1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
3: \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
4:
5: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
6: \newcommand{\myemail}{enomoto@icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp}
7:
8: \slugcomment{To be submitted to ApjL.}
9:
10: \shorttitle{Search for TeV gamma-rays from SN 1987A in 2001}
11: \shortauthors{Enomoto et al.}
12:
13: \begin{document}
14:
15: \title{Search for TeV gamma-rays from SN 1987A in 2001}
16:
17: \author{
18: R.~Enomoto\altaffilmark{1},
19: L.T.~Ksenofontov\altaffilmark{1},
20: H.~Katagiri\altaffilmark{1},
21: K.~Tsuchiya\altaffilmark{1},
22: A.~Asahara\altaffilmark{2},
23: G.V.~Bicknell\altaffilmark{3},
24: R.W.~Clay\altaffilmark{4},
25: P.G.~Edwards\altaffilmark{5},
26: S.~Gunji\altaffilmark{6},
27: S.~Hara\altaffilmark{1,2},
28: T.~Hara\altaffilmark{7},
29: H.~Hattori\altaffilmark{8},
30: Sei.~Hayashi\altaffilmark{9},
31: Shin.~Hayashi\altaffilmark{9},
32: C.~Itoh\altaffilmark{10},
33: S.~Kabuki\altaffilmark{1},
34: F.~Kajino\altaffilmark{9},
35: A.~Kawachi\altaffilmark{1},
36: T.~Kifune\altaffilmark{11},
37: H.~Kubo\altaffilmark{2},
38: J.~Kushida\altaffilmark{2,12},
39: Y.~Matsubara\altaffilmark{13},
40: Y.~Mizumoto\altaffilmark{14},
41: M.~Mori\altaffilmark{1},
42: H.~Moro\altaffilmark{8},
43: H.~Muraishi\altaffilmark{15},
44: Y.~Muraki\altaffilmark{13},
45: T.~Naito\altaffilmark{7},
46: T.~Nakase\altaffilmark{8},
47: D.~Nishida\altaffilmark{2},
48: K.~Nishijima\altaffilmark{8},
49: M.~Ohishi\altaffilmark{1},
50: K.~Okumura\altaffilmark{1},
51: J.R.~Patterson\altaffilmark{4},
52: R.J.~Protheroe\altaffilmark{4},
53: K.~Sakurazawa\altaffilmark{12},
54: D.L.~Swaby\altaffilmark{4},
55: T.~Tanimori\altaffilmark{2},
56: F.~Tokanai\altaffilmark{6},
57: H.~Tsunoo\altaffilmark{1},
58: T.~Uchida\altaffilmark{1},
59: A.~Watanabe\altaffilmark{6},
60: S.~Watanabe\altaffilmark{2},
61: S.~Yanagita\altaffilmark{10},
62: T.~Yoshida\altaffilmark{10},
63: and T.~Yoshikoshi\altaffilmark{16}
64: }
65:
66: \altaffiltext{1}{Institute for Cosmic Ray Research, University of Tokyo,
67: Chiba 277-8582, Japan}
68: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Physics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan}
69: \altaffiltext{3}{MSSSO, Australian National University, ACT 2611, Australia}
70: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Physics and Math. Physics, University of
71: Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia}
72: \altaffiltext{5}{Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, Kanagawa
73: 229-8510, Japan}
74:
75: \altaffiltext{6}{Department of Physics, Yamagata University, Yamagata 990-8560, Japan}
76: \altaffiltext{7}{Faculty of Management Information, Yamanashi Gakuin
77: University, Yamanashi 400-8575, Japan}
78: \altaffiltext{8}{Department of Physics, Tokai University, Kanagawa 259-1292, Japan}
79: \altaffiltext{9}{Department of Physics, Konan University, Hyogo 658-8501, Japan}
80: \altaffiltext{10}{Faculty of Science, Ibaraki University, Ibaraki 310-8512, Japan}
81: \altaffiltext{11}{Faculty of Engineering, Shinshu University, Nagano 380-8553, Japan}
82: \altaffiltext{12}{Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology,
83: Tokyo 152-8551, Japan}
84: \altaffiltext{13}{STE Laboratory, Nagoya University, Aichi 464-8601, Japan}
85: \altaffiltext{14}{National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, Tokyo 181-8588, Japan}
86: \altaffiltext{15}{Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, Ibaraki 300-0394, Japan}
87: \altaffiltext{16}{Department of Physics, Osaka City University, Osaka 558-858, Japan}
88:
89: \email{\myemail}
90:
91: \begin{abstract}
92: We searched for TeV gamma-rays from the remnant of SN 1987A
93: around 5400 days after the supernova.
94: The observations were carried out in 2001, from November 16 to December 11,
95: using the CANGAROO-II Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescope.
96: In total, 708 minutes of ON- and 1019 minutes of OFF-source data were obtained
97: under good conditions.
98: The detection threshold was estimated to be 1~TeV, due to the
99: mean zenith angle of 39$^\circ$.
100: The upper limits for the gamma-ray flux were obtained and compared with
101: the previous observations and theoretical models.
102: The observations
103: indicate that the gamma-ray luminosity is lower than $1\times 10^{37}$
104: erg~s$^{-1}$ at $\sim 10$ TeV.
105: \end{abstract}
106:
107: \keywords{supernovae: individual (SN 1987A)---
108: gamma rays: observations}
109:
110: \section{Introduction} The explosion of SN 1987A on February 23, 1987,
111: in the Large Magellanic Cloud, was first detected as a short neutrino
112: burst \citep{koshiba87, hirata87, bionta87}. It was subsequently
113: detected at almost all
114: wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum (see, e.g.,
115: \cite{chevalier92}, \cite{McCray93} and references therein).
116: After a weakening of
117: the emission, in accordance with the standard lightcurve for a core collapse
118: supernovae of Type II, at present it shows a continuous increasing
119: brightness in radio \citep{manchester02} and X-ray bands \citep{park02}.
120:
121: Although observational efforts in the high-energy gamma-ray region were
122: intensively carried out for several years
123: \citep{raubenheimer88, ciampa88, bond88a, bond88b, bond89, allen93a,
124: allen93b, stekelenborg93, yoshii96}, no positive signals were
125: obtained, with the possible exception of
126: a 2-day TeV gamma-ray burst \citep{bond88b}.
127: No observations since 1991 have been reported, despite the fact
128: that models predict an increasing flux of high energy gamma-rays
129: as the SN shock wave expands.
130:
131: It is now 15 years since SN 1987A.
132: Even an upper limit for the current period of the supernova remnant
133: evolution would be very important to constrain models for gamma-ray
134: emission.
135: The technology used to detect very high-energy gamma-rays has improved
136: significantly over this 15 year period, particularly with the
137: development of Imaging Atmospheric
138: Cherenkov Telescopes (IACTs).
139: IACTs detect optical Cherenkov photons produced by electrons in
140: cascades initiated by the interaction of gamma-rays at sub-TeV energies
141: in the Earth's upper atmosphere. The Cherenkov photons are strongly
142: beamed in the direction of the incident gamma-ray.
143: The CANGAROO-II telescope was, at the time of these observations,
144: the only one located in the southern hemisphere.
145:
146: % Both with historical and scientific meaning, we should observe it.
147: % Even an upper limit should contribute to the physics.
148: % Time scale is $O$(10y) which in its log scale is important
149: % to the history of the universe.
150:
151: The CANGAROO-II telescope is located near Woomera, South Australia.
152: Technical details are presented elsewhere
153: \citep{tanimori03}, and its performance is described in
154: \cite{enomoto02b, okumura02, itoh02}. The 10\,m diameter telescope
155: has an effective area of 57 m$^2$. SN~1987A can be seen
156: at a zenith angle of 38$^\circ$ at its culmination.
157: As a result, we can measure the TeV region with a significantly better
158: sensitivity than in previous measurements.
159: We report here on the results of observations of SN~1987A.
160:
161: \section{Observations and Analysis}
162:
163: The observations were carried out in 2001 over ten moonless nights
164: between November 16 and to December 11.
165: In total, 1275 min.\ of ON- and 1301 min.\ of OFF-source data were
166: recorded.
167: We removed the cloudy periods from the data and selected 708 min.\ of
168: ON- and 1019 min.\ of OFF-source data. The procedures and further
169: details of the analysis can be found in \cite{itoh03}.
170:
171: Briefly, in the analysis, ``cleaning'' cuts were applied to the
172: pixelized-camera images (each pixel being 0.115$^\circ$ square),
173: requiring that each pixel have greater than
174: $\sim$3.3~photoelectrons, that the Cherenkov photons arrived within
175: $\pm$40~nsec, and that a cluster of at least five adjacent triggered
176: pixels was contained in each event.
177: After these pre-selections, we carried out a shower image
178: analysis using the standard set of image parameters, $distance$, $length$,
179: $width$, and $\alpha$ \citep{hil85}, combining the
180: $length$ and $width$ (after
181: an initial $distance$ cut) to assign the likelihoods to each event
182: \citep{enomoto02a}. The likelihoods for both a gamma-ray origin and
183: a cosmic-ray proton origin were calculated. The cut that was used to reject
184: background events was based on the ratio of these two likelihoods.
185: After these cuts, the image orientation angles ($\alpha$) were plotted.
186: A gamma-ray signal would appear as an excess at low $\alpha$ after
187: the normalized OFF-source $\alpha$ distribution is subtracted from the
188: ON-source distribution. As shown in Figs.~\ref{fig1} a)--f), no
189: statistically significant excess of events
190: %greater than a certain level (4--5$\sigma$)
191: with $\alpha < 15^\circ$ was observed.
192: From top (a) to bottom (f) in Fig.~\ref{fig1}, six different
193: thresholds, which are shown in Table \ref{table1}, were applied to the
194: analysis. Our Monte Carlo simulations predicted that 73\% of the events
195: from a point source would have $\alpha < 15^\circ$
196: at these zenith angles.
197:
198: \section{Upper limits on the gamma-ray flux}
199:
200: The upper limits to the emission at each energy
201: was obtained by adding the statistical and systematic errors
202: to any excess events in the relevant plot in Fig.~\ref{fig1}.
203: The total error was the square root of the quadratic sum of both errors.
204: These errors were doubled to obtain $2\sigma$ Upper Limits (ULs).
205: In the case of a negative excess,
206: only the errors were used to determine the upper limit.
207: %we forced it to be a small positive number.
208:
209: The derivation of the integral flux depends on the unknown energy
210: spectrum of the incident gamma-rays.
211: %When deriving the integral flux, we suffered from the dependence
212: %of the energy spectrum of the incident gamma-rays.
213: We therefore tried several power-law energy spectra ($E^{-\gamma}$)
214: in Monte Carlo
215: simulations in order to determine the corresponding effective area of the
216: observations. Three spectra, with differential flux power-law indices of
217: $\gamma=2.0$, $2.5$, and $3.0$, were tested.
218: In all cases, the energy ranges of the generated gamma-rays
219: were 0.15--20~TeV.
220: We obtained integral flux upper limits under various assumptions,
221: as shown in Table \ref{table1}.
222: Although the threshold energies varied as expected
223: with initial power-law indices,
224: the spectral responses roughly agreed with each other.
225: We therefore adopted $\gamma=2.0$, plotted
226: in Fig.~\ref{fig2} by the dotted line with arrows, together with the
227: previous measurements and model predictions.
228:
229: \section{Discussion}
230:
231: In Fig.~\ref{fig2} we compile the upper limits on the flux of gamma rays
232: from SN 1987A of this observation (dotted line with arrows) and those
233: reported by others at different times since the explosion. Theoretical
234: predictions by \cite{berezhko00} (solid line), which correspond to a time
235: of $\sim$5000 days, and by \cite{gaisser89} (dashed line), which is almost
236: constant in time, are also shown.
237:
238: The upper limits of this observation are significantly better than those of
239: previous observations. In particular, at 3~TeV it is a factor of 20
240: lower than that of \cite{bond88b}. % , who claimed a burst.
241: At 1~TeV, the upper limit is tightened by a factor of 3,
242: and at the highest point
243: (several TeV) it is improved by a factor of 50.
244: Previous measurements calculated typical luminosity upper limits of
245: several times 10$^{38}$ erg\,s$^{-1}$, using a distance of
246: $\sim$50~kpc.
247: This observation indicates that the TeV gamma-ray luminosity is
248: lower than $1\times 10^{37}$~erg\,s$^{-1}$ at $\sim$10~TeV, which is now
249: of a similar order to
250: those in bright high-energy astronomical objects at
251: various wavelengths.
252:
253: The predictions concerning the emitted high-energy gamma-rays from
254: this source have been extensively discussed \citep{honda87,
255: nakamura87, yamada88, berezinsky89, gaisser89, schlickeiser91,
256: berezhko00}. High-energy photons can be produced in collisions of
257: accelerated particles with the ambient medium. There are several
258: processes which could accelerate particles in young supernova remnants
259: \citep[see, e.g.,][for a review]{dogiel89}.
260:
261: \cite{gaisser89} discuss the acceleration of
262: particles at the pulsar wind shock. However, an analysis of the
263: 2.14~ms pulsar candidate in the remnant of SN 1987A
264: \citep{middleditch00} suggests that the magnetic field strength at the
265: surface of a neutron star has an upper limit of $\sim 10^{10}$~G
266: \citep{nagataki01}, which is about two orders less than typical values
267: and that assumed by \cite{gaisser89}.
268:
269: The lightcurve of soft X-rays, which are expected from the interaction of
270: the supernova shock with the matter, can be well fitted with a $t^2$
271: relation \citep{aschenbach02}. The recent X-ray data points tend to
272: exceed the $t^2$ best fit \citep{aschenbach02, park02}. One can expect
273: the similar behaviour of the TeV gamma-ray flux from collisions
274: of accelerated cosmic rays with the ambient matter.
275:
276: Fig.~\ref{fig3} shows the dependence of the gamma-ray
277: flux with an energy $> 3$~TeV on time since the explosion.
278: The solid line is extracted
279: from the results of numerical calculations by \cite{berezhko00}. The dashed
280: curve is an extrapolation to that curve under the assumption that
281: $F_{\gamma} \propto t^2$, which is a reasonable lower limit of the expected
282: flux in the future. One can see that the our
283: upper limit is just a factor of 3 above the theoretical prediction for the
284: current epoch.
285:
286: The presence and growing amount of synchrotron radio emission
287: unambiguously testify to the presence of high-energy electrons accelerated
288: by the forward-moving ejecta-driven shock. The radio spectrum has a
289: power-law index of 0.88 \citep{manchester02}, which is much softer than
290: the value of 0.5 from linear diffusive shock acceleration. This can be
291: explained with an essential modification of the shock wave due to the very
292: effectively accelerated nucleonic cosmic ray pressure
293: \citep{berezhko00}. Also, radio measurements show that the shock velocity
294: has dropped from
295: the initial value of 10000--35000~km\,s$^{-1}$ to $\sim$3000~km\,s$^{-1}$
296: \citep{gaensler97},
297: which is consistent with the shock having encountered a denser shocked
298: component of the progenitor's stellar wind with a number density of $\sim
299: 100$~cm$^{-3}$ \citep{chevalier95}. It is thus reasonable to expect
300: a considerable flux of TeV gamma-rays from the decay of $\pi^0$ mesons
301: produced in collisions of the cosmic ray nucleonic component with the ambient
302: matter nuclei \citep{drury94, naito94}, which is expected to increase
303: approximately by a factor of 2 between 2000 and 2006 \citep{berezhko00}.
304:
305: At the current rate of
306: expansion, the shock will encounter the much denser inner
307: optical ring in the year 2004$\pm$2 \citep{manchester02}. Thus, one can
308: also expect a dramatic increase of the TeV gamma-ray flux, which
309: could well exceed the current upper limits. The future
310: detection of TeV gamma-ray emission,
311: %which will be higher than the current or
312: %future lower upper limits,
313: will unambiguously prove the idea that
314: the main part of nucleonic cosmic rays are indeed accelerated at the supernova
315: remnant shock waves by a diffusive acceleration process.
316:
317: %30 Dor C: The total non-thermal luminosity is $7\times 10^{35}$ erg/s,
318:
319: The next generation of southern
320: hemisphere IACTs, CANGAROO-III and H.E.S.S., will have improved sensitivities
321: and reduced energy thresholds. Considering the
322: present theoretical estimations and recent radio and X-ray
323: observations, deep observations, with a total ON-source exposure of
324: $\sim$100 hours, will have a good chance of detecting a signal.
325: A more detailed theory of high-energy gamma-ray production in the SN 1987A
326: environment is now needed.
327: Regular observations over the next decade are also highly desirable.
328:
329: \acknowledgments
330:
331: This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research by
332: the Ministry of Education, Culture, Science, Sports and Technology of
333: Japan and Australian Research Council. The receipt of JSPS Research
334: Fellowships is also acknowledged.
335:
336: \begin{thebibliography}{}
337: \bibitem[Allen et al.(1993a)]{allen93a} Allen, W.H., et al. 1993a, ApJ, 403, 239
338: \bibitem[Allen et al.(1993b)]{allen93b} Allen, W.H., et al. 1993b, Phys. Rev. D,
339: 48, 466
340: \bibitem[Aschenbach (2002)]{aschenbach02} Aschenbach, B., 2002, MPI
341: Report, 278, 13 (astro-ph/0208492)
342: \bibitem[Berezhko and Ksenofontov(2000)]{berezhko00} Berezhko, E.G., and
343: Ksenofontov, L.T., 2000, Astron. Lett., 26, 639
344: \bibitem[Berezinsky and Ptuskin(1989)]{berezinsky89} Berezinsky, V.S., and
345: Ptuskin, V.S., 1989, \apj, 340, 351
346: \bibitem[Bionta et al.(1987)]{bionta87} Bionta, R.M., et al., 1987, Phys. Rev.
347: Lett., 58, 1494
348: \bibitem[Bond et al.(1988a)]{bond88a} Bond, I.A., et al., 1988a, Phys. Rev.
349: Lett., 60, 1110
350: \bibitem[Bond et al.(1988b)]{bond88b} Bond, I.A., et al., 1988b, Phys. Rev.
351: Lett., 61, 2292
352: \bibitem[Bond et al.(1989)]{bond89} Bond, I.A., et al., 1989, ApJ, 344, L17
353: \bibitem[Chevalier(1992)]{chevalier92} Chevalier, R.A. 1992, Nature, 355, 691
354: \bibitem[Chevalier and Dwarkadas(1995)]{chevalier95} Chevalier, R.A., and
355: Dwarkadas, V.V., 1995, \apjl, 452, L45
356: \bibitem[Ciampa et al.(1988)]{ciampa88} Ciampa, D., et al., 1988, ApJ, 326, L9
357: \bibitem[Dogiel and Ginzburg(1989)]{dogiel89} Dogiel, V.A., and Ginzburg,
358: V.L., 1989, Space Sci.Rev, 49, 311
359: \bibitem[Drury, Aharonian and V\"olk(1994)]{drury94} Drury, L. O'C.,
360: Aharonian, F.A. and V\"olk, H.J., 1994, \aap, 287, 959
361: \bibitem[Enomoto et al.(2002a)]{enomoto02a} Enomoto, R., Hara, S., et al.
362: 2002a, Astropart. Phys., 16, 235
363: \bibitem[Enomoto et al.(2002b)]{enomoto02b} Enomoto, R., Tanimori, T., Naito,
364: T., Yoshida, T., Yanagita, S., et al., 2002b, Nature, 416, 823
365: \bibitem[Gaensler et al.(1997)]{gaensler97} Gaensler, B.M., et al.,
366: 1997, \apj, 479, 845
367: \bibitem[Gaisser, Harding and Stanev(1989)]{gaisser89} Gaisser, T.K.,
368: Harding, A.K. and Stanev, T., 1989, ApJ, 345, 423
369: \bibitem[Hillas(1985)]{hil85} Hillas, A.M.
370: 1985, Proc. 19th ICRC (La Jolla), 3, 445
371: \bibitem[Hirata et al.(1987)]{hirata87} Hirata, K., et al., 1987, Phys. Rev.
372: Lett., 58, 1490
373: \bibitem[Honda and Mori (1987)]{honda87} Honda, M. and Mori, M., 1987,
374: Progress of Theor.Phys., 78, 963
375: \bibitem[Itoh et al.(2002)]{itoh02} Itoh, C., Enomoto, R., Yanagita,
376: S., Yoshida, T., et al., 2002, \aap, 396, L1
377: \bibitem[Itoh et al.(2003)]{itoh03} Itoh, C., Enomoto, R., Yanagita,
378: S., Yoshida, T., et al., 2003, \aap, 402, 443
379: \bibitem[Koshiba et al.(1987)]{koshiba87} Koshiba, M., et al. 1987,
380: IAU Circ., 4338, 1
381: \bibitem[Manchester et al.(2002)]{manchester02}
382: Manchester, R.N. et al., 2002, PASA, 19, 207
383: \bibitem[Middleditch et al.(2000)]{middleditch00}
384: Middleditch, J. et al., 2000, New Astronomy, 5, 243
385: \bibitem[McCray(1993)]{McCray93} McCray, R., 1993, \araa, 31, 175
386: \bibitem[Nagataki and Sato(2001)]{nagataki01} Nagataki, S., and Sato,
387: K., 2001, Progress of Theor.Phys., 105, 429
388: \bibitem[Naito and Takahara(1994)]{naito94} Naito, T., and Takahara,
389: F., 1994, J.Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys., 20, 477
390: \bibitem[Nakamura, Yamada and Sato (1987)]{nakamura87} Nakamura, T.,
391: Yamada, Y. and Sato, H., 1987, Progress of Theor.Phys., 78, 1065
392: \bibitem[Okumura et al.(2002)]{okumura02} Okumura, K., et al., 2002, \apjl,
393: 579, L9
394: \bibitem[Park et al.(2002)]{park02} Park, S. et al., 2002, ApJ, 567, 314
395: \bibitem[Raubenheimer et al.(1988)]{raubenheimer88} Raubenheimer, B.C.,
396: et al., 1988, \aap, 193, L17
397: \bibitem[Schlickeiser and Stanev(1991)]{schlickeiser91} Schlickeiser,
398: R. and Stanev T., 1991, \aap, 243, L1
399: \bibitem[Sood et al.(1992)]{sood92} Sood, R.K., et al., 1992, \apj,
400: 395, 637
401: \bibitem[van Stekelenborg et al.(1993)]{stekelenborg93} van Stekelenborg,
402: J., et al., 1993, Phys. Rev. D., 48, 4504
403: \bibitem[Tanimori et al.(2003)]{tanimori03} Tanimori, T., et al., 2003,
404: submitted to Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A.
405: \bibitem[Yamada, Nakamura, Kasahara and Sato (1988)]{yamada88} Yamada, Y.,
406: Nakamura, T., Kasahara, K. and Sato, H., 1988, Progress of Theor.Phys.,
407: 79, 416
408: \bibitem[Yoshii et al.(1996)]{yoshii96} Yoshii, H., et al., 1996, ApJ, 472,
409: 800
410:
411: \end{thebibliography}
412:
413:
414: \clearpage
415:
416: \begin{figure}
417: \plotone{f1.eps}
418: \figcaption{Distributions of the image orientation angle ($\alpha$).
419: These were obtained by
420: subtracting the normalized off-source data from the on-source data.
421: The ratio of
422: events in the higher $\alpha$ ($>$ 20$^\circ$)
423: regions for the on- and off-source data was used as
424: the normalization factor.
425: From top (a) to to bottom (f), six threshold values,
426: as shown in Table \ref{table1}, were applied to the analysis.\label{fig1}}
427:
428: \end{figure}
429:
430: \begin{figure}
431: \plotone{f2.eps}
432: \figcaption{Upper limits on the flux of gamma-rays. The dotted line
433: is that obtained by this experiment. P: \cite{raubenheimer88}; J1--6:
434: \cite{bond88a, bond88b, bond89, allen93a, allen93b}; A: \cite{ciampa88};
435: S: \cite{stekelenborg93}; B: \cite{yoshii96}. The solid and dashed lines
436: are theoretical predictions of the flux by \cite{berezhko00, gaisser89},
437: respectively.
438: \label{fig2}
439: }
440: \end{figure}
441:
442: \begin{figure}
443: \plotone{f3.eps}
444: \figcaption{Flux of gamma-rays with energy $E>3$~TeV vs. time since the
445: SN~1987A explosion. The current work upper limit (C) is shown.
446: The solid curve was extracted from \cite{berezhko00}.
447: The dashed curve is an extrapolation to the solid one.
448: The time when the shock is expected to encounter the inner
449: optical ring is the hatched region.
450: \label{fig3}
451: }
452: \end{figure}
453:
454: \clearpage
455:
456: %\begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrrr}
457: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccccc}
458: \tablecolumns{7}
459: \tablewidth{0pc}
460: \tablecaption{Integral flux upper limit ($2\sigma$). \label{table1}}
461: \tablehead{
462: \colhead{} & \colhead{$\gamma$ = 2.0} & \colhead{}
463: & \colhead{$\gamma$ = 2.5} & \colhead{}
464: & \colhead{$\gamma$ = 3.0} & \colhead{} \\
465: \cline{2-2} \cline{4-4} \cline{6-6}\\
466: \colhead{bin} & \colhead{$E_{threshold}$} & \colhead{$2\sigma$-UL}
467: & \colhead{$E_{threshold}$} & \colhead{$2\sigma$-UL}
468: & \colhead{$E_{threshold}$} & \colhead{$2\sigma$-UL}\\
469: \colhead{number} & \colhead{(TeV)} & \colhead{(cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$)}
470: & \colhead{(TeV)} & \colhead{(cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$)}
471: & \colhead{(TeV)} & \colhead{(cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$)}}
472: \startdata
473: 1 & 1.2 & 7.5$\times 10^{-12}$
474: & 1.0 & 1.0$\times 10^{-11}$
475: & 0.9 & 1.3$\times 10^{-11}$ \\
476: 2 & 1.5 & 5.3$\times 10^{-12}$
477: & 1.4 & 5.8$\times 10^{-12}$
478: & 1.3 & 6.5$\times 10^{-12}$ \\
479: 3 & 1.9 & 3.5$\times 10^{-12}$
480: & 1.7 & 3.9$\times 10^{-12}$
481: & 1.7 & 3.7$\times 10^{-12}$ \\
482: 4 & 2.7 & 1.5$\times 10^{-12}$
483: & 2.2 & 1.8$\times 10^{-12}$
484: & 2.4 & 1.4$\times 10^{-12}$ \\
485: 5 & 5.0 & 4.3$\times 10^{-13}$
486: & 4.0 & 4.8$\times 10^{-13}$
487: & 3.5 & 5.0$\times 10^{-13}$ \\
488: 6 & 7.7 & 1.7$\times 10^{-13}$
489: & 8.0 & 1.3$\times 10^{-13}$
490: & 8.2 & 8.5$\times 10^{-14}$
491: \enddata
492: \end{deluxetable}
493:
494:
495: \end{document}
496:
497: