1 / 26

GROND observations of GRB Afterglows

GROND observations of GRB Afterglows. Color changes in afterglow light curves Dark bursts High-z perspectives. Jochen Greiner Max-Planck-Institute for extraterrestrial Physics Garching, Germany. GROND = GR B O ptical/ N IR D etector. r. g. z. i. H. K. J.

murielbrown
Download Presentation

GROND observations of GRB Afterglows

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GROND observations of GRB Afterglows Color changes in afterglow light curves Dark bursts High-z perspectives Jochen GreinerMax-Planck-Institute for extraterrestrial Physics Garching, Germany

  2. GROND=GRBOptical/NIRDetector r g z i H K J Imaging in 7 channels simultaneously

  3. GROND: General Design • 7 bands: Sloan g’, r’, i’, z’ and J, H, K One detector for one filter band (no movable filters!) 3 HAWAII 1K*1K Arrays + 4 E2V 2K*2K CCDs • Field-of-view: Visual: 5.4´x5.4´ (0.16´´/pixel) NIR: 10´x10´ (0.59´´/pixel) • Dichroics tuned to minimize intrinsic polarization effects • 2 shutters, i.e. g’r’ and i’z’ pairs of CCDs have same exposure • Combined telescope and intrinsic mirror (K-band) dithering • Sensitivity: 4 min 1 hr gr 21.5 mag 24.5 mag iz 20.5 mag 23.5 mag J/H/K (AB) 18.5/17.5/16.5 mag 21.5/20.5/19.5 mag

  4. GROND @ 2.2m MPI/ESO telescope History: First light: Apr 30, 2007 First GRB: May 21, 2007 Photometric calibration: Jul 2007 Routine observations: since Sep 2007 fastest response time: 2 min GROND

  5. 1. Color changes in GRB light curves GRB 070802: Sum of multiple flares dominates total flux: mimics spectral break because flares are harder than AG emission GRB 080129: flare of 3 mag amplitude and 20 min duration: SEDs on few minutes timescale shows changes throughout the flare GRB 080913B: two-component jet seen on-axis, with different α, ß, p GRB 080710: two-component jet seen off-axis

  6. GRB 070802: flares Krühler et al. 2008 Decay steeper after flares + each following flare has even steeper decay  thus no simple energy ejection Flares have harder emission than afterglow if not resolved, looks like spectral break

  7. Changing SEDs GRB 080129 Greiner et al. 2009 • spectral changes clearly visible, down to timescales of ~5 min • Likely cause: Residual collision a la Li & Waxman (2008)

  8. Two GRBs with 2-component jets… Krühler et al. 2009 Filgas et al. 2010 GRB 080710 GRB 080413B I II III IV

  9. …, but different SEDs GRB 080710 GRB 080413B Clear difference in spectral evolution, yet (nearly) similar interpretation: Two component jet viewed off-axis: fits light curve and SED; also consistent with low Eγiso and soft BAT spectrum (low Epeak) 2nd jet: Γo~50, θjet>10o Two component jet viewed on-axis: fits light curve and SED evolution(no cooling break due to flattening);jets have different α, ß, p2nd jet: Γo~20, θjet>9o

  10. 2. The “dark burst” issue Potential causes for optical darkness: Intrinsically faint (e.g. Fynbo et al. 2001) High redshift (e.g. Lamb & Reichart 2000) Large extinction (e.g. Rhoads 1999, Fynbo et al. 2001) Dark bursts: ßox < 0.5 Jakobsson et al. 2004…2009

  11. DARK BURSTS pre-Swift “dark” GRBs vs. UVOT vs. GROND Figure adapted fromFox et al. 2004 UVOT probes ~5 mag deeper at earlier times; yet large fraction of “dark” bursts high-z, extinction UVOT/Swift          GROND at the 2.2m MPI/ESO telescope 4 min GROND probes another ~2 mag deeper, +NIR 10 min 1 hr First exposure starts within 2-10 min

  12. The sample Selection criterion: Swift/XRT detection 20 GRBs with GROND start-of-observation within 30 min 2 not detected with GROND: GRB 090429B (but Gemini; z~9.3 candidate (Tanvir talk) ) GRB 080915 (very faint X-ray afterglow, but consistent with picture as described in the following) GROND limit in 2 ks

  13. Data handling • All bursts: fit simultaneous Swift/XRT and GROND SED  determine ßo, ßx, AV • z-distribution (all 18 have z) • AV-distribution Completeness level: 18/20 ≡ 90%

  14. XRT-GROND SEDs KHJ zirg GRB 080710 Only 1 GRB with X-ray and optical/NIR on same powl ßox sensitive to extinction AV AND SED shape ßox R band 1 keV GRB 080129 GRB 070802

  15. 2 examples with flat SEDs … both have nearly ßox ~ 0: AV ~ 1.2 z=6.7 GRB 080805 GRB 080913

  16. Dark bursts in our sample 5 dark bursts≡ 25%(with another 4 just at borderline) Consistent with earlier numbers

  17. SED slope distribution Majority has break, but break energy not well defined Break is consistent with 0.5 in all but 1 case Implies optical brightness up to ~4 mag fainter than without break, if break energy near 0.1 keV

  18. Intrinsic AV distribution in GRBs We see substantially more afterglows with solid AV detection 25% of GRBs have AV~0.5 mag; ~10% have AV > 1 mag Within statistics similar to AV distribution of core-collapse SN-IIP 10% (Kann et al. 2009) 25%

  19. Dark bursts revealed Optical darkness well explained by combination of • up to 4 mag due to break between X-ray and optical SED • combination of moderate redshift and moderate AV “Dark” bursts are not a reservoir of high-z bursts

  20. Redshift distribution Has completeness of 95% Is flatter than previous distributions (which had smaller completeness levels) Statistics not yet great

  21. The 2 non-detected GRBs Extrapolating X-ray spectrum with Δß=0.5, and comparing with GROND upper limits: • GRB 080915  consistent with even low z and AV=0 • GRB 090429B  consistent with z>6 & AV=0, or z~5 & AV~1 Effectively not only 18 detected, but all GRBs consistent with above picture GRB 090429B

  22. GRBs at redshift >5 060522 5.11071025 5.2060927 5.47050814 5.77050904 6.29080913 6.7090423 8.2 3. High-z capabilities of GROND GROND statistics (May 2007 - Apr 2010): 181 GRBs (south of δ=+30o) observed out of 258 95 detections out of 146 GRBs with XRT 31 with Ly-alpha affecting g’-band (z~2.5-3.5) 3 with 2175 Å bump (a la GRB 070802 @ z=2.45) 5 with (only) g’-band drop out (z=3.5-5) 2 high-z bursts (080913, 090423) But: Severe bias against z~4-6 bursts with moderate extinction Observed r’-band extinction

  23. z=10 z=13 GROND is sensitive up to z~13 7 filter bands cover Lyman-α for large z-range: 3<z<13 (assuming K-band detection)

  24. Example of GROND sensitivity 7 filter bands cover Lyman-α for large z-range: 3<z<13 GROND has proper z-band sensitivity to define drop-out for z~8 Advantage of separate detector per filter: can add sensibilization for spectral band: GROND@2.2m detector/filter is 4x more sensitive than FORS2@VLT  total efficiency only 4x less than FORS2, not 16 (8.22/2.22)

  25. Recognize ‘thermal’ transients 7 filter bands cover Lyman-α for large z-range: 3<z<13 GROND has proper z-band sensitivity to define drop-out for z~8 Allows to distinguish other types of transients, e.g. accretion-disk dominated galactic transients “GRB” 100331A likely galactic transient Only drawback: it’s only a 2m telescope…

  26. Summary Multi-color data allow spectral characterisation of flares/bumps/breaks in afterglow light curves Dark bursts: sample of 20 GRBs observed with GROND within 30 min has detection completeness of 90%  darkness due to (i) spectral break (~4 mag) (ii) combination of moderate AV and moderate z (1-5 mag) dark bursts are not a reservoir of high-z bursts! If GRB at z~8-13 are not substantially fainter than 080913/090423 (and δ< +30o) GROND is likely to detect those (crossing fingers for long life of Swift!)(GRB 090429 at z~9.3 (Tanvir talk) was ~1.5 mag fainter and missed) simulated GROND redshift error

More Related