Changeset 6825 for trunk/MagicSoft/GC-Proposal
- Timestamp:
- 03/16/05 07:14:15 (20 years ago)
- Location:
- trunk/MagicSoft/GC-Proposal
- Files:
-
- 3 added
- 2 edited
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
-
trunk/MagicSoft/GC-Proposal/GC.tex
r6802 r6825 46 46 a few hundred GeV has been detected by the Whipple, Cangaroo and HESS 47 47 collaborations. The reconstructed spectra from Cangaroo and HESS show 48 significant differences. The acceleration mechanisms have still to be 49 identified. 50 51 Various possibilities for the acceleration of the very high energy (VHE) 52 gamma rays are discussed in the literature, like accretion flow onto the 48 significant differences. The reasons for this discrepancy and the acceleration mechanisms have still to be identified. 49 50 Various possibilities for the production of very-high-energy (VHE) 51 gamma rays near the GC are discussed in the literature, like accretion flow onto the 53 52 central black 54 53 hole, supernova shocks in Sgr A East, proton acceleration near the event … … 61 60 62 61 At La Palma, the GC culminates at about 58 deg zenith angle (ZA). It can be 63 observed with MAGIC at up to 60 deg ZA for about 150 hours per year, between64 April and late August . The expected integral flux above 700 GeV derived from62 observed with MAGIC at up to 60 deg ZA, between 63 April and late August, yielding a total of 150 hours per year. The expected integral flux above 700 GeV derived from 65 64 the HESS data is $(3.2 \pm 1.0)\cdot 10^{-12}\mathrm{cm}^{-2}\mathrm{s}^{-1}$. 66 65 Comparing this to the expected MAGIC sensitivity from MC simulations, this … … 72 71 73 72 \begin{itemize} 74 \item to measure the gamma flux and its energy dependence (due to the high73 \item to measure the gamma-ray flux and its energy dependence (due to the high 75 74 zenith angles higher energies are accessible), 76 75 \item to inter-calibrate MAGIC and HESS, … … 107 106 108 107 The Galactic Center (GC) region contains many unusual objects which may be 109 responsible for the high 108 responsible for the high-energy processes generating gamma rays 110 109 \cite{Aharonian2005,Atoyan2004,Horns2004}. The GC is rich in massive stellar 111 110 clusters with up to 100 OB stars \cite{GC_environment}, immersed in a dense … … 142 141 GeV. Assuming a distance of 8.5 kpc, the gamma ray luminosity of this source 143 142 is very large $~2.2 \cdot 10^{37} \mathrm{erg}/\mathrm{s}$, which is 144 equivalent to about 10 Crab pulsars. An independent analysis of the EGRET data143 equivalent to about 10 times the gamma flux from the Crab nebula. An independent analysis of the EGRET data 145 144 \cite{Hooper2002} indicates a point source whose position is different from the GC at a confidence level beyond 99.9 \%. %\cite{Hooper2002, A&A 335 (1998) 161} 146 145 147 Up to now, the GC has been observed at 148 energies above 200 GeV by Veritas, Cangaroo and HESS, \cite{GC_whipple, 149 GC_cangaroo,GC_hess}. Figure \ref{fig:GC_gamma_flux} shows the reconstructed 150 spectra by the other IACTs while Figure \ref{fig:GC_source_location} shows the 146 At energies above 200 GeV, the GC has been observed by Veritas, Cangaroo and HESS, \cite{GC_whipple, 147 GC_cangaroo,GC_hess}. The spectra as measured by these experiments are displayed in Figure \ref{fig:GC_gamma_flux} while Figure \ref{fig:GC_source_location} shows the 151 148 different reconstructed positions of the GC source. Recently a second TeV 152 149 gamma source only about 1 degree away from the GC has been … … 158 155 \includegraphics[totalheight=6cm]{sgr_figure4.eps} 159 156 \end{center} 160 \caption[Gamma flux from GC.]{The VHE gamma flux as observed by the other IACTs and by the EGRET satellite\cite{GC_hess}.} \label{fig:GC_gamma_flux}157 \caption[Gamma flux from GC.]{The VHE gamma flux as observed by Whipple, Cangaroo , HESS and by the EGRET experiment \cite{GC_hess}.} \label{fig:GC_gamma_flux} 161 158 \end{figure} 162 159 … … 169 166 \end{figure} 170 167 171 The discrepancies between the measured flux spectra could indicate inter-calibration problems between the IACTs , asource variability of the order of one year could be due to the different regions in which the signal is integrated.168 The discrepancies between the measured flux spectra could indicate inter-calibration problems between the IACTs. An apparent source variability of the order of one year could be due to the different regions in which the signal is integrated. 172 169 173 170 … … 175 172 \section{Investigators and Affiliations} 176 173 177 The investigators of the proposed observations of the GC are stated in Table \ref{table:GC_investigators} together with their assigned analysis tasks. All other interestedmembers of the MAGIC collaboration are invited to join these efforts.174 The investigators of the proposed observations of the GC are stated in Table \ref{table:GC_investigators} together with their assigned analysis tasks. All members of the MAGIC collaboration are invited to join these efforts. 178 175 179 176 … … 190 187 \\ Pepe Flix & IFAE Barcelona& jflix@ifae.es & data analysis, disp 191 188 \\ Sabrina Stark & ETH Zurich & lstark@particle.phys.ethz.ch & data analysis, spectra 192 \\ Wolfgang Wittek & MPI Munich & wittek@mppmu.mpg.de & padding 189 \\ Wolfgang Wittek & MPI Munich & wittek@mppmu.mpg.de & padding, unfolding 193 190 \\ 194 191 \hline … … 198 195 \end{table} 199 196 197 The principal investigator is ....... 200 198 201 199 \section{Scientific Case} 202 200 203 201 204 In the GC region high 202 In the GC region high-energy gamma rays can be produced in different sources: 205 203 206 204 \begin{itemize} 207 \item{ entire innermost 10 pc region (interaction between cosmic rays and the dense ambient gas)}208 \item{ non-thermal radio filaments \cite{Pohl1997}}209 \item{ young SNR Sgr A East \cite{Fatuzzo2003}}205 \item{interaction between cosmic rays and the dense ambient gas within the innermost 10 pc region} 206 \item{in non-thermal radio filaments \cite{Pohl1997}} 207 \item{in the young SNR Sgr A East \cite{Fatuzzo2003}} 210 208 \item{in the compact radio source Sgr A*} 211 \item{ central part of the dark matter halo.}209 \item{in the central part of the dark matter halo.} 212 210 \end{itemize} 213 211 214 It is quite possible that some of these potential gamma-ray production sites contribute comparably to the theobserved TeV flux.215 216 217 % in the non-thermal radio filaments by high-energy leptons which scatter background infrared photons from the nearby ionized clouds \cite{Pohl1997,Aharonian2005}, or by hadrons colliding with dense matter. These high 218 219 220 In order to shed new light on the high 212 It is quite possible that some of these potential gamma-ray production sites contribute comparably to the observed TeV flux. 213 214 215 % in the non-thermal radio filaments by high-energy leptons which scatter background infrared photons from the nearby ionized clouds \cite{Pohl1997,Aharonian2005}, or by hadrons colliding with dense matter. These high-energy hadrons can be accelerated by the massive black hole \cite{GC_black_hole}, associated with the Sgr A$^*$, by supernovae or by energetic pulsars. Alternative mechanisms invoke the hypothetical annihilation of super-symmetric dark matter particles (for a review see \cite{jung96}) or curvature radiation of protons in the vicinity of the central super-massive black hole \cite{GC_black_hole,Melia2001}. 216 217 218 In order to shed new light on the high-energy phenomena in the GC region, and to constrain the emission mechanisms and sources, new observations with high sensitivity, good energy and angular resolution are necessary. For the interpretation of the observed gamma flux the following observables are important: 221 219 222 220 \begin{itemize} … … 237 235 238 236 239 \subsection{ Emission from Sgr A$^*$}240 241 Production of high-energy gamma rays within 10 Schwarzschild radii of a black hole (of any mass) could be copious because of effective acceleration of particles by the rotation-induced electric fields close to the event horizon or by strong shocks in the inner parts of the accretion disk. However, these energetic gamma rays generally cannot escape the source because of severe absorption due to interactions with the dense, low-frequency radiation through photon-photon pair production. But fortunately the supermassive black hole in our Galaxy is an exception because of its unusually low bolometric luminosity. The propagation effects related to the possible cascading in the photon filed may extend the high-energy limit to 10 TeV or even beyond \cite{Aharonian2005}.237 \subsection{Models for the gamma-ray emission from Sgr A$^*$} 238 239 Production of high-energy gamma rays within 10 Schwarzschild radii of a black hole (of any mass) could be copious because of effective acceleration of particles by the rotation-induced electric fields close to the event horizon or by strong shocks in the inner parts of the accretion disk. However, these energetic gamma rays generally cannot escape the source because of severe absorption due to interactions with the dense, low-frequency radiation through photon-photon pair production. Fortunately the supermassive black hole in our Galaxy is an exception because of its unusually low bolometric luminosity. The propagation effects related to the possible cascading in the photon filed may extend the high-energy limit to 10 TeV or even beyond \cite{Aharonian2005}. 242 240 243 241 … … 245 243 \subsubsection{Leptonic Models} 246 244 247 Also advection dominated accretion flow (ADAF) models can describe the production of high 248 249 A viable site of acceleration of highly energetic electrons could be the compact region within a few gravitational radii of the black hole. In this case the electrons produce not only curvature radiation, which peaks around 1 GeV, but also inverse Compton gamma rays (produced in the Klein-Nishina regime) with the peak emission around 100 TeV. As these high 245 Also advection dominated accretion flow (ADAF) models can describe the production of high-energy gamma radiation in the Galactic Center \cite{Atoyan2004}. 246 247 A viable site of acceleration of highly energetic electrons could be the compact region within a few gravitational radii of the black hole. In this case the electrons produce not only curvature radiation, which peaks around 1 GeV, but also inverse Compton gamma rays (produced in the Klein-Nishina regime) with the peak emission around 100 TeV. As these high-energy gammas cannot escape the source the observed gamma rays would be due to an electromagnetic cascade. 250 248 251 249 \subsubsection{Hadronic Models} … … 261 259 The presence of a Dark Matter halo of the Galaxy is well established by stellar dynamics \cite{Klypin2002}. At present, the nature of Dark Matter is unknown, but a number of viable candidates have been advocated within different theoretical frameworks, mainly motivated by particle physics (for a review see \cite{jung96}) including the widely studied models of supersymmetric (SUSY) Dark Matter \cite{Ellis1984}. Also models involving extra dimensions are discussed like Kaluza-Klein Dark Matter \cite{Kaluza_Klein,Bergstrom2004}. 262 260 263 The supersymmetric particle dark matter candidates might self-annihilate into boson or fermion pairs yielding very high 261 The supersymmetric particle dark matter candidates might self-annihilate into boson or fermion pairs yielding very high-energy gammas in subsequent decays and from hadronisation. The gamma flux above an energy threshold $E_{\mathrm{thresh}}$ per solid angle $\Omega$ is given by: 264 262 265 263 \begin{equation*} … … 279 277 280 278 Figure \ref{fig:exclusion_lmits} shows exclusion limits for MAGIC (solid straight lines) for the four most promising sources, 281 in the plane $N_{\gamma}(E_{\gamma}>E_{\mathrm{thresh}})\langle \sigma v \rangle$ vs. $m_{\chi}$. The energy threshold $E_ th$ has been assumed to be 100 GeV. Due to its proximity the GC yields the largest expected flux from particle dark matter annihilation and thus the lowest exclusion limit. Nevertheless, this minimum measurable flux is more than one order of magnitude above the highest fluxes predicted by SUSY models (full circles). Also the flux measured by the HESS experiment is far above the theoretical expectation.279 in the plane $N_{\gamma}(E_{\gamma}>E_{\mathrm{thresh}})\langle \sigma v \rangle$ vs. $m_{\chi}$. The energy threshold $E_{th}$ has been assumed to be 100 GeV. Due to its proximity the GC yields the largest expected flux from particle dark matter annihilation and thus the lowest exclusion limit. Nevertheless, this minimum measurable flux is more than one order of magnitude above the highest fluxes predicted by SUSY models (full circles). Also the flux measured by the HESS experiment is far above the theoretical expectation (dotted line). 282 280 283 281 … … 286 284 \includegraphics[totalheight=6cm]{plot_DM_exclusion.eps}%{Dark_exclusion_limits.eps} 287 285 \end{center} 288 \caption[DM exclusion limits.]{Exclusion limits (solid straight lines) for the four most promising sources of dark matter annihilation radiation. The GC is expected to give the largest flux fromall sources. For energies above 700 GeV, the flux from the GC as observed by the HESS experiment (dotted line) is within the reach of MAGIC. The full circles represent flux predictions from some typical SUSY models. -- Figure to be updated --} \label{fig:exclusion_lmits}286 \caption[DM exclusion limits.]{Exclusion limits (solid straight lines) for the four most promising sources of dark matter annihilation radiation. The GC is expected to give the largest flux (lowest exclusion limits) amongst all sources. For energies above 700 GeV, the flux from the GC as observed by the HESS experiment (dotted line) is within the reach of MAGIC. The full circles represent flux predictions from some typical SUSY models. -- Figure to be updated --} \label{fig:exclusion_lmits} 289 287 \end{figure} 290 288 … … 343 341 %\end{figure} 344 342 343 Preliminary conclusion : ?????????????????? 344 345 345 346 346 \section{Feasibility} 347 347 \label{section:feasibility} 348 349 \subsection{Expected gamma-ray fluxes} 348 350 The HESS collaboration has observed the GC for 16.5 hours, at zenith angles around 20 degrees, with energy thresholds between 165 and 255 GeV. The total number of excess events amounts to $\sim$300, and the differential gamma flux is measured as \cite{GC_hess}: 349 351 350 352 \begin{equation} 351 \frac{\mathrm{d}N_{\gamma}}{\mathrm{d}A\ mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}E} = (2.50 \pm 0.21 \pm 0.6) \cdot 10^{-12} \frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{sTeV}} \left(\frac{E}{\mathrm{TeV}}\right)^{-2.21\pm 0.09 \pm 0.15}352 \end{equation} 353 354 A fit to the published Cangaroo flux data points\cite{GC_cangaroo} yields:353 \frac{\mathrm{d}N_{\gamma}}{\mathrm{d}A\;\mathrm{d}t\;\mathrm{d}E} = (2.50 \pm 0.21 \pm 0.6) \cdot 10^{-12} \frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\;\mathrm{s\;TeV}} \left(\frac{E}{\mathrm{TeV}}\right)^{-2.21\pm 0.09 \pm 0.15} 354 \end{equation} 355 356 A fit to the flux data points from Cangaroo \cite{GC_cangaroo} yields: 355 357 356 358 \begin{equation} 357 \frac{\mathrm{d}N_{\gamma}}{\mathrm{d}A\mathrm{d}t\mathrm{d}E} = (3.4 \pm 3.8) \cdot 10^{-12} \frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{sTeV}} \left(\frac{E}{\mathrm{TeV}}\right)^{-4.4\pm 1.1} 358 \end{equation} 359 360 361 For a 60 deg ZA we conservatively estimate the analysis energy threshold to be about 700 GeV. The integrated flux of the HESS spectrum is: 359 \frac{\mathrm{d}N_{\gamma}}{\mathrm{d}A\;\mathrm{d}t\;\mathrm{d}E} = (3.4 \pm 3.8) \cdot 10^{-12} \frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\;\mathrm{s\;TeV}} \left(\frac{E}{\mathrm{TeV}}\right)^{-4.4\pm 1.1} 360 \end{equation} 361 362 The flux integrated above 700 GeV is determined as 362 363 363 364 \begin{equation} 364 \frac{\mathrm{d}N_{\gamma}(E>700 \mathrm{GeV})}{\mathrm{d}A\mathrm{d}t}=(3.2 \pm 1.0)\cdot 10^{-12}\frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}} 365 \end{equation} 366 367 368 while the integrated flux above 700 GeV obtained from the Cangaroo spectrum is given by: 369 370 \begin{equation} 371 \frac{\mathrm{d}N_{\gamma}(E>700 \mathrm{GeV})}{\mathrm{d}A\mathrm{d}t}=(3 \pm 5)\cdot 10^{-12}\frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}} \ . 372 \end{equation} 373 374 375 Thus the integral fluxes above 700 GeV based on the HESS and Cangaroo data agree within errors. 376 377 Using MC simulations \cite{MC-Camera} for small zenith angles we conservatively estimate MAGICs sensitivity \cite{MC-Sensitivity} to the integral flux to be: 378 379 \begin{equation} 380 \frac{\mathrm{d}N_{\gamma}(E>700 \mathrm{GeV})}{\mathrm{d}A\mathrm{d}t}\vline_{\mathrm{min}} \approx 6\cdot 10^{-13}\frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}} \ . 381 \end{equation} 382 383 Assuming this sensitivity and using the integrated flux of $3.2\cdot 10^{-12} \mathrm{cm}^{-2}\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ MAGIC will obtain an excess at the 5 384 $\sigma$ significance level in $1.8 \pm 0.5$ h observation time. 385 386 The observed Cangaroo and HESS spectra differ 387 substantially in the spectral index. While the Cangaroo spectrum only extends 388 to about 2 TeV, the recently published HESS spectrum goes up to about 9 TeV. Figure \ref{fig:MAGIC_flux_limits} shows the HESS and Cangaroo observed fluxes together with the minimum flux detectable by MAGIC in 20 hours observation time. 389 390 MAGIC will be able to solve the obvious discrepancy between the observed fluxes. Due to the observation under high zenith angle of about 60 deg MAGIC will be able to extend the source spectrum to higher energies. 365 \frac{\mathrm{d}N_{\gamma}(E>700 \mathrm{GeV})}{\mathrm{d}A\;\mathrm{d}t}=(3.2 \pm 1.0)\cdot 10^{-12}\frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\;\mathrm{s}} 366 \end{equation} 367 368 for HESS and $(3 \pm 5)\cdot 10^{-12}\frac{1}{\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}}$ 369 for Cangaroo, respectively. 370 371 The energy thresholds and flux sensitivities estimated for MAGIC on the basis of MC simulations (\cite{MC-Sensitivity, ECO-1000}) are given in Table \ref{table:MAGIC_sensitivity}. 372 373 \begin{table}[h]{\normalsize\center 374 \begin{tabular}{c|cccc} 375 \hline 376 ZA & $E_{th}$ & sensitivity & $\Phi(E>E_{th})$ 377 & $T_{5\sigma}$ \\ 378 & & above $E_{th}$ & &\\ 379 $[^{\circ}]$ & $[{\rm GeV}]$ & $[{\rm cm}^2\;{\rm s}]^{-1}$ 380 & $[{\rm cm}^2\;{\rm s}]^{-1}$ 381 & $ [{\rm hours}]$ \\ 382 \hline 383 60 & 700 & $6\cdot10^{-13}$ & $3.20\cdot10^{-12}$ & 1.8 \\ 384 70 & 1900 & $4\cdot10^{-13}$ & $0.95\cdot10^{-12}$ & 8.9 \\ 385 \hline 386 \end{tabular} 387 \caption{Energy threshold $E_{th}$ and sensitivity for MAGIC for 2 zenith angles ZA. The 4th and 5th column contain the expected integrated flux above $E_{th}$ and the time needed for observing a 5$\sigma$ excess, respectively.}\label{table:MAGIC_sensitivity}} 388 \end{table} 389 390 391 Figure \ref{fig:MAGIC_flux_limits} shows the HESS and Cangaroo fluxes together with the minimum flux detectable by MAGIC in 20 hours observation time. 392 393 391 394 392 395 … … 398 401 \end{figure} 399 402 400 401 402 %?? How long do we have to observe to get a good spectrum above 7 TeV?? 403 403 It can be seen from Table \ref{table:MAGIC_sensitivity} 404 that in the ZA range from 60 to 70 degrees the energy threshold rises from 700 GeV to 1900 GeV. Correspondingly, the time necessary for observing a 5$\sigma$ excess (assuming an integrated gamma flux as measured by HESS) increases from 1.8 to 8.9 hours. This strongly suggests the MAGIC data to be taken at the smallest ZA possible. Only then the MAGIC observations will contribute to an understanding of the discrepancies between the HESS and Cangaroo results. Due to the observation under high zenith angles ($\sim$60 deg) MAGIC will be able to extend the measurements of the energy spectrum to higher energies ($\sim$20 TeV). 405 406 407 ???? We still have no good estimate of the expected number of excess event for the different conditions. ??? \\ 408 409 ???? How long do we have to observe to get a good spectrum above 7 TeV ??? \\ 410 411 \subsection{Verification of the MAGIC analysis at high zenith angles} 412 In order to verify the correct performance of the MAGIC analysis at high ZA it is proposed to take Crab data in the interesting ZA range from 58$^{\circ}$ to 70$^{\circ}$, to reconstruct the gamma energy spectrum and to compare it with existing measurements. Like for the GC, either dedicated OFF data should be taken or observations should be made in the wobble mode. 404 413 405 414 … … 407 416 408 417 409 The GC culminates at about 58 deg ZA in La Palma. Below 60 deg ZA, it is visible between April and late August for about 150 hours. The GC has a quite large LONS background. This together with the large ZA requires to take either dedicated OFF data or to take data in the wobble mode. Since the LONS level is in any case very large moon observations are considered in addition to the normal observations. 418 The GC culminates at about 58 deg ZA in La Palma. Below 60 deg ZA, it is visible between April and late August for about 150 hours. The GC region has a quite high level of background light from the night sky. This together with the large ZA requires to take either dedicated OFF data or to take data in the wobble mode (see Section \ref{section:skydirections}). 419 %Since the LONS level is in any case very large moon observations are considered in addition to the normal observations. 410 420 411 421 412 422 \section{Requested Observation Time} 413 423 414 Based on the above estimates a 5 $\sigma$ excess is expected to be observed in about 2 hours. To acquire a data set which is comparable in size to those of the other experiments at least 40 hours of observation time are requested. These 40 hours may be either split into 20 hours ON and 20 hours OFF data taking or be devoted exclusively to data taking in the wobble mode. It is still being investigated which of the observation modes is to be preferred.415 416 To get the lowest possible threshold all data shallbe taken at the424 Based on the above estimates a 5$\sigma$ excess is expected to be observed in about 2 hours, under optimal conditions. To acquire a data set which is comparable in size to those of the other experiments at least 40 hours of observation time are requested. These 40 hours may be either split into 20 hours ON and 20 hours OFF data taking or be devoted exclusively to data taking in the wobble mode. At present, the prefered mode is the wobble mode. However, a final decision has not yet been taken. 425 426 As pointed out in Section \ref{section:feasibility}, all data should be taken at the 417 427 smallest possible zenith angles between culmination at about 58 deg and 60 418 428 deg. This limits the data taking interval to about 1 hour per night between 419 April and August. In order to have the most appropriate OFF data we propose to 420 take OFF data each night directly before or after the ON observations under 421 the same condition, i.e. ZA and azimuth. At such high zenith angles the effect 422 of the earth's magnetic field can be non-negligible. This depends of course on 423 ZA and azimuth under which the data is taken. 424 425 To extend the available observation time we propose to take moon ON and OFF data in addition. Also in this case, the proposed maximum ZA of 60 deg should not be exceeded during moon observations. 429 April and August. 430 431 432 To increase statistics we propose to take data during moonshine in addition. Also in this case, the maximum ZA of 60 deg should not be exceeded. 426 433 427 434 In order to take part in exploring the exciting physics of the GC … … 429 436 430 437 438 \section{Suggested sky directions to be tracked} 439 \label{section:skydirections} 440 441 %The number of bright stars around the GC, up to a magnitude of 9, within a distance of 1.75 degrees is given in Table \ref{table:GC_brightstars}. Their total number is 42, of which 16 have a distance to the GC of less than 1 degree. The brightest star is Sgr 3 with a magnitude of 4.5 at a distance of 1.3 degrees. There is no star brighter than mag = 8.4 which is closer than 1 degree to the GC. 442 443 444 %\begin{table}[h]{\normalsize\center 445 %\begin{tabular}{c|cc|c} 446 % \hline 447 % mag range & distance$<1^{\circ}$ & 1$^{\circ}<$distance$<1.75^{\circ}$ 448 % & total number \\ 449 % & & & \\ 450 %\hline 451 % 4 - 5 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ 452 % 5 - 6 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 453 % 6 - 7 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ 454 % 7 - 8 & 0 & 5 & 5 \\ 455 % 8 - 9 & 16 & 19 & 35 \\ 456 %\hline 457 % 4 - 9 & 16 & 26 & 42 \\ 458 %\end{tabular} 459 %\caption{Number of bright stars in the region around the Galactic center, including stars up to mag = 9. 460 %}\label{table:GC_brightstars}} 461 %\end{table} 462 463 \subsection{Wobble mode} 464 The star field around the GC, including stars up to a magnitude of 14, is depicted in Figure \ref{fig:GC_starfield}. One can see that the star field is roughly uniform except for the left lower part (RA$\;>\;$RA$_{GC}+4.7$ min), where the field is significantly brighter. The sky directions (WGC1, WGC2) to be tracked in the wobble mode should be chosen such that in the camera the sky field relative to the source position (GC) is similar to the sky field relative to the mirror source position (anti-source position). For this reason the prefered directions for the wobble mode are WGC1 = (RA$_{GC}$, dec$_{GC}$+0.4$^{\circ}$) and WGC2 = (RA$_{GC}$, dec$_{GC}$-0.4$^{\circ}$. During one night, 50\% of the data should be taken at WGC1 and 50\% at WGC2, switching between the 2 directions every 30 minutes. 465 466 \begin{figure}[h!] 467 \begin{center} 468 \includegraphics[totalheight=16cm]{GCregion14.eps} 469 \end{center} 470 \caption[Star field around the GC.]{Star field around the GC. Stars up to a magnitude of 14 are plotted. The 2 big circles correspond to distances of 1$^{\circ}$ and 1.75$^{\circ}$ from the GC, respectively. The x axis is pointing into the direction of decreasing RA, the y axis into the direction of increasing declination. The grid spacing in the declination is 20 arc minutes. 471 } \label{fig:GC_starfield} 472 \end{figure} 473 474 \begin{figure}[h!] 475 \begin{center} 476 \includegraphics[totalheight=16cm]{GCregion14large.eps} 477 \end{center} 478 \caption[Star field around the GC.]{Star field around the GC. Stars up to a magnitude of 14 are plotted. The 2 big circles correspond to distances of 1$^{\circ}$ and 1.75$^{\circ}$ from the GC, respectively. The x axis is pointing into the direction of decreasing RA, the y axis into the direction of increasing declination. The grid spacing in the declination is 1 degree. 479 } \label{fig:GC_starfield_large} 480 \end{figure} 481 482 \begin{figure}[h!] 483 \begin{center} 484 \includegraphics[totalheight=16cm]{GCregionOFF.eps} 485 \end{center} 486 \caption[Star field around the GC.]{Star field around the GC. Stars up to a magnitude of 12 are plotted. The ON region is indicated by the bigger circle in the center. A possible OFF region is shown by the bigger circle in the left upper part of the figure. The x axis is pointing into the direction of decreasing RA, the y axis into the direction of increasing declination. The grid spacing in the declination is 1 degree. 487 } \label{fig:GC_starfield_OFF} 488 \end{figure} 489 490 \subsection{ON/OFF mode} 491 492 A larger sky area than in Fig.\ref{fig:GC_starfield} is shown in Figs. \ref{fig:GC_starfield_large} and \ref{fig:GC_starfield_OFF}. The bigger circle in the center indicates the ON region around the GC. An appropriate OFF region, with a sky field similar to that of the ON region, would be the one marked by the bigger circle in the upper left part of Fig.\ref{fig:GC_starfield_OFF} . It is centered at the Galactic Plane, contains the bright star Sgr 3 (at (RA, dec) = $(17^h47^m34^s,\;-27^{\circ}49'51"$) ) in its outer part and has the coordinates GC$_{OFF}$ = (RA, dec) = $(17^h52^m00^s,\;-26^{\circ}39'06")$. The difference in RA between the GC and GC$_{OFF}$ corresponds to about 7 minutes. 493 494 %In order to have the most appropriate OFF data we propose to 495 %take OFF data each night directly before or after the ON observations under 496 %the same condition. 497 498 499 500 431 501 \section{Outlook and Conclusions} 432 502 433 The GC is an interesting target in all wavelength s. A great wealth of scientific publications is available, over 600 since 1999. First detections of the GC by the other IACTs Whipple, Cangaroo and HESS are made. Nevertheless the reconstructed fluxes differ significantly. This can be explained by calibration problems, time variations of the source or different integrated sources due to different point spread functions. The nature of the source of the VHE gamma rays is not yet been agreed on.434 435 Conventional acceleration mechanisms for the VHE gamma radiation utilize the accretion onto the black hole and supernova remnants. The GC is expected to be the brightest source of VHE gammas from particle dark matter annihilation. Although the observed gamma radiation is most probably not due to dark matter annihilation, it is interesting to investigate and characterize the observed gamma radiation as it is not excluded that a part of the flux is due to dark matter annihilation.436 437 The MAGIC data could help to determine the nature of the source and to solve the flux discrepancies between the measurements by other experiments. Due to the large Zenith angle MAGIC will have a large energy threshold but also a large collection area and good statistics at the highest energies. The observation results canalso be used to inter-calibrate the different IACTs.503 The GC is an interesting target in all wavelength bands. There is a great wealth of scientific publications, over 600 since 1999. First detections of the GC by the IACTs Whipple, Cangaroo and HESS were made. The measured fluxes exhibit significant differences. These may be explained by calibration problems, by time variations of the source or by different source regions due to different point spread functions. The nature of the source of the VHE gamma rays has not yet been identified. 504 505 Conventional acceleration mechanisms for the VHE gamma radiation utilize the accretion onto the black hole and supernova remnants. The GC is expected to be the brightest source of VHE gammas from particle dark matter annihilation. Although the observed gamma radiation is most probably not due to dark matter annihilation, it is interesting to investigate and characterize the observed gamma radiation as a contribution due to dark matter annihilation is not excluded. 506 507 Data taken by MAGIC could help to determine the nature of the source and to understand the flux discrepancies. Due to the large zenith angles MAGIC will have a large energy threshold but also a large collection area and good statistics at the highest energies. The measurements may also be used to inter-calibrate the different IACTs. 438 508 439 509 … … 450 520 The authors thank A. Moralejo for helpful discussions about the Monte Carlo simulations. 451 521 522 \newpage 452 523 453 524 \bibliography{bibbib} 454 525 \bibliographystyle{GC} 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 526 464 527 … … 529 592 \end{equation} 530 593 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 -
trunk/MagicSoft/GC-Proposal/bibbib.bib
r6794 r6825 6 6 eprint = "astro-ph/0212509", 7 7 SLACcitation = "%%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0212509;%%" 8 } 9 10 @Article{ECO-1000, 11 author = {{Martinez}, M. and others}, 12 title = "ECO, the European Gamma-Ray Observatory: Low-threshold 13 Telescopes at La Palma", 14 year = "2003", 15 eprint = "", 16 SLACcitation = "%%CITATION = ASTRO-PH xxxxx;%%" 8 17 } 9 18
Note:
See TracChangeset
for help on using the changeset viewer.