Frbs in a (Largish) Nutshell
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FRBS IN A (LARGISH) NUTSHELL Ben Stappers Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics University of Manchester - with material from Petroff, Keane, Possenti, Thornton RADIO TRANSIENTS • Searches for dispersed single pulses found repeating bursts in PMPS data • RRATs – neutron stars with very sporadic detectable emission* • Also interested in highly dispersed single pulses; 2 possible examples • These searches then revealed an exciting new type of source! The “Lorimer burst” Lorimer, et al. (2007) DM = 375 cm-3 pc (15%) Keane, et al. (2012) DM = 746 cm-3 pc (70%) * McLaughlin, et al. (2006) A POPULATION OF FAST RADIO BURSTS AT PARKES. • Four highly-dispersed single pulses in 24% of the high-latitude survey -3 • DM = 944, 723, 1103, 553 cm pc • Only 3-6% of the measured DM can be explained by MW – even lower than LB & KB (15%,70%) • None have been observed to repeat in follow up observations of many 10’s of hours. FRB 110220 Thornton, Stappers et al 2013 ALSO SEEN AT ARECIBO & GBT(?) NOW FRB 121102 Spitler et al. 2014 • Galactic anticentre. (l=175,b=0.223) • DM (pc cm−3) 557.4 ± 2.0 • DMNE2001,max (pc cm−3) 188 4 POPULATION GROWING FRB 131104 - Ravi, Shannon, Jameson 2015 FRB011025 - Burke-Spoloar & Bannister 2014 DM = 780 cm−3 pc, 11xNE2001 DM = 790 cm−3 pc, 7xNE2001 FRB 140514 - Petroff et al 2015 +++ PKS bursts DM = 563 cm−3 pc, 16xNE2001 5 EXTRAGALACTIC? High DM values Scattering Scales close to ν-4 as expected Very precise cold plasma, ν-2, law. 6 SOME CURRENT NUMBERS from numbers compiled by Keane. 7 INFERRING DISTANCE FROM APPARENT DM see Walker talk • Can model free electron density as fn. of redshift, z * • Contributions from host, IGM, MW, and intervening galaxy (possibly) • Deal in terms of delay across the observing band – not traditional DM • How much dispersion from a host? • MW center maybe 700 cm-3 pc** • Likely much lower for source in an inclined galactic disk -3 • i = 60° DMhost ≈ 100 cm pc Total TIGM THost Dispersive Delay TMW Source Redshift ** Deneva, Cordes, & Lazio (2009) * Ioka (2003); Inoue (2004) DISPERSION CONTRIBUTIONS DMhost DMinter DMMW -3 ~ 700 cm pc DMinter(iinter) DMMW(l, b) rest frame DM host ? iinter i -3 DMhost(i=60°) ~ 100 cm pc z = 0.81; Dcm = 2.8 Gpc DMIGM(z) z = 0.60; Dcm = 2.2 Gpc ν ➔ν(1+z) RATES • If Thornton, et al 2013 • A) the intrinsic luminosity does not depend on distance and detectability depends only on luminosity. • B) in a Euclidean universe then… • The Lorimer burst had significantly higher fluence ~ 150 Jy ms and thus the rate of LBs should consequently be lower (225 sky-1 day-1) than measured here. • Within significant uncertainties the LB and these FRBs are consistent with being from the same population of A) + B) objects • Several experiments* (e.g. ATA, PALFA, VFASTR) have placed limits on this rate via non- detections: our result is consistent with the lack of detection by these searches. • The large amount of on sky time means It should come as no surprise that Parkes has detected most of the FRBs to date • Lots of caveats on the rates, small number of sources and recent developments suggest it may be a factor of 2-3 overestimated. • See more of this in discussions in subsequent talks….. WHERE ARE THEY IN THE SKY From Petroff. 11 SKY DISTRIBUTION unscattered local/isotropic- —excluded at 3.6 σ scattered Petroff et al. 2014 al. et Petroff cosmological —- disagreement at Burke-Spolaor & Bannister 2014 2.9 σ with low-lat rates FRB events are simulated and the effects of dispersive smearing, interstellar scattering, and Tsky are also taken into account to estimate the effective S/N with which the pulse would be detected at Parkes radio telescope. In [Bourke-Spolaor & Bannister 2014] isotropic local and cosmological distributions of sources are assumed 12 WHAT ABOUT THE PERYTONS? • Swept frequency pulses – perytons* - have been seen at Parkes • Has been suggested that Lorimer burst is a peryton • Perytons are symmetrical in width and widths are W ~ 20 ms pulses • “DM” of the perytons peaks at 375 cm-3 pc with range 200—420 cm-3 pc • Found in all beams simultaneously: indicative of sidelobe detection or near field source. • “kinks” seen in dispersion sweep, i.e. not a pure power law. • Our narrow widths, wide spread of DMs, remarkable adherence to predictions of cold plasma propagation – including scattering, single beam detections mean FRBs are not perytons • Low B values - 6 Perytons 0 FRBs! • Watch this space….. Parkes Bleien Obs. * Burke-Spolaor, et al. (2011); Bagchi et al.(2012), Saint-Hilaire, Benz, Monstein2 2014, Petroff et al. 2015 NON DETECTIONS LOFAR Pilot Survey VLA Fast Imaging Coenen et al 2014 Law et al 2014 150 MHz, flat spectrum 1.4 GHz, 166 hours New limits including LOFAR Single Station - Karastergiou et al. 2015 See also papers by Hassall et al 2013, Lorimer et al 2013 & Metzger et al. 2015 …. on limits and predictions. 14 CURRENT SUMMARY Given the so far observed parameters: • Burst of ≈ millisecond duration • Dispersion measure > 5-10 x the expected Milky Way contribution • Dispersion delay = ν -2 : in two cases ν -2.003±0.006 and ν-2.000±0.006 • When measurable, scattering time follows ν -4.8±0.4 and ν -4.0±0.4 • Peak Flux density at 1.4 GHz ≈ 1 Jansky • Rate ≈ 104 sky/day ≈ 10-3 MWgal/yr Assuming extra-DM is mainly due to the IGM: • Red-shift 0.2 < z < 1.3 (IGM from [Ioka 2003;Inoue 2004]) • Comoving distance 1 < D (Gpc) < 4 • Fluence 0.5 < F (Jy msec) < 8 38 40 • Isotropic luminosity 10 < Liso (erg) < 10 33 36 • Brightness temperature 10 < T (K) < 10 15 WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF FRBs? WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF FRBs? WHAT ARE THEY? Kulkarni et al. 2014 provided a wide review of possibilities, from local radio interferences to high z cosmological sources Suitable progenitor models are those which have an ultra-clean emitting region and, in addition, a low density circum-stellar medium so that external absorption is not significant. This means, almost always, that the free-free optical depth should not be large (for usual parameters, the plasma frequency is usually well below the GHz band) Core Collapse SuperNovae (CCSN) [Thornton et al 2013] • energetics might work / environs not clean? Binary White Dwarf merger to highly magnetic rapidly spinning White Dwarf [Kashiyama et al 2013] • environs not clean enough? Asteroid/Planet/WD magnetosphere interaction with the wind from a orbited pulsar/NS [Mottez & Zarka 2014] • events should repeat with orbital period 18 Magnetar Giant Flares Popov & Postnov 2007, Thornton et al 2013, Kulkarni et al 2014, Lu et al 2014 • Energetic works (with 10-6 radio efficiency) and rate about right for Magnetars. • Compatible with a clean enough environment [Kulkarni et al 14] • Synchrotron maser mechanism from relativistic, GIANT FLARE FROM SGR1806-20 magnetized shocks formed via the interaction of the RHESSI DATA magnetic pulse with the plasma within the nebula. • A scattering tail appears when the medium is highly turbulent at the interface btw the plerion and star 100000 forming molecular clouds. 10000 s • Expected to be 5 repeatable over decade-long . 0 / s t n timescale u o 1000 C • Also [Lyubarsky 2014] indicates that a strong detectable TeV ms-burst should be associated to 100 these events and visible by Cerenkov detector up to 10 ≈100 Mpc 0 100 200 300 400 Time, s 19 COSMOLOGICAL PROBES The first measurement of the average density of the ionized component of the Inter Galactic Medium along 1000+ lines of sight. He II reionization leads to a ∼ 8% jump in the differential DM across the He II reionization epoch. • likely need thousands of FRBs around z ∼ 2 − 3 The RM from IGM to z = 1 is only 6 rad m−2 for an IGM magnetic field of 10 nG. • tens of thousand of FRBs are needed to clearly map out the redshift evolution of RM caused by the IGM magnetic field. Zheng et al 2014 20 COSMOLOGICAL PROBES With a series of 100 to 1000’s independent z determination (from the identification of the source at other wavelengths), one could • measure the missing baryonic matter in the Universe [e.g. through the investigations of galactic halos at 0.2-2 virial radii [MacQuinn 2014]] • important parameter in galaxy formation and feedback models • weigh baryons in the IGM [Deng & Zhang 2014] ; - > 50% baryons missing at z < 2 and most may reside at temperatures and densities that are difficult to detect with current methods • constrain the EoS of the “dark energy” [Gao et al 2014; Zhou et al 2014] ; • BUT there are issues with accuracy of the IGM model that is required. • put limits to the existence of floating MACHO-like objects in the IGM via gravitational lensing (better with > 5 GHz observations) [Zheng et al. 2014] Macquart et al. SKA Science book. 21 WHERE NEXT? • Definitely need to find more: • Increase the population to understand the properties of the bursts • Distribution on the sky and how affected by local ISM properties • What is the luminosity distribution? Are they standard candles? • What is the source population? Only one? • Spectral properties in the radio • Higher redshifts etc…. • Rapid response to bursts - Petroff Talk • Follow up at other wavelengths (triggered/be-triggered) • Get host location, and even potentially location within host • Independent distance estimation. • More information to allow determination of source. • IGM studies • Sufficiently large number of lines of sight to build IGM density model • Scattering in the IGM • Missing Baryons? • Ionisation properties and epochs.