4.6 Article

Fermi-LAT upper limits on gamma-ray emission from colliding wind binaries

Journal

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
Volume 555, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220502

Keywords

gamma rays: stars; stars: massive; binaries: general

Funding

  1. Austrian Science Fund FWF

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Context. Colliding wind binaries (CWBs) are thought to give rise to a plethora of physical processes including acceleration and interaction of relativistic particles. Observation of synchrotron radiation in the radio band confirms there is a relativistic electron population in CWBs. Accordingly, CWBs have been suspected sources of high-energy gamma-ray emission since the COS-B era. Theoretical models exist that characterize the underlying physical processes leading to particle acceleration and quantitatively predict the non-thermal energy emission observable at Earth. Aims. We strive to find evidence of gamma-ray emission from a sample of seven CWB systems: WR 11, WR 70, WR 125, WR 137, WR 140, WR 146, and WR 147. Theoretical modelling identified these systems as the most favourable candidates for emitting gamma-rays. We make a comparison with existing gamma-ray flux predictions and investigate possible constraints. Methods. We used 24 months of data from the Large Area Telescope (LAT) on-board the Fermi Gamma Ray Space Telescope to perform a dedicated likelihood analysis of CWBs in the LAT energy range. Results. We find no evidence of gamma-ray emission from any of the studied CWB systems and determine corresponding flux upper limits. For some CWBs the interplay of orbital and stellar parameters renders the Fermi -LAT data not sensitive enough to constrain the parameter space of the emission models. In the cases of WR140 and WR147, the Fermi -LAT upper limits appear to rule out some model predictions entirely and constrain theoretical models over a significant parameter space. A comparison of our findings to the CWB eta Car is made.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available