1: % VERSIONE RIVISTA !!!
2: %
3: %% The command below calls the preprint style
4: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
5: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
6: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
7: %%
8: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
9:
10: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
11:
12: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
13:
14: %\documentstyle{emulateapj}
15:
16: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
17:
18: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
19:
20: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
21: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
22: %% use the longabstract style option.
23:
24: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
25:
26:
27: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
28: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
29: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
30: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
31: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
32: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
33:
34: \shorttitle{X--ray/Optical follow-up of PKS~2155--304}
35: \shortauthors{Foschini et al.}
36:
37: \begin{document}
38:
39: \title{X--ray/UV/Optical follow-up of the blazar PKS 2155--304 after
40: the giant TeV flares of July 2006}
41:
42: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
43: %% author and affiliation information.
44: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
45: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
46: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
47: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
48:
49: \author{L. Foschini\altaffilmark{1,*}, G. Ghisellini\altaffilmark{2},
50: F. Tavecchio\altaffilmark{2}, A. Treves\altaffilmark{3},
51: L. Maraschi\altaffilmark{2}, M. Gliozzi\altaffilmark{4}, C.M. Raiteri\altaffilmark{5},
52: M. Villata\altaffilmark{5}, E. Pian\altaffilmark{6}, G. Tagliaferri\altaffilmark{2},
53: G. Tosti\altaffilmark{7},
54: R.M. Sambruna\altaffilmark{8}, G. Malaguti\altaffilmark{1}, G. Di Cocco\altaffilmark{1},
55: P. Giommi\altaffilmark{9}}
56:
57:
58: \altaffiltext{1}{INAF/IASF-Bologna, Via Gobetti 101, 40129 Bologna (Italy)}
59: \altaffiltext{2}{INAF/Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, Via Brera 28, 20121 Milano (Italy)}
60: \altaffiltext{3}{Dipartimento di Scienze, Universit\`a dell'Insubria,
61: Via Vallegio 11, 22100 Como (Italy)}
62: \altaffiltext{4}{George Mason University, Department of Physics and Astronomy, School
63: of Computational Sciences, Mail Stop 3F3, 4400 University Drive,
64: Fairfax, VA 22030, USA}
65: \altaffiltext{5}{INAF/Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino, Via Osservatorio 20, 10025
66: Pino Torinese (Italy)}
67: \altaffiltext{6}{INAF/Osservatorio Astronomico di Trieste, Via G.B.
68: Tiepolo 11, 34131 Trieste (Italy)}
69: \altaffiltext{7}{Osservatorio Astronomico, Universit\`a di Perugia, Via B. Bonfigli,
70: 06126 Perugia (Italy)}
71: \altaffiltext{8}{NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 661, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA}
72: \altaffiltext{9}{ASI Science Data Centre, Via G. Galilei, 00044 Frascati, (Italy) }
73:
74: \altaffiltext{*}{Email: \texttt{foschini@iasfbo.inaf.it}}
75:
76: \begin{abstract}
77: We present all the publicly available data, from optical/UV
78: wavelengths (UVOT) to X--rays (XRT, BAT), obtained from
79: \emph{Swift} observations of the blazar PKS~2155--304,
80: performed in response to the rapid alert sent out
81: after the strong TeV activity (up to $17$ Crab flux level at
82: $E>200$~GeV) at the end of July 2006. The X-ray flux
83: increased by a factor of 5 in the $0.3-10$~keV energy band and by a
84: factor of $1.5$ at optical/UV wavelengths, with roughly one day of
85: delay. The comparison of the spectral energy distribution built with
86: data quasi-simultaneous to the TeV detections shows an increase of the
87: overall normalization with respect to archival data, but only a
88: small shift of the frequency of the synchrotron peak that remains
89: consistent with the values reported in past observations when the
90: TeV activity was much weaker.
91:
92:
93: \end{abstract}
94:
95: \keywords{BL Lacertae objects: general -- BL Lacertae objects: individual: PKS 2155-304}
96:
97:
98: \section{Introduction}
99:
100: PKS~2155--304 ($z=0.116$) is one of the best known blazars and the
101: second brightest in X-rays (after Mkn 421), observed
102: many times at various wavelengths. At $\gamma-$ray energies, it
103: was first detected by CGRO/EGRET with a photon index
104: $\Gamma=1.71\pm 0.24$ in the energy range $0.03-10$~GeV (Vestrand et
105: al. 1995). This hard spectrum suggested a possible detection in the
106: TeV energy range (Vestrand et al. 1995, Stecker et al. 1996, Tavecchio
107: et al. 1998) that was first achieved by the University of Durham Mark
108: 6 $\check{\rm C}$erenkov telescope in $1996-1997$ (Chadwick et
109: al. 1999).
110:
111: In 2002--2003 the TeV activity has been monitored by
112: HESS\footnote{\texttt{http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/hfm/HESS/}} that
113: detected a flux variation in the $E>300$~GeV energy band from $1.2$ to
114: $7.8\times 10^{-11}$~ph~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ equivalent to $90-560$
115: mCrab (Aharonian et al. 2005a). At the end of July 2006, the source
116: displayed an anomalously high activity. Preliminary analysis of the HESS
117: data showed an average flux level of $8$~Crab in the $E>200$~GeV
118: energy band with flares up to $17$~Crab during the night of
119: $27-28$~July, an average flux level of $1$~Crab during the night of
120: $28-29$~July with smaller activity, while a second outburst occurred
121: in the night of $29-30$~July with an average of $5$~Crab and flares up
122: to $13$~Crab (Raue et al. 2006, Aharonian et al., in prep.).
123: The event was detected also by
124: MAGIC\footnote{\texttt{http://wwwmagic.mppmu.mpg.de/}} (A. De Angelis,
125: private communication). Following a rapid alert (Benbow et al. 2006)
126: some high-energy satellites pointed at PKS~2155--304.
127:
128: The \emph{Swift} satellite (Gehrels et al. 2004) performed optical/UV
129: and X-ray follow-up, starting on July~$29$ ending on August~$29$
130: 2006, with repeated short exposure pointings. Here we present the results
131: of these observations, a comparison with previous ones, when PKS~2155--304
132: was in a low activity state and theoretical modeling of the SEDs.
133:
134: \section{Data analysis}
135:
136: The data from the three instruments onboard \emph{Swift} have been
137: processed and analyzed with \texttt{HEASoft v. 6.1.2} with the latest
138: calibration files (6 December 2006).
139:
140: Data from individual pointings
141: from the coded-mask hard X-rays detector BAT (optimized for the
142: $15-150$~keV energy band, Barthelmy et al. 2005) were binned, cleaned
143: from hot pixels and background, and deconvolved. The intensity images
144: were then integrated by using the variance as weighting
145: factor. PKS~2155--304 was not detected either in individual pointings
146: nor in the integrated mosaic image. The upper limit for a $3\sigma$
147: detection in the $20-40$~keV energy band -- already corrected for
148: systematics -- is $3.3\times 10^{-10}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$
149: ($42$~mCrab) for the pointing of $29$~July~$2006$ (exposure $6$~ks)
150: and $1.6\times 10^{-10}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ ($20$~mCrab) for the
151: overall mosaic (exposure $30$~ks).
152:
153: Data from the X-ray Telescope XRT ($0.3-10$~keV, Burrows et al. 2005)
154: were analyzed using the \texttt{xrtpipeline} task. XRT
155: automatically switches the operating mode according to the target
156: source flux, changing from window timing (WT, high flux) to photon
157: counting (PC, low flux) with a threshold around $1$~mCrab ($5\times
158: 10^{-11}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$). The X-ray flux of PKS~2155--304
159: remained almost always above $\approx 10^{-10}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$
160: (Fig.~\ref{fig:swiftlc}) and therefore we analyzed only the window
161: timing mode data. There are also a few hundreds of seconds exposure in
162: photon counting mode, but the point-spread function (PSF) is severely
163: affected by pile-up. Nevertheless, we used the source position
164: measured in the images accumulated with PC data as best input for the
165: pipeline of WT mode (without imaging). We selected only the grade 0
166: (single pixel) events and extracted the spectra only from pointings
167: with exposures greater than $100$~s, in order to have the best
168: available statistics. The remaining pointings (i.e. with less than
169: $100$~s) are anyway included in the lightcurve displayed in the top panel
170: of Fig.~\ref{fig:swiftlc}, in order to give a better coverage of the time
171: evolution of the source.
172:
173: Since most of the pointings lasted a
174: few hundreds of seconds, there exposure is insufficient to have data
175: at energies above $4-6$~keV, except for the pointing of 29 July, where
176: a $5$~ks exposure allowed us to have useful signal up to $8$~keV. In
177: addition, the XRT response is limited at low energies, because there
178: are still some residual instrumental feature around $0.5$~keV (Campana
179: et al. 2006). Therefore, the extracted spectra were fitted in the
180: range $0.3-0.45$~keV and from $0.6$ to $4-8$~keV, depending on the
181: statistics and then the flux was measured in the full $0.3-10$~keV
182: band. The results are summarized in Table~\ref{table:swiftlog}.
183:
184: For XRT, we note that the observation indicated in Table~\ref{table:swiftlog} as ``29/31-07''
185: actually started on $29$~July~$2006$ at $00:55:42$~UTC and ended on $31$~July~$2006$ at
186: $00:01:00$~UTC, resulting in an elapsed time of $\approx 1.7\times 10^{5}$~s. However, the
187: effective exposure time is only $4916$~s. Thus, the spectral data reported in Table~\ref{table:swiftlog}
188: refer to the average of the snapshot observations during this period. In addition, we
189: also extracted from this observation, the subset of data referring only to the night
190: between 29 and 30 July, in order study the data available that are simultaneous to TeV observations.
191: The spectral information about that night are indicated in Table~\ref{table:swiftlog} as
192: ``30-07''.
193:
194:
195: Data from the optical/UV telescope UVOT (Roming et al. 2005) were
196: analyzed by using the \texttt{uvotmaghist} task with a source region
197: of $6''$ for optical and $12''$ for UV filters. The background was
198: extracted from an annular region centered on the source and with an
199: inner region equal to the source region plus $2''$ and the outer
200: radius equal to $60''$. To take into account systematic effects, we
201: added a $10\%$ error in flux (resulting in about
202: $0.1$~magnitudes). The results, simultaneous to the X-ray fits, are
203: summarized in Table~\ref{table:swiftlog}, while complete lightcurves
204: are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:swiftlc}.
205:
206: In order to compare X-rays/UV/optical data close to the outburst with
207: data when PKS~2155--304 was not active
208: (i.e. with low X-ray/UV/optical fluxes), we retrieved and
209: analyzed \emph{Swift} observations of the blazar performed in April $2006$.
210: The results of the analysis are reported in Table~\ref{table:swiftlog}
211: where the flux difference between April and August observations
212: shows up clearly.
213:
214: \section{Discussion and interpretation}
215:
216: \subsection{Overview of data}
217:
218: The \emph{Swift} observations of PKS~$2155-304$ starting on July 29th at $00:55$
219: during the phase of strong TeV activity reported by HESS (Raue et
220: al. 2006, Aharonian et al., in prep.), show an initial
221: increase of the X-ray flux, by a factor 4, between the observation of
222: 29 July and that of 30 July followed by an overall decrease, while
223: optical/UV fluxes show a moderate activity
224: (Fig. \ref{fig:swiftlc2}). No detection in hard X-rays was obtained
225: with BAT.
226:
227: With respect to the April 2006 observations, XRT recorded a
228: change by a factor $5$, while the UV flux increased by a factor of $\approx 1.5$. For comparison
229: the HESS observations of July 2006 showed "night-averaged" intensities in
230: the TeV band of factors $\approx 16$ and $\approx 10$ larger than those
231: in $2002-2003$ ($0.5$~Crab; Aharonian et al. 2005),
232: but with short flares of up to a factor of $34$.
233:
234: The sparseness of the available data does not allow us to make
235: stringent correlations with TeV data. We note however that the initial
236: flare in X-rays taking place between the nights of 29 and 30 July, approximately
237: coincides with the second TeV outburst, while a lower amplitude flare in the UV
238: occurs about one day later (Fig.~\ref{fig:swiftlc2}). Since the UVOT detector often saturated
239: because of coincidence losses, we cannot exclude the occurrence of
240: other flares with greater amplitude.
241:
242:
243:
244: %A time delay of one day between TeV and X-ray, and X-ray and
245: %UV/optical data is not unusual for PKS~2155--304, as already
246: %reported, e.g., by Urry et al. (1997), Tanihata et al. (2001), Kataoka
247: %et al. (2001). On the other hand, given the strong variability of the
248: %blazar at TeV energies during the night of $29-30$ July, we cannot
249: %exclude TeV flaring events correlated in time with the X-rays with
250: %very short timescales.
251:
252: \subsection{Spectral Energy Distribution}
253:
254: With the current data set we cannot probe the short (5 min) timescale
255: variability preliminarily reported by HESS (Raue et al. 2006;
256: Aharonian et al., in prep.), but can investigate only quantities
257: averaged over timescales of days. We therefore assembled the spectral
258: energy distribution (SED, Fig.~\ref{fig:sed}) using the \emph{Swift}
259: observation tagged as ``30 July'' that is quasi-simultaneous to the second
260: TeV flare occurred during the night between $29-30$ July 2006.
261: We also considered TeV and \emph{Swift} observations performed on 2 August,
262: when the blazar activity was declining.
263:
264: In order to discuss the observed SEDs in terms of changes of relevant
265: physical quantities, we used the model by Ghisellini et al. (2002) to
266: reproduce the SEDs in Fig.~\ref{fig:sed}. As generally assumed for
267: this and the other TeV BL Lacs (e.g. Aharonian 2004) the X-ray
268: emission is attributed to synchrotron radiation and the $\gamma$--ray
269: component to the synchrotron self-Compton (SSC) process. The source
270: is assumed to be a sphere of radius $R$ travelling with bulk Lorentz
271: factor $\Gamma$ at an angle $\theta$ with respect to the line of
272: sight, yielding a Doppler factor $\delta$. The magnetic field $B$ is
273: tangled and homogeneous. The distribution of emitting relativistic
274: electrons is computed as the result of a broken power law injection
275: distribution $\propto \gamma^{-s}$ between $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$,
276: and $\propto \gamma^{-1}$ below $\gamma_1$, subject to radiative
277: cooling occurring in a light crossing time $R/c$. This injection of
278: relativistic particles correspond to an injected power $L_{\rm inj}'$
279: as measured in the comoving frame. The resulting particle
280: distribution $N(\gamma)$ is formed by power law segments, the steepest
281: of which is $\propto \gamma^{-(s+1)}$.
282: %
283: % Within this model one can compute the luminosity, $L_{\rm inj}'$
284: % in the comoving frame, that needs to be injected in the form of particles in
285: % the emission region.
286: % as well as
287: % the kinetic powers carried by the emission region in the form of magnetic and particle
288: % (electrons ad protons) energy densities.
289: %, and the total radiative luminosity,
290: %indicated respectively with
291: %$L_{\rm B}$, $L_{\rm e}$, $L_{\rm p}$, $L_{\rm rad}$, respectively.
292: % The model has also an external seed photon field,
293: % mainly from the broad line region, but in the present case it has been
294: % set to zero, so that only the synchrotron self Compton (SSC)
295: % scattering plays a role.
296: %
297: All the parameters corresponding to the two models
298: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sed} are listed in Table~\ref{param}.
299: Tavecchio et al. (1998) have shown that, in principle, if the
300: peak frequencies and fluxes of the synchrotron and self--Compton
301: components and the variability timescales are known, then the
302: main parameters for the SSC model are determined.
303: At present we have only a very partial knowledge of the SED at high energies,
304: resulting in ambiguities in the parameter choice.
305: To fix them, we minimized the luminosity in the
306: self--Compton component assuming an intrinsically steep TeV spectrum.
307: We have also assumed that the variability timescales is
308: $\sim$1 hour, as typically observed in the X--ray band
309: (e.g. Zhang et al. 2002).
310: The much shorter 5 minute variability timescale recently observed in the
311: TeV band should then imply a different additional region/emission process.
312:
313: The model results show that, while there is some evidence of a flatter X-ray spectrum
314: at higher intensity, the frequency of the sychrotron peak remains at $\approx
315: 10^{15-16}$~Hz, consistent with other observations
316: with much weaker TeV activity (cf Urry et al. 1997, Chiappetti et
317: al. 1999, Foschini et al. 2006). The low peak frequency value is also a result
318: of the choice of reproducing the optical-UV fluxes.
319: The large difference in TeV fluxes associated with small
320: differences in X-ray spectra requires, in SSC models,
321: an increase of the relativistic electrons accompanied by a decrease of the
322: magnetic field.
323:
324: The above point is confirmed by a comparison of the present data and model
325: with the \emph{BeppoSAX} observation in November $1997$
326: (Chiappetti et al. 1999) which was
327: performed quasi-simultaneously to the TeV observations by Chadwick et
328: al. (1999), when PKS~2155--304 was at about $0.3$~Crab (average flux,
329: $E>300$~GeV).
330: With respect to the parameters derived for the November 1997 episode
331: the present SSC models yield (cf. Table~\ref{param})
332: a larger Doppler factor ($\delta=33$ vs 18), a smaller magnetic field
333: ($B=$0.27--0.55 G vs 1 G), a flatter index of the electron distribution
334: ($p=s+1=$ 3.5--3.6 vs 4.85), and a smaller frequency of the synchrotron peak
335: ($\approx 10^{16}$ vs $10^{17}$~Hz) with very similar emitting regions
336: ($R=5\times 10^{15}$ vs $3\times 10^{15}$~cm).
337:
338: In summary, within a simple SSC scheme, the physical parameters of the source
339: changed, in the sense of a harder particle spectrum,
340: a smaller magnetic field and a greater beaming factor in the 2006
341: observations.
342: This is required by the the different self--Compton to synchrotron
343: luminosity ratio, which was substantially larger in the 2006 observations.
344:
345:
346: \subsection{Comparison with other cases: Mkn 501 in 1997, Mkn 421 1998-2000}
347:
348: It is interesting to compare the present episode with other
349: exceptional activity states occurred in the past in blazar sources
350: with similar SEDs (HBL, Padovani \& Giommi 1995). The most striking
351: example todate is the strong TeV activity exhibited by Mkn 501 in
352: April 1997, observed by the Whipple Observatory: during the nights
353: from 7 to 19 April 1997, its flux ($E>350$~GeV) changed from $0.5$ to
354: the peak of $3.8$~Crab occurred on 16 April, with an average of
355: $1.6$~Crab and no hourly timescale variability (Catanese et
356: al. 1997). \emph{BeppoSAX} observed the simultaneous highly chromatic
357: evolution of the source in X-rays: the flux increased by factors of
358: $4.2$, $2.4$, and $1.5$ in the $13-200$~keV, $2-10$~keV, and
359: $0.1-2$~keV energy bands respectively, resulting in a frequency shift
360: of the synchrotron peak by two orders of magnitude (Pian et al. 1998,
361: Tavecchio et al. 2001). RXTE observations revealed also timescales
362: variability down to a few tens of minutes (Xue \& Cui
363: 2005). Observations with U filter showed a modest increase of 1\% in
364: flux (Catanese et al. 1997). A less extreme, though analogous,
365: behaviour was observed in Mkn 421 in 1998-2000. The X-ray and TeV
366: activity were correlated also on short timescale (Maraschi et al 1999,
367: Takahashi et al. 2000) with larger amplitude variations in the TeV
368: band. The synchrotron peak appeared to shift to higher energies but
369: not as dramatically as for Mkn 501.
370:
371: The behaviour of PKS~2155-304 appears less striking in X-rays than for
372: the previous two sources but more extreme in the TeV variability. The
373: important questions to be answered concern the understanding of these
374: different "modes" of variability in terms of physical models of the
375: sources. The upcoming gamma-ray missions (AGILE -GLAST) and the
376: continuous developments of Cherenkov Telescope facilities will allow
377: to define the spectral variability at high energies with unprecedented
378: accuracy. It is however mandatory to complement the high energy data
379: with extensive observations in the X-ray band in order to approach the
380: physical origin of the variability.
381:
382:
383: \section{Conclusions}
384:
385: We presented the observations of the blazar PKS~2155--304 performed by
386: the \emph{Swift} satellite immediately after the giant TeV flare observed by HESS at
387: the end of July 2006 (Raue et al. 2006; Aharonian et al., in prep.).
388: The most important result appears to be that, in correspondence with the dramatic TeV
389: activity, the X-ray intensity changed by a factor 5 but without large spectral
390: changes. In particular the frequency of the synchrotron peak remained at values
391: similar to those observed in the past (e.g. 1997, Chiappetti et al. 1999), during low
392: TeV activity. Modeling of the SED based on the SSC process in a homogeneous
393: region suggests an increase of the Doppler factor ($33$ in $2006$; $18$ in $1997$)
394: and of the relativistic electrons associated with a decrease of the magnetic field
395: ($0.27$ G in $2006$; $1$ G in $1997$).
396:
397: %The limited and uneven sampling does not allow us to put tight
398: %constraints, but it is evident that PKS~2155--304 underwent an
399: %exceptional episode that should be considered as a case study for
400: %future deeper investigations.
401:
402: \acknowledgements LF thanks V. Bianchin for useful discussions. This
403: research has made use of data obtained from the High Energy
404: Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center (HEASARC), provided by
405: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center.
406:
407:
408: \begin{thebibliography}{}
409: \bibitem[2005]{hess1} Aharonian F., Akhperjanian A.G., Aye K.-M., et al., 2005a, A\&A 430, 865
410:
411: \bibitem[2005]{hess3} Aharonian F., Akhperjanian A.G., Aye K.-M., et al., 2005b, A\&A 442, 895
412:
413: \bibitem[Aharonian(2004)]{2004vhec.book.....A} Aharonian, F.~A.\ 2004, Very
414: high energy cosmic gamma radiation : a crucial window on the extreme
415: Universe, by F.A.~Aharonian.~River Edge, NJ: World Scientific Publishing,
416: 2004
417:
418: \bibitem[2005]{BAT} Barthelmy S.D., Barbier L.M., Cummings J.R., et al., 2005, Space Sci. Rev. 120, 143
419:
420: \bibitem[2006]{hess2} Benbow W., Costamante L., Giebels B. on behalf of the HESS Collaboration, 2006, ATel 867
421:
422: \bibitem[2005]{XRT} Burrows D.N., Hill J.E., Nousek J.A., et al., 2005, Space Sci. Rev. 120, 165
423:
424: \bibitem[2006]{RMFXRT} Campana S., Beardmore A.P., Cusumano G., Godet O., 2006, Swift XRT CALDB Release Note 09:
425: Response matrices and Ancillary Response Files
426:
427: \bibitem[1997]{catanese} Catanese M., Bradbury S.M., Breslin A.C., et al., 1997, ApJ 487, L143
428:
429: \bibitem[1999]{chadwick} Chadwick P.M., Lyons K., T.J.L. McComb, et al., 1999, ApJ 513, 161
430:
431: \bibitem[1999]{chiappetti} Chiappetti L., Maraschi L., Tavecchio F., et al., 1999, ApJ 521, 552
432:
433: \bibitem[2006]{foschini1} Foschini L., Ghisellini G., Raiteri C.M., et al., 2006, A\&A 453, 829
434:
435: \bibitem[2004]{gehrels} Gehrels N., Chincarini G., Giommi P., et al., 2004, ApJ 611, 1005
436:
437: \bibitem[2002]{ghisellini1} Ghisellini G., Celotti A., Costamante L., 2002, A\&A 386, 833
438:
439: \bibitem[2001]{kataoka} Kataoka J., Takahashi T., Wagner S.J., et al., 2001, ApJ 560, 659
440:
441: \bibitem[1995]{lockman} Lockman F.J., Savage B.D., 1995, ApJSS 97, 1
442:
443: \bibitem[Maraschi et al.(1999)]{1999ApJ...526L..81M} Maraschi, L., et al.\
444: 1999, \apjl, 526, L81
445:
446: \bibitem[1995]{padovani} Padovani P. \& Giommi P., 1995, ApJ 444, 567
447:
448: \bibitem[1998]{elena} Pian E., Vacanti G., Tagliaferri G., et al., 1998, ApJ 492, L17
449:
450: \bibitem[2006]{raue} Raue M. on behalf of the HESS Collaboration, 2006, In: The keV to TeV Connection. Roma, 17-19 October 2006
451: [\texttt{http://gri.rm.iasf.cnr.it/keVtoTeV/Docs$\setminus$33\_Mraue.pdf}]
452:
453: \bibitem[2005]{UVOT} Roming P.W.A., Kennedy T.E., Mason K.O., et al., 2005, Space Sci. Rev. 120, 95
454:
455: \bibitem[1996]{stecker1} Stecker F.W., de Jager O.C., \& Salamon M.H., 1996, ApJ 473, L75
456:
457: \bibitem[2006]{stecker2} Stecker F.W. \& Scully S.T., 2006, ApJ 652, L9
458:
459: \bibitem[Takahashi et al.(2000)]{2000ApJ...542L.105T} Takahashi, T., et
460: al.\ 2000, \apjl, 542, L105
461:
462: \bibitem[2001]{tanihata} Tanihata C., Urry C.M., Takahashi T., et al., 2001, ApJ 563, 569
463:
464: \bibitem[1998]{fabrizio1} Tavecchio F., Maraschi L., \& Ghisellini G., 1998, ApJ 509, 608
465:
466: \bibitem[2001]{fabrizio2} Tavecchio F., Maraschi L., Pian E., et al., 2001, ApJ 554, 725
467:
468: \bibitem[1997]{urry} Urry C.M., Treves A., Maraschi L., et al., 1997, ApJ 486, 799
469:
470: \bibitem[1995]{egret} Vestrand W.T., Stacy J.G., \& Sreekumar P., 1995, ApJ 454, L93
471:
472: \bibitem[2005]{xuecui} Xue Y. \& Cui W., 2005, ApJ 622, 160
473:
474: \bibitem[2002]{zhang} Zhang, Y.H., Treves, A., Celotti, A. et al., 2002, ApJ, 572, 762
475:
476: \end{thebibliography}
477:
478: \clearpage
479:
480: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccccccccc}
481: \tabletypesize{\tiny}
482: \tablecaption{\footnotesize{Summary for Swift observations. See Fig.~\ref{fig:swiftlc} for the complete set of data.}\label{table:swiftlog}}
483: \tablewidth{0pt}
484: \tablehead{
485: \colhead{Date} & \colhead{XRT Exposure [s]} & \colhead{Parameters\tablenotemark{a}}
486: & \colhead{F\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{$\tilde{\chi}^2$/dof} &
487: \colhead{V\tablenotemark{c}} & \colhead{B\tablenotemark{c}}
488: & \colhead{U\tablenotemark{c}} & \colhead{UVW1\tablenotemark{c}}
489: & \colhead{UVM2\tablenotemark{c}} & \colhead{UVW2\tablenotemark{c}}
490: }
491: \startdata
492: \multicolumn{10}{c}{\it April 2006}\\
493: \hline
494: $16-04$ & $400$ & $2.40\pm 0.09$ & $0.94$ & $1.36/41$ & $13.0$ & $13.4$ & $12.5$ & $12.3$ & $12.6$ & $12.6$\\
495: $26-04$ & $155$ & $2.4\pm 0.1$ & $1.31$ & $0.99/20$ & $12.8$ & $13.2$ & $12.3$ & $12.0$ & $12.4$ & $12.3$\\
496: \hline
497: \multicolumn{10}{c}{\it July-August 2006}\\
498: \hline
499: $29/31-07$ & $4916$ & $2.30\pm 0.03$, $1.19_{-0.11}^{+0.09}$, $2.80\pm 0.04$ & $3.43$ & $1.22/319$ & $12.6$ & $13.0$ & $12.1$ & $11.7$ & $12.0$ & $11.9$\\
500: $30/07$ & $3276$ & $2.25\pm 0.03$, $1.2\pm 0.1$, $2.81\pm 0.05$ & $3.61$ & $1.17/287$ & {} & {} & {} & {} & {} & {}\\
501: $01-08$ & $351$ & $2.62\pm 0.05$ & $2.90$ & $1.17/93$ & $12.5$ & $<12.8$ & $<12.0$ & $<11.3$ & $11.7$ & $11.7$\\
502: $02-08$ & $1842$ & $2.44_{-0.07}^{+0.05}$, $1.2\pm 0.2$, $2.90_{-0.08}^{+0.10}$ & $2.46$ & $1.06/195$ & $12.5$ & $12.9$ & $<12.0$ & $11.4$ & $11.8$ & $11.7$\\
503: $03-08$ & $1605$ & $2.24_{-0.13}^{+0.05}$, $1.1_{-0.2}^{+0.1}$, $2.75_{-0.08}^{+0.06}$ & $2.96$ & $1.31/205$ & $12.6$ & $12.9$ & $<12.0$ & $11.6$ & $11.9$ & $11.9$\\
504: $05-08$ & $517$ & $2.67\pm 0.05$ & $2.01$ & $0.96/93$ & $12.6$ & $13.0$ & $<12.0$ & $11.6$ & $11.9$ & $11.8$\\
505: $06-08$ & $295$ & $2.64\pm 0.08$ & $1.68$ & $0.91/52$ & $12.7$ & $13.0$ & $-$ & $11.6$ & $-$ & $-$\\
506: $08-08$ & $439$ & $2.62\pm 0.05$ & $2.29$ & $0.93/91$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
507: $10-08$ & $318$ & $2.58\pm 0.06$ & $2.17$ & $0.91/70$ & $12.6$ & $12.9$ & $<12.0$ & $<11.3$ & $11.8$ & $11.7$\\
508: $12-08$ & $139$ & $2.8\pm 0.2$ & $1.27$ & $1.10/17$ & $12.5$ & $12.8$ & $<12.0$ & $<11.3$ & $12.2$ & $11.6$\\
509: $20-08$ & $184$ & $2.4\pm 0.1$ & $1.14$ & $1.09/25$ & $12.5$ & $12.9$ & $<12.0$ & $11.6$ & $11.9$ & $11.8$\\
510: $22-08$ & $161$ & $2.6\pm 0.1$ & $1.62$ & $1.42/25$ & $12.5$ & $12.9$ & $<12.0$ & $11.5$ & $11.9$ & $11.8$\\
511: \enddata
512: \tablenotetext{a}{$\Gamma$ for the power law model or $\Gamma_1$, $E_{\rm{break}}$ [keV],
513: $\Gamma_2$, respectively, for the broken power law model. The absorption column is
514: fixed to the Galactic value ($N_{\rm{H}}=1.36\times 10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$, Lockman \& Savage 1995).}
515: \tablenotetext{b}{Observed flux in the $0.3-10$~keV band [$10^{-10}\times$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$].}
516: \tablenotetext{c}{Observed magnitudes. Error $0.1$ mag for all, including systematics.
517: Lower limits indicate a saturation of the detector.}
518: \end{deluxetable}
519:
520: \clearpage
521:
522: \begin{table}
523: \begin{center}
524: \caption{Parameters for the SSC model by Ghisellini, Celotti \& Costamante (2002)
525: used to interpolate the
526: SED (Fig.~\ref{fig:sed}). $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}$ is the bulk Lorentz factor, $\theta$
527: the viewing angle, $\delta$ the Doppler factor, and $B$ the magnetic field.
528: See the text for more details.\label{param}}
529: \vskip 12pt
530: \begin{tabular}{llll}
531: \hline
532: &Jul 29 &Aug 2 & Units \\
533: \hline
534: % \multicolumn{4}{c}{\emph{Model parameters}}\\
535: \hline
536: $R$ & $5$ & $5$ & $10^{15}$~cm \\
537: $L^\prime_{\rm inj}$ & $1.1$ & $0.3$ & $10^{42}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ \\
538: $\gamma_{\rm break}$ & $1.5$ & $0.9$ & $10^4$\\
539: $\gamma_{\rm max}$ & $1.75$ & $1.1$ & $10^5$\\
540: $s$ & $2.5$ & $2.6$ & \\
541: $B$ & $0.27$ & $0.55$ & Gauss \\
542: $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}$ & $30$ & $30$ & \\
543: $\theta$ & $1.7$ & $1.7$ & degrees \\
544: $\delta$ & $33.5$ & $33.5$ & \\
545: \hline
546: % \multicolumn{4}{c}{\emph{Output parameters}}\\
547: % \hline
548: % $\delta$ & $33.5$ & $33.5$ & \\
549: % $L_B$ & $0.0061$ & $0.025$ & $10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$\\
550: % $L_{\rm e}$ & $0.71$ & $0.19$ & $10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$\\
551: % $L_{\rm p}$ & $4.32$ & $0.61$ & $10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$\\
552: % $L_{\rm rad}$ & $0.89$ & $0.27$ & $10^{45}$~erg~s$^{-1}$\\
553: % \hline
554: \end{tabular}
555: \end{center}
556: \end{table}
557:
558: \clearpage
559:
560: \begin{figure}
561: \centering
562: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.6]{f1.ps}
563: \caption{Lightcurves built from data of \emph{Swift} instruments. From top to bottom:
564: XRT [$0.3-10$~keV], UVOT UVW2 ($1880$~\AA), UVM2 ($2170$~\AA), UVW1 ($2510$~\AA),
565: B ($4390$~\AA), V ($5440$~\AA). For XRT: only WT mode data have been included, binned to
566: $500$~s; a flux of $10^{-10}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ is approximately equal to $3.5-4.5$~c/s. For UVOT:
567: U filter data are not included, since for most of the observing time the detector was
568: saturated; for all the other filters, the flux is given in units
569: $10^{-14}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$~\AA$^{-1}$ and is not corrected for absorption.
570: The mark on abscissa indicates the $00:00:00$~UTC of the day, i.e. the
571: day $2035$ corresponds to $29$ July $2006$ at $00:00:00$.
572: \label{fig:swiftlc}}
573: \end{figure}
574:
575: \clearpage
576:
577: \begin{figure}
578: \centering
579: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.6]{f2.ps}
580: \caption{Normalized lightcurves. Black filled circles indicate XRT data [$0.3-10$~keV]
581: normalized to their average in July-August $2006$ ($7.1\pm 0.6$ c/s).
582: Open squares indicate the average from UV filters, which are UVW2 ($1880$~\AA),
583: UVM2 ($2170$~\AA), and UVW1 ($2510$~\AA), normalized to
584: $(11.6\pm 0.6)\times 10^{-14}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$~\AA$^{-1}$.
585: \label{fig:swiftlc2}}
586: \end{figure}
587:
588: \clearpage
589:
590: \begin{figure}
591: \centering
592: \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{f3.ps}
593: \caption{Spectral Energy Distribution of PKS~2155--304: the red
594: symbols are the quasi-simultaneous data of 29 July; the black symbols
595: refer to the observations of 2 August. HESS data from Raue et
596: al. 2006; \emph{Swift} quasi-simultaneous data are from the present
597: work. For comparison, we also report data from the historical
598: records: green symbols refer to archival data (references in
599: Chiappetti et al. 1999) and to the H.E.S.S. TeV spectrum taken in
600: October-November 2003 (Aharonian et al. 2005b), while other colors
601: report the \emph{XMM-Newton} data from Foschini et al. (2006). The red
602: continuous line represents the synchrotron self Compton model (SSC,
603: see Ghisellini et al. 2002) used to fit the data of 29 July 2006,
604: while the black line represents the model fitted to the data of 2
605: August. Both models include the absorption at TeV energies due to the
606: extragalactic infrared background calculated according to Stecker \&
607: Scully (2006). The dashed line indicates the instrinsic (i.e. not
608: absorbed) spectrum.\label{fig:sed}}
609: \end{figure}
610:
611: \end{document}
612: