smallest flux for sensitive polarimetry in a reasonable observing time. However in the spatial distribution of the background in a laboratory environment we observed an accumulation on the edges of the sensitive plane due to the presence of the nearby cell walls. We recently developed gas pixel detectors with a new design of the gas cell having a larger distance of the walls from the sensitive plane. In this paper we compare the spatial distribution of the measured background for the two design and their residual systematics. Also the impact of the background in the case of SgrB2 a faint extended source in the galactic center region is evaluated.

show abstract

Section: The Very Difficult Measurement Of Sgrb2: a Faint Extended Momentioning

confidence: 94%

The background of the gas pixel detector and its impact on imaging X-ray polarimetry

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This question is answered in section 5.1.2. Here we just write that the background is still about 30 times smaller with respect to the expected source rate as based on estimates from Bunner (1978). The image of Sgr B2 on the detector active area is shown in the collage of fig.…”

Section: Scattering In Aspherical Situationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CH 4 (Bunner (1978)) (c/s) (c/s) (c/s) (c/s) Point-like 24" HEW 2 10 −3 -200 5 10 −12 5.5 10 −7 5.6 10 −6 (407 µm) (4.8 nCrab) (49 nCrab) SgrB2…”

Section: The Background Of Xipementioning

confidence: 99%

XIPE: the x-ray imaging polarimetry explorer

Soffitta¹,

Bellazzini²,

Bozzo³

et al. 2016

Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Ultraviolet to Gamma Ray

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

XIPE, the X-ray Imaging Polarimetry Explorer, is a mission dedicated to X-ray Astronomy. At the time of writing XIPE is in a competitive phase A as fourth medium size mission of ESA (M4). It promises to reopen the polarimetry window in high energy Astrophysics after more than 4 decades thanks to a detector that efficiently exploits the photoelectric effect and to X-ray optics with large effective area. XIPE uniqueness is time-spectrallyspatially-resolved X-ray polarimetry as a breakthrough in high energy astrophysics and fundamental physics. Indeed the payload consists of three Gas Pixel Detectors at the focus of three X-ray optics with a total effective area larger than one XMM mirror but with a low weight. The payload is compatible with the fairing of the Vega launcher. XIPE is designed as an observatory for X-ray astronomers with 75 % of the time dedicated to a Guest Observer competitive program and it is organized as a consortium across Europe with main contributions from

show abstract

“…The modulation factors calculated by the simulation, not including diffusion, do not, therefore, sensibly deteriorate. In contrast to the Bragg stage, and also to the Thomson stage of SXRP, a microgap polarimeter is not background-limited at low source flux, as the particle background is negligible because of the neon-based mixture [35]. Also, a microgap rejects charged particle background very efficiently due to segmentation of the anode.…”

Section: Expected Sensitivitymentioning

confidence: 99%