4.7 Article

Accurate flux calibration of GW170817: is the X-ray counterpart on the rise?

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stab3533

关键词

stars: neutron; gravitational waves; gamma-ray burst

资金

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) [NNXI6AB66G, NNX17AB18G, S0NSSC20K0389]
  2. National Science Foundation (NSF) [2108950]
  3. European Union [871158]
  4. MIUR [20179ZE5KS]
  5. ERC
  6. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  7. Division Of Astronomical Sciences [2108950] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The X-ray emission from the GW170817 gravitational wave transient is described as non-thermal afterglow radiation produced by a structured relativistic jet viewed off-axis, and continues to be detected 3.3 years after the merger. While there is no evidence of an increase in X-ray flux, a growing tension between observations and the jet model is confirmed, prompting the need for further observations at radio and X-ray wavelengths to break the degeneracy between models.
X-ray emission from the gravitational wave transient GW170817 is well described as non-thermal afterglow radiation produced by a structured relativistic jet viewed off-axis. We show that the X-ray counterpart continues to be detected at 3.3 years after the merger. Such long-lasting signal is not a prediction of the earlier jet models characterized by a narrow jet core and a viewing angle approximate to 20 deg, and is spurring a renewed interest in the origin of the X-ray emission. We present a comprehensive analysis of the X-ray dataset aimed at clarifying existing discrepancies in the literature, and in particular the presence of an X-ray rebrightening at late times. Our analysis does not find evidence for an increase in the X-ray flux, but confirms a growing tension between the observations and the jet model. Further observations at radio and X-ray wavelengths would be critical to break the degeneracy between models.

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

4.7
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