1: \documentclass[12pt]{emulateapj}
2:
3: \shorttitle{GRB\,060927 at $z = 5.47$}
4: \shortauthors{Ruiz-Velasco et al.}
5:
6: \begin{document}
7:
8: \title{Detection of GRB~060927 at \symbol{122} = 5.47: Implications for the Use of
9: Gamma-Ray Bursts as Probes of the End of the Dark Ages%
10: \altaffilmark{1}}
11: \author{
12: A. E. Ruiz-Velasco\altaffilmark{2,3},
13: H. Swan\altaffilmark{4},
14: E. Troja\altaffilmark{5,6,7},
15: D. Malesani\altaffilmark{2},
16: J. P. U. Fynbo\altaffilmark{2},
17: R. L. C. Starling\altaffilmark{5},
18: D. Xu\altaffilmark{2},
19: F. Aharonian\altaffilmark{8},
20: C. Akerlof\altaffilmark{4},
21: M. I. Andersen\altaffilmark{9},
22: M. C. B. Ashley\altaffilmark{10},
23: S. D. Barthelmy\altaffilmark{11},
24: D. Bersier\altaffilmark{12},
25: J. M. Castro Cer\'on\altaffilmark{2},
26: A. J. Castro-Tirado\altaffilmark{13},
27: N. Gehrels\altaffilmark{11},
28: E. G\"o\u{g}\"u\c{s}\altaffilmark{14},
29: J. Gorosabel\altaffilmark{13},
30: C. Guidorzi\altaffilmark{12,15},
31: T. G\"{u}ver\altaffilmark{16},
32: J. Hjorth\altaffilmark{2},
33: D. Horns\altaffilmark{8},
34: K. Y. Huang\altaffilmark{17},
35: P. Jakobsson\altaffilmark{18},
36: B. L. Jensen\altaffilmark{2},
37: \"{U}. K{\i}z{\i}lo\v{g}lu\altaffilmark{19},
38: C. Kouveliotou\altaffilmark{20},
39: H. A. Krimm\altaffilmark{11,21},
40: C. Ledoux\altaffilmark{22},
41: A. J. Levan\altaffilmark{23},
42: T. Marsh\altaffilmark{23},
43: T. McKay\altaffilmark{4},
44: A. Melandri\altaffilmark{12},
45: B. Milvang-Jensen\altaffilmark{2},
46: C. G. Mundell\altaffilmark{12},
47: P. T. O'Brien\altaffilmark{5},
48: M. \"{O}zel\altaffilmark{24},
49: A. Phillips\altaffilmark{10},
50: R. Quimby\altaffilmark{25},
51: G. Rowell\altaffilmark{8},
52: W. Rujopakarn\altaffilmark{26},
53: E. S. Rykoff\altaffilmark{4},
54: B. E. Schaefer\altaffilmark{27},
55: J. Sollerman\altaffilmark{2},
56: N. R. Tanvir\altaffilmark{5},
57: C. C. Th\"one\altaffilmark{2},
58: Y. Urata\altaffilmark{28},
59: W. T. Vestrand\altaffilmark{29},
60: P. M. Vreeswijk\altaffilmark{22},
61: D. Watson\altaffilmark{2},
62: J. C. Wheeler\altaffilmark{25},
63: R. A. M. J. Wijers\altaffilmark{30},
64: J. Wren\altaffilmark{29},
65: S. A. Yost\altaffilmark{4},
66: F. Yuan\altaffilmark{4},
67: M. Zhai\altaffilmark{31} and
68: W. K. Zheng\altaffilmark{31}.
69: }
70:
71: \altaffiltext{1}{Partly based on observations carried out with the ESO telescopes under
72: programmes 077.D-0661, 077.A-0667, 078.D-0416, and the large programme 177.A-f0591.}
73:
74: \altaffiltext{2}{Dark Cosmology Centre, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Juliane Maries Vej 30, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark}
75:
76: \altaffiltext{3}{Departmento de Astronom\'ia, Universidad de Guanajuato, Apartado Postal 144, 36000 Guanajuato, Mexico}
77:
78: \altaffiltext{4}{University of Michigan, 2477 Randall Laboratory, 450 Church St., Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA}
79:
80: \altaffiltext{5}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK}
81:
82: \altaffiltext{6}{INAF-Istituto di Astrofisica Spaziale e Fisica Cosmica Sezione di Palermo, Via Ugo La Malfa 153, 90146 Palermo, Italy}
83:
84: \altaffiltext{7}{Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiche ed Astronomiche, Sezione di Astronomia, Universit\`a di Palermo, Piazza del Parlamento 1, 90134 Palermo, Italy}
85:
86: \altaffiltext{8}{Max-Planck-Institut f\"{u}r Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany}
87:
88: \altaffiltext{9}{Astrophysikalisches Institut, 14482 Potsdam, Germany}
89:
90: \altaffiltext{10}{School of Physics, Department of Astrophysics and Optics, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia}
91:
92: \altaffiltext{11}{NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA}
93:
94: \altaffiltext{12}{Astrophysics Research Institute, Liverpool John Moores University, Twelve Quays House, Egerton Wharf, Birkenhead CH41 1LD, UK}
95:
96: \altaffiltext{13}{Instituto de Astrof\'isica de Andaluc\'ia (IAA-CSIC), Apartado de Correos, 3.004, E-18.080 Granada, Spain}
97:
98: \altaffiltext{14}{Sabanc{\i} University, Orhanl{\i}-Tuzla 34956 Istanbul, Turkey}
99:
100: \altaffiltext{15}{INAF-Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, via Bianchi 46, 23807, Merate, Italy}
101:
102: \altaffiltext{16}{Istanbul University, Science Faculty Department of Astronomy \& Space Sciences, Istanbul 34119, Turkey}
103:
104: \altaffiltext{17}{Institute of Astronomy, National Central University, Ching-Li 32054, Taiwan}
105:
106: \altaffiltext{18}{Centre for Astrophysics Research, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Herts AL10 9AB, UK}
107:
108: \altaffiltext{19}{Middle East Technical University, 06531 Ankara, Turkey}
109:
110: \altaffiltext{20}{NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, NSSTC, VP-62, 320 Sparkman Drive, Huntsville, AL 35805, USA}
111:
112: \altaffiltext{21}{Universities Space Research Association, 10211 Wincopan Circle, Suite 500, Columbia, MD 21044, USA}
113:
114: \altaffiltext{22}{European Southern Observatory, Alonso de C\'ordova 3107, Casilla 19001, Vitacura, Santiago 19, Chile}
115:
116: \altaffiltext{23}{Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK}
117:
118: \altaffiltext{24}{\c{C}anakkale Onsekiz Mart \"{U}niversitesi, Terzio\v{g}lu 17020, \c{C}anakkale, Turkey}
119:
120: \altaffiltext{25}{Department of Astronomy, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, USA}
121:
122: \altaffiltext{26}{Steward Observatory, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA}
123:
124: \altaffiltext{27}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge Louisiana 70803, USA}
125:
126: \altaffiltext{28}{Department of Physics, Saitama University, Shimo-Okubo, Sakura, Saitama 338-8570, Japan}
127:
128: \altaffiltext{29}{Los Alamos National Laboratory, NIS-2 MS D436, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA}
129:
130: \altaffiltext{30}{Institute of Astronomy ``Anton Pannekoek'', University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 403, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands}
131:
132: \altaffiltext{31}{National Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100012, China}
133:
134: \begin{abstract}
135:
136: We report on follow-up observations of the gamma-ray burst GRB\,060927
137: using the robotic ROTSE-IIIa telescope and a suite of larger aperture
138: ground-based telescopes. An optical afterglow was detected 20~s after the
139: burst, the earliest rest-frame detection of optical emission from any GRB.
140: Spectroscopy performed with the VLT about 13 hours after the trigger shows a
141: continuum break at $\lambda \approx 8070$~\AA, produced by neutral hydrogen
142: absorption at $z \approx 5.6$. We also detect an absorption line at 8158 \AA{}
143: which we interpret as \ion{Si}{2} $\lambda$ 1260 at $z=5.467$. Hence,
144: GRB\,060927 is the second most distant GRB with a spectroscopically measured
145: redshift. The shape of the red wing of the spectral break can be fitted by a
146: damped Ly$\alpha$ profile with a column density with $\log(N_{\rm
147: HI}$/cm$^{-2}) = 22.50 \pm 0.15$. We discuss the implications of this work for the
148: use of GRBs as probes of the end of the dark ages and draw three main
149: conclusions: {\it i)} GRB afterglows originating from $z \gtrsim 6$ should be
150: relatively easy to detect from the ground, but rapid near-infrared monitoring is
151: necessary to ensure that they are found;
152: {\it ii)} The presence of large \ion{H}{1} column
153: densities in some GRBs host galaxies at $z>5$ makes
154: the use of GRBs to probe the reionization epoch via spectroscopy of the red
155: damping wing challenging; {\it iii)} GRBs appear crucial to locate typical
156: star-forming galaxies at $z > 5$ and therefore the type of galaxies responsible
157: for the reionization of the universe.
158:
159: \end{abstract}
160:
161: \keywords{gamma rays: bursts (\objectname{GRB\,060927}) --- cosmology}
162:
163:
164: \section{INTRODUCTION}
165:
166: It is well established that most long-duration gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are
167: caused by the death of massive stars \citep[e.g.][]{galama,jensNature,stanek03} and,
168: due to their brightness, they can be seen throughout the observable universe
169: \citep{Kawai}. Given these facts, it has long been realized that GRBs could be
170: powerful probes of star-formation activity throughout the history of the
171: universe \citep[e.g.][]{wijers98}. The currently operating \textit{Swift}
172: satellite \citep{gehrels} has revolutionized the GRB field: it has not only
173: increased the detection rate of rapidly well-localized GRBs by roughly an order
174: of magnitude compared to previous missions, but it also detects much fainter
175: and more distant bursts \citep{palli06}.
176: %compared to previous missions
177: In the \textit{Swift} era, GRBs have indeed become cosmological probes of the
178: early Universe, as already extensively predicted in the literature
179: %With \textit{Swift}, it is now a practical proposition
180: %to use GRBs to probe the early universe back to the end of the dark ages. This
181: %possibility has already been extensively discussed in the literature
182: \citep[e.g.][]{wijers98,lamb2000}. In particular, \citet{barkana} argue that
183: GRBs may be optimal probes of the epoch of reionization.
184:
185: Here we present observations of GRB\,060927 for which we determine a very high
186: redshift ($z=5.467$, \S~\ref{sec:redshift}). In \S~\ref{sec:afterglow} we
187: discuss the light curve and the properties of the afterglow in the context of
188: the fireball model. In \S~\ref{sec:darkages} we end by revisiting the question
189: of how GRBs may be used to probe the end of the dark ages.
190:
191: Throughout this paper we assume a cosmology with $H_0 = 70$
192: km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{\rm m} = 0.3$ and $\Omega_\Lambda = 0.7$. In
193: this model, a redshift of 5.47 corresponds to a luminosity distance
194: $D_{\rm{lum}} = 51.9$ Gpc and a distance modulus $\mu = 48.6$~mag. At that distance,
195: $1\arcsec$ on the sky corresponds to 6.01 proper kpc and the look-back time is
196: 12.4 Gyr (roughly 92\% of the time since the Big Bang).
197:
198:
199: \section{OBSERVATIONS AND DATA ANALYSIS}
200:
201: \subsection{High-Energy Properties}
202: \label{sec:highenergy}
203:
204: GRB\,060927 and its X-ray afterglow were detected by the Burst Alert Telescope
205: (BAT) and the X-ray Telescope (XRT) on-board the \textit{Swift} spacecraft on
206: 2006 September 27.58860 UT. At the measured redshift of $z=5.47$
207: (\S~\ref{sec:redshift}) the BAT 15--150~keV energy band and the XRT 0.3--10~keV
208: energy band correspond to 97--970~keV and 1.9--64.7~keV in the source rest
209: frame, respectively. Here we describe the burst phenomenology as observed by
210: the \textit{Swift} instruments. Data have been analyzed using the standard
211: analysis software distributed within FTOOLS%
212: \footnote{\texttt{http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov}\,.} v.~6.1.1.
213:
214: The gamma-ray prompt emission shows a complex light curve with an initial
215: bright episode, split into two peaks. The peak flux is reached during the first
216: peak, $\sim 0.7$~s after the trigger ($T_0$), and the emission subsequently
217: decays to the background level at $\sim T_{0}+9$~s. A fainter bump is visible
218: at $\sim T_{0}+20$~s. The observed duration is $T_{90} = 22.6\pm0.3$~s, which,
219: accounting for the $(1+z)$ time stretching factor, corresponds to
220: $3.54\pm0.05$~s in the source rest frame. GRB\,060927 is thus a long-duration
221: GRB \citep{Kouv93}, both in the observer's frame and in the rest frame.
222:
223: A simple power-law model is not a good fit to the BAT time-average spectrum of
224: the burst ($\chi^2 = 72$ for 57 d.o.f.). A significant improvement is achieved
225: by adopting a cutoff power law ($\chi^2 = 58$ for 56 d.o.f.), which provides a
226: photon index $\Gamma = 0.9 \pm 0.4$ and a peak energy $E_{\rm p} =
227: 72_{-6}^{+39}$~keV. The observed burst fluence is $1.1^{+0.2}_{-0.7} \times
228: 10^{-6}$ erg~cm$^{-2}$ in the 15--150~keV band. A fit with a Band model
229: \citep{band93} does not significantly improve the $\chi^2$ value, albeit this
230: can be due to the low sensitivity of BAT at high energies. Using the best-fit model,
231: we can classify GRB\,060927 as an X-ray rich GRB using the definition proposed
232: by \citet{Lamb}. During the initial prompt emission, hard-to-soft spectral
233: evolution is present, the first spike being significantly harder than the
234: second. The spectrum of the late bump is consistent with that of the second
235: spike.
236:
237: The X-ray afterglow was detected by XRT about 70~s after the trigger and it was
238: monitored for the following 3 days. The X-ray afterglow position, calculated
239: using the updated boresight \citep{gcn5750}, is $\mbox{R.A. (J2000)} = 21^{\rm
240: h} 58^{\rm m} 12\fs03$, $\mbox{decl. (J2000)} = 05\arcdeg 21\arcmin 49\farcs4$,
241: with a 90\% error radius of 3\farcs7. This position is within 0\farcs7 of the
242: optical counterpart (\S~\ref{sec:imaging}). The X-ray light curve displays an
243: initial shallow decay with a slope $\alpha_1 = 0.71 \pm 0.06$, steepening to
244: $\alpha_2 = 1.35\pm0.11$ at $\sim4$~ks after the trigger. The spectrum is
245: modeled with an absorbed power law with photon index $\Gamma = 1.87\pm0.17$.
246: After correcting for the Galactic absorption $N_{\rm H} = 5.2 \times
247: 10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$, the 90\% confidence limit for the intrinsic absorption is
248: $N_{\rm H} < 3.4 \times 10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$ (observer frame). Indeed, little
249: observed X-ray absorption is expected at this large redshift (\citealt{grupe};
250: although see GRB\,050904: \citealt{Watson06,Cusumano06,Campana07}), since most
251: of the important absorption edges have been redshifted out of the observed
252: X-ray region.
253: %The spectrum is modeled with an absorbed power law with photon index
254: %$1.87\pm0.17$ and an {\em intrinsic} host absorption $<3.4 \times
255: %10^{22}$~cm$^{-2}$ at the 90\% confidence level, corresponding to a
256: %hydrogen column density of $1.3\times10^{22}\,$ cm$^{-2}$,
257: %additional to the Galactic one,
258: %over and above the Galactic value which is fixed to be $5.2 \times
259: %10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$ \citep{dl90}.
260: The unabsorbed flux in the 0.3--10~keV energy band from $T_0+75$~s to
261: $T_0+11.3$~ks is $(5.7\pm0.8) \times 10^{-12}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ from
262: which we derive a lower limit of $10^{-6}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$ to the fluence emitted
263: by the X-ray afterglow.
264:
265:
266: \subsection{Ground-Based Imaging Observations}
267: \label{sec:imaging}
268:
269: The optical afterglow was first detected by the 45~cm telescope of the Robotic
270: Optical Transient Search Experiment in Australia (ROTSE-IIIa). The first
271: unfiltered image started 16.5~s after the burst trigger \citep{schaefer},
272: which corresponds to 3~s in the GRB rest frame. Therefore, this is the
273: earliest rest-frame detection of optical emission from any GRB%
274: \footnote{See \texttt{http://grad40.as.utexas.edu/grblog.php}\,.}.
275:
276: Subsequent follow-up observations were obtained by several ground-based
277: facilities. In particular, we used the data from the following instruments:
278: %the 85~cm Xinglong Optical Telescope located at Yanshan mountains, China;
279: the robotic 2.0~m Faulkes Telescope South (FTS) located at the Siding Spring
280: Observatory, Australia, equipped with RatCam;
281: %, which began automatic observing 1.78 minutes after the trigger
282: the 105~cm Schmidt Telescope at the Kiso Observatory in Japan;
283: the 2.56~m Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT), equipped with ALFOSC at La Palma
284: (Canary Islands); the 4.2~m William Herschel Telescope (WHT), using the Aux
285: port imager, also at La Palma; the 1.54~m Danish Telescope situated at La
286: Silla Observatory in Chile; and the 8.2~m Antu and Kueyen Unit Telescopes of
287: the ESO Very Large Telescope (VLT) on Cerro Paranal in Chile, equipped with
288: FORS2 and FORS1, respectively. Near-infrared (NIR) observations were secured
289: using the ISAAC camera on the ESO VLT Antu. In Table~\ref{tb:log}, we provide
290: the complete observing log.
291: %The first column indicates the epoch of the beginning of the observations
292: %(UT). The first line indicates the time of the BAT trigger on board
293: %\textit{Swift}, used as the reference for the second column, the time elapsed
294: %between the observations and the GRB. The third column indicates the magnitude
295: %with its error. For the ROTSE data, a correction for the Ly$\alpha$ forest
296: %absorption and Galactic extinction has been applied (Sect.~3.1). For the rest,
297: %we report the observed magnitudes. The fourth column shows the flux density in
298: %units of erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$~Hz$^{-1}$ centered at $\lambda_{0} =
299: %8191$~\AA{} (see Sect.~3.1). The fifth column shows the exposure time in
300: %seconds (times the number of exposures in some cases). The sixth column
301: %indicates the adopted filter, and the last column lists the telescope name and
302: %its diameter in meters.
303: The reduction of the optical and NIR data was performed using standard IRAF%
304: \footnote{IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories,
305: which are operated by the Association of Universities for Research in
306: Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science
307: Foundation.}
308: tools. The photometry of the afterglow was performed using both PSF-matched and
309: aperture photometry.
310:
311: Using the VLT image from 2006 September 30, we determined the position of the
312: afterglow to be $\mbox{R.A. (J2000)} = 21^{\rm h} 58^{\rm m} 12\fs02$,
313: $\mbox{decl. (J2000)} = +05\arcdeg 21\arcmin 48\farcs9$, relative
314: to $\approx 30$ isolated, non saturated USNO-B1 stars. The estimated uncertainty
315: is about 0\farcs2 in each coordinate.
316:
317: The detection of the afterglow by ROTSE and the lack of an optical counterpart
318: observation by UVOT on board \textit{Swift} \citep{Oates06a} revealed within a
319: few minutes that the afterglow of GRB\,060927 was very red. This was soon
320: confirmed by the FTS observations, which showed an $I$-band afterglow with no
321: corresponding $R$-band emission within the first 30 minutes after the GRB
322: \citep{guidorzia}. Later, deep WHT observations taken 8.9~hr after
323: the burst indicated $R-I > 2.0$. The $R$-band image from the NOT taken 6.2~hr
324: after the burst reveals a low signal-to-noise detection of the afterglow with $R \sim 24.4$.
325: After realizing the high redshift nature of the GRB (see below) we obtained
326: deep $I$-band imaging with the VLT leading to a detection of the afterglow
327: $\sim 2.6$ days after the burst, and an upper limit at 15 days. We also
328: obtained VLT/ISAAC NIR imaging leading to tentative detections in the $J$ and
329: $K$ bands. No host galaxy was detected down to $I > 25.8$ ($3\sigma$ limit). In
330: Fig.~\ref{fg:image} we show the afterglow of GRB\,060927 as detected in the
331: ROTSE and $I$-band VLT exposures.
332:
333:
334:
335:
336: \subsection{Spectroscopic Observations and Redshift Determination}
337: \label{sec:redshift}
338:
339: Spectroscopic observations were performed with the FORS1 instrument at the VLT
340: 12.5~hr after the trigger. We used the grism 300V covering the spectral range
341: from 3600 to 8900~\AA{} at a resolution of 12~\AA{} (using a 1\farcs0 wide
342: slit). The acquisition was performed by aligning the slit with a galaxy
343: $3\farcs1$ North of the afterglow and using a position angle for which the
344: slit covered the afterglow position ($\mathrm{PA} = 20\arcdeg$ West of North).
345: The afterglow was not detected in the $R$-band acquisition image down to a
346: limiting magnitude $R \sim 24.0$.
347:
348: In the spectrum, a faint continuum is detected at the expected position of the
349: afterglow, but only redward of $\lambda = 8070$~\AA. This feature is similar
350: to what is seen in the spectra of quasars at redshift $z > 5$ \citep{cool}.
351: From this clear and sharp discontinuity in the spectrum we conclude that
352: GRB\,060927 is a high-redshift event, and is not red because of dust extinction. We
353: interpret the absorption blueward of the break, where the flux level is
354: consistent with zero, as a Ly$\alpha$ forest trough at redshift $z \approx
355: 5.6$. In the sky-subtracted two-dimensional spectrum we also clearly detect a
356: single absorption line at $\lambda = 8148$~\AA{} in a wavelength region clear of bright sky
357: lines (see Fig.~\ref{fg:spec}). This is most likely \ion{Si}{2} $\lambda$ 1260
358: at a redshift of $z = 5.467$. At this redshift we would also expect
359: \ion{O}{1}/\ion{Si}{2} at 1303~\AA{} and \ion{C}{2} at 1335~\AA{}, but these
360: fall on bright sky lines and hence would not be detectable. This value for the
361: redshift supersedes our preliminary determination \citep{Fynbo06}. The difference in
362: the redshift derived using the hydrogen and silicon lines is due to the
363: presence of strong neutral hydrogen absorption (see \S~\ref{sec:Lyalpha}): the
364: damping wing of the Ly$\alpha$ trough effectively shifts the cutoff at redder
365: wavelengths, mimicking the effect of a larger redshift. In Fig.~\ref{fg:spec}
366: we show the one-dimensional flux- and wavelength-calibrated spectrum (upper
367: panel) and the processed CCD image (lower panel). In the latter, we can see the
368: sharp continuum break in the afterglow spectrum. The two traces above
369: correspond to nearby objects falling on the slit. We last note that the
370: pseudo-redshift for this burst \citep{pseudoz_GCN,pseudoz_paper} is $\hat{z} =
371: 2.37 \pm 0.75$, significantly different (4$\sigma$) from the spectroscopic
372: value.
373:
374:
375: \subsection{Fitting the Red Damping Wing}
376: \label{sec:Lyalpha}
377:
378: Measuring the shape of the absorption profile of the damping wing provides a
379: determination of the column density of the neutral hydrogen along the line of
380: sight to the progenitor in the host \citep{madau}. Using the Fit-Lyman program
381: within MIDAS, we fitted the wing shape with a Damped Ly$\alpha$ absorber system
382: centered at 7861~\AA{}, assuming $z_{\rm DLA} = z_{\rm Si\,II} = 5.467$. In
383: Fig.~\ref{fg:Lyalpha} we show the fit to the Ly$\alpha$ and \ion{Si}{2}
384: $\lambda$ 1260 absorption line profiles in a $\pm 30,000$~km~s$^{-1}$ velocity
385: interval (solid curve). The best-fit column density is estimated to have
386: $\log(N_{\rm HI} / {\rm cm}^{-2}) = 22.50 \pm 0.15$.
387: The $N_{HI}$ value is firmly set by the core of the DLA line, i.e., the part of the
388: spectrum which has zero residual flux, whatever the continuum normalisation is.
389: while the error is mostly due to
390: the continuum placement. The $N_{\rm HI}$ value is in the
391: range of those found for other \textit{Swift} GRBs at $z > 2$ \citep{palli06b},
392: although at the high end of the distribution.
393: %and could be a serious obstacle if we want to use this as a probe of the end
394: %of the dark ages.
395:
396:
397:
398:
399: \section{AFTERGLOW PROPERTIES}
400: \label{sec:afterglow}
401:
402: \subsection{Light Curve}
403: \label{sec:lc}
404:
405: A major complication with the analysis of the optical light curve is the
406: photometric calibration. The ROTSE data were taken with no filter. For the
407: other telescopes, the $I$-band data were obtained using three different filter
408: variants: an SDSS-like $i$ filter for the FTS, the cutoff Harris $I$ for the
409: WHT, and the ``standard'' Bessell $I$ for the VLT. For all of them, a
410: significant fraction of the light within the effective filter passband is
411: absorbed by the Ly$\alpha$ forest. This makes it difficult to obtain a
412: meaningful calibrated magnitude or flux from the measured counts.
413:
414: The ROTSE telescope spectral response is
415: determined by the CCD characteristics, which results in an equivalent broadband
416: filter with a spectral window from 3000 to 10,000~\AA{} and a peak efficiency
417: around 6000~\AA{}. Due to absorption by the Ly$\alpha$ forest, we expect little
418: flux blueward of 8000~\AA{} and therefore our effective response for the
419: optical transient is closer to the $I$ band rather than to the $R$ band. To obtain a
420: consistently calibrated afterglow flux, we have used the SDSS photometry of
421: neighboring stars \citep{CoolGCN,Adelman} to establish the numerical
422: conversion factors from ROTSE magnitudes to photon count rates. Six bright,
423: unsaturated and isolated SDSS stars were selected near the GRB for this
424: calibration, spanning a broad range of stellar color. By using the four-band
425: $griz$ SDSS data for these stars, we estimated the total flux in the ROTSE
426: passband. After convolving these total fluxes with the ROTSE spectral response
427: function a model flux for each of the six comparison stars was produced. The RMS
428: variation of these computed values to the ROTSE measurements was 0.09~mag,
429: which gives a reasonable measure of the absolute accuracy of this procedure.
430: We note, however, that since the counterpart was close to detection threshold,
431: statistical uncertainties were always dominating the total error budget.
432:
433: The next step requires some assumptions about the spectral energy distribution
434: of the GRB afterglow. We adopted a ``typical'' power-law form, $F_\nu(\nu)
435: \propto \nu^{-\beta}$, with $\beta = 0.75$ (see also \S~\ref{sec:SED}). This
436: spectrum was folded first with the Ly$\alpha$ absorption in the intergalactic
437: medium (IGM) using the model described by \citet{Meiksin2005} and, second, with
438: the ROTSE spectral response. In the ROTSE passband, 83\% of the GRB flux is
439: absorbed by the IGM. Since optical observations must be compared over four
440: different optical passbands, it is desirable to pick a reference wavelength
441: $\lambda_0$ common to all of them in order to minimize the effects of the
442: uncertainty in $\beta$. A sensible choice for $\lambda_0$ requires it to be
443: higher than the Ly$\alpha$ cutoff frequency (corresponding to 8000~\AA) and
444: lower than the long-wavelength cutoff of any of the various $I$-band filters
445: (i.e., 8650~\AA{} for FTS $i$). From the above constraints, we chose
446: arbitrarily $\lambda_0 = 8190$~\AA. Rather than quoting magnitudes based on large
447: extrapolations to actual filter bandwidths, we computed the spectral flux
448: density at the value of $\lambda_0$ indicated above. We also checked the effect
449: of varying the afterglow spectral index $\beta$ by $\pm 0.25$. Since the
450: observed spectral region is narrowly confined by the Ly$\alpha$ cutoff and by
451: the edge of the filters, the corresponding fluxes are not much changed (by
452: $\sim 1\%$). The inferred flux numerical values are listed in
453: Table~\ref{tb:log}, and have been corrected for the Galactic extinction $E(B-V)
454: = 0.06$~mag \citep{Nh} as well.
455:
456: A similar, but simpler procedure was carried out for the data obtained from the
457: other telescopes. These were in fact equipped with narrow-band filters, so
458: the fraction of light inside the filter lost due to the
459: intergalactic medium absorption was computed. Taking into account the appropriate filter
460: sensitivity functions and the detector quantum efficiencies, this fraction is
461: $68\%$, $47\%$, and $56\%$ for the FTS, WHT, and VLT, respectively.
462:
463: We also note that the afterglow was marginally detected in the $R$ band by the
464: NOT and by the Danish 1.54 m telescopes. This detection is very likely due to
465: the extension of the $R$-band filter response redward of 8000~\AA. Using the
466: tabulated filter efficiency, we estimate that $\approx 6\%$ of the light is
467: transmitted (3~mag suppression). Considering the observed color $R - I = 2.3
468: \pm 0.3$, and correcting for the Ly$\alpha$ suppression in both filters, we
469: infer an intrinsic $R - I = 0.2 \pm 0.3$, which is consistent with normal
470: afterglow colors given the large uncertainty. We thus confirm that very small
471: light is transmitted blueward of the Ly$\alpha$ cutoff.
472:
473: %In order to plot the $I$-band measurements on the same scale as the ROTSE
474: %points we estimate the fraction of afterglow light in the transmission defined
475: %by the respective $I$-band filters and CCD efficiency curves that is absorbed
476: %away. For the Faulkes, WHT and VLT observations these fractions are XX, YY
477: %and 60.5\%, respectively. We then correct the $I$-band magnitudes for this
478: %absorption.
479:
480:
481: %%%Reference to Fig. 4 %%%
482:
483: In Fig.~\ref{fg:lc} we present the light curve of the GRB\,060927 afterglow,
484: showing $I$-band corrected fluxes and X-ray data points. The X-ray afterglow
485: seems to be rather typical \citep{Zhang06,OB06,Nousek06}. At early times
486: ($t \lesssim 3000 s$) it is characterized by a shallow decay, with temporal
487: index $\alpha_1 \approx 0.7$. Comparison with the extrapolation of the BAT flux also
488: implies a steep decline before the beginning of the observation, showing that
489: GRB\,060927 had all the three ``canonical'' phases. The shallow decline
490: steepened to $\alpha_2 \approx 1.3$ at $\sim 4$~ks after the trigger.
491:
492: The situation is different in the optical. After $\sim 500$~s the data are
493: fairly well described by a single power law with decay index $\alpha = 1.17 \pm
494: 0.03$ ($\chi^2 = 3.6$ with 6 d.o.f.). The early ROTSE data, however, lie
495: significantly below the extrapolation of the late light curve; a single
496: power-law fit to the full $I$-band data set provides an unacceptable $\chi^2 =
497: 86$ for 11 d.o.f.. A flat light curve between 300 and 1000 s is also visible
498: in the Kiso $R$-band data. The last ROTSE points agree well with the FTS data, so that
499: the difference cannot be due to an intercalibration problem.
500:
501: One possibility is
502: that a break was present also in the optical, at $\sim 500$~s after the
503: trigger. Alternatively, the peak at $\sim 300$~s after the GRB may suggest a
504: rebrightening. The flux after the peak follows a single power law, indicating
505: that no flare was present. Rather, the flux was steadily larger than the
506: extrapolation of the behavior before the brightening. This step-like behavior
507: is consistent with being due to an episode of energy injection. Energy
508: injection is also often invoked to explain the shallow X-ray decay
509: \citep[e.g.][]{Zhang06}, albeit in GRB\,060927 the shallow phase ended significantly
510: later than the brightening episode. A different possibility is that the early
511: emission was due to another component, like a reverse shock or central engine
512: activity (note that the first ROTSE measurements are simultaneous to the last
513: peak of the prompt emission).
514:
515: %Although there is some scatter, the optical light curve is fairly well
516: %represented by a power-law decay with decay slope $\alpha \approx 0.7$ from
517: %the early ROTSE point to the latest detection with the VLT at 2.6 days past
518: %burst. %The slope connecting the last two detections looks steeper than for
519: %the early data (corresponding to $\alpha = 1.34 \pm 0.12$), and could suggest
520: %a break at $t \la 10^5$~s. However, the uncertainties in the flux conversion
521: %and the large statistical errors of the early data prevent us from drawing firm
522: %conclusions.
523:
524: It is remarkable that the observed $I$-band flux is declining by the very early
525: observation (3 s in the GRB rest frame). This is difficult to explain in the
526: context of the standard afterglow model \citep[e.g.][]{Sari98}. The flux is
527: indeed expected to rise before the so-called deceleration time $t_{\rm dec}$.
528: If the early emission was due to the forward shock, our data constrain $t_{\rm
529: dec} \la 3$~s (GRB frame). This translates into a lower limit on the fireball
530: initial Lorentz factor $\Gamma_0 \ga 1000$. Furthermore, a break in the light
531: curve is expected when the injection frequency $\nu_{\rm inj}$ crosses the
532: observed band. The lack of such a break requires that $\nu_{\rm inj}$ was
533: already below the optical range at the beginning of our observations. Very small
534: equipartition parameters are required for this to happen. These difficulties
535: may also support the idea that the early emission was not due to the forward
536: shock.
537:
538: %This would require a large fireball Lorentz factor (so that the afterglow
539: %onset is very early) and low equipartition parameters (so the synchrotron
540: %injection frequency is redward of the observed band).
541:
542: %A common interpretation for the shallow decline phase is energy injection. The
543: %presence of the rebrightening at optical wavelengths might be consistent wi
544:
545: %The $I$-band data could be well fitted by a single power-law from 0.01 day to
546: %2.6 day with a temporal index of $\simeq0.8$, which is significantly different
547: %from the simultaneous X-ray decline
548:
549: The optical and X-ray decay slopes at late times are marginally consistent.
550: This is in agreement with the broad-band spectral analysis carried out at $t
551: \sim 5700$~s (\S~\ref{sec:SED}), which shows that the overall SED is well
552: described by a single power law. The hard spectral index $\beta \approx 0.7$
553: (Table~\ref{tb:SED}) suggests the cooling frequency was above the X-ray region.
554: However, as discussed before, at early times the X-ray emission was flatter,
555: and the optical light curve showed no steepening at the X-ray break time. This
556: behavior has already been noted in a number of \textit{Swift} bursts
557: \citep[e.g.][]{Panaitescu06}.
558:
559: %and may suggest that the $I$-band and X-ray emissions lie in different
560: %segments of the spectrum, or that they are produced in distinct regions. The
561: %spectral analysis at $t \sim 5700$~s (Sect.~\ref{sec:SED}), however, shows no
562: %evidence for a break between the optical to X-ray bands. Because of the
563: %sparseness of the data, it is difficult to draw more robust conclusions.
564:
565: %We have also attempted to model the available data using the code described by
566: %\citet{Huang00} and \citet{FP06}, to provide a qualitative description of the
567: %afterglow. The model has five parameters, as usual in afterglow modeling.
568: %These are the fireball kinetic energy $E_{\rm k}$, the fraction of energy
569: %gained by the electrons and by the magnetic field $\varepsilon_{\rm e}$ and
570: %$\varepsilon_{\rm B}$, the circumburst number density $n$, and the electron
571: %distribution index $p$. The adopted parameters are reported in
572: %Fig.~\ref{fg:lc}, and include an episode of energy injection. From the
573: %comparison of the prompt emission energy $E_{\rm iso}$ with the fireball
574: %energy $E_{\rm k}$, we find the radiation efficiency to be $\eta \sim 25\%$. As
575: %anticipated, it is difficult to interpret the four earliest unfiltered points
576: %in the context of the external forward shock model. Instead they might be
577: %attributed to the interaction between the separate GRB sub-outflows or the
578: %activity of the central engine, or possibly are due the reverse shock emission.
579: %The dip in the ROTSE early-time light curve may indicate the onset of the
580: %external shock.
581:
582:
583:
584: \subsection{Burst Energetics}
585: \label{sec:energetics}
586:
587: The time-averaged spectral energy distribution of the prompt emission is well
588: fitted by a cutoff power law with a photon index $\Gamma = 0.9\pm0.4$ and a
589: peak energy $E_{\rm p} =72_{-6}^{+39}$~keV. In the burst rest frame, the
590: intrinsic peak energy was $E'_{\rm p} = 466_{-40}^{+250}$~keV. The burst
591: fluence over the $T_{90}$ interval in the 15--150 keV band was
592: $1.1_{-0.7}^{+0.2} \times 10^{-6}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$. This corresponds to an
593: isotropic-equivalent energy $E_{\rm iso} = 7.7^{+2.8}_{-5.0} \times
594: 10^{52}$~erg in the rest-frame 1--10\,000~keV band. The values of $E'_{\rm p}$
595: and $E_{\rm iso}$ make this GRB consistent with the Amati relation
596: \citep{Ama02,Ama06}.
597:
598: %which when using the Amati relation \citep{Ama02} would provide a constraint
599: %on the observed peak energy $48 \,{\rm KeV} < E^{\rm obs}_p< 70 \,{\rm KeV}$
600: %at the $1\sigma$ level. This constraint on the observed peak energy is thus
601: %well consistent with the above fitting peak energy with a higher C.L., that
602: %is, this burst follows the Amati relation.
603:
604: We can provide only a lower limit to any light curve break, which corresponds
605: to $t_{\rm b} \ga 2.6$~days (the epoch of our last detection). The lower limits
606: for the jet opening angle and for the beaming-corrected energy are $\vartheta >
607: 5\arcdeg$ and $E_{\rm jet} > 2.6 \times 10^{50}$~erg, respectively. The
608: $E'_{\rm p}$ vs $E_{\rm jet}$ correlation \citep{Ghirla04} predicts for this
609: burst $t_{\rm b} = 10^{+8}_{-4}$~days \citep{Campana07}, thus GRB\,060927 is
610: consistent with this relation, although it does not constrain it (see also
611: \citealt{Ghirla07}).
612:
613:
614: \subsection{The Afterglow Spectral Energy Distribution}
615: \label{sec:SED}
616:
617: We have constructed the spectral energy distribution (SED) of the afterglow
618: covering from NIR to X-ray wavelengths at 5709~s after the \textit{Swift} BAT
619: trigger. Both a power law (PL) and a broken power law (BPL) have been fitted
620: including the effect of dust absorption, adopting the extinction curves of the
621: Milky Way (MW), the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) and the Small Magellanic Cloud
622: (SMC) as parametrized by \citet{pei}, and of photoelectric absorption in the
623: X-ray band (assuming Solar metallicity). All fits include a fixed Galactic
624: absorption component, with $N_{\rm H,Gal} = 5.2 \times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$
625: \citep{dl90} and $E(B-V) = 0.062$~mag. Correction for Ly$\alpha$ blanketing
626: was applied to the $I$ and $R$ data. When excluding the $R$ band data,
627: which are severely suppressed, the parameters did not change within the errors.
628: All the results are listed in
629: Table~\ref{tb:SED}, and the best fit is shown in Fig.~\ref{fg:SED}.
630: Also considering the broad-band SED, we do not measure any
631: intrinsic X-ray absorption, consistent with the XRT analysis alone. A broken
632: power law with photon indices $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$ provides no improvement
633: upon the single power law fits, and the break energies are difficult to
634: constrain. We also test for the presence of a cooling break in the observed
635: energy range by fixing $\Gamma_1 = \Gamma_2 - 0.5$, as expected from the
636: standard synchrotron theory, but found that no such break is required. The
637: optical absorption is found to be low, in agreement with many previous studies
638: of GRB host galaxy extinction \citep[e.g.,][]{Kann06,extincs}. However, it is
639: not possible in this case to differentiate between the three tested extinction
640: curves. The 2175~\AA{} bump characteristic of the MW extinction curve would
641: occur at $\sim 1.4$~$\mu$m when redshifted to $z = 5.47$, falling in between
642: the $J$ and $K$ bands where we have no observations. From our data we can,
643: however, obtain an accurate measurement of the power-law slope at this epoch,
644: which is consistent within the errors with the value derived from fitting the
645: X-ray data alone (\S~\ref{sec:highenergy}). The similar decay indices in the
646: optical and X-ray ranges also suggests that both components lie on the same
647: spectral segment.
648:
649:
650:
651: \section{GAMMA-RAY BURSTS AS PROBES OF THE DARK AGES}
652: \label{sec:darkages}
653:
654: Spectroscopy of GRB afterglows has been argued to be a powerful tool to probe
655: the red Ly$\alpha$ damping wing resulting from the neutral intergalactic medium
656: before reionization \citep{barkana}. In fact, they have simple power-law continuum
657: spectra and a relatively small ionizing effect on
658: their environments (compared to QSOs). This shape allows one to directly infer the neutral
659: hydrogen column and hence the state of reionization \citep{madau}. However, as
660: pointed out by \citet{totani06}, this method may be compromised by the strong
661: hydrogen absorption due to the dense environments that long GRBs usually seem
662: to be situated in \citep{palli06b}.
663: %GRB\,060927 together with GRB\,050904 show that high
664: %\ion{H}{1} column densities may be typical also for $z>5$ GRBs.
665: Our observation that such a high absorbing column is also present in a $z > 5$
666: GRB confirms that it is likely difficult to use afterglow spectra
667: as a diagnostic of reionization due to the Ly$\alpha$ damping wing. We also note,
668: however, that GRB-DLA column densities are usually lower than for GRB\,060927:
669: in the sample by \citet{palli06b} only two out of 18 events ($\approx 10\%$)
670: have $N_{\rm HI} > 10^{22.5}¯\mathrm{~cm}^{-2}$. Furthermore, as pointed
671: out by \citep{BrommLoeb07}, it is conceivable that higher-redshift bursts may
672: explode inside less massive halos, and thus with lower column densities.
673:
674: The outlook for the use of GRBs as star-formation tracers is much better. For
675: example, it has also been suggested by \citet{wijers98} that GRBs could be
676: {\it ideal} tracers of the average star formation density due to their
677: brightness, independently of dust extinction and the fact that they originate
678: from a single (or double) stellar progenitor and so do not require a detectable
679: host galaxy \citep[see also][]{conselice05}. Evidence has been mounting that
680: GRBs may only trace star formation in relatively metal-poor environments
681: \citep[e.g.][]{lefloch,fynbo,Tanvir04,Soller05,fruchter,stanek06,modjaz07}. In
682: the popular collapsar model, GRBs are expected to be formed only by stars with
683: metallicity below about 0.2--$0.3 Z_{\odot}$ \citep[][but see also
684: \citealt{fryer}]{heger,MacF,Hirschi,WH06,LangerNorman06}. However, before $z
685: \approx 5$ the majority of the star-formation should occur in environments with
686: $Z < 0.2 Z_{\odot}$ \citep{nuza}, and therefore the redshift distribution of
687: $z>5$ GRBs should directly map the star formation history of the universe back
688: to the first era of population-II objects, and possibly the first population-III
689: stars \citep[e.g.][]{bromm,belczinski}.
690:
691: Furthermore, GRBs afterglows pinpoint their host galaxies, provide redshifts for them,
692: and in some cases measures of their metallicity, gas density and dynamical
693: state\footnote{Although the existence of the GRB might select enviroments with
694: special properties,
695: recent observations \citep{Chen06,Watson07,Vreeswijk07} have shown
696: that the material being probed by afterglow spectroscopy is not in the immediate surroundings
697: of the GRB site, implying that it may be representative of the host galaxy properties.}.
698: This provides a route to identify and study the
699: types of galaxies that are responsible for the bulk of the star formation, and
700: hence for the bulk of the (re)-ionization of the universe.
701: This is very important
702: since other methods to locate high redshift galaxies with current
703: instrumentation only locate the brightest systems that are too rare to account
704: for the bulk of the ionization \citep{labbe07}, possibly with the exception of
705: gravitational lensing \citep{stark}.
706:
707: \textit{Swift} has been operating for more than two years and we now have a
708: good sample of GRBs from which to constrain their fraction at very high
709: redshift. We followed \citet{palli06} and selected only \textit{Swift} GRBs
710: with low Galactic extinction and promptly determined XRT positions. In this
711: way we created an unbiased sample with a larger redshift completeness, discarding those bursts with adverse
712: observing conditions. By December 2006, there had been a total of 83 of these
713: bursts: 46 with spectroscopic redshift measurements (with a mean
714: $\langle z \rangle = 2.31$), 18 with no optical/NIR afterglow nor host galaxy detection, and 19
715: with optical/NIR afterglow or host galaxy detection but unknown spectroscopic redshift.
716: In order to compile this list, we browsed the literature, and we also
717: made use of the preliminary results of an ongoing large program aimed at
718: detecting GRB host galaxies and measuring their redshifts
719: (J. Hjorth et al. 2007 in preparation; \citet{palli06c}).
720: In Fig.~\ref{fg:zdist} we show the redshift distribution for the 83 bursts.
721: The arrows indicate upper limits based on the information available:
722: afterglow colors, host galaxy and/or Ly$\alpha$ break constraints.
723: The shaded bar indicates bursts for which we have no redshift information at all.
724:
725: Several bursts in the sample with very red afterglows have shown properties
726: expected for high-redshift bursts: GRB\,050502B, GRB\,050716, GRB\,060108,
727: GRB\,060602A, GRB\,060719, GRB\,060814, GRB\,060923A and GRB\,060923C
728: \citep[][respectively]{Cenko05,Tanvir05,Levan06a,Jensen,Malesani06,Levan06b,Fox,DAvanzo}.
729: However, for GRB\,060108 \citep{Oates06b}, GRB\,060814 \citep{Campana06}, and
730: GRB\,060923A \citep{Levan06c}, the detection of the host galaxy in the $R$ band
731: indicates $z \lesssim 5.5$ and hence the red afterglow color is due
732: to dust extinction rather than to high redshift%
733: \footnote{The afterglow of GRB\,060108 was also detected in the $B$ band,
734: implying a low redshift $z < 3.2$ \citep{Oates06b}.}.
735:
736: We now try to constrain the fraction $f$ of \textit{Swift} GRBs at $z > 6$.
737: From the initial sample we removed
738: bursts with measured or constrained redshift, leading to a sub-sample of 20 candidates:
739: 18 bursts with no information at all and
740: 2 bursts with very loose redshift constraints. We rejected from this set those
741: bursts with duration shorter than 14~seconds\footnote{A burst with $T_{90} = 14$~s at $z=6$ has
742: a proper time duration of $\approx2$~s; see also \citet{Campana06}.}
743: and those with (significant) excess column density in the X-ray spectra. As
744: pointed out by \citet{grupe}, high-redshift GRBs tend to show little or no X-ray
745: absorption, since the affected spectral region is redshifted out of the
746: observing window (see however the striking counterexample of GRB\,050904 at
747: $z=6.295$: \citealt{Watson06,Cusumano06,Campana07}). Only six bursts
748: were considered as candidates for being at $z>6$. Together with GRB\,050904, they set an upper
749: limit of $f <7/83 \approx 8\%$.
750: Do we have any evidence that these bursts are at
751: high redshift?
752: %For the GRBs with unknown redshift and neither optical afterglow nor host galaxy detection (27 in total),
753: We retrieved from the literature optical magnitude upper
754: limits\footnote{\texttt{http://grad40.as.utexas.edu/grblog.php}\,.} and X-ray
755: fluxes\footnote{\texttt{http://astro.berkeley.edu/$\sim$nat/swift}\,.}
756: \citep{ButlerKocevski07} in order
757: to estimate an upper limit to the optical-to-X-ray spectral index $\beta_{\rm
758: OX}$. High-redshift bursts necessarily have $\beta_{\rm OX} < 0.5$ \citep{palli04}.
759: Unfortunately, the existing observational limits are not deep enough to
760: constrain $\beta_{\rm OX} < 0.5$ for any of the candidates. By considering
761: GRB\,050904, we can thus set a lower limit $f \gtrsim 1/83 \approx 1\%$,
762: even if we
763: caution, of course, that this limit is based on one single event. It has been
764: argued \citep{ButlerKocevski07} that afterglow spectra may be intrinsically
765: curved (due to the presence of spectral breaks) and this could spuriously
766: mimic the presence of excess column density. If we remove the requirement of zero
767: excess absorption, the upper limit on $f$ becomes $f < 16/83 \approx 19\%$,
768: which is of course less constraining and very conservative.
769:
770: From what is shown above, it is possible that \textit{Swift} had
771: detected some GRBs with $z > 6$ in addition to GRB~050904.
772: How do we improve our follow-up
773: strategies in order to identify these bursts and secure spectroscopic
774: redshifts? It is clear from the discussion above that the afterglows of such
775: events will be very red due to Lyman-forest blanketing, but that not all red
776: afterglows are from high redshift bursts. Fortunately, the dust-extinguished bursts
777: will likely be behind large column densities of soft X-ray absorbing material
778: and hence can be filtered away \citep{grupe}. The main issue is therefore to
779: detect the NIR afterglows.
780:
781: The two most distant GRBs known, GRB\,050904
782: \citep[e.g.][]{Kawai,haislip,gendre,totani06,Taglia05} and GRB\,060927 (this work),
783: were both detected with relatively small aperture robotic telescopes (TAROT and
784: ROTSE-IIIa, respectively). This suggests that we may expect bright afterglows
785: from a substantial fraction of GRBs with $z>6$, but these will not be
786: detectable with most of the currently operating robotic instruments because of
787: the lack of light in the optical window.
788: NIR robotic projects (e.g. REM, GROND on the ESO 2.2m, the 1.3m CTIO
789: telescope, PAIRITEL, BOOTES-IR) are expected to provide accurate afterglow
790: positions in just a few minutes, and, hence, to increase the sample of
791: spectroscopically measured high-redshift GRBs. However, three of these are
792: placed within a few hundred kilometers of each other in Chile. In order to make
793: the search of events that are only visible in the NIR as efficient as in the
794: optical, a more wide-spread net of NIR (semi)-robotic telescopes is required. A
795: possible solution, easy to implement on a short time scale, is to equip many of
796: the 1.5--3~m class telescopes, that have had less observing demands since the
797: advent of 8--10~m telescopes, with red-sensitive deep-depletion CCDs and
798: $z$-band filters \citep[see e.g.][]{guidorzib}. In this way the probability of
799: detecting bursts out to $z \approx 7.5$ would dramatically increase.
800:
801:
802:
803: \section{SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS}
804:
805: We have presented X-ray and optical observations of the afterglow of
806: GRB~060927, performed with the \textit{Swift} spacecraft and several
807: ground-based telescopes. The spectroscopic observations made with the VLT
808: showed a flux dropout starting at $\lambda = 8070$~\AA. We interpret the
809: absorption blueward of the break as due to the Ly$\alpha$ forest at
810: redshift $z \approx 5.6$. We also detect a \ion{Si}{2} $\lambda$ 1260
811: absorption line at $\lambda = 8148$~\AA{}, corresponding to $z = 5.467$.
812:
813: The modeling of the red damping wing of the Ly$\alpha$ absorption found in
814: the optical afterglow spectrum leads to a column density with $\log(N_{\rm
815: HI} / {\rm cm}^{-2}) = 22.50 \pm 0.15$. This is similar to the values observed in
816: GRBs at lower redshift. Such large values make the use of the GRBs to
817: probe the reionization epoch via spectroscopy of the red damping wing
818: challenging.
819:
820: The light curve in the gamma-ray band shows an initial bright episode,
821: split in two peaks, with a total duration $T_{90} = 22.6 \pm 0.3$~s. The X-ray
822: light curve is characterized by a shallow decline phase lasting $\sim
823: 3000$~s, with the temporal index being $\alpha_1 \approx 0.7$.
824: The shallow decline steepened to $\alpha_2
825: \approx 1.3$ at $\sim 4$~ks after the trigger. The optical data are
826: fairly well described by a single power law with decay index $\alpha =
827: 1.17\pm 0.03$ after $\sim 500$~s, while an extra component is apparent at
828: earlier times.
829:
830: We selected a sample of \textit{Swift} GRBs with low Galactic
831: extinction and promptly determined XRT positions. From this unbiased
832: sample, we constrain the fraction $f$ of GRBs at $z > 6$. Including
833: GRB\,050904, we set a conservative upper limit $f<19\%$. We also point
834: out that GRB\,060927 was detected by a 45 cm telescope (ROTSE). This shows
835: that high-redshift GRBs can be very bright, and are in principle easy to
836: detect, provided that red and near-infrared detectors are employed. We
837: suggest to exploit the potential of the $z$-band filter, capable to detect
838: bursts up to $z \approx 7.5$.
839:
840: \acknowledgments
841:
842: The Dark Cosmology Centre is funded by the Danish National Research Foundation.
843: The authors acknowledge benefits from collaboration within the EU FP5 Research
844: Training Network ``Gamma-Ray Bursts: An Enigma and a Tool''. DM acknowledges
845: financial support from the Instrument Center for Danish Astrophysics. JG
846: acknowledges the support of Spanish research programmes ESP2005-07714-C03-03
847: and AYA2004-01515. PJ acknowledges support by a Marie Curie Intra-European Fellowship
848: within the 6th European Community Framework Program under contract
849: number MEIF-CT-2006-042001. ROTSE-III has been supported by NASA grant NNG-04WC41G, NSF
850: grant AST-0407061, the Australian Research Council, the University of New South
851: Wales, the University of Texas, and the University of Michigan. Work performed
852: at LANL is supported through internal LDRD funding. Special thanks to the
853: observatory staff at Paranal and Siding Spring Observatory, especially Andre
854: Phillips.
855:
856: \begin{thebibliography}{}
857:
858: \bibitem[Adelman-McCarthy et al.(2006)]{Adelman} Adelman-McCarthy, J. K., et al. 2006, \apjs, 162, 38
859: \bibitem[Amati et al.(2002)]{Ama02} Amati, L., et al. 2002, \aap, 390, 81
860: \bibitem[Amati(2006)]{Ama06} Amati, L. 2006, \mnras, 372, 233
861: \bibitem[Atteia(2003)]{pseudoz_paper} Atteia, J.-L. 2003, \aap, 407, L1
862: \bibitem[Band et al.(1993)]{band93} Band, D., et al. 1993, \apj, 413, 281
863: \bibitem[Band(2006)]{band} Band, D. L. 2006, \apj, 644, 378
864: \bibitem[Barkana \& Loeb(2004)]{barkana} Barkana, R., \& Loeb, A. 2004, \apj, 601, 64
865: \bibitem[Belczynski et al.(2007)]{belczinski} Belczynski, K., Bulik, T., Heger, A., \& Fryer, C. 2007, \apj, in press (astro-ph/0610014)
866: \bibitem[Bromm \& Loeb(2006)]{bromm} Bromm, L., \& Loeb, A. 2006, \apj, 642, 382
867: \bibitem[Bromm \& Loeb(2007)]{BrommLoeb07} Bromm, L., \& Loeb, A. 2007, review to appear in ``Gamma-ray Bursts'' (CUP) (arXiv:0706.2445)
868: \bibitem[Burrows et al.(2006)]{gcn5750} Burrows, D. N., Moretti, A., Perri, M., Capalbi, M., Angelini, L., \& Hill, J. E. 2006, GCN 5750
869: \bibitem[Butler \& Kocevski(2007)]{ButlerKocevski07} Butler, N. R., \& Kocevski, D. 2007, \apj, 663, 407
870: \bibitem[Campana et al.(2007a)]{Campana07a} Campana, S., et al. 2007a, \apj, 654, L17
871: \bibitem[Campana et al.(2007b)]{Campana07} Campana, S., Guidorzi, C., Tagliaferri, G., Chincarini, G., Moretti, A., Rizzuto, D., \& Romano, P. 2007b, A\&A, in press (astro-ph/0703676)
872: \bibitem[Campana et al.(2007c)]{Campana06} Campana, S., Tagliaferri, G., Malesani, D., Stella, L., D'Avanzo, P., Chincarini, G., \& Covino, S. 2007c, \aap, 464, L25
873: \bibitem[Cenko et al.(2005)]{Cenko05} Cenko, S. B., Fox, D. B., Rich, J., Schmidt, B., Christiansen, J., \& Berger, E. 2005, GCN
874: Circular 3358
875: \bibitem[Chen et al.(2007)]{Chen06} Chen, H.-W., Prochaska, J. X., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Bloom, J. S., Dessauges-Zavadsky, M., \& Foley, R. 2007, \apj, 663, 420
876: \bibitem[Conselice et al.(2005)]{conselice05} Conselice, C. J., et al., 2005, \apj, 633, 29
877: \bibitem[Cool et al.(2006a)]{cool} Cool, R. J., et al. 2006a, \aj, 132, 823
878: \bibitem[Cool et al.(2006b)]{CoolGCN} Cool, R. J., et al. 2006b, GCN Circular 5631
879: \bibitem[Cusumano et al.(2006)]{Cusumano06} Cusumano, G., et al. 2006, \nat, 440, 164
880: \bibitem[D'Avanzo et al.(2006)]{DAvanzo} D'Avanzo, P., Covino, S., Malesani, D., \& Tagliaferri, G. 2006, GCN Circular 5609
881: \bibitem[Dickey \& Lockman(1990)]{dl90} Dickey, J. M., \& Lockman, F. J. 1990, \araa, 28, 215
882: %\bibitem[Fan \& Piran(2006)]{FP06} Fan, Y. Z., \& Piran, T. 2006, \mnras, 369, 197
883: \bibitem[Fox, Rau, \& Ofek(2006)]{Fox} Fox, D. B., Rau, A., \& Ofek, E. O. 2006, GCN Circular 5597
884: \bibitem[Fruchter et al.(2006)]{fruchter} Fruchter, A. S., et al. 2006, \nat, 441, 463
885: \bibitem[Fryer \& Heger(2005)]{fryer} Fryer, C. L., \& Heger, A. 2005, \apj, 623, 302
886: \bibitem[Fynbo et al.(2003)]{fynbo} Fynbo, J. P. U., et al. 2003, \aap, 406, L63
887: \bibitem[Fynbo et al.(2006)]{Fynbo06} Fynbo, J. P. U., et al. 2006, GCN Circular 5651
888: \bibitem[Galama et al.(1998)]{galama} Galama, T. J., et al. 1998, \nat, 395, 670
889: \bibitem[Gehrels et al.(2004)]{gehrels} Gehrels, N., et al. 2004, \apj, 611, 1005
890: \bibitem[Gendre et al.(2006)]{gendre} Gendre, B., Galli, A., Corsi, A., Klotz, A., Piro, L., Stratta, G., Bo\"er, M., \& Damerdji, Y. 2006, \aap, 462, 565
891: \bibitem[Ghirlanda et al.(2004)]{Ghirla04} Ghirlanda, G., Ghisellini, G., \& Lazzati, D. 2004, \apj, 616, 331
892: \bibitem[Ghirlanda et al.(2007)]{Ghirla07} Ghirlanda, G., Nava, L., Ghisellini, G., \& Firmani, C. 2007, \aap, 466, 127
893: \bibitem[Grupe et al.(2006)]{grupe} Grupe, D., et al. 2006, \aj, 133, 2216
894: %\bibitem[Grupe(2006b)]{Grupe06} Grupe, D. 2006, GCN Circular 5515
895: \bibitem[Guidorzi et al.(2006a)]{guidorzia} Guidorzi, C., et al. 2006, GCN Circular 5633
896: \bibitem[Guidorzi et al.(2006b)]{guidorzib} Guidorzi, C., et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 288
897: \bibitem[Haislip et al.(2006)]{haislip} Haislip, J. B., et al. 2006, \nat, 440, 181
898: \bibitem[Heger et al.(2003)]{heger} Heger, A., Fryer, C. L., Woosley, S. E., Langer, N., \&
899: Hartmann, D. H. 2003, \apj, 591, 288
900: \bibitem[Hirschi, Meynet, \& Maeder(2005)]{Hirschi} Hirschi, R., Meynet, G., \& Maeder, A. 2005, \aap, 443, 581
901: \bibitem[Hjorth et al.(2003)]{jensNature} Hjorth, J., et al. 2003, \nat, 423, 847
902: %\bibitem[Huang et al.(2000)]{Huang00} Huang, Y. F., et al. 2000, \apj, 543, 90
903: \bibitem[Jakobsson et al.(2004)]{palli04} Jakobsson, P., Hjorth, J., Fynbo, J. P.
904: U., Watson, D., Pedersen, K., Bj\"ornsson, G., \& Gorosabel, J. 2004, \apj, 617, L21
905: \bibitem[Jakobsson et al.(2006a)]{palli06} Jakobsson, P., et al., 2006a, \aap, 447, 897
906: \bibitem[Jakobsson et al.(2006b)]{palli06b} Jakobsson, P., et al. 2006b, \aap, 460, L13
907: \bibitem[Jakobsson et al.(2006c)]{palli06c} Jakobsson, P., Hjorth, J., Fynbo, J. P. U., Gorosabel, J., \& Jaunsen, A. O. 2006c, procs. of the XI Marcel Grossman Meeting on General Relativity, eds. H. Kleinert, R. T. Jantzen, \& R. Ruffini (astro-ph/0611561)
908: \bibitem[Jensen et al.(2006)]{Jensen} Jensen, B. L., Hjorth, J., Fynbo, J. P. U., \& N\"ar\"anen, J. 2006, GCN Circular 5203
909: \bibitem[Kann et al.(2006)]{Kann06} Kann, D. A., Zeh, A., \& Klose, S. 2006, \apj, 641, 993
910: \bibitem[Kawai et al.(2006)]{Kawai} Kawai, N., et al. 2006, \nat, 440, 184
911: \bibitem[Kouveliotou et al.(1993)]{Kouv93} Kouveliotou, C., Meegan, C. A., Fishman, G. J., Bhat, N. P., Briggs, M. S., Koshut, T. M., Paciesas, W. S., \& Pendleton, G. N. 1993, \apj, 413, L101
912: \bibitem[Labb\'e et al.(2006)]{labbe07} Labb\'e, I., Bowens, R., Illingworth, G. D., \& Franx, M. 2006, \apj, 649, L67
913: \bibitem[Lamb \& Reichart(2000)]{lamb2000} Lamb, D. Q., \& Reichart, D. E. 2000, \apj, 536, 1
914: \bibitem[Lamb, Donaghy, \& Graziani(2005)]{Lamb} Lamb, D. Q., Donaghy, T. Q., \& Graziani, C. 2005, \apj, 620, 355
915: \bibitem[Le Floc'h et al.(2003)]{lefloch} Le Floc'h, E., et al. 2003, \aap, 400, 499
916: \bibitem[Levan, Tanvir, \& Fuhrman(2006a)]{Levan06a} Levan, A. J., Tanvir, N. R., \& Fuhrman, L. 2006a, GCN Circular 4503
917: \bibitem[Levan et al.(2006b)]{Levan06b} Levan, A. J., Tanvir, N. R., Rol, E., Fruchter, A., \& Adamson, A. 2006b, GCN Circular 5455
918: \bibitem[Levan, Tanvir, \& Gorosabel(2006c)]{Levan06c} Levan, A. J., Tanvir, N. R., \& Gorosabel, J. 2006c, GCN Circular 5673
919: \bibitem[MacFadyen \& Woosley(1999)]{MacF} MacFadyen, A. I., \& Woosley, S. E. 1999, \apj, 524, 262
920: \bibitem[Madau \& Rees(2000)]{madau} Madau, P., \& Rees, M. J. 2000, \apj, 542, L69
921: \bibitem[Malesani et al.(2006)]{Malesani06} Malesani, D., Fynbo, J., D'Avanzo, P.,
922: Covino, S., Fugazza, D., Jakobsson, P., \& Vreeswijk, P. M. 2006, GCN Circular 5354
923: \bibitem[Meiksin(2005)]{Meiksin2005} Meiksin, A. 2005, \mnras, 356, 596
924: \bibitem[Modjaz et al.(2007)]{modjaz07} Modjaz, M., et al., 2007, \aj, submitted
925: (astro-ph/0701246)
926: %\bibitem[Morris et al.(2006)]{Morris06} Morris, D., et al. 2006, GCN Circular 4632
927: %\bibitem[Naoz \& Bromberg(2007)]{Naoz} Naoz, S., \& Bromberg, O. 2007, \mnras, submitted (astro-ph/0702357)
928: \bibitem[Langer \& Norman(2006)]{LangerNorman06} Langer, N., \& Norman, C. A. 2006, \apj, 638, L63
929: \bibitem[Nousek et al.(2006)]{Nousek06} Nousek J. A., et al., 2006, \apj, 642, 389
930: \bibitem[Nuza et al.(2007)]{nuza} Nuza, S. E., Tissera, P. B., Pellizza, J., Lambas, D. G.,
931: Scannapieco, C., \& De Rossi, M. E. 2007, \mnras, 375, 665
932: \bibitem[Oates \& Barbier(2006a)]{Oates06a} Oates, S. R., \& Barbier, L. M. 2006, GCN Circular 5643
933: \bibitem[Oates et al.(2006b)]{Oates06b} Oates, S. R., et al. 2006, \mnras, 372, 327
934: \bibitem[O'Brien et al.(2006)]{OB06} O'Brien, P. T., et al. 2006, New J. Phys., 8, 121
935: \bibitem[Panaitescu et al.(2006)]{Panaitescu06} Panaitescu, A., M\'esz\'aros, P.,
936: Burrows, D., Nousek, J., Gehrels, N., O'Brien, P., \& Willingale, R. 2006,
937: \mnras, 369, 2059
938: \bibitem[Pei(1992)]{pei} Pei Y. C. 1992, \apj, 395, 130
939: \bibitem[Pelangeon \& Atteia(2006)]{pseudoz_GCN} Pelangeon, A., \& Atteia, J.-L. 2006, GCN Circular 5644
940: \bibitem[Sari, Piran, \& Narayan(1998)]{Sari98} Sari, R., Piran, T., \& Narayan, R. 1998, \apj, 497, L17
941: \bibitem[Schaefer, Yost, \& Yuan(2006)]{schaefer} Schaefer, B. E., Yost, S. A., \& Yuan, F. 2006, GCN Circular 5629
942: \bibitem[Schlegel, Finkbeiner, \& Davis(1998)]{Nh} Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., \& Davis, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525
943: \bibitem[Sollerman et al.(2005)]{Soller05} Sollerman, J., \"Ostlin, G., Fynbo, J. P. U., Hjorth, J., Fruchter, A., \& Pedersen, K. 2005, New Astr. 11, 103
944: \bibitem[Stanek et al.(2003)]{stanek03} Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2003, \apj, 591, L17
945: \bibitem[Stanek et al.(2006)]{stanek06} Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2006, Acta Astronomica, 56, 333
946: \bibitem[Stark et al.(2007)]{stark} Stark, D. P., et al. 2007, \apj, 663, 10
947: \bibitem[Starling et al.(2007)]{extincs} Starling, R. L. C., Wijers, R. A. M. J., Wiersema, K., Rol, E., Curran, P. A.,
948: Kouveliotou, C., van der Horst, A. J., \& Heemskerk, M. H. M. 2007, \apj, 661, 787
949: \bibitem[Tagliaferri et al.(2005)]{Taglia05} Tagliaferri, G., et al. 2005, \aap, 443, L1
950: \bibitem[Tanvir et al.(2004)]{Tanvir04} Tanvir N. R., et al. 2004, \mnras, 352, 1073
951: \bibitem[Tanvir et al.(2005)]{Tanvir05} Tanvir, N., et al. 2005, GCN Circular 3632
952: \bibitem[Totani et al.(2006)]{totani06} Totani, T., Kawai, N., Kosugi, G., Aoki, K.,
953: Yamada, T., Iye, M., Ohta, K., \& Hattori, T. 2006, \pasj, 58, 485
954: \bibitem[Vreeswijk et al.(2007)]{Vreeswijk07} Vreeswijk, P. M., et al. 2007, \aap, 468, 83
955: \bibitem[Watson et al.(2006)]{Watson06} Watson, D., et al. 2006, \apj, 637, L69
956: \bibitem[Watson et al.(2007)]{Watson07} Watson, D., Hjorth, J., Fynbo, J. P. U., Jakobsson, P., Foley, S., Sollerman, J., \& Wijers, R. A. M. J. 2007, \apj, 660, L101
957: \bibitem[Wijers et al.(1998)]{wijers98} Wijers, R. A. M. J., Bloom, J. S.,
958: Bagla, J. S., \& Natarajan, P. 1998, \mnras, 294, L13
959: \bibitem[Woosley \& Heger(2006)]{WH06} Woosley, S. E., \& Heger, A. 2006, \apj, 637, 914
960: \bibitem[Zhang et al.(2006)]{Zhang06} Zhang, B., Fan, Y. Z., Dyks, J., Kobayashi, S., M\'esz\'aros, P.,
961: Burrows, D. N., Nousek, J. A., \& Gehrels, N. 2006, \apj, 642, 354
962:
963:
964: \end{thebibliography}
965:
966:
967: \clearpage
968:
969:
970: %%%Table with observations%%%
971:
972: \begin{deluxetable}{lllllll}
973: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
974: %\rotate
975: \tablewidth{0pt}
976: \tablecaption{Ground-based observations of GRB\,060927. Upper limits are at the 3$\sigma$ level.\label{tb:log}}
977: \tablehead{
978: \colhead{Time (UT)\tablenotemark{a}} &
979: \colhead{$\Delta t$ (s)} &
980: \colhead{Exposure (s)} &
981: \colhead{Magnitude\tablenotemark{b}} &
982: \colhead{$F_\nu(\lambda_0)$\tablenotemark{c}} &
983: \colhead{Filter} &
984: \colhead{Telescope}
985: }
986: \startdata
987: %Sep. 27.588599 & 0 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 15--150 keV & \textit{Swift} BAT \\
988: Sep. 27.588794 & 16.8 & 5 & 14.39$\pm$0.20 & $6800\pm1300$ & none & 0.45-m ROTSE-IIIa \\
989: Sep. 27.588956 & 30.8 & 5 & 14.67$\pm$0.22 & $5200\pm1100$ & none & 0.45-m ROTSE-IIIa \\
990: Sep. 27.589216 & 53.3 & 15 & 15.56$\pm$0.19 & $2290\pm410$ & none & 0.45-m ROTSE-IIIa \\
991: Sep. 27.589804 & 104.1 & 25 & 17.16$\pm$0.41 & $520\pm200$ & none & 0.45-m ROTSE-IIIa \\
992: Sep. 27.590624 & 174.9 & 200 & 17.86$\pm$0.30 & $275\pm78$ & none & 0.45-m ROTSE-IIIa \\
993: Sep. 27.594007 & 467.2 & 600 & 17.07$\pm$0.21 & $570\pm110$ & none & 0.45-m ROTSE-IIIa \\
994: Sep. 27.602126 & 1168.7 & 600 & 17.99$\pm$0.40 & $243\pm92$ & none & 0.45-m ROTSE-IIIa \\
995: Sep. 27.654894 & 5727.9 & 600 & $>17.04$ & $< 590$ & none & 0.45-m ROTSE-IIIa \\
996: %Sep. 27.589652 & 91 & 19$\times$20 & 19.7$\pm$0.3 & \nodata & none & 0.85-m Xinglong \\
997: Sep. 27.593845 & 453.2 & 930 & $>20.1$ & \nodata & SDSS $R$ & 2.0-m FTS \\
998: Sep. 27.597834 & 797.9 & 60 & $>18.4$ & $< 570$ & SDSS $i$ & 2.0-m FTS \\
999: Sep. 27.602725 & 1221.3 & 120 & 19.02$\pm$0.17 & $320\pm50$ & SDSS $i$ & 2.0-m FTS \\
1000: Sep. 27.609716 & 1824.4 & 180 & 19.64$\pm$0.22 & $180\pm37$ & SDSS $i$ & 2.0-m FTS \\
1001: Sep. 27.616009 & 2368.2 & 120 & 19.43$\pm$0.27 & $220\pm55$ & SDSS $i$ & 2.0-m FTS \\
1002: Sep. 27.623009 & 2973.0 & 180 & 20.57$\pm$0.47 & $77\pm33$ & SDSS $i$ & 2.0-m FTS \\
1003: Sep. 27.602650 & 1214.0 & 90 & 19.5$\pm$0.3 & \nodata & $R$ & 1.05-m Kiso \\
1004: Sep. 27.627431 & 3355.0 & 90 & 19.4$\pm$0.1 & \nodata & $R$ & 1.05-m Kiso \\
1005: Sep. 27.629468 & 3531.0 & 90 & 19.8$\pm$0.2 & \nodata & $R$ & 1.05-m Kiso \\
1006: Sep. 27.844120 & $2.21\times10^{4}$ & 3$\times$300 & 24.4$\pm$0.3 & \nodata & $R$ & 2.5-m NOT \\
1007: Sep. 27.957326 & $3.18\times10^{4}$ & 4$\times$100 & $>25.5$ & \nodata & $B$ & 4.2-m WHT \\
1008: Sep. 27.964109 & $3.24\times10^{4}$ & 4$\times$100 & $>24.6$ & \nodata & $V$ & 4.2-m WHT \\
1009: Sep. 27.973495 & $3.32\times10^{4}$ & 4$\times$100 & $>24.2$ & \nodata & $R$ & 4.2-m WHT \\
1010: Sep. 27.978808 & $3.37\times10^{4}$ & 4$\times$100 & 22.11$\pm$0.16 & $7.2\pm1.1$ & Harris $I$ & 4.2-m WHT \\
1011: Sep. 28.006500 & $3.61\times10^{4}$ & 13$\times$900 & 24.5$\pm$0.26 & \nodata & Bessell $R$ & 1.54-m Danish \\
1012: Sep. 28.064850 & $4.11\times10^{4}$ & 2$\times$60 & $>$24.0 & \nodata & Bessell $R$ & 8.2-m VLT \\
1013: Sep. 28.108681 & $4.49\times10^{4}$ & 3$\times$1800 & \nodata & \nodata & G300V & 8.2-m VLT \\
1014: Sep. 30.004618 & $2.09\times10^{5}$ & 10$\times$30 & 21.35$\pm$0.29 & \nodata & $K$ & 8.2-m VLT \\
1015: Sep. 30.039178 & $2.12\times10^{5}$ & 30$\times$60 & 23.15$\pm$0.45 & \nodata & $J$ & 8.2-m VLT \\
1016: Sep. 30.159225 & $2.22\times10^{5}$ & 21$\times$300 & 24.85$\pm$0.17 & $0.72\pm0.11$ & Bessell $I$ & 8.2-m VLT \\
1017: Oct. 13.067980 & $1.34\times10^{6}$ & 25$\times$300 & $>25.8$ & $< 0.3$ & Bessell $I$ & 8.2-m VLT \\
1018: \enddata
1019: \tablenotetext{a}{The reported times correspond to the beginning of the observation.}
1020: \tablenotetext{b}{Not corrected for Galactic extinction.}
1021: \tablenotetext{c}{Flux density at $\lambda_0 = 8190$~\AA, measured in $\mu$Jy, corrected for Galactic extinction $E(B-V) = 0.06$~mag.}
1022: \end{deluxetable}
1023:
1024:
1025:
1026: \begin{deluxetable}{llllllll}
1027: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1028: \tablecaption{Model fits to the SED at epoch 5709 s since trigger. All errors are at the 90\% confidence level.
1029: \label{tb:SED}}
1030: \tablewidth{0pt}
1031: \tablehead{
1032: \colhead{Model\tablenotemark{a}} &
1033: \colhead{Ext. curve\tablenotemark{b}} &
1034: \colhead{$N_{\rm H}$ \tablenotemark{c}} &
1035: \colhead{$E(B-V)$} &
1036: \colhead{$\Gamma_1$}&
1037: \colhead{$E_{\rm b}$ (keV)} &
1038: \colhead{$\Gamma_2$} &
1039: \colhead{$\chi^2$/dof}
1040: }
1041: \startdata
1042: PL &MW &$< 1.2$ &0.13$^{+0.03}_{-0.02}$ &1.70$\pm$0.06 &\nodata &\nodata &9.5/20 \\
1043: PL &MW &0 (frozen) &0.13$^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ &1.70$\pm$0.06 &\nodata &\nodata &9.5/21 \\
1044: PL &LMC &$< 1.1$ &0.08$^{+0.02}_{-0.01}$ &1.68$^{+0.04}_{-0.06}$ &\nodata &\nodata &10.7/20 \\
1045: PL &LMC &0 (frozen) &0.08$^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$ &1.68$^{+0.05}_{-0.06}$ &\nodata &\nodata &10.7/21 \\
1046: PL &SMC &$< 1.0$ &0.07$^{+0.01}_{-0.02}$ &1.61$^{+0.05}_{-0.04}$ &\nodata &\nodata &11.5/20 \\
1047: PL &SMC &0 (frozen) &0.07$\pm$0.03 &1.66$^{+0.10}_{-0.05}$ &\nodata &\nodata &11.5/21 \\
1048: BPL &MW &$< 3.6$ &0.11$^{+0.06}_{-0.07}$ &1.64$^{+0.09}_{-0.21}$ &$<$106 &1.83$^{+7.17}_{-0}$ &6.6/18 \\
1049: BPL ($\Gamma_1=\Gamma_2-0.5$) &MW &$< 4.7$ &0.13$^{+0.06}_{-0.09}$ & &$>$1.0 & 2.19$^{+0.06}_{-0.13}$ &8.9/19 \\
1050: BPL &LMC &$< 3.6$ &0.07$\pm$0.04 &1.63$^{+0.07}_{-0.21}$ &$<$2.7 &1.83$^{+0.33}_{-0}$ &7.0/18 \\
1051: BPL ($\Gamma_1=\Gamma_2-0.5$) &LMC &$< 4.8$ &0.07$^{+0.05}_{-0.04}$ & &$>$0.9 &2.13$^{+0.09}_{-0.08}$ &9.5/19 \\
1052: BPL &SMC &$< 3.5$ &0.05$^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$ &1.66$^{+0.07}_{-0.21}$ &$<$2.4 &1.83$^{+0.31}_{-0}$ &7.0/18 \\
1053: BPL ($\Gamma_1=\Gamma_2-0.5$) &SMC &$< 4.8$ &0.05$^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$ & &$>$0.8 &2.12$^{+0.07}_{-0.08}$ &9.5/19 \\
1054: \enddata
1055: \tablenotetext{a}{PL: power law with photon index $\Gamma_1$; BPL: broken power law with photon indices $\Gamma_1$, $\Gamma_2$ and break energy $E_{\rm b}$.}
1056: \tablenotetext{b}{MW: Milky Way; LMC: Large Magellanic Cloud; SMC: Small Magellanic Cloud.}
1057: \tablenotetext{c}{Rest-frame hydrogen column density in units of $10^{22}$~cm$^{-2}$.}
1058: \end{deluxetable}
1059:
1060: \clearpage
1061:
1062: %%% Figures %%%
1063:
1064: %%Afterglow detection%%%
1065: \begin{figure}
1066: \centering
1067: %\includegraphics[width=0.80\textwidth]{f1.eps}
1068: \plotone{f1.eps}
1069: \caption{Top: unfiltered image from ROTSE-IIIa obtained 19~s after the
1070: trigger. Bottom: VLT $I$-band images 2.6 days (left) and 15.5 days (right)
1071: after the trigger. The circles indicate the position of the optical
1072: afterglow. North is up, East is left.\label{fg:image}}
1073: \end{figure}
1074:
1075: \clearpage
1076: %%%VLT spectrum %%
1077: \begin{figure}
1078: \centering
1079: %\includegraphics[width=0.80\textwidth]{f2_color.eps}
1080: \plotone{spec_bw.ps}
1081: \caption{Afterglow spectrum of GRB\,060927 taken 12.5~hr after the trigger.
1082: The one-dimensional spectrum is shown in the upper panel with the identified
1083: absorption Ly$\alpha$ and \ion{Si}{2} lines indicated. The CCD image of the spectrum in
1084: the corresponding wavelength range is shown in the lower panel (bottom trace).\label{fg:spec}}
1085: \end{figure}
1086:
1087: \clearpage
1088: %%% Fit of the ly-alpha line %%%
1089: \begin{figure}
1090: \centering
1091: %\includegraphics[width=0.80\textwidth]{f3_color.eps}
1092: \plotone{f3_color.eps}
1093: \caption{Afterglow spectrum with the model fit to the Ly$\alpha$ and
1094: \ion{Si}{2} $\lambda$ 1260 absorption line profiles (solid curve). The
1095: corresponding column density has $\log(N_{\rm HI}/{\rm cm}^{-2}) =
1096: 22.50 \pm 0.15$.\label{fg:Lyalpha}}
1097: \end{figure}
1098:
1099: \clearpage
1100: %%% Light curve %%%
1101: \begin{figure}
1102: \centering
1103: %\includegraphics[width=0.80\textwidth]{f4_color.eps}
1104: \plotone{f4_color.eps}
1105: \caption{Optical (8190~\AA, filled symbols) and X-ray (1.4 keV, crosses) light
1106: curves of GRB\,060927. The early BAT measurements were extrapolated to the
1107: XRT range using the best-fit spectral model. Optical data were corrected for
1108: the Galactic extinction. The dotted line shows the best-fit power-law model
1109: to the $I$-band light curve for $t > 500$~s, while the dashed line shows the
1110: best-fit broken power-law model to the X-ray light curve.\label{fg:lc}}
1111: %The solid lines show the prediction of a forward-shock synchrotron model,
1112: %based on standard afterglow theory \citep{Huang00,FP06}. Energy injection with
1113: %$\dot{E}_{\rm k} \propto t^{-XX}$ during the first XXXX~s was considered to
1114: %account for the shallow X-ray decay slope. The model parameters are $E_{\rm k}
1115: %= XX \times 10^{53}$~erg, $\varepsilon_{\rm e} = 0.XX$, $\varepsilon_{B} =
1116: %0.XX$, $p = 2.XX$, $n = XX$~cm$^{-3}$.\label{fg:lc}}
1117: %\citep[e.g.][]{Sari98}.
1118: \end{figure}
1119:
1120: \clearpage
1121: %%-- SED --%%
1122: \begin{figure}
1123: \centering
1124: %\plotone{f5_color.eps}
1125: \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.8\textwidth]{f5_color.eps}
1126: \caption{Example of fit to the NIR/X-ray SED. The model (thick solid line) shows a single power law with Milky-Way extinction.
1127: The lower panel shows the residuals of the fit.\label{fg:SED}}
1128: \end{figure}
1129:
1130: \clearpage
1131: %%% Redshifts %%%
1132: \begin{figure}
1133: \centering
1134: %\includegraphics[width=0.80\textwidth]{f6_color.eps}
1135: \plotone{f6_color.eps}
1136: \caption{The redshift distribution of \textit{Swift} GRBs up to 2006 December.
1137: The arrows indicate upper limits based on the afterglow colors and/or presence of
1138: Ly$\alpha$ breaks in the spectra and/or detection of the host galaxy. The
1139: shaded bar indicates the 18 bursts for which we have no constraints on the redshift.
1140: \label{fg:zdist}}
1141: \end{figure}
1142:
1143:
1144:
1145: \end{document}