eva lefa
play

Eva Lefa MPI-K/LSW Heidelberg Based on work in collaboration with - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Eva Lefa MPI-K/LSW Heidelberg Based on work in collaboration with Felix Aharonian and Frank Rieger HEPRO III, Barcelona, June 27-July 1, 2011 EBL and very Hard Gamma-ray spectra of Blazars Solution/interpretation through standard


  1. Eva Lefa MPI-K/LSW Heidelberg Based on work in collaboration with Felix Aharonian and Frank Rieger HEPRO III, Barcelona, June 27-July 1, 2011

  2.  EBL and very Hard Gamma-ray spectra of Blazars  Solution/interpretation through standard leptonic scenarios  Self-consistent Synchrotron self-Compton model • power- law distribution with high “low energy cut - off” in an expanding source • Relativistic maxwellian-like distributions  External Compton scenario

  3.  Blazars ’ TeV photons interact with EBL via  Deformation of the emitted spectrum E e -2 electron index E γ -1.5 TeV photon index (Thomson) and steeper for Klein-Nishina regime Aharonian et al. 2006  The spectra of some sources appear very hard with photon index Γ≤ 1.5 even for the lowest level of EBL (1ES1101- 232,1ES0229+200…)

  4.  “Exotic” scenarios  Lorentz invariance violation ( Kifune 1999 and others)  DARMA scenario (De Angelis et al. 2009)  “Astrophysical” scenarios  Secondary γ -rays from CR protons (Essey et al. 2011)  Up-scatter of CMB photons from extended jet (Bottcher et. al 2008)  Cold ultrarelativistic wind ( Aharonian et al. 2002 )  Internal absorption ( Aharonian et al. 2008, Zacharopoulou et al. 2011 )  Within standard leptonic models? (homogeneous, 1-zone SSC) We need hard electron energy distributions  relativistic shocks/shear flows can produce distributions harder than (eg. Derishev et al. 2003, Stecker et al. 2007) BUT: any hard injection spectrum of electrons, after radiative (synchrotron or Thompson) losses, gets a standard form “E e -2 ”

  5.  Katarzynski et al. 2007 : homogeneous 1-zone SSC model of power-law electrons with large value of electron minimum cut-off  Hardest possible index at TeV range ( Tavecchio et al. 2009 for 1ES 0229+200 with γ min ~5.10 5 ) Tavecchio et al. 2009 Electrons develop a γ -2 wing below γ min due to synchrotron losses • Very low magnetic field (B ~ 4.10 -4 G) • Practically no cooling • Extremely large electron energy density expansion of the source ?

  6. Need to consider time-depended solutions  (for radiative losses Mastichiadis & Kirk ‟98, Coppi & Aharonian „99) Adiabatic losses dominate over synchrotron losses when  e.g. B~0.1G, R~10 15 cm, γ <10 6 Spherical relativistic expansion with  constant velocity R=R o +u(t-t o ) constant injection of power-law electrons time Solution to kinetic equation •

  7.  γ 0 at electrons  ν 1/3 at synchrotron spectrum  injected γ 0min contribution dominates at low energies  hard slope can remain at TeV (for timescales relative to the source size) and relax assumptions for the parameters (B~0.1 G) time Cut-off frequencies drop: Adiabatic cooling: due to MF reduction Synchrotron cooling: due to evolution of γ min

  8. B~0.1G, R~10 15 cm, γ min ~5.10 5  In reality synchrotron losses may alter the electron distribution at high energies higher than raises with time so if then no modification at the hard TeV range

  9.  Narrow distributions, Minimum cut-off ?  Stohastic acceleration + synchrotron losses ( Schlickeiser 1985, Aharonian et al. 1986, and investigated later for modeling blazars e.g. Saugé & Henri 2004; Katarzynski et al. 2006, Giebels et al. 2007...) Steady state solution to Fokker-Planck equation : • relativistic Maxwell-like distribution Cut-off energy: at balance • between acceleration and losses, can take values of ~10 5 and more

  10. γ c =1.5 10 5 γ‟ c =3 γ c B=0.08 G R=5.10 14 cm (B/Bcr) γ 3 c >>1 Compton peak at the electron cut-off energy  F ν ~ ν 1/3 at TeV range (very good agreement with narrow power-law)  B-field of the order 0.1G (more reasonable parameters)  Energy losses under account

  11. TeV data obtained with HESS, corrected for 2 EBL models of Francheschini, high level-red points, low level – green

  12. Electrons up-scatter external photon field, e.g. disk photons (of  planckian distribution) after reprocessed/rescattered by BLR clouds  In ECS scenarios we can get even harder spectra F ν ~v at TeV range B=1G γ c =4.10 4 T~2. 10 4 Γ=1 3

  13.  Combination of narrow distributions, e.g. 3-4 blobs with maxwellian-like electrons of different “temperatures” γ c and same parameters  Same energy in each blob -> power-law like spectra of index 2 EED SSC spectrum  Hard features may arise in the spectrum if the energetics of a single component change: very different γ c , more energy, different doppler factor…

  14. Neronov et al. 2011: 30 days very hard flare with photon index  Γ=1.1 at 10-200 GeV , no variability below 10 GeV ( Γ =1.8) Neronov et al. 2011

  15. Neronov et al. 2011: 30 days very hard flare (photon index  Γ=1.1 ) at 10-200 GeV , no variability below 10 GeV ( Γ =1.8)

  16.  Even very hard spectra can be approached within standard emission scenarios under certain assumptions  Limiting case for SSC is F ν ~ ν 1/3 , for ECS F ν ~ ν 1  Narrow power-law electrons + adiabatic losses: recover the hard TeV spectrum, higher MF  Maxwell-like electron distributions can form naturally hard TeV spectra under radiative losses Thank you!

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend