Paper detail

The signature of the central engine in the weakest relativistic explosions: GRB100316D

We present late-time radio and X-ray observations of the nearby sub-energetic Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB)100316D associated with supernova (SN) 2010bh. Our broad-band analysis constrains the explosion properties of GRB100316D to be intermediate between highly relativistic, collimated GRBs and the spherical, ordinary hydrogen-stripped SNe. We find that ~10^49 erg is coupled to mildly-relativistic (Gamma=1.5-2), quasi-spherical ejecta, expanding into a medium previously shaped by the progenitor mass-loss with rate Mdot ~10^-5 Msun yr^-1 (for wind velocity v_w = 1000 km s^-1). The kinetic energy profile of the ejecta argues for the presence of a central engine and identifies GRB100316D as one of the weakest central-engine driven explosions detected to date. Emission from the central engine is responsible for an excess of soft X-ray radiation which dominates over the standard afterglow at late times (t>10 days). We connect this phenomenology with the birth of the most rapidly rotating magnetars. Alternatively, accretion onto a newly formed black hole might explain the excess of radiation. However, significant departure from the standard fall-back scenario is required.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access12 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.

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.