1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \documentclass{emulateapj}
3: \shorttitle{Prompt Optical Detection of GRB~050401}
4: \shortauthors{Rykoff et al.}
5:
6: \begin{document}
7:
8: \title{Prompt Optical Detection of GRB~050401 with ROTSE-IIIa}
9:
10: \author{
11: Rykoff,~E.~S.\altaffilmark{1},
12: Yost,~S.~A.\altaffilmark{1},
13: Krimm,~H.~A.\altaffilmark{2,3},
14: Aharonian,~F.\altaffilmark{4},
15: Akerlof,~C.~W.\altaffilmark{1},
16: Alatalo,~K.\altaffilmark{1},
17: Ashley,~M.~C.~B.\altaffilmark{5},
18: Barthelmy,~S.~D.\altaffilmark{2},
19: Gehrels,~N.\altaffilmark{2},
20: G\"{u}ver, T.\altaffilmark{6},
21: Horns,~D.\altaffilmark{4},
22: K{\i}z{\i}lo\v{g}lu,~\"{U}.\altaffilmark{7},
23: McKay,~T.~A.\altaffilmark{1},
24: \"{O}zel,~M.\altaffilmark{8},
25: Phillips,~A.\altaffilmark{5},
26: Quimby,~R.~M.\altaffilmark{9},
27: Rujopakarn,~W.\altaffilmark{1},
28: Schaefer,~B.~E.\altaffilmark{10},
29: Smith,~D.~A.\altaffilmark{1},
30: Swan,~H.~F.\altaffilmark{1},
31: Vestrand,~W.~T.\altaffilmark{11},
32: Wheeler,~J.~C.\altaffilmark{9},
33: Wren,~J.\altaffilmark{11}
34: }
35:
36: \altaffiltext{1}{University of Michigan, 2477 Randall Laboratory, 450 Church
37: St., Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, erykoff@umich.edu, sayost@umich.edu,
38: akerlof@umich.edu, kalatalo@umich.edu, tamckay@umich.edu, wiphu@umich.edu,
39: donaldas@umich.edu, hswan@umich.edu}
40: \altaffiltext{2}{NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Laboratory for High Energy
41: Astrophysics, Greenbelt, MD 20771, krimm@milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov,
42: scott@milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov,gehrels@milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov}
43: \altaffiltext{3}{Universities Space Research Association, 10227 Wincopin
44: Circle, Suite 212, Columbia, MD 21044}
45: \altaffiltext{4}{Max-Planck-Institut f\"{u}r Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1,
46: 69117 Heidelberg, Germany, Felix.Aharonian@mpi-hd.mpg.de,
47: horns@mpi-hd.mpg.de}
48: \altaffiltext{5}{School of Physics, Department of Astrophysics and Optics,
49: University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia,
50: mcba@phys.unsw.edu.au, a.phillips@unsw.edu.au}
51: \altaffiltext{6}{Istanbul University Science Faculty, Department of Astronomy
52: and Space Sciences, 34119, University-Istanbul, Turkey,
53: tolga@istanbul.edu.tr}
54: \altaffiltext{7}{Middle East Technical University, 06531 Ankara, Turkey,
55: umk@astroa.physics.metu.edu.tr}
56: \altaffiltext{8}{\c{C}anakkale Onsekiz Mart \"{U}niversitesi, Terzio\v{g}lu
57: 17020, \c{C}anakkale, Turkey, m.e.ozel@comu.edu.tr}
58: \altaffiltext{9}{Department of Astronomy, University of Texas, Austin, TX
59: 78712, quimby@astro.as.utexas.edu, wheel@astro.as.utexas.edu}
60: \altaffiltext{10}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State
61: University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, schaefer@lsu.edu}
62: \altaffiltext{11}{Los Alamos National Laboratory, NIS-2 MS D436, Los Alamos, NM
63: 87545, vestrand@lanl.gov, jwren@nis.lanl.gov}
64:
65: \begin{abstract}
66: The ROTSE-IIIa telescope at Siding Spring Observatory, Australia, detected
67: prompt optical emission from \emph{Swift} GRB~050401. In this letter, we
68: present observations of the early optical afterglow, first detected by the
69: ROTSE-IIIa telescope 33~s after the start of $\gamma$-ray emission,
70: contemporaneous with the brightest peak of this emission. This GRB was neither
71: exceptionally long nor bright. This is the first prompt optical detection of a
72: GRB of typical duration and luminosity. We find that the early afterglow decay
73: does not deviate significantly from the power-law decay observable at later
74: times, and is uncorrelated with the prompt $\gamma$-ray emission. We compare
75: this detection with the other two GRBs with prompt observations, GRB~990123 and
76: GRB~041219a. All three bursts exhibit quite different behavior at early times.
77:
78: \end{abstract}
79: \keywords{gamma rays:bursts}
80:
81: \section{Introduction}
82:
83: The detection of prompt optical emission contemporaneous with gamma-ray bursts
84: (GRBs) has been quite difficult. Until now, only two bursts, GRB~990123 and
85: GRB~041219a, have had optical light detected while detectable $\gamma$-rays
86: were still being emitted. The ROTSE-I instrument detected a bright $9^{th}$
87: magnitude flash coincident with GRB~990123, a burst exceptionally luminous in
88: $\gamma$-rays~\citep{abbbb99}. The RAPTOR-S telescope detected faint optical
89: emission from GRB~041219a that was correlated with the $\gamma$-ray
90: emission~\citep[henceforth, V05]{vwwfs05}. GRB~041219a was an unusually long
91: burst (over 6 minutes) that allowed extended optical monitoring during the
92: $\gamma$-ray emission. The \emph{Swift} detection of GRB~050401 and rapid
93: dissemination of its coordinates enabled the first prompt detection of an
94: optical counterpart for a GRB with a typical duration and fluence. With a T90
95: of $33\,\mathrm{s}$ and a fluence of
96: $1.4\times10^{-5}\,\mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$ in the 15-350 keV
97: band~\citep{sbbcf05}, this burst was neither especially long nor bright.
98:
99: In this letter, we report on the prompt detection of the optical afterglow of
100: GRB~050401 with the ROTSE-IIIa (Robotic Optical Transient Search Experiment)
101: telescope located at Siding Spring Observatory (SSO), Australia. Our initial
102: detection of the afterglow is coincident with the brightest peak in the
103: $\gamma$-ray emission. ROTSE-IIIa followed the afterglow through the first
104: four minutes after the burst, recording a fading afterglow consistent with a
105: backward extrapolation of the afterglow measured at much later times. We
106: compare these observations to the two previously observed cases of prompt
107: optical emission, and to the empirical model of V05 that suggested a coupling
108: of $\gamma$-ray and optical flux.
109:
110: \section{Observations and Analysis}
111: \label{sec:observations}
112:
113: The ROTSE-III array is a worldwide network of 0.45~m robotic, automated
114: telescopes, built for fast ($\sim 6$ s) responses to GRB triggers from
115: satellites such as HETE-2 and \emph{Swift}. They have wide ($1\fdg85 \times
116: 1\fdg85$) fields of view imaged onto Marconi $2048\times2048$ back-illuminated
117: thinned CCDs, and operate without filters. The ROTSE-III systems are described
118: in detail in \citet{akmrs03}.
119:
120: On 2005 April 01, \emph{Swift}/BAT detected GRB~050401 (\emph{Swift} trigger
121: 113120) at 14:20:15 UT. The position was distributed as a Gamma-ray Burst
122: Coordinates Network (GCN) notice at 14:20:34 UT, with a $4\arcmin$ radius error
123: box. The burst had a $T_{90}$ duration of $33\pm2\,\mathrm{s}$, and the
124: position was released during the $\gamma$-ray emission~\citep{sbbcf05}. The
125: \emph{Swift} trigger time was 9 seconds after the start of the GRB; in this
126: paper we reference all times to the start of $\gamma$-ray emission at 14:20:06
127: UT.
128:
129: ROTSE-IIIa responded automatically to the GCN notice, beginning its first
130: exposure in less than 6 seconds, at 14:20:39.2 UT, during the largest peak of
131: the $\gamma$-ray emission. The automated burst response included a set of ten
132: 5-s exposures, ten 20-s exposures, and a long sequence of 60-s exposures
133: continuing for about 5 hours until twilight. Initial analysis of the prompt
134: response did not yield an obvious afterglow candidate. About an hour after the
135: burst, at 15:17:16.8 UT, \citet{mp05} initiated a burst response on the SSO
136: 40-inch telescope. They detected a new $20^{th}$ magnitude object at
137: $\alpha=16^h31^m28\fs8$, $\delta=02\arcdeg11\arcmin14\farcs2$ (J2000.0) which
138: they identified as the optical counterpart. Further analysis of the ROTSE-IIIa
139: images revealed this source at magnitudes close to our detection limit. Later
140: spectroscopic observations by \citet{fjhws05} at the VLT revealed a redshift of
141: 2.9 for this burst. The burst position has a high galactic latitude of
142: $31\fdg8$, so extinction from the Milky Way is not significant.
143:
144: The $\gamma$-ray light curve from the \emph{Swift}/BAT instrument is shown in
145: Figure~\ref{fig:grblc}. The light curve has been normalized to the peak flux.
146: Overplotted are the first two ROTSE-IIIa observations, with the first 5-s
147: integration coincident with the brightest peak in the $\gamma$-ray emission.
148: That burst was 56 degrees from the spacecraft axis, which means that the source
149: illuminated only 8\% of the BAT detectors~\citep{bbcfg05}. The \emph{Swift}
150: spacecraft began its slew to the target during the ROTSE-IIIa observation,
151: delayed by 9 seconds due to an earth-limb constraint. All the BAT flux values
152: were corrected for partial illumination and other geometric effects, including
153: the spacecraft slew. The $\gamma$-ray spectrum during this period is well fit
154: by a simple power law with a photon index of $1.58\pm0.06$, with a $\chi^2$ of
155: 58.0 (57 d.o.f.). This is consistent with the index early in the burst
156: suggesting that there is no significant spectral
157: evolution. Table~\ref{tab:fluxvals} shows the flux density and flux
158: measurements for the $\gamma$-ray emission coincident with the first two
159: ROTSE-IIIa observations. To obtain a $3\sigma$ upper limit for the $\gamma$-ray
160: flux coincident with the second ROTSE-IIIa integration, we assumed the source
161: had the same spectral shape as the first integration.
162:
163:
164: \begin{figure}
165: \rotatebox{90}{\scalebox{0.85}{\plotone{f1.eps}}}
166: \caption{\label{fig:grblc}$\gamma$-ray lightcurve for GRB~050401. The time is
167: seconds since the start of $\gamma$-ray emission at 14:20:06 UT. The burst
168: T90 duration was $33\pm2\,\mathrm{s}$. The first two optical detections
169: (peak normalized) have been overplotted. The first ROTSE-IIIa observation is
170: coincident with the brightest $\gamma$-ray peak, and there is no correlation
171: between the $\gamma$-ray flux and the optical flux at the early time.}
172: \end{figure}
173:
174:
175: \begin{deluxetable}{cccc}
176: \tablewidth{0pt}
177: \tablecaption{Simultaneous ROTSE-III and \emph{Swift} measurement of
178: GRB~050401.\label{tab:fluxvals}}
179: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
180: \tablehead{
181: \colhead{Obs.} &
182: \colhead{Energy Band} & \colhead{Flux Density (mJy)} & \colhead{Flux
183: ($\mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$)}
184: }
185: \startdata
186: 1 & $R_c$-band\tablenotemark{a} & $0.59\pm0.16$ & $6.6\pm1.8\times10^{-13}$\\
187: & 15-350 keV & & $7.60\pm24\times10^{-7}$\\
188: & 15-25 keV & $2.73\pm0.09$ & $6.60\pm0.21\times10^{-8}$ \\
189: & 25-50 keV & $1.91\pm0.06$ & $1.16\pm0.04\times10^{-7}$ \\
190: & 50-100 keV & $1.28\pm0.12$ & $1.55\pm0.14\times10^{-7}$ \\
191: & 100-350 keV & $0.70\pm0.02$ & $4.24\pm0.14\times10^{-7}$\\
192: \hline
193: 2 & $R_c$-band\tablenotemark{a} & $0.28\pm0.08$ & $3.2\pm0.9\times10^{-13}$\\
194: & 15-350 keV & & $<4.02\times10^{-8}$\\
195: \enddata
196: \tablenotetext{a}{The unfiltered ROTSE magnitudes have been calibrated such
197: that they are roughly equivalent to the $R_c$ band system.}
198: \tablecomments{Observation 1 is 33.2~s - 38.2~s post-burst, and observation 2
199: is 47.5~s - 89.7~s post-burst.}
200: \end{deluxetable}
201:
202:
203:
204: The ROTSE-IIIa images were bias-subtracted and flat-fielded. The flat-field
205: image was generated from 30 twilight images. We used SExtractor~\citep{ba96}
206: to perform the initial object detection and to determine the centroid positions
207: of the stars. After the first 5-s integration, images were co-added in sets of
208: three to improve our signal to noise. The transient is not detected in
209: individual frames, which have limits consistent with the magnitudes derived
210: from the co-added frames. The images were then processed with a customized
211: version of the DAOPHOT PSF fitting package~\citep{stetson87} that has been
212: ported to the IDL Astronomy User's Library~\citep{landsman95}. The magnitude
213: zero-point for each image is calculated from the median offset to the USNO~1-m
214: $R$-band standard stars~\citep{henden05} in the magnitude range of
215: $13.5<V<20.0$ with $0.4 < V-R < 1.0$. As we have no data on afterglow color
216: information at the early time, no additional color corrections have been
217: applied to our unfiltered data.
218:
219: Figure~\ref{fig:mosaic} shows the optical counterpart and a later non-detection
220: image. The panel on the left is a co-addition of all our images with
221: significant flux, from 33~s to 281~s post-burst. The panel on the right is the
222: subsequent non-detection image from 290~s to 487~s
223: post-burst. Table~\ref{tab:photometry} contains the optical photometry for the
224: early afterglow. In addition, Table~\ref{tab:fluxvals} shows the approximate
225: flux density for our first two observations, assuming the ROTSE-IIIa unfiltered
226: magnitudes are roughly equivalent to the $R_c$-band system.
227:
228:
229: \begin{figure}
230: \rotatebox{90}{\scalebox{0.60}{\plotone{f2.eps}}}
231: \caption{\label{fig:mosaic}Optical counterpart of GRB~050401. The panel on the
232: left shows the counterpart in a co-added image from 33~s to 281~s
233: post-burst. The counterpart is absent from the panel on the right, a
234: co-added image from 290~s to 487~s post-burst.}
235: \end{figure}
236:
237:
238: \begin{deluxetable}{lcrrc}
239: \tablewidth{0pt}
240: \tablecaption{Optical Photometry for GRB~050401\label{tab:photometry}}
241: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
242: \tablehead{
243: \colhead{Telescope} &
244: \colhead{Filter} &
245: \colhead{$t_{\mathrm{start}}$ (s)} &
246: \colhead{$t_{\mathrm{end}}$ (s)} &
247: \colhead{Magnitude}
248: }
249: \startdata
250: ROTSE-IIIa & None & 33.2 & 38.2 & $16.80\pm 0.29$\\
251: ROTSE-IIIa & ... & 47.5 & 89.7 & $17.59\pm 0.34$\\
252: ROTSE-IIIa & ... & 99.2 & 140.9 & $17.42\pm 0.23$\\
253: ROTSE-IIIa & ... & 150.2 & 184.3 & $17.88\pm 0.25$\\
254: ROTSE-IIIa & ... & 201.5 & 281.2 & $18.58\pm 0.43$\\
255: ROTSE-IIIa & ... & 290.3 & 487.1 & $>18.60$\\
256: \enddata
257: \tablecomments{All times are in seconds since the burst time, 14:20:06 UT (see \S~\ref{sec:observations})}
258: \end{deluxetable}
259:
260:
261: \section{Results}
262:
263: Figure~\ref{fig:lightcurve} shows the optical light curve of GRB~050401 with
264: the ROTSE-IIIa observations combined with later followup from larger
265: telescopes. The light curve for the first 40000~s is well fit by a single
266: power-law $f_\nu\propto{t^{\alpha}}$ with a decay slope $\alpha=-0.76\pm0.03$
267: ($\chi^2=4.7$, 6 d.o.f.). Interestingly, there is no evidence that the
268: afterglow is either brighter or dimmer during the prompt $\gamma$-ray emission
269: than one would predict from an extrapolation of the later afterglow. We see no
270: evidence for excess emission expected from a reverse shock flash, nor do we see
271: evidence for a deficit of emission during the rise of the early afterglow.
272:
273:
274: \begin{figure}
275: \rotatebox{90}{\scalebox{0.85}{\plotone{f3.eps}}}
276: \caption{\label{fig:lightcurve}Optical lightcurve for GRB~050401. The filled
277: circles are from ROTSE-IIIa and the empty circles are taken from the
278: literature~\citep{pm05,kispr05,mkp05}. A power-law fit with a decay
279: slope of $\alpha=-0.76\pm0.03$ is overplotted. The early
280: optical afterglow, including the first point coincident with the $\gamma$-ray
281: emission, does not show any significant deviation from the power-law decay
282: visible at later times.}
283: \end{figure}
284:
285:
286: With the detection of a prompt optical counterpart, we can compare the optical
287: to $\gamma$-ray flux ratio from GRB~050401 to that of GRB~041219a and
288: GRB~990123, the other two bursts with prompt detections. Following the method
289: of V05, we have calculated the optical to $\gamma$-ray flux ratio
290: $F_{R_c}/F_\gamma$ for the prompt optical observation and the first subsequent
291: co-added integration. As with V05, we use the flux integrated in the
292: \emph{Swift}/BAT 15-350 keV band over the duration of our observation. We have
293: not performed any $k$-corrections because we do not know the spectral shape of
294: the prompt optical emission.
295:
296: The flux ratio for the first ROTSE-IIIa observation of GRB~050401 is
297: $8.7\pm2.3\times10^{-7}$. We have tested the correlation between the optical
298: and $\gamma$-ray fluxes for the first two integrations. We fit a simple
299: proportional model of the form $F_\mathrm{opt} = aF_\gamma$ using the two
300: optical detections and the $\gamma$-ray detection and upper limit. This
301: proportional model results in a very poor fit, with a $\chi^2$ probability of
302: 0.04\%. Therefore, the $\gamma$-ray and optical flux are not correlated.
303:
304: % For the prompt observation,
305: %the logarithmic color ratio, $-2.5 log_{10}(F_{R_c}/F_\gamma)$, is $15.2$.
306:
307: The flux ratio during the first ROTSE-III integration is $\sim$14 times dimmer
308: in optical than that calculated for GRB~041219a in V05. If the flux ratio for
309: GRB~050401 were the same as that for GRB~041219a, we would expect an optical
310: detection at $\sim14$ magnitude. If the transient had been this bright we
311: would have detected it with a S/N of over 25, which we can firmly rule out. In
312: addition, V05 had to perform an approximate galactic reddening correction of
313: 4.9 magnitudes, and suggest that the true extinction value may be larger. This
314: would imply that the optical to $\gamma$-ray flux is even larger for
315: GRB~041219a, and V05 would predict a brighter counterpart for GRB~050401.
316:
317: We have also compared the prompt optical flux from GRB~050401 to that from
318: GRB~990123. Although the optical emission from GRB~990123 is not correlated
319: with the $\gamma$-ray emission, V05 have suggested that the first detection of
320: the transient at $11^{th}$ magnitude might be related to the brightest
321: $\gamma$-ray peak. Using the GRB (``Band'') model parameters from
322: \citet{bbkpk99}, we have calculated the flux in the 15-350 keV band for the
323: first ROTSE-I integration of GRB~990123. We find that the
324: optical-to-$\gamma$-ray flux ratio is $1.7\times10^{-5}$, or about a factor of
325: 20 larger than that for GRB~050401. However, it is reasonable to expect that
326: this first optical detection of GRB~990123 is the onset of the reverse shock,
327: which is not evident in the early afterglow of GRB~050401.
328:
329:
330: %We have compared the prompt optical flux from GRB~050401 to that from
331: %GRB~990123. Although the optical emission from GRB~990123 is obviously
332: %correlated with the $\gamma$-ray emission, V05 have suggested that the first
333: %detection of the $11^{th}$ magnitude transient might be correlated with the
334: %brightest $\gamma$-ray peak. We have thus recalculated the $\gamma$-ray to
335: %optical flux ratio for the first ROTSE-I integration. \citet{bbkpk99}
336: %calculated the GRB (``Band'') model parameters ($E_p$, $\alpha$, and $\beta$)
337: %for this for the $\gamma$-ray emission coincident with the first image,
338: %normalized to the BATSE 20-2000 keV energy band. As the \emph{Swift}-BAT
339: %measures the GRB spectrum in much softer $\gamma$-rays, we must integrate the
340: %flux in the 15-350 keV band using the best fit GRB model. We find the flux
341: %ratio is $1.7\times10^{-5}$, or about a factor of 5 larger than that for
342: %GRB~050401. However, it is reasonable to expect that this first optical
343: %detection of GRB~990123 might be the onset of the reverse shock, and thus
344: %uncorrelated with the $\gamma$-ray emission.
345:
346: The primary difficulty in comparing the optical flux to the $\gamma$-ray flux
347: is that all three bursts have different spectral shapes in the $\gamma$-ray
348: regime. Comparing the optical and $\gamma$-ray flux densities avoids the
349: integration over the arbitrary $\gamma$-ray passband and can simplify the
350: comparison of these different bursts. Table~\ref{tab:fluxdens} shows the flux
351: density at 1.9 eV (the peak of the $R_c$ passband), 20 keV, and 100 keV for the
352: three bursts. We have chosen to examine the first optical integration of
353: GRB~990123, which might be before the onset of the reverse shock; the third
354: optical integration of GRB~041219a, which is coincident with the final peak in
355: the $\gamma$-ray emission; and the first optical integration of GRB~050401,
356: also coincident with the final $\gamma$-ray peak. There does not seem to be
357: any obvious pattern common to all three bursts.
358:
359:
360: \begin{deluxetable*}{ccccc}
361: \tablewidth{0pt}
362: \tablecaption{Flux densities for prompt counterparts.\label{tab:fluxdens}}
363: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
364: \tablehead{
365: \colhead{Burst} & \colhead{$F_{\mathrm{opt}}
366: (\mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1})$} &
367: \colhead{$f_\nu$ [1.9 eV] (mJy)} &
368: \colhead{$f_\nu$ [20 keV] (mJy)} & \colhead{$f_\nu$ [100 keV] (mJy)}
369: }
370: \startdata
371: GRB~990123 (1) & $1.0\pm0.1\times10^{-10}$ & $89\pm12$ & $3.4\pm0.3$ & $5.7\pm0.3$ \\
372: GRB~041219a (3) & $4.3\pm0.9\times10^{-12}$ & $3.8\pm0.8$ & $2.88\pm0.07$ & $0.83\pm0.04$\\
373: GRB~050401 & $6.6\pm1.8\times10^{-13}$ & $0.59\pm0.16$ & $2.73\pm0.09$ & $0.99\pm0.12$\\
374: \enddata
375: \end{deluxetable*}
376:
377:
378: \section{Discussion}
379:
380: Although V05 have seen evidence for correlation between the optical flux and
381: $\gamma$-ray flux for GRB~041219a, this correlation is absent in GRB~050401.
382: Each of the three GRBs with prompt optical detections displays a different
383: relationship between optical and $\gamma$-ray flux. For GRB~990123, the
384: optical and $\gamma$-ray emission vary independently, and the optical emission
385: is much brighter than a back extrapolation of the afterglow would suggest. For
386: GRB~041219a, the optical and $\gamma$-ray emission are correlated, but we do
387: not have any further observations to compare this to the later afterglow.
388: Finally, for GRB~050401, the optical and $\gamma$-ray emission vary
389: independently, and the prompt optical emission is well fit by a backward
390: extrapolation of the later afterglow emission.
391:
392: As the prompt optical emission of GRB~050401 is indistinguishable from the
393: later afterglow, it is most likely radiated from the same emitting region. In
394: the fireball model~\citep{p05}, the afterglow radiation is from the forward
395: external shock. This would indicate that any optical emission related to the
396: prompt $\gamma$-ray emission radiated by the internal shocks is negligible
397: compared to the forward shock emission. As the optical observations began only
398: 33~s after the start of the $\gamma$-ray emission, this would imply a very
399: rapid rise in the forward shock emission. Therefore, the typical synchrotron
400: peak, $\nu_m$, must have passed the optical band at $<30~\mathrm{s}$. This is
401: consistent with both an ISM environment~\citep{se01} and a wind
402: environment~\citep{cl00} with small but reasonable values for the microphysical
403: parameters. In addition, the lack of a reverse shock signature is consistent
404: with a high density wind medium~\citep{np04}. This early behavior is quite
405: different from the behavior of GRB~990123, GRB~041219a, and for other early
406: afterglows such as that from GRB~030418~\citep{rspaa04} that have been observed
407: to rise after tens or hundreds of seconds.
408:
409: The rapid localization of GRB~050401 by \emph{Swift}, combined with the rapid
410: response of the ROTSE-III instruments, has allowed, for the first time, the
411: detection of a prompt optical counterpart of a typical GRB. \emph{Swift} will
412: localize $\sim75$ bursts per year, and the ROTSE-III instruments can promptly
413: respond to $\sim40\%$ of these bursts. Many of these localizations will be
414: during the $\gamma$-ray emission, and we expect the ROTSE-III instruments to
415: achieve $\sim5$ prompt detections per year. During the next few years we will
416: sample the range of prompt optical emission from GRBs, perhaps revealing
417: patterns which will inform our understanding of the underlying GRB engine.
418:
419: \acknowledgements
420:
421: This work has been supported by NASA grants NNG-04WC41G and NGT5-135, NSF
422: grants AST-0407061, the Australian Research Council, the University of New
423: South Wales, and the University of Michigan. Work performed at LANL is
424: supported through internal LDRD funding. Special thanks to the observatory
425: staff at Siding Spring Observatory.
426:
427: %\include{biblio}
428:
429:
430: \newcommand{\noopsort}[1]{} \newcommand{\printfirst}[2]{#1}
431: \newcommand{\singleletter}[1]{#1} \newcommand{\switchargs}[2]{#2#1}
432: \begin{thebibliography}{}
433:
434: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Akerlof} {\rm et~al.\/}}{1999}]{abbbb99}
435: {Akerlof}, C., et~al.
436: \newblock 1999, \nat, 398, 400
437:
438: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Akerlof} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2003}]{akmrs03}
439: {Akerlof}, C.~W., et~al.
440: \newblock Jan. 2003, \pasp, 115, 132
441:
442: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Barthelmy} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{bbcfg05}
443: {Barthelmy}, S.~D., et~al.
444: \newblock July 2005, To be published in Space Science Reviews,
445: arXiv:astro-ph/0507410
446:
447: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Bertin} \& {Arnouts}}{1996}]{ba96}
448: {Bertin}, E. \& {Arnouts}, S.
449: \newblock June 1996, \aaps, 117, 393
450:
451: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Briggs} {\rm et~al.\/}}{1999}]{bbkpk99}
452: {Briggs}, M.~S., et~al.
453: \newblock Oct. 1999, \apj, 524, 82
454:
455: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Chevalier} \& {Li}}{2000}]{cl00}
456: {Chevalier}, R.~A. \& {Li}, Z.
457: \newblock June 2000, \apj, 536, 195
458:
459: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Fynbo} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{fjhws05}
460: {Fynbo}, J.~P., et~al.
461: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3176
462:
463: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Henden}}{2005}]{henden05}
464: {Henden}, A.
465: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3454
466:
467: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Kahharov} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{kispr05}
468: {Kahharov}, B., {Ibrahimov}, M., {Sharapov}, D., {Pozanenko}, A., {Rumyantsev},
469: V., \& {Beskin}, G.
470: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3174
471:
472: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Landsman}}{1995}]{landsman95}
473: {Landsman}, W.~B. 1995, , in ASP Conf. Ser. 77: Astronomical Data Analysis
474: Software and Systems IV
475:
476: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{McNaught} \& {Price}}{2005}]{mp05}
477: {McNaught}, R. \& {Price}, P.~A.
478: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3163
479:
480: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Misra} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{mkp05}
481: {Misra}, K., {Kamble}, A.~P., \& {Pandey}, S.~B.
482: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3175
483:
484: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Nakar} \& {Piran}}{2004}]{np04}
485: {Nakar}, E. \& {Piran}, T.
486: \newblock Sept. 2004, \mnras, 353, 647
487:
488: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Piran}}{2005}]{p05}
489: {Piran}, T.
490: \newblock 2005, Reviews of Modern Physics, 76, 1143
491:
492: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Price} \& {McNaught}}{2005}]{pm05}
493: {Price}, P.~A. \& {McNaught}, R.
494: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3164
495:
496: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Rykoff} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2004}]{rspaa04}
497: {Rykoff}, E.~S., et~al.
498: \newblock Feb. 2004, \apj, 601, 1013
499:
500: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Sakamoto} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{sbbcf05}
501: {Sakamoto}, T., et~al.
502: \newblock 2005, GCN Circ. No. 3173
503:
504: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Sari} \& {Esin}}{2001}]{se01}
505: {Sari}, R. \& {Esin}, A.~A.
506: \newblock Feb. 2001, \apj, 548, 787
507:
508: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Stetson}}{1987}]{stetson87}
509: {Stetson}, P.~B.
510: \newblock Mar. 1987, \pasp, 99, 191
511:
512: \bibitem[\protect\astroncite{{Vestrand} {\rm et~al.\/}}{2005}]{vwwfs05}
513: {Vestrand}, W.~T., et~al.
514: \newblock May 2005, \nat, 435, 178
515:
516: \end{thebibliography}
517:
518: \end{document}
519:
520: