Arxiv:1902.03905V2 [Astro-Ph.HE] 1 Mar 2019

Multimessenger Research before GW170817 Giuseppina Modestino∗ INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044, Frascati (Roma) Italy (Dated: March 4, 2019) Linking the previous research that occurred over the last decades, I will try to provide some objective elements to evaluate the innovation of the joint observation of GW170817 and GRB 170817A and their occurrence detection, in light of preceding experiences regarding the experimental research of association between γ-ray bursts (GRBs) and gravitational waves (GWs). Without debating about the phenomenological properties of astrophysical events, I propose a comparison between that result and the previous experimental research by the interferometer GW community, using a fundamental energy emission law, and including about fifteen years of accredited results regarding coincident detection. From the present review, an intense and old pre-existing activity in the field of multimessenger observations emerges giving a first interesting fact. The widespread opinion that joint detection of GW170817 and GRB 170817A has opened a new method in astrophysics does not find a robust reason. Moreover, some critical points highlight. In the past, applying the same multimessenger method, numerous measures have been taken towards much brighter and much closer sources. Then, it would have been plausible to see joint signals even taking into account a worse sensitivity of the instruments of the time. At current time, there is only one event associated to a subthreshold GRB, compared to a long list of candidate events that would have been much more revealing. If these inconsistencies are admissible enough to lead to a claim, then the question arises about the interpretation of the long previous measurements carried out applying the same multimessenger observation method but without positive responses. PACS numbers: 04.80.Nn, 95.55.Ym, 98.70.Rz I. INTRODUCTION by all telescopes, as noticed by Tarnopolski [2015], this dis- tinction is one of the main topics for the attribution of the GW170817 event to the merger of an NS-NS binary system. Regarding GW170817 by LIGO Scientific Collaboration Even if any different progenitors may be in the case of black and Virgo Collaboration, and GRB 170817A by Fermi GRB hole engine or millisecond-magnetar models for the produc- Monitor, the joint detection (Abbott et al: [2017a, 2017b, tion of GRBs, central engines may provide an unique theme 2017c, 2017d, 2017e]; Arcavi et al: [2017]; Goldstein et al: between many classes of extremely luminous transient, from [2017]; Savchenko et al:,[2017]; Kilpatrick et al:,[2017]; luminous supernovae to long and short GRBs (Levan [2016], Tanvir et al:,[2017]; Pan et al: [2017]; Lipunov, et al:,[2017]) Mereghetti [2008], van Putten [2004]). In that sense, dated has been greeted as the opening of a new scientific era, the back to the year 1968, the article ”Prompt gamma rays and multimessenger astronomy, meaning the search for GW sig- X rays from supernovae” (Colgate [1968]) can be reported as nals and associated strong EM emissions as GRBs are. The an historical example of interpretation as multifaceted phe- claim was accompanied by a particular emphasis underlying nomenon. GRBs were discovered between 1969 July and novelty of the GW170817, such as to think that it is the result 1972 July using four widely separated Vela spacecraft (Klebe- of a completely innovative observational method in the scien- sadel [1973]). At first, the search was aimed to detect EM tific panorama of GW research. Really, supernovae, magne- fluxes near the times of appearance of supernovae. Subse- tars and merger of binary compact systems like neutron star quently, numerous mainly satellite telescopes were put into (NS) or black hole (BH) are always been considered sources operation, with the precise scientific objective of detecting for GW as well as for electromagnetic (EM) emission in a GRBs and interpreting their nature, and the experiments for very wide frequency spectrum from highest γ burst to X-ray, the research of GWs have always referred to them, based on arXiv:1902.03905v2 [astro-ph.HE] 1 Mar 2019 optical, infrared and soon on, so much that it is impossible to the fundamental hypothesis that GRBs and GWs have com- fully cite scientific references to justify this paradigm. (Any- mon origins (Fuller & Shi [1998], Fryer et al: [2001], van way, from the ideological and historical point of view, in the Putten [2001]). The aim of this review is to examine the ob- introduction in Abbott et al: [2017b], a very large list of quotes servations of GW170817 and GRB 170817A, taking into the can be found). It is widely believed that two time categories account the preexisting GW research investigating about the identify two types of progenitors, being long bursts (> 2s) multiwavelength signals, trying to highlight as much as pos- attributed to supernova explosions, while short GRBs to the sible the well documented experimental activity related to the fusion of two compact objects such as NS-NS or NS-BH. Al- detection of EM transients understood as signatures extreme though the bimodal time distribution has not been confirmed cosmological phenomena. In the sectionII, the initial GW experimental activity aimed at GRB correlation research will be reported. That activity began at the end of the nineties of the past century, by the resonant bars (Coccia [1998]) as de- ∗Electronic address: [email protected] 2 tectors of GWs, able to monitor the Milky Way with the ap- A. Resonant GW detectors propriate sensitivity according to the most accredited models (Misner et al: [1973]). Then, in Sect.III, the activity of GW Basically, resonant detectors are metallic bars - typically interferometer detectors will be reported. The joint GRB and aluminium - of mass M and length L, that are lengthened by a GW observations carried out both using statistical technique quantity ∆L for a GW signal carrying an energy Es. Compu- analyzing until up thousand events (Sect.III A), both dedi- tation of the GW strain amplitude h from the energy signal Es cating special investigation to some special event or source requires a model for the signal shape. Conventionally, a short (Sect.III B). In Sect.III C, taking into consideration three fun- pulse is considered with a flat spectrum on the resonance re- damental aspects of multimessenger astronomy, the distance gion and on equivalent bandwidth ∆ν. Based on the so called to the source, GW detectors sensitivity, and EM luminosity, thermo-acoustic effect, the bar excitation mechanism is essen- a model-independent term of comparison between the various tially described by the following formula (Pizzella [1997], As- observations will be defined. In the Sect.IV, the comparison tone [2006]) will be shown between the previous measurements and the r GW170817 current evaluation, relatively applying isotropic ∆L L Es h ≈ = 2 (1) energy emission law (Abbott et al: [2017e]) and the term just L τgv M defined. where v is the sound velocity in the specific metallic medium, and h is the minimum discernible amplitude (SNR=1) for a GW signal with time duration τg ∼ 1=∆ν. Assuming Tn (in kelvin units) as the temperature innovation for burst detection II. MULTIMESSENGER ASTRONOMY AND INITIAL after optimum filtering for short signals, the signal energy is GRAVITATIONAL WAVE EXPERIMENTS normally expressed as follows E = kT (2) The GW experiments started with Weber ([2017]). His con- s n troversial but ingenious activity has inspired many groups to where k is the Boltzmann constant. Belonging to IGEC (In- undertake experimentation, especially using resonant detec- ternational Gravitational Event Collaboration, Allen [2000], tors (Amaldi et al: [1977, 1989]; Astone et al: [1993, 1997]; Astone et al: [2007, 2010]), an international network of GW Mauceli et al: [1996]; Heng et al: [1996]; Allen et al: detectors, EXPLORER and NAUTILUS were long-lived de- [2000]). These kind of GW antennas produced an intense vices as resonant bars suitable for GW experimental research, experimental activity (Pizzella [2016]) of which a significant since for more than twenty, they represented reliable exper- part was dedicated to the search for correlations between imental apparata able to observe galactic GW signal gener- astrophysical EM transients and pulses from GW detectors. ated by the conversion of about 0:001 M . Having been First of all there was a correlation study (Weber & Radak made by Roma group ROG (Ricerca Onde Gravitazionali), [1996]) between pulses recorded by an aluminium cylindrical EXPLORER operated at CERN (Conseil Européen pour la bar between 1991 and 1992, and 80 GRB triggers from cat- Recherche Nucléaire) since 1990, and NAUTILUS operated alog of BATSE (Burst and Transient Source Experiment on in LNF (Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati) of INFN (Istituto NASA’s Compton Gamma Ray Observatory-CGRO), a very Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Italy) from 1995 until 2016, revolutionary detector that was launched on 1991 (Paciesas both using an aluminum bar of 2300 kg, a capacitive trans- et al: [1999]). Aware that the hypotheses on the GRB were ducer and a SQUID (Superconductive Quantum Interference consistent with the collision models BH-NS and NS-NS, they Device) amplifier. Very similar to described devices there presented the measurements performed with a bar of 3600 kg, was also AURIGA (Antenna Ultracriogenica Risonante per showing compatibility with the gravitational radiation emitted l’indagine Gravitazionale Astronomica) (Prodi et al: [1998]), by 1M at a distance of 1.5 Mpc. These measures have not built by another Italian research group of INFN, and operat- been overly quoted by the scientific community, probably as ing for a very long period at Legnaro (Padua, Italy). That result of the controversial issues raised by Weber that put into were cryogenic detectors, so (as Eq.2 can explain), the most crisis the current model of GW detection at the end of the sensitive GW detectors among resonant bars.

Load more