Study of a Population of Gamma-Ray Bursts with Low-Luminosity
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITE NICE SOPHIA ANTIPOLIS European Community Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate International Relativistic Astrophysics Ph.D. Program Study of a Population of Gamma-ray Bursts with Low-Luminosity Afterglows Presented and defended by H¨usne DERELI Erasmus Mundus Fellow Defended on the 16th of December 2014 Commission: arXiv:1503.04580v1 [astro-ph.HE] 16 Mar 2015 AysunAky¨uz Professor Reporter LorenzoAmati Researcher,INAF Examiner Jean-LucAtteia Astronomer Reporter Michel Bo¨er Director of Research, CNRS Supervisor PascalChardonnet Professor Examiner MassimoDellaValle Professor Co-supervisor BruceGendre VisitingProfessor Examiner ii Summary Gamma-ray bursts (GRB) are extreme events taking place at cosmological distances. Their origin and mechanism have been puzzling for decades. They are crudely classified into two groups based on their duration, namely the short bursts and the long bursts. Such a classification has proven to be extremely useful to determine their possible progenitors: the merger of two compact objects for short bursts and the explosion of a (very) massive star for long bursts. Further classifying the long GRBs might give tighter constraints on their progenitor (initial mass, angular momentum, evolution stage at collapse) and on the emission mechanism(s). The understanding of several aspects of GRBs has greatly advanced after the launch of the Swift satellite, as it allows for multi-wavelength observation of both the prompt phase and the afterglow of GRBs. On the other hand, a world collaboration to point ground optical and radio telescopes has allowed many breakthroughs in the physics of GRBs, for instance with several detections of supernova in the late afterglow phase. In my thesis, I present evidence for the existence of a sub-class of long GRBs, based on their faint afterglow emission. These bursts were named low-luminosity afterglow (LLA) GRBs. I discuss the data analysis and the selection method of these bursts. Then, their main properties are described (prompt and afterglow). Their link to supernova is strong as 64% of all the bursts firmly associated to SNe are LLA GRBs. This motivated the study of supernovae in my thesis. Finally, I present additional properties of LLA GRBs: the study of their rate density, which seems to indicate a new distinct third class of events, the properties of their host galaxies, which show that they take place in young star-forming galaxies, not different from those of normal long GRBs. Additionally, I show that it is difficult to reconcile all differences between normal long GRBs and LLA GRBs only by considering instrumental or environmental effects, a different ejecta content or a different geometry for the burst. Thus, I conclude that LLA GRBs and normal long GRBs should have different properties. In a very rudimentary discussion of the possible progenitor, I indicate that a binary system is favored in the case of LLA GRB. The argument is based on the initial mass function of massive stars, on the larger rate density of LLA GRBs compared to the rate of normal long GRBs and on the type of accompanying SNe. Such a classification of GRBs is important to constrain their emission mechanisms and pos- sible progenitors, which are still highly debated. However, more multi-wavelength observations of weak bursts at small redshift are required to give tighter constraints on the properties of both the burst and its accompanying supernova if present. iii iv SUMMARY Acknowledgements I would like to thank many people for their help and support while I was making this work. My first thanks will go to the European Commission for the support through the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate Program, to the program coordinator Prof. Pascal Chardonnett and to Dr. Catherine Nary Man director of ARTEMIS laboratory and Prof. Farrokh Vakili director of Cˆote d’Azur Observatory, as well as to the secretaries of ARTEMIS, Seynabou Ndiaye and David Andrieux for providing all comfortable conditions for my thesis study. Secondly, I would like to thank the director of the Astronomical Observatory of Capodimonte Prof. Massimo Della Valle, also my co-supervisor who provided me good conditions during my mobility period. I must also thank several persons who contributed directly or indirectly for my studies during that period. My first gratitude will go to Dr. Maria Teresa Botticella, for her understanding, patience, help, effort as well as encouragements. My second gratitude will be for Dr. Massimo Dall’ora, Dr. Stefano Valenti, Dr. Andrea Pastorello, Prof. Stefano Benetti, Dr. Luc Desart, Dr. Eda Sonba¸s, Dr. Korhan Yelkenci, Dr. Sinan Alis for their help and helpful comments for my studies on the Supernovae topic. Lastly, I would like to thank Cristina Barbarino for her friendship. I also would like to thank to Prof. Remo Ruffini, director of ICRANet, for his encouragements. I must also thank Dr. Luca Izzo for his collaboration during that time. And I should not forget to thank all my colleagues in the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate and IRAP Programs, especially Liang Li and Yu Wang for their collaboration. A special thank you will go for two very special persons, Jonas Pedro Pereira and Onelda Bardho for their warm and helpful friendships in any condition. I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Michel Bo¨er, whose expertise and understanding added considerably to my thesis study. I am grateful for his guidance throughout my study. My special thanks are also to Dr. Bruce Gendre for his collaboration, whose expertise, advices, valuable comments, also added to my Ph.D. experience. I also would like to thank my colleagues of the GRB group, Dr. Tania Regimbau, Onelda Bardo, Karelle Siellez and Duncan Meacher for useful discussions. Additionally, special thanks will go to Dr. Alian Klotz and Dr. Lorenzo Amati for their collaboration. Finally, I wish to thank my friends students at the Cˆote d’Azur Observatory for their warm friendships. Finally, my special gratitude will be for Damien B´egu´e, my husband, whose expertise, helpful comments and discussions improved my knowledge during my study and whose love, understand- ing, patience supported me to finish my Ph.D. I also would like to thank his parents for their love and support. My last special thanks will go to each member of my family for their love and specially to my sister Sunduz C¸i¸cek and my best friend Sevin¸cMantar for their endless support. v vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I must thank Jean-Louis Sougn´efor proofreading my thesis. Finally, I acknowledge my thesis reporters Prof. Dr. Aysun Aky¨uz and Dr. Jean-Luc Atteia for their helpful comments. H¨usne Dereli is supported by the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate Program by Grant Num- ber 2011-1640 from the EACEA of the European Commission. She completed her Ph.D. thesis in the laboratory of ARTEMIS directed by Nary Man Catherine which is located in the OCA, Cˆote d’Azur Observatory directed by Farrokh Vakili. Contents Summary iii Acknowledgements v 1 Introduction 1 1.1 DiversityofGRBsProgenitors . .. 1 1.2 The Last Stages of Stellar Evolution . ... 3 1.2.1 Howdostarsdie? ............................... 3 1.2.2 Supernovae (SNe) classification . 6 1.2.3 Extremecase: Gamma-RayBurst(GRBs) . 9 1.3 ObservationalPropertiesofGRBs . .... 10 1.3.1 Spatialproperties................................ 10 1.3.2 Temporalproperties .............................. 10 1.3.3 Spectral properties of the prompt emission . ... 11 1.3.4 Afterglow .................................... 12 1.3.5 GRB-SNassociation .............................. 13 1.3.6 DifferentkindsofGRBs ............................ 14 1.3.7 ProgenitorsofGRBs.............................. 15 1.4 Emission Theory of Gamma-Ray Bursts: The Fireball Model . ...... 16 1.4.1 Generaldescription............................... 16 1.4.2 Detailed afterglow theory . 18 1.5 PurposeoftheThesis ................................ 24 2 ObservationandDataReductionAppliedtoSN2004ex 27 2.1 The intermediate characteristics of type II SNe . ....... 27 2.2 Introduction of SN 1993J and SN 2008ax: comparative sample . ........ 28 2.2.1 PropertiesofSN2008ax............................ 28 2.2.2 PropertiesofSN1993J ............................ 28 2.3 Supernovae:SN2004ex .............................. .. 28 2.4 Photometry....................................... 29 2.4.1 Dataanalysis.................................. 29 2.4.2 Thelight-curveofSN2004ex ......................... 30 2.4.3 ThecomparisonwithothertypeIIbSNe. 32 2.4.4 ThecomparisonwithothertypesofSNe. 33 2.5 Spectroscopy ..................................... 33 2.5.1 Dataanalysis.................................. 33 2.5.2 ThespectralresultofSN2004ex . 35 2.5.3 Thevelocityandmassofhydrogen . 35 vii viii CONTENTS 2.5.4 ThespectralcomparisonoftypeIIbSNe. ... 36 2.6 Discussion........................................ 36 2.6.1 Possible progenitor . 39 3 DataReductionAppliedtoX-rayobservationsofGRBs 41 3.1 The Swift Satellite ................................... 41 3.1.1 DetectiontechniquesforX-rays. .. 41 3.1.2 Instrumental properties of Swift ....................... 42 3.2 X-raydataanalysis.................................. 43 3.2.1 Extraction of light-curves and spectra . ... 43 3.2.2 Fittingthespectra............................... 44 3.3 Selectionofthesample................................ 46 3.3.1 SelectionoflongGRBs ............................ 46 3.3.2 Selection of the late-time afterglow . 47 3.3.3 Cosmological Scaling . 49 3.3.4 Energycorrection................................ 50 3.4 Selection of the LLA sample from the global one . ...