4.6 Article

Gamma rays detected from Cygnus X-1 with likely jet origin

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 596, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628917

关键词

accretion, accretion disks; acceleration of particles; gamma rays: general; radiation mechanisms: non-thermal; stars: individual: Cygnus X-1; X-rays: binaries

资金

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  2. MINECO [FPA2012-39502, AYA2015-71042-P, AYA2013-47447-C3-1-P, MDM-2014-0369, BES-2014-069376]
  3. ERDF funds
  4. EdOW
  5. Catalan DEC [SGR2012-1073m, SGR2014-86]
  6. European Social Funds through a Ramon y Cajal fellowship
  7. Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa [SEV-2012-0234]
  8. Marie Curie Career Integration Grant [321520]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims. We probe the high-energy (>60 MeV) emission from the black hole X-ray binary system, Cygnus X-1, and investigate its origin. Methods. We analyzed 7.5 yr of data by Fermi-LAT with the latest Pass 8 software version. Results. We report the detection of a signal at similar to 8 sigma statistical significance that is spatially coincident with Cygnus X-1 and has a luminosity of 5.5 x 10(33) erg s(-1), above 60 MeV. The signal is correlated with the hard X-ray flux: the source is observed at high energies only during the hard X-ray spectral state, when the source is known to display persistent, relativistic radio-emitting jets. The energy spectrum, extending up to similar to 20 GeV without any sign of spectral break, is well fit by a power-law function with a photon index of 2.3 +/- 0.2. There is a hint of orbital flux variability, with high-energy emission mostly coming around the superior conjunction. Conclusions. We detected GeV emission from Cygnus X-1 and probed that the emission is most likely associated with the relativistic jets. The evidence of flux orbital variability indicates the anisotropic inverse-Compton on stellar photons as the mechanism at work, thus constraining the emission region to a distance 10(11)-10(13) cm from the black hole.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据