Rince fáda

Discovery of a New Soft Gamma Repeater, SGR 1627−41

“…There are a number of observations discussed here which support this claim. First, the position of SAX J1635.8-4736 is mutually consistent with the narrow error box for SGR 1627-41 (Hurley et al 1999d, Smith et al 1999) and the SNR G337.0-0.1. Second, its spectrum is very similar to those found for the other SGR X-ray counterparts (Hurley et al 1999a).…”

“…Using BATSE Earth occultation constraints, we limited the allowable range along the annulus to 1.5 • (Woods et al 1998; Figure 4). A more detailed account of the localization of this SGR is reported in Hurley et al (1999d) and Smith et al (1999). In view of the association of SGRs with young SNRs, we searched the Whiteoak & Green (1996) catalogue of SNRs near the refined error box.…”

“…A statistical study of bursts from SGR 1806-20 has shown that no correlation exists between the energy released in a burst and the time until the next burst (Laros et al 1987). Also, it was found that both burst peak fluxes and time intervals between bursts resemble truncated log-normal and log-normal distributions, respectively (Laros et al 1987, Hurley et al 1994. A differential energy distribution of events follows a Gutenberg-Richter power law (-1.66 exponent; Gutenberg & Richter 1956) with a maximum energy E max ≈ 5 × 10 41 ergs (Cheng et al 1995).…”

Statistical Properties of SGR 1900+14 Bursts

“…-2similar distribution was obtained empirically by Gutenberg and Richter (1956a;1965) for the distribution of EQ energies, with power law index γ EQ =1.6 ± 0.2; and in computer simulations of fractures in a stressed, elastic medium (Katz 1986). The distribution of time intervals between successive SGR 1806-20 events is well described by a log-normal distribution analogous to the waiting times distribution of microglitches seen in the Vela pulsar (see Hurley et al 1994). Cheng et al (1996) also showed that cumulative waiting time distributions of SGR 1806-20 and EQ events are similar.…”

“…The distribution of waiting times between successive SGR 1900+14 bursts is characterized by a log-normal function, similar to that of SGR 1806-20 (Hurley et al 1994). Waiting times between SGR 1900+14 bursts are on average shorter than those of SGR 1806-20 since all SGR 1900+14 bursts occurred during the most active period of the source.…”