Paper detail

GRB 170817A as a Refreshed Shock Afterglow viewed off-axis

Energy injection into the external shock system that generates the afterglow to a gamma-ray burst (GRB) can result in a re-brightening of the emission. Here we investigate the off-axis view of a re-brightened refreshed shock afterglow. We find that the afterglow light-curve, when viewed from outside of the jet opening angle, could be characterised by a slow rise, or long-plateau, with a maximum flux determined by the total system energy. Using the broadband afterglow data for GRB170817A, associated with the gravitational wave detected binary neutron star merger GW170817, we show that a refreshed shock model with a simple top-hat jet can reproduce the observed afterglow features. We consider two particular refreshed shock models: a single episode of energy injection; and a period of continuous energy injection. The best fit model parameters give a jet opening angle, for our first or second model of $θ_j=5.2^{+1.1}_{-0.6}~$or$~6.3^{+1.7}_{-1.1}$ deg, an inclination to the line of sight $ι=16.0^{+3.4}_{-1.1}~$or$~17.8^{+4.5}_{-2.9}$ deg, an initial isotropic equivalent kinetic energy $E_1 = (0.3^{+3.5}_{-0.3}~$or$~0.5^{+6.7}_{-0.2})\times10^{52}$erg and a total/final, refreshed shock energy $E_{\rm total}=(0.42^{+5.6}_{-0.4}~$or$~1.26^{+18.2}_{-0.7})\times10^{53}$erg. The first model fitting prefers an initial bulk Lorentz factor $Γ_{0,1}<60$, with a comparatively low central value of $Γ_{0,1}=19.5$, indicating that, in this case, the on-axis jet could have been a `failed-GRB&#39;. Alternatively, our second model is consistent with a bright GRB for an on-axis observer, with $Γ_{0,1}=162.2^{+219.7}_{-122.1}$. Due to the low-Lorentz factor or the jet opening angles at $θ_j\simι/3$, both models are unable to reproduce the $γ$-ray emission observed in GRB170817A, which would therefore require an alternative explanation such as cocoon shock-breakout.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.