1:
2: \documentclass[
3: ,final % use final for the camera ready runs
4: %% ,draft % use draft while you are working on the paper
5: %% ,numberedheadings % uncomment this option for numbered sections
6: %% , % add further options here if necessary
7: ]
8: {aipproc}
9:
10: \layoutstyle{8x11single}
11:
12: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
13: %% FRONTMATTER
14: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
15:
16: \begin{document}
17:
18: \def\Swift{\emph{Swift}}
19: \newcommand{\lesssim}{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over\sim \;$}}
20: \newcommand{\gtrsim}{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over\sim \;$}}
21: \newcommand{\apj}{{\it Astrophysical J.,~}}
22:
23: \title{Gamma Ray Bursts in the Swift and GLAST Era}
24:
25: \classification{98.62.Nx, 98.70.Rz}
26: \keywords {gamma-rays: bursts --- cosmology}
27:
28: \author{Truong Le and Charles D. Dermer}{
29: address={Code 7653, Space Science Division,
30: Naval Research Laboratory\break Washington, DC 20375, USA} }
31:
32: %%\author{<author2>}{
33: %% address={<common address for author2 and author3>}
34: %%}
35:
36: %%\author{<author3>}{
37: %% address={<common address for author2 and author3>}
38: %% ,altaddress={<author1 address>} % additional visiting address
39: %%}
40:
41:
42: \begin{abstract}
43: We summarize our model for long-duration gamma ray bursts (GRBs) that
44: fits the redshift ($z$) distributions measured with Swift and missions
45: before Swift, and the pre-Swift GRB jet opening-angle distribution inferred from
46: achromatic breaks in the optical light curves. We
47: find that the comoving rate density of GRB sources exhibits positive
48: evolution to $z \gtrsim 3$ -- 5, whereas the star formation rate
49: inferred from measurements of the blue and UV luminosity density peaks
50: at $z\sim 1$ -- 3. The mean intrinsic beaming factor of GRBs is found
51: to be $\approx 34$ -- 42, and we predict that the mean GRB optical jet opening
52: half-angle measured with Swift is $\approx 10^\circ$. We estimate the
53: number of GRBs per year that GLAST is expected to observe based on
54: ratios of BATSE and EGRET GRB fluences.
55: \end{abstract}
56:
57: \maketitle
58:
59: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
60: %% MAINMATTER
61: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
62:
63: \section{Introduction}
64:
65: With the launch of the \Swift~satellite~\citep{geh04}, rapid follow-up
66: studies of GRBs triggered by the Burst Alert Telescope (BAT) on
67: \Swift~became possible. A fainter and more distant population of GRBs
68: than found with the pre-\Swift~satellites CGRO-BATSE, BeppoSAX,
69: INTEGRAL, and HETE-2 is detected~\citep{ber05}. The mean redshift of
70: 41 pre-\Swift~GRBs that also have measured optical afterglow
71: beaming breaks~\citep{fb05}
72: is $\langle z\rangle = 1.5$, while 16 GRBs discovered by \Swift~have
73: $\langle z\rangle = 2.72$~\citep{jak06}. The null hypothesis that the
74: redshift distributions of \Swift~and pre-\Swift~GRBs are the same
75: is rejected in several statistical tests at the $\gtrsim$97\%
76: confidence level \citep{bag06}.
77:
78: In recent work \citep{ld06}, we considered whether the differences
79: between the pre-\Swift~and \Swift~redshift distributions can be
80: explained with a physical model for GRBs that takes into account the
81: different flux thresholds of GRB detectors, where we assume the
82: detector threshold for \Swift~and pre-\Swift~GRBs to be $\sim 10^{-8}$
83: and $\sim 10^{-7}\ \rm ergs \ cm^{-2} \ s^{-1}$, respectively
84: \citep{ld06}, corresponding to the minimum peak fluxes of GRBs with
85: redshifts measured by Swift and missions before Swift. We summarize
86: \citep{ld06} and make an independent estimate of the number of GRBs that
87: GLAST should detect.
88:
89: \section{Results}
90:
91: We parameterize the distribution of GRB jet opening angles
92: with a function of the form $dN/d\mu_j \propto
93: (1-\mu_j)^s$, where arccos$(\mu_j)$ is the jet half-angle, and find
94: best fit values for the $\gamma$-ray energy release ${\cal E}_\gamma$
95: for different functional forms of the comoving rate density of GRBs
96: (see Fig.~1, left panel). We simplify the analysis with a flat GRB
97: $\nu F_\nu$ spectrum, and assume that the properties of GRBs do not
98: change with time. Adopting the uniform jet model where the energy per
99: solid angle is roughly constant throughout the GRB jet, and taking a
100: mean intrinsic duration of 10 seconds, we obtain best-fit values with
101: a corrected emitted $\gamma$-ray energy ${\cal E}_\gamma = 4 \times
102: 10^{51}$ ergs, jet opening angles in the range $0.05$ -- $0.7$
103: radians, and with $s\approx -1.25$.
104:
105: Our analysis shows that good fits to the pre-\Swift~and
106: \Swift~redshift and opening angle data require a GRB rate
107: history that rises faster than the star formation rate (SFR2,3,4)
108: at high redshifts (SFR5 and SFR6; see Fig.~1, left panel).
109: %
110: \begin{figure}[t]
111: \resizebox{1\textwidth}{!} {\includegraphics[width=7.5in]{f1.eps}}
112: \caption{{\it Left panel:} star formation rate (SFR) functions
113: used in our GRB study. The solid line (SFR1) is a constant
114: comoving density; SFR2 and SFR4 are low and high ranges for the
115: SFR; SFR3 is a recent fit \citep{hb06} to the data; SFR5 and SFR6
116: are GRB rate histories that give a good fit to the \Swift~and
117: pre-\Swift~redshift distribution and the pre-Swift opening angle
118: distribution \citep{ld06}. {\it Right panel:} Estimate of the
119: number of GRBs per year GLAST will observe, based on measured
120: EGRET/BATSE fluence ratios.} %
121:
122: \end{figure}
123: %
124: The results of our fitting indicate that GRB activity was greater in
125: the past and is not simply proportional to the bulk of the star
126: formation as traced by the blue and UV luminosity density of the
127: universe. Furthermore, our model predicts the mean intrinsic beaming
128: factor of GRB jetted outflows contributing to the optical breaks
129: to be in the range from $\approx 34-42$. The analysis
130: also indicates that the average jet opening half-angle of GRBs
131: detected with Swift is $\langle\theta_j\rangle \approx 10^\circ$,
132: compared to the pre-\Swift~average of $7^\circ$ \citep{ld06}. Thus we
133: expect to detect more faint low-redshift, large opening angle GRBs
134: that pre-\Swift~satellites could not detect (see also \citep{psf03}).
135:
136: We also estimate the number of GRBs per year GLAST will observe using
137: the fluence ratios of BATSE ($\simeq 20$ keV -- 2 MeV) and EGRET (100
138: MeV -- 5 GeV) for the 5 BATSE bursts also detected in the EGRET spark
139: chamber~\citep{din95}. We find that the average BATSE/EGRET fluence
140: ratio is $\approx 5$\%, though with large scatter and not taking into
141: account Earth occultation (e.g., for GRB 940217) \citep{der05},
142: deadtime effects \citep{din95}, and anomalous GRBs like GRB 941017
143: \citep{gon03}. Our estimate uses the BATSE 4B fluence distribution, a
144: Band function with Band $\beta = -2.5$ added to a $>$ 30 MeV spectral
145: component with a $-2$ photon index in the EGRET/GLAST
146: range~~\citep{dcs98}, and power-law approximations for the EGRET and GLAST
147: effective areas \citep{dd05}.
148:
149: Fig.1, right panel, gives the resulting estimate of the number of
150: GRBs GLAST should observe per year full-sky for a fluence ratio of
151: 10\%, for different integral photon numbers and energies. We find
152: that there will be $\approx 350$ ($\approx 25$) GRBs/yr full-sky
153: from which the GLAST LAT would detect $\geq 5$ photons with energy
154: $E> 30$ MeV ($> 1$ GeV), and $\approx 25$ ($\approx 8$) GRBs/yr
155: full-sky with $\geq 1$ photon with $E>5$ GeV ($>10$ GeV). A
156: similar conclusion \citep{omo06}, obtained by extrapolating BATSE
157: results fitted with the Band function to LAT energies, gives an
158: estimate of 50-70 GRBs/yr with $>5$ photons with $E> 30$ MeV. Our
159: analysis also shows that GRBs give very little ($\lesssim 1$\% )
160: contribution to the diffuse extragalactic $\gamma$-ray background.
161: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
162: %% BACKMATTER
163: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
164: \begin{theacknowledgments}
165: T.~L. is funded through NASA {\it GLAST} Science Investigation
166: No.~DPR-S-1563-Y. The work of C.~D.~D. is supported by the Office
167: of Naval Research. We thank Nicola Omodei and Brenda Dingus for
168: discussions, and Brenda Dingus for pointing out how deadtime
169: effects could be important for EGRET.
170: \end{theacknowledgments}
171: %
172: \vskip-.2in
173: \begin{thebibliography}{}
174:
175: \bibitem{geh04}
176: Gehrels, N.\ {\it et al.} 2004, \apj 611, 1005
177:
178: \bibitem{ber05}
179: Berger, E.\ {\it et al.} 2005, \apj 634, 501
180:
181: \bibitem{fb05}
182: Friedman, A.~S., \& Bloom, J.~S. 2005, \apj 627, 1
183:
184: \bibitem{jak06}
185: Jakobsson, P.\ {\it et al.} 2006, {\it Astron.\ \& Astrophys.}, 447, 897
186:
187: \bibitem[Bagoly et al.(2006)]{bag06}
188: Bagoly, Z.\ {\it et al.} 2006, {\it Astron.\ \& Astrophys.}, 453, 797
189:
190: \bibitem{ld06}
191: Le, T., \& Dermer, C. D. 2006, \apj in press (astro-ph/0610043)
192:
193: \bibitem{hb06}
194: Hopkins, A. M., \& Beacom, J. F. 2006, \apj 651, 142
195:
196: \bibitem{psf03}
197: Perna, R., Sari, R., \& Frail, D.\ 2003, \apj 594, 379
198:
199: \bibitem{din95}
200: Dingus, B.~L.\ 1995, {\it Astrophys.\ Space Sci.} 231, 187
201:
202: \bibitem{gon03} Gonz{\'a}lez,
203: M.~M.\ {\it et al.} 2003, {\it Nature}, 424, 749
204:
205: \bibitem{der05}
206: Dermer, C.~D.\ 2005, in {\it Atmospheric Cherenkov Detectors VII},
207: astro-ph/0512164
208:
209: \bibitem{dcs98}
210: Dingus, B.~L., Catelli, J.~R., \& Schneid, E.~J.\ 1998, {\it AIP
211: Conference Series}, 428, 349
212:
213: \bibitem{dd05}Dermer, C.~D., \&
214: Dingus, B.~L.\ 2004, {\it New Astronomy Review}, 48, 537
215:
216: \bibitem{omo06}
217: Omodei, N., for the GLAST/LAT GRB Science Group 2006,
218: astro-ph/0603762
219:
220: \end{thebibliography}
221:
222: \end{document}
223:
224: %\endinput
225: %%
226: %% End of file `template-8s.tex'.
227: