Paper detail

And then they were two: detection of non-thermal radio emission from the bow shocks of two runaway stars

Winds from massive stars have recently been deemed promising sites for investigating relativistic particle acceleration. Particularly, the resulting bow shock from the interaction of the winds of runaway stars with interstellar matter has been observed at multiple wavelengths. Here we investigate the O4If star, BD+433654, the bow shock of which is, so far, the only one proven to radiate both thermally and non-thermally at radio frequencies. We also consider NGC7635 as a bow shock candidate and examine its apex for indications of thermal and non-thermal radio emission. We observed both sources with the VLA at 4-8 GHz and 8-12 GHz, and with the Effelsberg telescope at 4-8 GHz. We analysed data from both telescopes individually and combined, obtained their spectral index maps and calculated their Spectral Energy Distributions. We present the first high-resolution maps of radio emission from NGC7635. We find that both emit non-thermal emission in the radio regime, with the clearest evidence for NGC7635. Our results are less conclusive for BD+433654, as the emission from its bow shock becomes weaker and fainter at higher radio frequencies. Our results extend the previous radio results for the BD+433654 bow shock to higher frequencies. Modelling of our data for both sources shows that accelerated electrons at the wind termination shock are a plausible source for the non-thermal radio emission, but energetics arguments suggest that any non-thermal X-ray and $γ$-ray emission could be significantly below existing upper limits. Enhanced synchrotron emission from compressed Galactic cosmic rays in the radiative bow shock could also explain the radio emission from the BD+433654 bow shock but not NGC7635. Non-detection of point-like radio emission from BD+433654 puts an upper limit on the mass-loss rate of the star that is lower than values quoted in the literature. [abridged]

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access10 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.