MWN Shock (Clustered Flares) - Revision history

Emma Platts: /* Consistency with Observations */

2019-09-06T10:55:23Z

Consistency with Observations

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:55, 6 September 2019
Line 32:		Line 32:
	== Consistency with Observations ==		== Consistency with Observations ==

	Arecibo telescope and the Robert C. Byrd GreenBank Telescope (GBT) have spent a total of ∼20hrs observing the remnants of six GRBs (5 long and 1 short) with evidence of having a central magnetar similar to a magnetar that is assumed to powers FRB 121102 (~~https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.10222~~.~~pdf~~). No FRBs were observed from these remnants. The probability of non-detection of FRBs akin to FRB 121102 is 8.9×10−6, which challenges the young magnetar model. The theory is not ruled out though: recent localizations of FRB 180924 (Bannister et al.2019) and FRB 190523 (Ravi et al. 2019) suggest that the host galaxy of FRB is abnormal for repeating FRBs.		Arecibo telescope and the Robert C. Byrd GreenBank Telescope (GBT) have spent a total of ∼20hrs observing the remnants of six GRBs (5 long and 1 short) with evidence of having a central magnetar similar to a magnetar that is assumed to powers FRB 121102 (Yunpeng Men et al. 2019). No FRBs were observed from these remnants. The probability of non-detection of FRBs akin to FRB 121102 is 8.9×10−6, which challenges the young magnetar model. The theory is not ruled out though: recent localizations of FRB 180924 (Bannister et al. 2019) and FRB 190523 (Ravi et al. 2019) suggest that the host galaxy of FRB is abnormal for repeating FRBs.

	The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta.		The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta.

Emma Platts: /* Consistency with Observations */

2019-09-06T10:54:37Z

Consistency with Observations

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:54, 6 September 2019
Line 32:		Line 32:
	== Consistency with Observations ==		== Consistency with Observations ==

	Arecibo telescope and the Robert C. Byrd GreenBank Telescope (GBT) have spent a total of ∼20hrs observing the remnants of six GRBs (5 long and 1 short) with evidence of having a central magnetar similar to a magnetar that is assumed to powers FRB 121102 (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.10222.pdf). No FRBs were observed from these remnants. The probability of non-detection of FRBs is 8.9×10−6, which challenges the young magnetar model. The theory is not ruled out though: recent localizations of FRB 180924 (Bannister et al.2019) and FRB 190523 (Ravi et al. 2019) suggest that the host galaxy of FRB is abnormal for repeating FRBs.		Arecibo telescope and the Robert C. Byrd GreenBank Telescope (GBT) have spent a total of ∼20hrs observing the remnants of six GRBs (5 long and 1 short) with evidence of having a central magnetar similar to a magnetar that is assumed to powers FRB 121102 (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.10222.pdf). No FRBs were observed from these remnants. The probability of non-detection of FRBs akin to FRB 121102 is 8.9×10−6, which challenges the young magnetar model. The theory is not ruled out though: recent localizations of FRB 180924 (Bannister et al.2019) and FRB 190523 (Ravi et al. 2019) suggest that the host galaxy of FRB is abnormal for repeating FRBs.

	The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta.		The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta.

Emma Platts at 10:53, 6 September 2019

2019-09-06T10:53:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:53, 6 September 2019
Line 19:		Line 19:
	\|NeutrinoCounterpart = --		\|NeutrinoCounterpart = --
	\|References = http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843L..26B		\|References = http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843L..26B
	\|Comments = ~~Lots of constraints make theory more testable~~.		\|Comments = FRB 121102 may by unlikely in this scenario.
	}}		}}

Line 32:		Line 32:
	== Consistency with Observations ==		== Consistency with Observations ==

	~~The flares from young magnetars are consistent with~~ the ~~properties~~ of the ~~Lorimer burst. FRB 110523 is in-keeping with magnetar flares. Based on the observations~~ of ~~SGR 1806-20, the energy~~ and ~~number~~ of ~~particles in FRB 121102 are found~~ to ~~be consistent with~~ magnetar ~~ejecta, and thus it~~ is ~~arguably more likely~~ to ~~be powered by magnetic fields than rotational energy. The host galaxy of~~ FRB 121102 ~~supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor~~ (~~SLSNe I~~) ~~formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars~~. The ~~variable radio source associated with FRB 121102~~ is ~~consistent with~~ the ~~giant flare~~ theory~~, too~~: ~~it may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB~~ (~~such that only the afterglow is observed~~)~~. Constraints on the large, decreasing RM~~ and ~~required radio transparency for~~ FRB ~~121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe~~. ~~Such a nebula can also account for~~ the ~~observed properties~~ of ~~the variable counterpart associated with~~ FRB ~~121102~~.		Arecibo telescope and the Robert C. Byrd GreenBank Telescope (GBT) have spent a total of ∼20hrs observing the remnants of six GRBs (5 long and 1 short) with evidence of having a central magnetar similar to a magnetar that is assumed to powers FRB 121102 (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.10222.pdf). No FRBs were observed from these remnants. The probability of non-detection of FRBs is 8.9×10−6, which challenges the young magnetar model. The theory is not ruled out though: recent localizations of FRB 180924 (Bannister et al.2019) and FRB 190523 (Ravi et al. 2019) suggest that the host galaxy of FRB is abnormal for repeating FRBs.

	~~Arecibo telescope~~ and the ~~Robert C~~. ~~Byrd GreenBank Telescope~~ (~~GBT~~) ~~have spent~~ a ~~total~~ of ~~∼20hrs observing~~ the ~~remnants~~ of ~~six GRBs~~ with ~~evidence of having a central~~ magnetar ~~(https://arxiv~~.~~org/pdf/1908.10222.pdf). No FRBs were observed from these remnants~~.		The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta.

			Flares are consistent with the properties of the Lorimer burst and of FRB 110523.

	Soft gamma repeaters (SGRs) and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.		Soft gamma repeaters (SGRs) and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.

Emma Platts at 10:39, 6 September 2019

2019-09-06T10:39:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:39, 6 September 2019
Line 28:		Line 28:
	== Observational Constraints ==		== Observational Constraints ==

	High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. Expected to form in active star formation regions, often inside a visible SNR, however may occasionally form far star forming regions. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.		High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. Expected to form in active star formation regions, often inside a visible SNR, however may occasionally form far star forming regions. The event rate of repeating FRBs is expected to be lower than non-repeating. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.

	== Consistency with Observations ==		== Consistency with Observations ==

	The flares from young magnetars are consistent with the properties of the Lorimer burst. FRB 110523 is in-keeping with magnetar flares. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta, and thus it is arguably more likely to be powered by magnetic fields than rotational energy. The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is consistent with the giant flare theory, too: it may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed)~~. Note that for the flare model to be consistent, this emission is expected to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years~~. Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102.		The flares from young magnetars are consistent with the properties of the Lorimer burst. FRB 110523 is in-keeping with magnetar flares. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta, and thus it is arguably more likely to be powered by magnetic fields than rotational energy. The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is consistent with the giant flare theory, too: it may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102.

	A magnetar ~~that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a soft gamma repeater~~ (~~SGR~~). ~~Although~~ SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.		Arecibo telescope and the Robert C. Byrd GreenBank Telescope (GBT) have spent a total of ∼20hrs observing the remnants of six GRBs with evidence of having a central magnetar (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.10222.pdf). No FRBs were observed from these remnants.

			Soft gamma repeaters (SGRs) and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.

Emma Platts at 10:23, 6 September 2019

2019-09-06T10:23:57Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:23, 6 September 2019
Line 29:		Line 29:

	High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. Expected to form in active star formation regions, often inside a visible SNR, however may occasionally form far star forming regions. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.		High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. Expected to form in active star formation regions, often inside a visible SNR, however may occasionally form far star forming regions. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.


	== Consistency with Observations ==		== Consistency with Observations ==

Emma Platts at 10:23, 6 September 2019

2019-09-06T10:23:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:23, 6 September 2019
Line 19:		Line 19:
	\|NeutrinoCounterpart = --		\|NeutrinoCounterpart = --
	\|References = http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843L..26B		\|References = http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843L..26B
	\|Comments = ~~Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts~~.		\|Comments = Lots of constraints make theory more testable.
	}}		}}

Emma Platts at 10:21, 6 September 2019

2019-09-06T10:21:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:21, 6 September 2019
Line 5:		Line 5:
	{{FRBTableTemplate		{{FRBTableTemplate
	\|Category = SNR (Magnetars)		\|Category = SNR (Magnetars)
	\|Progenitor = ~~MWD~~ Shock (Clustered Flares)		\|Progenitor = MWN Shock (Clustered Flares)
	\|Type = Repeat		\|Type = Repeat
	\|EnergyMechanism = Maser		\|EnergyMechanism = Maser
Line 24:		Line 24:
	== Model Description ==		== Model Description ==

	A hyper-active magnetar ~~is proposed to~~ produce multiple millisecond flares at different energies close to the magnetar. Such a magnetar is young with a hyper-energetic SN shell and an ultra-fast rotation period. The multiple flares interact to form a series of shocks before reaching the MWN. The FRBs arise from a synchrotron maser formed by gyrating particles at the shock front. Flares in this scenario arise from ambipolar diffusion in the magnetar core; a process which is then enhanced by the strong magnetic fields associated with the high magnetar spin. The flares will therefore be significantly more energetic than those of usual magnetars. Less active magnetars can emit FRBs by the same mechanism, but these will be non-repeating. Since repeating FRBs call for rarer magnetars, their event rate is expected to be lower.		A hyper-active magnetar may produce multiple millisecond flares at different energies close to the magnetar. Such a magnetar is young with a hyper-energetic SN shell and an ultra-fast rotation period. The multiple flares interact to form a series of shocks before reaching the magnetar wind nebula (MWN). The FRBs arise from a synchrotron maser formed by gyrating particles at the shock front. Flares in this scenario arise from ambipolar diffusion in the magnetar core; a process which is then enhanced by the strong magnetic fields associated with the high magnetar spin. The flares will therefore be significantly more energetic than those of usual magnetars. Less active magnetars can emit FRBs by the same mechanism, but these will be non-repeating. Since repeating FRBs call for rarer magnetars, their event rate is expected to be lower than non-repeating.

	The flares from young magnetars are consistent with the properties of the Lorimer burst. FRB 110523 is in-keeping with magnetar flares. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles N ~ 10^{52} in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta, and thus it is arguably more likely to be powered by magnetic fields than ~~rotational energy. The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long~~-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is consistent with the giant flare theory, too: it may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Note that for the flare model to be consistent, this emission is expected to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years. Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102.

	== Observational Constraints ==		== Observational Constraints ==
Line 32:		Line 30:
	High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. Expected to form in active star formation regions, often inside a visible SNR, however may occasionally form far star forming regions. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.		High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. Expected to form in active star formation regions, often inside a visible SNR, however may occasionally form far star forming regions. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.

	~~SGRs~~:
			== Consistency with Observations ==

			The flares from young magnetars are consistent with the properties of the Lorimer burst. FRB 110523 is in-keeping with magnetar flares. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta, and thus it is arguably more likely to be powered by magnetic fields than rotational energy. The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is consistent with the giant flare theory, too: it may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Note that for the flare model to be consistent, this emission is expected to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years. Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102.

	A magnetar that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a soft gamma repeater (SGR). Although SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.		A magnetar that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a soft gamma repeater (SGR). Although SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.

Emma Platts at 10:18, 6 September 2019

2019-09-06T10:18:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:18, 6 September 2019
Line 30:		Line 30:
	== Observational Constraints ==		== Observational Constraints ==

	High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.		High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. Expected to form in active star formation regions, often inside a visible SNR, however may occasionally form far star forming regions. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.

	SGRs:		SGRs:
	A magnetar that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a soft gamma repeater (SGR). Although SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.		A magnetar that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a soft gamma repeater (SGR). Although SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.

Emma Platts at 10:14, 6 September 2019

2019-09-06T10:14:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:14, 6 September 2019
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|MicrowaveCounterpart = --		\|MicrowaveCounterpart = --
	\|THzCounterpart = --		\|THzCounterpart = --
	\|OIRCounterpart = ~~Maybe~~		\|OIRCounterpart = Possible bright optical
	\|XrayCounterpart = --		\|XrayCounterpart = Yes but ~100 years later
	\|GammarayCounterpart = Low energy gamma-rays, sGRB if jet aligned		\|GammarayCounterpart = Low energy gamma-rays, sGRB if jet aligned
	\|GWCounterpart = Yes		\|GWCounterpart = Yes
	\|NeutrinoCounterpart = --		\|NeutrinoCounterpart = --
	\|References = http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843L..26B		\|References = http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...843L..26B
	\|Comments = ~~None~~		\|Comments = Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts.
	}}		}}

Line 30:		Line 30:
	== Observational Constraints ==		== Observational Constraints ==

	~~From these models, high~~-energy GRBs~~, and possibly a coincident optical flash~~ from the explosion are predicted. ~~Flaring from~~ the reverse shock could lead to additional (lower-energy) gamma-ray emission~~, and the interaction between the~~ GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. ~~A testable signature~~ is ~~that~~ the persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.		High-energy GRBs from the explosion are predicted. A bright optical flash may occur with some FRBs when the blast wave strikes the wind bubble in the tail of a previous flare. The reverse shock could lead to additional lower-energy gamma-ray emission. The GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. Polarization is predicted to be linear and constant through the bursts. The persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.

			SGRs:
	A magnetar that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a soft gamma repeater (SGR). Although SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.		A magnetar that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a soft gamma repeater (SGR). Although SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.

Emma Platts at 09:57, 6 September 2019

2019-09-06T09:57:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:57, 6 September 2019
Line 27:		Line 27:

	The flares from young magnetars are consistent with the properties of the Lorimer burst. FRB 110523 is in-keeping with magnetar flares. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles N ~ 10^{52} in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta, and thus it is arguably more likely to be powered by magnetic fields than rotational energy. The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is consistent with the giant flare theory, too: it may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Note that for the flare model to be consistent, this emission is expected to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years. Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102.		The flares from young magnetars are consistent with the properties of the Lorimer burst. FRB 110523 is in-keeping with magnetar flares. Based on the observations of SGR 1806-20, the energy and number of particles N ~ 10^{52} in FRB 121102 are found to be consistent with magnetar ejecta, and thus it is arguably more likely to be powered by magnetic fields than rotational energy. The host galaxy of FRB 121102 supports the predicted long-duration gamma-ray bursts and hydrogen-poor (SLSNe I) formed in the birth of millisecond magnetars. The variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is consistent with the giant flare theory, too: it may be emission directly from the MWN, the shock interaction between the flare and the MWN, or afterglow from an off-axis LGRB (such that only the afterglow is observed). Note that for the flare model to be consistent, this emission is expected to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years. Constraints on the large, decreasing RM and required radio transparency for FRB 121102 is consistent with a young magnetar with an expanding magnetized electron-ion nebula, akin to those associated with SLSNe. Such a nebula can also account for the observed properties of the variable counterpart associated with FRB 121102.

	The flare theory has been met with various criticisms. The upper limit on RMs of giant flares is 4 orders of magnitude lower than that observed for FRB 121102. The magnetar wind therefore may not have a large enough magnetic field to account for the RM without a massive BH in its vicinity. Should this be the case, the chances of having a young magnetar near a massive BH is far lower than having a regular magnetar. The polarization percentage of pulsar emission has been observed to generally increase with decreasing observing frequency, with some pulsars also having a constant linear polarization percentage below some critical frequency. The variation of RM is also expected to increase as the distance to the pulsar increases. To be consistent with ~ 100 linear polarization and varying RM (~ 10 over 7 months) of FRB 121102, FRBs must originate some distance from the surface of magnetar. This presents a conflict: the enormous brightness temperatures of FRB emission requires strong magnetic fields close to the magnetar surface. The age of the magnetar must also fall within a "Goldilocks Zone": for the appropriate energy budget, the magnetar cannot be too old, but to penetrate ejecta and avoid DM variation it cannot be too young.

	== Observational Constraints ==		== Observational Constraints ==
Line 34:		Line 32:
	From these models, high-energy GRBs, and possibly a coincident optical flash from the explosion are predicted. Flaring from the reverse shock could lead to additional (lower-energy) gamma-ray emission, and the interaction between the GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. A testable signature is that the persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.		From these models, high-energy GRBs, and possibly a coincident optical flash from the explosion are predicted. Flaring from the reverse shock could lead to additional (lower-energy) gamma-ray emission, and the interaction between the GRB and the ejecta could lead to broadband afterglow emission lasting days to weeks. The quasi-steady nebular emission of the MWN itself may be difficult to detect. X-rays are able to penetrate the ejecta, but only on 100 year timescales, and are therefore unlikely to be detected. A testable signature is that the persistent variable radio source associated with FRB 121102 is predicted to decay by ~ 10 within the next few years.

	A magnetar that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a SGR. Although SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20. Searches for GRBs associated with FRBs (repeating and non-repeating) with the Fermi Large Area Telescope (LAT) have not revealed any results, nor have placed any stringent constraints on the magnetar model.		A magnetar that emits bursts at irregular intervals is a soft gamma repeater (SGR). Although SGRs and FRBs share similar properties, such as: characteristic timescales, low duty factors and repetition, there is a crucial difference. SGRs are observed to be entirely thermal with frequencies above the X-ray range, whereas FRBs are observed in radio frequencies. Another possible inconsistency is that the Parkes Telescope failed to detect an FRB counterpart to the giant flare of SGR 1806-20: only one of the fifteen FRBs analyzed has a gamma-ray fluence ratio consistent with the SGR. The bursts of FRB 121102 have varied spectral characteristics, which suggests the observed fluence ratio may vary significantly between different magnetars and between bursts from the same magnetar. FRBs therefore may not be observable for all SGRs, which would explain the lack of a detectable radio counterpart in SGR 1806-20.