Paper detail

Beaming as an explanation of the repetition/width relation in FRBs

It is currently not known if repeating fast radio bursts (FRBs) are fundamentally different from those that have not been seen to repeat. One striking difference between repeaters and apparent non-repeaters in the CHIME sample is that the once-off events are typically shorter in duration than sources that have been detected two or more times. We offer a simple explanation for this discrepancy based on a selection effect due to beamed emission, in which highly-beamed FRBs are less easily observed to repeat, but are abundant enough to detect often as once-off events. The explanation predicts that there is a continuous distribution of burst duration---not a static bimodal one---with a correlation between repetition rate and width. Pulse width and opening angle may be related by relativistic effects in shocks, where short-duration bursts have small solid angles due to a large common Lorentz factor. Alternatively, the relationship could be a geometric effect where narrow beams sweep past the observer more quickly, as with pulsars. Our model has implications for the FRB emission mechanism and energy scale, volumetric event rates, and the application of FRBs to cosmology.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.