Paper detail

Magnetization Degree of Gamma-Ray Burst Fireballs: Numerical Study

The relative strength between forward and reverse shock emission in early gamma-ray burst afterglow reflects that of magnetic energy densities in the two shock regions. We numerically show that with the current standard treatment, the fireball magnetization is underestimated by up to two orders of magnitude. This discrepancy is especially large in the sub-relativistic reverse shock regime (i.e. the thin shell and intermediate regime) where most optical flashes were detected. We provide new analytic estimates of the reverse shock emission based on a better shock approximation, which well describe numerical results in the intermediate regime. We show that the reverse shock temperature at the onset of afterglow is constant, $(\barΓ_d-1)\sim 8\times10^{-2}$, when the dimensionless parameter $ξ_{0}$ is more than several. Our approach is applied to case studies of GRB 990123 and 090102, and we find that magnetic fields in the fireballs are even stronger than previously believed.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.