PoS(ICRC2019)949 http://pos.sissa.it/ ∗ [email protected] Speaker. When a star ispowerful disrupted hadronic jet by can a be generated supermassive andI black be review a hole, the source simplest of and high models energy its ofand neutrinos neutrino debris and show production cosmic are that rays. from the accreted such resulting Tidal ontoneutrino neutrino Disruption flux it, Events flux detected (TDEs), is at a IceCube. detectable, The and possibilityHigh can of Energy a explain joint Cosmic a explanation fraction Ray of the of datafurther neutrino the is and study diffuse Ultra- to briefly be illustrated. fully substantiatedthe I – 2014-2015 discuss that neutrino the a flare observed single hypothesis by TDE – IceCube. burst which might requires have been responsible for ∗ Copyright owned by the author(s) under the terms of the Creative Commons c Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). 36th International Cosmic Ray Conference -ICRC2019- July 24th - August 1st, 2019 Madison, WI, U.S.A. Cecilia Lunardini Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events Department of Physics, Arizona State University,E-mail: 450 E. Tyler Mall, Tempe, AZ 85287-1504 USA PoS(ICRC2019)949 , ]. ]. × ' 12
8 14 15 . , , , M 8 11 = 13 14 ' ], and, as m ]. 7 R 3 10 / , 1 9 ) Cecilia Lunardini , m 2 of the mass of 8 / / 1 M 2 ∼ ] show that this happens 4 = ( ], lasting for days, months , t 4 r 3 , , 3 2 , , 2 ]. The idea of TDEs as the cause 1 roughly of solar size, , 6 1 R and . The latter condition implies that disrup- m
M 6 1 (with ]. After disruption, about 10 , if this radius is larger than the SMBH Schwarzschild R / 19 3 [ / M 1 cm), moving on a path that approaches a SMBH, of −
) ] will be presented, proposing the hypothesis that the TXS 10 M
cm ] could be due to a TDE. 17 10 M 2 11 . / 18 7 × 10 m and radius 10 ]). 96 )( × . 5 m
' 3 6 R erg is available for the jet. If the mass infall rate is sufficiently high / ' ' max R 53 2
( c M R 3 10 / / = 1 < × R 9 MG
M ] and references therein), TDEs have emerged as an attractive alternative, for 2 M ' 16 6 = 2 I will review the theory of neutrinos from TDEs, following mainly Refs. [ s / 10 g and 2 2 R / c > 33 new, preliminary, material [ M
t . Let us also consider the ideal scenario of a black hole in vacuum (no prior accretion 3 r 10 M M ∼ × cm Consider a star of mass Recently, realistic, detailed studies have been performed on high energy neutrinos from TDEs, In Sec. Interestingly, some TDE observations carry signatures of a relativistic jet in their X-ray emis- When a star wanders too close to a supermassive black hole (SMBH), it can be torn into pieces 12 ]. The possibility of a joint interpretation of the neutrino data and of the UHECR data – with 99 max . radius, In Sec. 10 the star becomes bound toE the SMBH and is ultimately accreted on it. Therefore, a total energy 0506+056 neutrino historical flare [ 2. Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events: single burst2.1 and diffuse Basic flux TDE physics and rates tion can occur if with focus on their possible contribution to the observed diffuse neutrino flux at IceCube [ or even years. TDEs are veryare interesting usually in quiet astronomy (in because they contrast allow withTens to the of probe active black galactic candidate holes nuclei, TDEs that AGN), and havenear-future therefore been surveys difficult (see, observed, to e.g., study. and [ more frequent observations are expected with attention to the heavyIn nuclear composition the of current the theoreticalto cosmic context, several rays where hypotheses, – and the has at theconstraints also the interpretation on same been the of time studied historically the multi-messenger favored [ constraints interpretations IceCubeetc., (starburst are data see, galaxies, already is AGN, e.g., placing gamma still tight [ raytheir open bursts, being dark in GeV-TeV gamma-rays, andfeatures for weaken their the characteristically constraints long duration. onfraction Both TDE of such neutrino the emission, IceCube observed allowing flux. TDEs to account for a large 1 when the star’s distance to the SMBH falls below the tidal radius: 13 sion. The best studied of such jetted TDEs is Swift J1644+57 [ and ultimately accreted onto theflare black of hole. radiation As in a the result thermal, of UV such and Tidal X-rays Disruption is Event produced (TDE), [ a Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events 1. Introduction: tidal disruptions as particle accelerators of relativistic jets – probablyto with considering hadronic them content, a from possible thebyproduct source of matter of the of latter Ultra-High the via Energy disrupted photo-hadronic Cosmic star interaction, Rays of – high (UHECR) leads energy [ neutrinos [ mass activity, etc.). As thestroyed star by becomes tidal closer forces. to Basic the arguments of SMBH, balancing it of can forces be [ deformed, and ultimately de- PoS(ICRC2019)949 + ). 1 ∝ ' (
) 6 ]. It . 1 M E TD 2 ]. ). ( [ ˙ − 6 N 0 1 µ 3 13 M / F 10 s 3 2 5 2 ∝ / 3s 6 − erg . E = t 2 ) 53 M ∼ ). See [ min , Cecilia Lunardini 10 z M M · ( ˙ ρ , for is the pion production M 1 γ − ]. Therefore, TDEs are p ]). One gets a local rate f 2 yr 3 20 − yr [ ) ]. The flare will last as long as 1 6 Mpc (which scale with − 6 Γ . 1 − . , in the SMBH frame. All the parameters 0 3 min 10 ( and . The quantity M v O p (with exceptions, see Table caption). The t ∼ ξ ) , the rate of observable jetted TDEs is ex- 1 ∼ br 0 br , η , ( X T X R ε ε ( ∆ . A major uncertainty is the lower cutoff mass, > 2
< ε M ε dM 5 ) M 10 , depending on , 1 z = − ( ˙ ρ yr 3 min max − 1 of all TDEs host such jets [ min M . M ]. Combining it with the SMBH mass function, which scales M 0 R ]. The fluence of muon neutrinos can be expressed as 19 8 for ∼ [ 1 1 η ) = 10 Gpc − z − ( yr − yr R 3 ], gives the volumetric (comoving) rate, differential in − 1 35 . . 0 0 20 − . Here the total energy in protons is expressed as proportional to the energy in [ , via the phenomenological constant ) ) Lower X-ray spectral index Higher X-ray spectral index DefinitionVariability timescaleLorentz factorBaryonic loading (energy in protons versusMagnetic X-rays) loading (energy in magnetic fieldProton versus spectral X-rays) indexIsotropic equivalent energy in X-raysDuration of X-ray flareObserved X-ray break energy 1 10 3 6 value 6 1 keV 2 10 Mpc p ' 2 µ
/ ξ ) 6 3 ζ X 0 M − − ( E + ˜ 6 R M br 1 p , p X B T v = ( Γ 10 β t α 8 10 k X ξ ξ E ∆ π p / ε Parameters of the model for the neutrino fluence in fig. ζ ∼ E Symbol γ M p ) ( f 7 0 , of the SMBH for which disruption can be effective (see, e.g. [ . Although a numerical approach is necessary for precision, it is useful to introduce some ap- The cosmological rate of TDEs is very uncertain. The predicted rate per SMBH is As a phenomenological approach, one can consider photohadronic neutrino production in a , and the total rate p ( 3 3 ξ R − min − X ) proximate analytical scalings [ Table 1: E X-rays, generic jet, with parameters setvalues to will match appear those in of the the equations best below observed and TDE, in Swift Table J1644+57. These is estimated that a fraction the infall rate remains aboverelatively long the transients, very Eddington different rate, from second-long phenomena like the Gamma-Ray Bursts. 10 roughly like M of Considering the jet beaming angle,pected to and be the fraction 2.2 Neutrino production in a TDE jet starting elements of the neutrino fluxthe calculation proton are spectrum, the which background are photon taken (X-ray) as spectrum having power-law and forms (spectral indices in Table are set to reproduce those of the Swift J1644+57 TDE, except Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events a jet can be generated, with super-Eddington luminosity that declines with time as z PoS(ICRC2019)949 . ]: = ≡ ]). min s and 21 br τ , (2.1) 13 M v ]). p t br br , , ]. Fig. E p p 24 2 (below . , , E E 22 � 0 ]: the corre- 23 , with ≥ < = i.e. s . The strong τ p p 13 G E E � M ' code [ Cecilia Lunardini v t for for (right panel), shows , compared with the � 1 1 ]): ⊤ 1
6 − − ⊤ its minimum variability β α M ) ) v . The detailed simulation ⊥ ⊤ 5 t � 1 pb pb ⊤ has been set to Adapted from [ ]). In the figure, the product NeuCosmA 10 E E ⊥ ⊤ PeV (shown, from [ η / / ���[�/���] 24 ⊥ ⊤ p p = × ' , � E E p is the proton energy leading to ⊥ ⊤ ( ( E ξ Right: 23 min ⊥ ⊤ br ( were proposed. Here I review the , = ⊥ ⊤ M p � × G E M 1 − is explained by how the scalings of � M b where shell collisions take place, see [ ), the diffuse flux decreases rapidly as
ε
-��� -��� -��� -��� -��� -��� -���
c
�� �� � ��� ��� )] /( Φ
KeV [
).
� � � - - R - 2.1 3 1 9 2.1 . The product , as a function of the neutrino energy, for a single TDE − 10
µ ¯ ν M s scales in a way that was found to fit AGN data [ (Sec. 5 2 8 v + Γ t 10 10 M µ 10 is the jet bulk Lorentz factor and ν = Γ 4 7 is determined by the SMBH Schwarzschild time (a relation- M . − min 7 10 ) v t 10 M br , M -resonance corresponding to the X-ray break energy, Γ X 6 GeV 10 6 ε ∆ , for 10 E 10 / . Moreover, µ M ¯ ν 5 declines with
1 10 5 + ) − M ]: the fluence of are energy-dependent suppression factors that account for pion and muon 10 . All other parameters are constants, as in Table µ 1) to reproduce the measured IceCube flux at 1 KeV 6 M 2 ν . ( µ , 13 0 is the average X-ray luminosity, and = z 2 ζ ) 10 X ergs 4 ( ) / G L
˙ T 5 ρ 10 . 10 ∆ M M ], some tentative parameter scalings with and 47 / from [ / 4 5 1 - - Γ X π 13 0.1 10 10 ( has been adjusted to a more conservative value (see caption) to match the data. This 0.01 10 10 ζ E /
0.001
63s Μ cm GeV E F E L H L
H η
Left: M 2 2 = - ' 35 35, in the strong scaling model, for different SMBH masses. × . GeV X . c p 7 0 0 L / ξ ) = ( The diffuse flux of neutrinos is obtained by convolving the neutrino emission of a single TDE Naturally, the jet parameters will vary with the type of SMBH and star involved in the dis- s ' = R M = z γ influence the pion production efficiency, Eq. ( (left panel) shows the predicted muon neutrino fluences for different values of 5 10 ( p . π f measured IceCube flux after 6 yearsG of data taking (taken from [ with the cosmological rateBecause of the TDEs, rate with inclusion of neutrino oscillations and redshift effects. sponding diffuse flux of 2.3 Diffuse flux and connection with the UHECR increases, and is strongly affected bythe the diffuse uncertainty on flux this predicted parameter. by Fig. the strong scaling model, with Figure 1: photo-pion production at the 1 time scale (which influences the collision radius at the reference value, Here “strong scaling” scenario, where ship that was suggested in2 the interpretation of the Swift J1644+57 data, [ of the neutrino production1 and propagation was performedenhancement with of the the neutrino emission forΓ decreasing Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events efficiency, i.e., the average fraction of energy deposited into pion production: The factors Γ propagation (energy losses and decay). ruption. In [ H He N Fe 20 (E/eV) 10 19.5 log 19
PoS(ICRC2019)94918.5 18 ,
3 ].
).
2
50 40 30 20 10 70 60 max
σ
(X ) [g cm [g ) ] −
28 -2 ergs 2.1 54 ]). Thus, He N Fe 14 GeV cm 20 6 10 . 1 1 − N, was injected , reproduces the Cecilia Lunardini (E/eV) H ∼ 10 14
10 9 7 . . T 19.5 5 neutrino events in M 0 0 log ∆ 5 + − ± 1 × . 10 2 ν 19 L = =
s. Electromagnetic observa- PeV energy (see [ min / 100 ∼ M Φ 18.5 ergs 47 EPOS-LHC 10 18 × 2
distributions as a function of the energy.
.
]. The most natural scenario is the disruption
840 820 800 780 760 max 740 720 700 680 660
〈 〉 1 ] cm [g X 27 -2 max ∼ , X 4 ν ]. An example of resulting UHECR spectrum and 28 L 30 20.5 , 20 days, total fluence is 29 (E/eV) ± 100 TeV. , 20 10 ∼ ], and references therein). 22 log ], which could explain the relatively heavy composition of the 110 Auger, ICRC2015, shift -20% ], the production and propagation of neutrinos and UHECR was 32 15 ' , 19.5 , ; the agreement with the data is very good. The corresponding 14 T 2 31 Simulated energy spectrum of UHECRs (thick); and its components from 14 ∆ , ] on the average of the 336) revealed the likely detection of a flare of 13 19 . ). In [ 26 27 0 Left:
, ]. = M 25 z ) 14 18.5 5 10 − 18 3 ], with duration 36 38 37
10
18
( 10 10 10
] yr sr km [eV J E
-1 -1
2 -2 3 Taken from [ ∼ M Predictions and data [ An analysis of IceCube archival data at the coordinates of the blazar TXS 0506+056 (TXS The three month-long duration of the neutrino flare immediately suggests a TDE as a natural Motivated in part by the success of TDE models on the neutrino front, applications to the measured fluence and spectrum very well (without any fitting to the data), as shown in Fig. in the jet, as (accurate) approximationand of methodology the mixed used carbon-oxygen are injection. those The in numerical [ codes 2014-2015 [ Intriguingly, the strong scaling TDE model discussed above, with from here on, redshift Right: it is possible that thesequence stars, entire, might diverse account TDE for phenomenology, most including of the both UHECR white and dwarf neutrino data. and3. main The TXS 0506+056 historical flare: a tidal disruption? and estimated isotropic equivalent luminosity isotropic equivalent energy, suggestive of a disrupted star of a few solar masses, see Sec. explanation, corroborated by the relatively high energy of the event ( (groups of) different nuclear species (thin, color coding insimulated right consistently, by panel). including the The effects of Augerpropagation nuclear in data cascading the are in intergalactic the shown medium. jet [ For as simplicity, well a as single cosmic nuclear ray species, composition is shown inneutrino Fig. flux matches the observed neutrino spectrum at IceCube at Figure 2: tions of TXS for theaveraged same blazar time emission period (see are [ sparse, and available data are consistent with the time- of carbon-oxygen white dwarfs, whichholes ( is can be realized efficiently for intermediate mass black UHECR seen at the Pierre Auger Observatory [ UHECR have been studied.medium-heavy nuclei [ In the latter context, TDEs are attractive as a potential source of Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events adjustment implies that theparameter current space IceCube of data the alreadyobserved model. constrain energy spectrum the From well interesting the above figure, region one of can the also see that the model reproduces the PoS(ICRC2019)949 1 ]. max 33 , M 34 32 star). These ; see Table . 1 30
1 PeV M Cecilia Lunardini 28 IceCube 2018 50 TeV 26 ] z ∼ 24 H 14/15 flare data
, GeV y ]), which exceeds c 22 n ] show that in the strong e 35 u [ 20 MeV q 17 e r
f [ 18 0 1 keV M g historical data 16 o 8 l 2 h c t eV (right panel) shows the latter case, 14 n o m M c 3 0 m 4
3 10 0 5 1 . 5 12 1 Multimessenger plot, showing the photon 0 1 7 = 1 = meV E r ' D = u T D 10 d ]). R N E t V ]. It is also conceivable that an undetected e ]), where the jet is made of two zones, one 8 33 -9 TXS
-10 -11 -12 -13 -14 Right: 36 0 1
] s m c g r e , E d / N d E [ g o l 33
The measured neutrino fluence (dashed), and the 1 2 2 M 5 � Left: �� strong scaling model (solid; same as fig. �
�� M 5 � 10 �� = M � ]. might exist in the vicinity of the core of TXS, and disrupt a Sun-like �/��� �� 33
M � IceCube 5 �� 10 � ∼ �� M � -� -� ]. Indications of significant absorption of X-rays, consistent with an accretion disk, �� ��
6 ����� ����� �����
μ Spectra for the TXS historical flare. � � � �� ��� � ) ( ) (
� � - ) and would require a variability time scale much greater than that in Table ]. Absorption might partially explain why Swift J1644+57 was dark in gamma rays above 12 2.1 , Despite the issues, a TDE interpretation of the historical flare is still a possibility. It might re- To improve the TDE interpretation of the historical flare, one can turn to non-minimal jet 9 star, with possible effects due to the interplay with the central black hole and its accretion disk. black hole with Another issue is that the strongwith scaling the model high (and the estimated TDE mass(Sec. interpretation of in the general) is TXS in SMBH tension ( where the electromagnetic constraints are saturatedalso the and unnaturally only high one energy neutrino budget, eventresults corresponding is agree to predicted the with disruption (note those of in a [ 100 MeV [ have been found in the (non-jetted) TDE PS16dtm [ quire including other potentially important phenomena.by For the example, the debris accretion of torus the generated disruptedjet [ star could cause significant absorption effects, and possibly choke a models. The factmotivation that to TXS use a is compact an core active model galaxy, (see, with e.g., [ a pre-existing jet and accretion disk, is a picture of the flare is considered. Indeed, preliminary calculations [ wider and with lower particle/radiationenergy part density of (the the pre-existing photon jet),TDE), spectrum, which which and can the is explain other responsible more thecompact for compact low model the and is denser high found (the energy toneutrino core, gamma be spectrum due and unable rays to exceed to the and photon accommodate constraints, neutrinos.predicting all or the accommodate the number Unfortunately, the observations: of latter the at it neutrino the can events price reproduce in of the the under- flare. Fig. Figure 3: for the parameters). The good agreement is accidental. corresponding prediction for the Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events (left panel). The TDE interpretation becomes more complex, however, once the multi-messenger spectrum data, the neutrinodashed: flare neutrinos. spectrum, Figure courtesy and of a Shan Gao, prediction based in on the [ compact core model (solid: photons; scaling model the predicted photon fluxto exceeds the the flare. measurements and This upper is bounds known synchronous to be a general problem of a minimal jet framework, see, e.g. [ PoS(ICRC2019)949 , 7 , , 329 ]. 693 , no. 1, 371 ]. Cecilia Lunardini ]. 461 , A179 (2018) The Center of the 616 , in (03, 1975) 295–298. , no. 8, 083005 (2016) 254 93 arXiv:1106.2426 ]. Nature , no. 1, 10828 (2018) , ]. arXiv:1807.08794 8 arXiv:1612.00918 Ultra-High Energy Cosmic Rays and , p. 543, 1989. Tidally disrupted stars as a possible origin of both ]. , 081301 (2011) [ Probing the tidal disruption flares of massive black 84 The nature of the central parsec of the Galaxy ]. 6 ]. arXiv:1306.2274 , no. 1, 3 (2017) [ 838 High-energy Neutrino Flares from X-Ray Bright and Dark arXiv:1612.00011 , no. 6398, 147 (2018) [ IAU Symposium ]. 361 ]. ]. Giant AGN Flares and Cosmic Ray Bursts, Astrophys. J. , 523 (1988). High Energy Neutrinos from the Tidal Disruption of Stars, Phys. Rev. D arXiv:1612.03160 Tidal disruption jets of supermassive black holes as hidden sources of 333 Opening a New Window onto the Universe with IceCube, Prog. Part. Nucl. arXiv:1104.4787 ]. ]. ]. TeV?PeV Neutrinos from Low-Power Gamma-Ray Burst Jets inside Stars, arXiv:1805.11112 Discovery of the Onset of Rapid Accretion by a Dormant Massive Black Hole, Neutrino emission from the direction of the blazar TXS 0506+056 prior to the Can tidal disruption events produce the IceCube neutrinos?, Mon. Not. Roy. , no. 12, 121102 (2013) [ , , (Nov., 1982) 120–134. , no. 2, 1354 (2017) [ Tidal disruption event demographics, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 111 et al. et al. Manifestations of a Massive Black Hole in the Galactic Center 262 469 Tidal disruption of stars by supermassive black holes: Status of observations, JHEAp arXiv:1505.01093 Possible power source of seyfert galaxies and qsos , 421 (2011) [ Tidal disruption of stars by black holes of 10 to the 6th-10 to the 8th solar masses in , 73 (2018) [ arXiv:0802.1074 arXiv:1601.06787 476 (M. Morris, ed.), vol. 136 of 102 , no. 12, 123001 (2017) [ arXiv:1711.03555 arXiv:1512.08596 arXiv:1711.11274 cosmic rays and neutrinos at the[ highest energies, Sci. Rep. 95 IceCube-170922A alert, Science Neutrinos from Tidal Disruptions by Massive Black Holes, Astron. Astrophys. Phys. Nature Phys. Rev. Lett. Astron. Soc. 148 (2015) [ (2009) [ [ Tidal Disruption Events, Astrophys. J. [ (2016) [ cosmic rays: explaining the IceCube TeV-PeV neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D holes with high-energy neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D Astrophys. J. Galaxy nearby galaxies, Nature [6] D. N. Burrows [7] G. R. Farrar and A. Gruzinov, [8] X. Y. Wang, R. Y. Liu, Z. G. Dai and K. S. Cheng, [9] X. Y. Wang and R. Y. Liu, [2] M. J. Rees, [3] J. H. Lacy, C. H. Townes, and D. J. Hollenbach, [5] S. Komossa, [1] J. G. Hills, [4] E. S. Phinney, [14] D. Biehl, D. Boncioli, C. Lunardini and W. Winter, [15] C. Guépin, K. Kotera, E. Barausse, K. Fang and K. Murase, [13] C. Lunardini and W. Winter, [19] C. S. Kochanek, [17] S. Gao, C. Lunardini, A. Palladino[18] and W. Winter,M. work G. in Aartsen progress. [10] K. Murase and K. Ioka, [16] M. Ahlers and F. Halzen, [11] L. Dai and K. Fang, [12] N. Senno, K. Murase and P. Meszaros, Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events References PoS(ICRC2019)949 ]. ]. , ]. Dissecting the Cecilia Lunardini SimProp v2r4: Monte arXiv:1507.03991 arXiv:1510.05223 , no. 1, L104 (2019) [ TXS 0506+056, the first , 186 (2013) , no. 6, 063007 (2017) ]. 484 , no. 2, L29 (2019) , A101 (2018) arXiv:1807.04275 96 768 874 , 2015. 611 Leptohadronic Blazar Models ]. ]. , no. 11, 009 (2017) ]. 1711 , no. 1, 98 (2015) [ ]. 809 Cosmic-Ray and Neutrino Emission from Self-Consistent Models of the AGN and Black High-energy cosmic ray nuclei from tidal , no. 1, 88 (2019) [ 3 Measurements of the first two moments of the depth of 7 arXiv:1807.04461 Modelling the coincident observation of a high-energy The flux of ultra-high energy cosmic rays after ten years UHECR escape mechanisms for protons and neutrons arXiv:1209.4702 ]. arXiv:1703.07816 arXiv:1702.06978 arXiv:1901.10806 [ Ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays from tidally-ignited white dwarfs, Phys. What governs the bulk velocity of the jet components in active galactic , 114 (2012) [ , no. 1, 192 (2018) [ ]. ]. ]. ]. ]. ]. 759 480 PS16dtm: A Tidal Disruption Event in a Narrow-line Seyfert 1 Galaxy, , The IceCube Neutrino Observatory - Contributions to ICRC 2015 Part II: A combined maximum-likelihood analysis of the high-energy astrophysical , , Investigation of two Fermi-LAT gamma-ray blazars coincident with high-energy , no. 2, 106 (2017) [ , et al. arXiv:0710.4488 et al. et al. 843 et al. , no. 10, 103003 (2017) [ 96 , 20 (2009) [ arXiv:1901.06998 arXiv:1812.05939 arXiv:1705.08909 arXiv:1706.00391 arXiv:1301.6163 arXiv:1705.03729 Astrophys. J. cosmic neutrino source, is not a[ BL Lac, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. Applied to the 2014?2015 Flare of[ TXS 0506+056, Astrophys. J. neutrino and a bright blazar flare, Nat. Astron. region around IceCube-170922A: the blazar TXSNot. 0506+056 Roy. as Astron. the Soc. first cosmic neutrino source, Mon. neutrinos detected by IceCube, Hole Populations: Duty Cycles, Accretion Rates,690 and the Mean Radiative Efficiency, Astrophys. J. nuclei?, Astrophys. J. Gamma-Ray Bursts with a Nuclear Cascade,[ Astron. Astrophys. Atmospheric and Astrophysical Diffuse Neutrino Searches of All Flavors, disruption events: Origin, survival, and implications,[ Phys. Rev. D shower maximum over nearly three decades2015. of energy, combining data from, PoS(ICRC2015)420 [ Rev. D neutrino flux measured with IceCube, Astrophys. J. of operation of the Pierre Auger Observatory, PoS(ICRC2015)271 Carlo simulation code for UHECR propagation,[ JCAP from GRBs, and the cosmic ray-neutrino connection, Astrophys. J. [36] P. K. Blanchard [35] P. Padovani, F. Oikonomou, M. Petropoulou, P. Giommi and E. Resconi, [34] S. Gao, A. Fedynitch, W. Winter and M. Pohl, [33] X. Rodrigues, S. Gao, A. Fedynitch, A. Palladino and W. Winter, [32] P. Padovani, P. Giommi, E. Resconi, T. Glauch, B. Arsioli, N. Sahakyan and M. Huber, [21] B. Chai, X. Cao and M. Gu, [23] M. G. Aartsen [27] A. Porcelli, for the Pierre Auger Collaboration, [28] I. Valino, for the Pierre Auger Collaboration, [31] S. Garrappa Neutrinos from Tidal Disruption Events [20] F. Shankar, D. H. Weinberg and J. Miralda-Escude, [22] D. Biehl, D. Boncioli, A. Fedynitch and W. Winter, [24] M. G. Aartsen [25] R. Alves Batista and J. Silk, [26] B. T. Zhang, K. Murase, F. Oikonomou and Z. Li, [30] P. Baerwald, M. Bustamante and W. Winter, [29] R. Aloisio, D. Boncioli, A. Di Matteo, A. F. Grillo, S. Petrera and F. Salamida,