Paper detail

Why are some BL Lacs detected by \fermi, but others not ?

By cross-correlating an archival sample of 170 BL Lacs with 2 year \fermilat AGN sample, we have compiled a sample of 100 BL Lacs with \fermi detection (FBLs), and a sample of 70 non-\fermi BL Lacs (NFBLs). We compared various parameters of FBLs with those of NFBLs, including the redshift, the low frequency radio luminosity at 408 MHz ($L_{\rm 408MHz}$), the absolute magnitude of host galaxies ($M_{\rm host}$), the polarization fraction from NVSS survey ($P_{\rm NVSS}$), the observed arcsecond scale radio core flux at 5 GHz ($F_{\rm core}$) and jet Doppler factor; all the parameters are directly \textbf{measured} or derived from available data from literatures. We found that the Doppler factor is on average larger in FBLs than in NFBLs, and the $Fermi~ γ$-ray detection rate is higher in sources with higher Doppler factor. In contrast, there are no significant differences in terms of the intrinsic parameters of redshift, $ L_{\rm 408MHz}$, $ M_{\rm host}$ and $ P_{\rm NVSS}$. FBLs seem to have a higher probability of exhibiting measurable proper motion. These results strongly indicate a higher beaming effect in FBLs compared to NFBLs. The radio core flux is found to be strongly correlated with $γ$-ray flux, which remains after excluding the common dependence of the Doppler factor. At the fixed Doppler factor, FBLs have systematically larger radio core flux than NFBLs, implying lower $γ$-ray emission in NFBLs since the radio and $γ$-ray flux are significantly correlated. Our results indicate that the Doppler factor is an important parameter of $γ$-ray detection, the non-detection of $γ$-ray emission in NFBLs is likely due to low beaming effect, and/or low intrinsic $γ$-ray flux, and the gamma-rays are likely produced co-spatially with the arcsecond-scale radio core radiation and mainly through the SSC process.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.