4.7 Article

The 80 Ms follow-up of the X-ray afterglow of GRB 130427A challenges the standard forward shock model

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 462, Issue 1, Pages 1111-1122

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stw1704

Keywords

gamma-ray burst: general; gamma-ray burst: individual: GRB 130427A

Funding

  1. PRIN-INAF [2012/13]
  2. Premiale LBT
  3. NASA [NNX13AD28A, NNX15AP95A]
  4. FIGARONet collaborative network
  5. Agence Nationale de la Recherche [ANR-14-CE33]
  6. TLS Tautenburg
  7. Ida
  8. Instrument Center for Danish Astrophysics (IDA)
  9. Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR) [FIRB 2012 RBFR12PM1F]
  10. UK Space Agency
  11. Spanish Ministry [AYA2012-39727-C03-01]
  12. Icelandic Research Fund (IRF)
  13. STFC [ST/K000977/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

GRB 130427A was the brightest gamma-ray burst detected in the last 30 yr. With an equivalent isotropic energy output of 8.5 x 10(53) erg and redshift z = 0.34, it uniquely combined very high energetics with a relative proximity to Earth. As a consequence, its X-ray afterglow has been detected by sensitive X-ray observatories such as XMM-Newton and Chandra for a record-breaking baseline longer than 80 million seconds. We present the X-ray light curve of this event over such an interval. The light curve shows a simple power-law decay with a slope alpha = 1.309 +/- 0.007 over more than three decades in time (47 ks-83 Ms). We discuss the consequences of this result for a few models proposed so far to interpret GRB 130427A, and more in general the significance of this outcome in the context of the standard forward shock model. We find that this model has difficulty in explaining our data, in both cases of constant density and stellar-wind circumburst media, and requires far-fetched values for the physical parameters involved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available