● canonical disclaimer

● some general remarks

● selected topics

● UHECRs

● DM

● GRBs

VULCANO 2008 – CONCLUDING REMARKS

● nomination for the conference hit

● acknowledgements

As every year, the selection, based on personal impressions, will be arbitrary and unfair

quotation from my Vulcano 2007 concluding remarks:

● we had an excellent conference

● we heard a lot of excellent talks

● some talks were clearly missing

e.g. ● status of HST & JWST

● highlights of SWIFT

(I hope that organizers of Vulcano 2008 will

rectify this deficiency)

AND THEY DID !

UHECRs

Big news from AUGER !

● Correlations of UHECR events with AGNs !

If events > 57 EeV with |b|>12o are considered, then 19 out of 21 are correlated (5 expected)

● GZK cut off confirmed !

● Composition of UHECRs: neither p nor Fe

courtesy A. Letessier-Selvon

(De Roeck, 2008)

GZK cut off

Maximum signal occurs @ same energy where the flux is reduced by 50% with respect to an extrapolated power law

courtesy A. Letessier-Selvon

CONCLUSIONS (A. Letessier-Selvon)

• Anisotropy of UHECR has been established at > 99% CL for the parameters E~60 EeV, D~100 Mpc, ~4º

• Nature of the correlation provides evidences for the ‘GZK’ effect and the hypothesis that the CR are dominantly protons from AGN within our ‘GZK’ horizon

• Sources could be other than AGN as long as they have similar spatial distributions

• Increased statistics (+Auger North) will allow source identification as well as measurements of MF along the line of sight and maybe some surprises….

It is just the beginning….

GOOD NEWS:

Dark matter exists !

Beautiful talks by:

● Sergio Colafrancesco

● many others

gazeta wyborcza, 9.01.2007

DM candidates“Fuzzy” CDM

Axions

Neutrinos

Light (MeV) DM

SUSY DM

Dar

k M

atte

rM

WIM

P

Extra dimension

Branons

Mirror Matter

PBHs

Lower possible end of CDMBosons with M10-22 eVLower possible end of CDMBosons with M10-22 eV

Non-thermal productioneV < Maxion < m eVExperimental limits

Non-thermal productioneV < Maxion < m eVExperimental limits

Warm DM 0.0005 < h2< 0.0076Massive neutrinos acceptableSterile with m 10-100 keV

Warm DM 0.0005 < h2< 0.0076Massive neutrinos acceptableSterile with m 10-100 keV

Gravitinos

Neutralinos

Sneutrinos

Axinos

Q-balls

Split-SUSY

Kaluza-Klein excitationsL-KK (r-parity) particle: stableMKK 1 TeV

Kaluza-Klein excitationsL-KK (r-parity) particle: stableMKK 1 TeV

String theory brane fluctuationsMbranon > 100 GeVString theory brane fluctuationsMbranon > 100 GeV

Ordinary matter in mirror worldDissipative & complex chemicsOrdinary matter in mirror worldDissipative & complex chemics

BHs @ quark-hadron transitionMPBH Mhorizon(T=102MeV) > M

BHs @ quark-hadron transitionMPBH Mhorizon(T=102MeV) > M

WIMPzillas

Chaplygin Gas

Produced at the end of Inflation

M > 1013 GeVProduced at the end of Inflation

M > 1013 GeV

DM-DE common originP = - A / DM-DE common originP = - A /

Spin = 0 supersymmetric particle MeV < MLDM < 4 MeVElusive: only e± 511 keV line

Spin = 0 supersymmetric particle MeV < MLDM < 4 MeVElusive: only e± 511 keV line

POPULAR DM CANDIDATES

DM induced astro-particle signals

-rays

Bremss.-ICS UV/X-rays

SynchrotronRadio

SZE sub-mm

Heating

Neutrinos

-annihilation

annihilation

Covering the whole e.m. spectrum

Synchro

tronSZ

Effe

ct

ICS

Brem.+ICS+ 0

Brem.+ICS

ICS

annihilation

products

DM annihilation in cosmic structuresGalaxies (Optical)

Diffuse gas(X-rays)

Relativistic particles (Radio halos/relics)

No gas(No X-rays)

No rel. particles (No radio emission)

Stars (Optical)

ClusterCluster

dSph GalaxydSph Galaxy

SZE in DM halosSZthSZth

SZrelSZrel

SZDMSZDM

SZkinSZkin

SZwarmSZwarm

A structure with:

• Hot gas• Warm gas• Rel. Plasma• DM• Distant & Vr

SZE in pure DM halos

SZDMSZDM

A structure with:

• • • • DM• Nearby (Vr ≈ 0)

Dwarf Spheroidal gal.Dwarf Spheroidal gal.

1ES0657-556

● It is fascinating that we could map

so well so many possibilities

and that we may expect to obtain significant astrophysical constraints on DM particles

The signal from DAMA (significant annual modulation) is very exciting

But, if interpreted as due to DM annihilation (model dependent) it seems to be too strong comparing with other astrophysical constraints

We have to be patient ! [Vulcano 2006]

The last statement remains true at Vulcano 2008

We live in a SWIFT era

GRBs

Beautiful talks by:

● Lorenzo Amati

● Guido Chincarini

● many others

● cosmology & GRBs

● giant flares of distant magnetars

● collimation

10-6 (DF, AD) or 10-2 ÷ 10-3 (common wisdom)

New SWIFT data indicate that light curves breaks are not achromatic

→ common wisdom has a problem

This translates into the frequency of the events (and also their energetics): is the fraction of SNe that are accompanied by GRBs ≥ 10-1 or rather ~ 10-3 ?

How strong is the collimation ?

● no evidence of achromatic breaks in light curves !

(they are chromatic or absent)

● Amati relation is alive and well (now based on 70 GRBs)

But

● Amati relation, corrected for beaming is no longer shown (too few GRBs with achromatic breaks – only ~ 10)

● There were people in this room (D. Fargione, A. Dar), who never believed achromatic breaks interpretation and advocated much stronger collimation (10-7 ÷ 10-6)

Collimation

Amati et al. (2002) analyzed a sample of 12 BeppoSAX events with known redshift

we found evidence of a strong correlation between Ep,i and Eiso , highly significant ( = 0.949, chance prob. 0.005%) despite the low number of GRBs included in the sample

Ep,i = kEiso

(0.52+/-0.06)

Amati et al. , A&A, 2002

analysis of an updated sample of long GRBs/XRFs with firm estimates of z and Ep,i (41 events) gives a chance probability for the Ep,i-Eiso correlation of ~10-15 and a slope of 0.57+/-0.02

the scatter of the data around the best fit power-law can be fitted with a Gaussian with (logEp,i) ~ 0.2 (~0.15 extra-poissonian)

confirmed by the most recent analysis (more than 70 events, Ghirlanda et al. 2008, Amati et al. 2008)

only firm outlier the local peculiar GRB 980425 (GRB 031203 debated)

Amati et al. 2008

●●●

Recent Swift detection of an X-ray transient associated with SN 2008D at z = 0.0064, showing a light curve and duration similar to GRB 060218

Peak energy limits and energetics consistent with a very-low energy extension of the Ep,i-Eiso correlation Evidence that this transient may be a very soft and weak GRB (XRF 080109), thus confirming the existence

of a population of sub-energetic GRB ?

Modjaz et al., ApJ, 2008 Li, MNRAS, 2008

●

courtesy L. Amati

the Ep,i-Eiso correlation becomes tighter when adding a third observable: jet opening angle (jet -> E = [1-cos(jet)]*Eiso (Ghirlanda et al. 2004) or “high signal time” T0.45 (Firmani et al. 2006)

the logarithmic dispersion of these correlations is very low: can they be used to standardize GRB ?

jet angle inferred from break time in optical afterglow decay, while Ep,i-Eiso-T0.45 correlation based on prompt emission properties only

Standardizing GRB with 3-parameters spectrum-energy correlations

courtesy L. Amati

Collimated or isotropic ?

lack of jet breaks in several Swift X-ray afterglow light curves, in some cases, evidence of achromatic break

challenging evidences for Jet interpretation of break in afterglow light curves or due to present inadequate sampling of optical light curves w/r to X-ray ones and to lack of satisfactory modeling of jets ?

courtesy L. Amati

Collimated or isotropic ?

● Unusual burst GRB080319B

● Possible interpretation: double jet (G. Chincarini)

inner jet: opening angle ≈ 0.4o

outer jet: opening angle ≈ 8o

The collimation factor for inner jet is ~ 2x10-6 !!!

● cosmology & GRBs

Ghirlanda, Ghisellini et al. 2005, 2006,2007

What can be obtained with 150 GRB with known z and Ep and complementarity with other probes (SN Ia, CMB)

complementary to SN Ia: extension to much higher z even when considering the future sample of SNAP (z < 1.7), cross check of results with different probes

courtesy L. Amati

SHORT GRBs

● Large part (majority ?) of short GRBs are compact objects mergers

● Some of them must be giant outbursts of distant magnetars

Events such as Dec. 27, 2004 outburst of SGR 1806-20 (Eburst=3x1046 erg) must happen in nearby galaxies (they occur at a rate of ~ 0.1/yr in our Galaxy)If they occur within ~ 100 Mpc, they have to be classified as short GRBs

Candidates for giant outburst of distant magnetars (seen as short GRBs)

GRB 051103 (in M81) Eburst=7x1046 erg

GRB 070201 (in M31) Eburst=6x1046 erg

GRB051103 – A POSSIBLE EXTRAGALACTIC MAGNETAR FLARE (EMF)

IPN ErrorEllipse

M81

M82Swift BAT15-150 keVNot imaged

GRB070201 – ANOTHER EMF?

-400 -200 0 200 400TIME, MILLISECONDS

0

40

80

120

CO

UN

TS

/2 m

s.

KONUS-W INDGRB0702012 ms. DATA

IPN ErrorBox

M31

Eburst=6x1046 erg

My nomination to the conference hit

goes this year to

Auger (early results) !

In 2009 a silver jubilee !

(25 anniversary of the start of „Multifrequency …” workshop!)

SEE YOU AT VULCANO!