The Very-High-Energy Gamma-Ray Sky and the CTA Observatory
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The very-high-energy gamma-ray sky and the CTA Observatory Jürgen Knödlseder (IRAP, Toulouse) Directeur de Recherche (CNRS) The menu Light starter I. Why we do gamma-ray astronomy Assortment of AppeMzers II. What have we learned so far Main Dish III. What comes next Desert IV. Concluding remarks First course I. Why we do gamma-ray astronomy A historical introducMon The discovery of cosmic rays 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 Viktor Franz Hess (1912) 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 The nature of cosmic rays 1910 Charged 1920 parMcles! Gamma 1930 rays! 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 Robert Millikan and Arthur Holly Compton (1931) A hot debate (1932) 2000 2010 Cosmic charged parMcles ! 1910 1920 1930 1940 MS ChrisMan Huygens 1950 Clay and Berlage (1932) 1960 1970 Geiger counter 1980 4 cm gold bar 1990 Geiger counter 2000 Bothe and Kohlhörster (1929) 2010 Cosmic stac 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Karl Jansky (1933) 2010 An ambiMous amateur 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Grote Reber (1944) 2010 … and the first radio sky map 1910 1920 Cas A 1930 Cygnus X 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 Galactic centre 1990 2000 2010 Synchrotron radiaon 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 Langmuir,Elder,Gurevitsch, 1970 Charleton et Pollock (1948) 1980 1990 2000 Discovery of synchrotron radiaon (1947) 2010 Consequences 1910 Cosmic-ray parMcles emit gamma rays! 1920 1930 Hayakawa (1952) 1940 Hutchinson (1952) 1950 1960 Feenberg and Primakoff (1948) 1970 1980 Curvature Radiation 1990 2000 2010 Radhakrishnan and Cooke (1969) Philip Morrison (1958) The dawn of gamma-ray astronomy 1910 or how to observe photons of the highest energies? 1920 1930 1940 Atmosphere barrier Flux barrier 1950 1960 1970 1980 1 photon per cm2/keV per year ! 1990 1 photon per cm2/keV per century ! 2000 2010 Going into space 1910 or how to overcome the atmosphere barrier 1920 1930 1940 1950 Explorer XI (1962) OSO 3 (1967) 1960 Comparison of effecMve 1970 detecMon area (to scale) 1980 COS-B (1975) 1990 EGRET (1991) 2000 2010 Fermi (2008) Observing from ground 1910 or how to overcome the flux barrier (and turn the atmosphere into a detector) 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Observing from ground 1910 The Cherenkov technique in a nutshell 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Observing from ground 1910 The stereo Cherenkov technique in a nutshell 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Observing from ground 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Galbraith & Jelley (1953) 2010 Observing from ground 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 Crimée (1960-1963) Photographie d’une gerbe (1961) 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Irlande (1963-1967) Whipple (1968-1990) Observing from ground 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 HESS (2004-) 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 MAGIC (2004-) VERITAS (2007-) Observing from ground 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 MILAGRO (2004-2008) 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 HAWC (2014-) 2010 Second course II. What have we learned so far In the VHE domain (ground-based gamma-ray astronomy) with a strong focus on GalacMc science A hundred of gamma-ray sources The source zoo SNRs Binaries Starbursts AGN Pulsars/PWN Jets Shocks Shocks Jets Accreon Diffusion Diffusion Cosmic Winds rays GRBs Dark Jets matter Shocks Intergalactic VHE gamma rays probe medium ParMcle acceleraon and propagaon Cosmic rays Highest energy processes in a large variety of objects IntergalacMc medium Dark maer and fundamental physics Significance, in full detail full in Significance, Significance GalacMc populaons H.E.S.S. GalacMc Plane Survey Deil, Chaves+ (H.E.S.S.) 15 VHE source distribution GalacMc populaons GalacMc latude profile of H.E.S.S. GalacMc Plane Survey sources GalacticGalacMc populaons TeV source populations The cosmic-ray spectrum or the quest for the GalacMc PeVatron ParMcle acceleraon at shocks or the Fermi mechanism ParMcles gain energy by crossing and recrossing the shock The Hillas criterion or what systems can accelerate parMcles Systems below the lines are excluded Supernova remnants as parMcle R. D. Blandford et al. / Nuclearaccelerators Physics B Proceedings Supplement 00 (2014) 1–14 3 Figure 3: Chandra X-ray 4.0 6.0 keV image of the Tycho supernova remnant, showing detailed non-thermal emitting features manifesting the Non-thermal X-ray emission is a clear sign for electron acceleraon to − shock fronts (from [16]). ~ 100 TeV (synchrotron emission of electrons in amplified B fields) are not obviously seen in any other spectral band (eg. [32, 33] and [34] for a review). Figure 5 shows the light curve of the biggest flare in April 2011. The flux doubled within td . 8 hours at the rising edges. The spectral energy distribution for a few flares taken near the peak flux level is shown in Figure 6. The emission process is most likely to be synchrotron, requiring elec- trons/positrons of energy 3 PeV in a 1 mG mag- ⇠ ⇠ netic field. A peak of 400 MeV indicates very effi- ⇠ cient acceleration that goes beyond the classical radia- tion reaction limit in an MHD setting. These flares are not accompanied by changes in the pulsar timing and so presumably originate in the nebula which is many Figure 4: Gamma-ray spectrum of W44 as measured with the Fermi light years in size. The isotropic energy radiated in the LAT, which shows good agreement with pion-decay gamma-ray pro- strongest flare was 1034 J which is equivalent to the ⇠ duction model (from [17]). energy contained within a region about a hundred, not ten, light hours across. Either there is strong relativis- 1.3. Crab Nebula tic beaming or some way must be found to concentrate energy within a small volume (or both). The Crab Nebula has long been our best high energy astrophysics laboratory and many common e↵ects have 1.4. Relativistic Jets first been identified there. It is not disappointing us. Re- cent discoveries include 400 GeV pulsation [28, 29], Fermi and the ACTs have also made dramatic ob- ⇠ rapid secular variation in the total nebular flux [30] and servations of relativistic jets from AGN, GRB and bi- rapid variation of the “inner knot” which may mark the nary sources. Blazars (AGN directed towards us) ex- termination of the wind in the inner nebula [31]. How- hibit variability on timescales that can be as short as few ever the most striking discovery, which may presage a minutes (e.g., [35, 36]). However, we can place a lower new kind of particle acceleration with clear relevance to bound on the radius of emission because the gamma cosmic ray origin, is the discovery of dramatic, 10 hr rays have to avoid pair production as they escape the ⇠ γ-ray flares which are localized around 400 MeV and near infrared photons. The far more luminous quasars, Hadronic and leptonic emission the pion bump as a disMncMve feature Eγ ~ 0.1 Ep R. D. Blandford et al. / Nuclear Physics B Proceedings Supplement 00 (2014) 1–14 3 Figure 3: Chandra X-ray 4.0 6.0 keV image of the Tycho supernova remnant, showing detailed non-thermal emitting features manifesting the − shockIndicaons for a pion bump fronts (from [16]). but not a GalacMc PeVatron are not obviously seen in any other spectral band (eg. [32, 33] and [34] for a review). Figure 5 shows the light curve of the biggest flare in April 2011. The flux doubled within td . 8 hours at the rising edges. The spectral energy distribution for a few flares taken near the peak flux level is shown in Figure 6. The emission process is most likely to be synchrotron, requiring elec- trons/positrons of energy 3 PeV in a 1 mG mag- ⇠ ⇠ netic field. A peak of 400 MeV indicates very effi- ⇠ cient acceleration that goes beyond the classical radia- tion reaction limit in an MHD setting. These flares are not accompanied by changes in the pulsar timing and so presumably originate in the nebula which is many Figure 4: Gamma-ray spectrum of W44 as measured with the Fermi light years in size. The isotropic energy radiated in the LAT, which shows good agreement with pion-decay gamma-ray pro- strongest flare was 1034 J which is equivalent to the ⇠ duction model (from [17]). energy contained within a region about a hundred, not ten, light hours across. Either there is strong relativis- 1.3. Crab Nebula tic beaming or some way must be found to concentrate energy within a small volume (or both). The Crab Nebula has long been our best high energy astrophysics laboratory and many common e↵ects have 1.4. Relativistic Jets first been identified there. It is not disappointing us. Re- cent discoveries include 400 GeV pulsation [28, 29], Fermi and the ACTs have also made dramatic ob- ⇠ rapid secular variation in the total nebular flux [30] and servations of relativistic jets from AGN, GRB and bi- rapid variation of the “inner knot” which may mark the nary sources. Blazars (AGN directed towards us) ex- termination of the wind in the inner nebula [31]. How- hibit variability on timescales that can be as short as few ever the most striking discovery, which may presage a minutes (e.g., [35, 36]). However, we can place a lower new kind of particle acceleration with clear relevance to bound on the radius of emission because the gamma cosmic ray origin, is the discovery of dramatic, 10 hr rays have to avoid pair production as they escape the ⇠ γ-ray flares which are localized around 400 MeV and near infrared photons. The far more luminous quasars, EvoluMon of the SNR accelerator HESSHESS Indicaons for a J1641-463: J1641-463: PeVatron HESS J1641-463 p-pleptonic model modelfits data doesn't better fit → well Emax (Klein-Nishina > 100 TeV (99% effect) CL) Assuming a PL for Kelner+06 parameterization primary electron spectrum RX J1713 for Assuming a PL withcomparison Γ = 2.1 Requires electron primary proton spectrum cutoff > 700 TeV (99% CL) to fit measured VHE One of the highest Emax every spectrum inferred from VHE data 4 Hundreds of TeV electrons measured luminosity (d = 11 kpc) 1 34 -1 ) suffer severe losses in L = 4 ¥ 10 erg s .