Paper detail

On the Composition of GRBs' Collapsar Jets

The duration distribution of long Gamma Ray Bursts reveals a plateau at durations shorter than ~20 s (in the observer frame) and a power-law decline at longer durations (Bromberg et al., 2012). Such a plateau arises naturally in the Collapsar model. In this model the engine has to operate long enough to push the jet out of the stellar envelope and the observed duration of the burst is the difference between the engine's operation time and the jet breakout time. We compare the jet breakout time inferred from the duration distribution (~10 s in the burst's frame) to the breakout time of a hydrodynamic jet (~10 s for typical parameters) and of a Poynting flux dominated jet with the same overall energy (<~1 s). As only the former is compatible with the duration of the plateau in the GRB duration distribution, we conclude that the jet is hydrodynamic during most of the time that its head is within the envelope of the progenitor star and around the time when it emerges from the star. This would naturally arise if the jet forms as a hydrodynamic jet in the first place or if it forms Poynting flux dominated but dissipates most of its magnetic energy early on within the progenitor star and emerges as a hydrodynamic jet.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.