Paper detail

On the observed duration distribution of gamma-ray bursts from collapsars

The duration of the prompt emission of long gamma-ray bursts is generally considered to be fairly similar to the duration of the activity of the engine in the center of the progenitor star. Here, we investigate the relation between the duration of the engine activity and that of the observed light curve, using inputs from both numerical simulations and observations. We find that the observed burst duration is a good proxy for the engine duration after the time necessary for the jet to break out the star's surface is subtracted. However, the observed duration is a function of the viewing angle and can be significantly shorter than the duration of the engine activity. We also show that the observed, redshift-corrected burst duration evolves only moderately with redshift for both observations and synthetic light curves. We conclude that the broad distribution of the observed duration of long BATSE gamma-ray bursts is mostly accounted for by an engine lasting ~20 s, the dispersion being due to viewing and redshift effects. Our results do not rule out the existence of engines with very long duration. However, we find that they are constrained to be a small minority of the BATSE detected bursts.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.