Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:08:52.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Workshop on Stellar Tidal Disruption

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2012

Glennys R. Farrar*
Affiliation:
Center for Cosmology and Particle Physics, New York University, USA email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The past year has seen major advances in the observational status of Stellar Tidal Disruption, with the discovery of two strong optical candidates in archived SDSS data and the real-time X-ray detection of Swift J1644+57, plus rapid radio and optical follow-up establishing it as a probable Tidal Disruption Flare (TDF) in “blazar mode”. These observations motivated a workshop devoted to discussion of such events and of the theory of their emission and flare rate. Observational contributions included a presentation of Swift J2058+05 (a possible second example of a TDF in blazar mode), reports on the late-time evolution and X-ray variability of the two Swift events, and a proposal that additional candidates may be evidenced by spectral signatures in SDSS. Theory presentations included models of radio emission, theory of light curves and the proposal that GRB101225A may be the Galactic tidal disruption of a neutron star, an interpretation of Swift J1644+57 as due to the disruption of a white dwarf instead of main-sequence star, calculation of the dependence of the TDF rate on the spin of the black hole, and analysis of the SDSS events, fitting their SEDs to profiles of thoretical emission from accretion disks and showing that their luminosity and rate are consistent with the proposal that TDEs can be responsible for UHECR acceleration.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2012

References

Berger, E., et al. , 2011, ApJ, in press.Google Scholar
Bloom, J. S., et al. , 2011. Science, 333, 203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campana, S., et al. , 2011, Nature, 480, 69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cannizzo, J. K., Troja, E., & Lodato, G., 2011, ApJ, 742, 32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cenko, S. B., et al. , 2011, ArXiv e-printsGoogle Scholar
Farrar, G. R. & Gruzinov, A. 2009, ApJ, 693, 329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krolik, J. H. & Piran, T., 2011. ApJ, 743, 134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levan, A. J., et al. , 2011. Science, 333, 199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodato, G. & Rossi, E. M. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metzgerm, B. D., Giannios, D., & Mimica, P. 2011, ArXiv e-printsGoogle Scholar
Strubbe, L. E. & Quataert, E. 2009, MNRAS, 400, 2070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Velzen, S., et al. , 2011, ApJ, 741, 73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Velzen, S., Körding, E., & Falcke, H. 2011, MNRAS, 417, L51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J. & Merritt, D., 2004. ApJ, 600, 149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zauderer, B. A. 2011, Nature, 476, 425CrossRefGoogle Scholar