2022
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2202.05705
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: We present 849 new bursts from FRB 20121102A detected with the 305-m Arecibo Telescope. Observations were conducted as part of our regular campaign to monitor the activity and evolution of burst properties. The 10 reported observations were carried out between 1150 and 1730 MHz and fall in the active period around November 2018. All bursts were dedispersed at the same dispersion measure and are consistent with a single value of (562.4 ± 0.1) pc cm −3 . The burst rate varies between 0 bursts and 218 ± 16 bursts… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 77 publications
3
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The slope of the intrinsic luminosity function, 𝛾, is found to be −0.95 +0.18 −0.15 -consistent with the observed high-energy slope of the luminosity functions of known repeating FRBs, e.g. 𝛾 = −0.85±0.3 (Li et al 2021), −0.88 > 𝛾 > −1.29 (Jahns et al 2022), and 𝛾 = −1.04 ± 0.02 (Hewitt et al 2022) for FRB 20121102A. This is consistent with, though not sufficient proof of, apparently once-off FRBs being simply the high-energy tails of intrinsically repeating objects.…”
Section: Constraints On Other Parameterssupporting
confidence: 83%
“…The slope of the intrinsic luminosity function, 𝛾, is found to be −0.95 +0.18 −0.15 -consistent with the observed high-energy slope of the luminosity functions of known repeating FRBs, e.g. 𝛾 = −0.85±0.3 (Li et al 2021), −0.88 > 𝛾 > −1.29 (Jahns et al 2022), and 𝛾 = −1.04 ± 0.02 (Hewitt et al 2022) for FRB 20121102A. This is consistent with, though not sufficient proof of, apparently once-off FRBs being simply the high-energy tails of intrinsically repeating objects.…”
Section: Constraints On Other Parameterssupporting
confidence: 83%
“…One is around several milliseconds and the other is around tens of seconds [78]. Besides, the second peak was found to be consistent with Poisson statistics and this was confirmed by Arecibo observation soon later [65]. It is worth further discussion whether two types of burst process exist.…”
Section: Energy Pulse Width and Waiting Time Distributionsupporting
confidence: 67%
“…Recently, more and more high-burst-rate repeating FRBs have been detected, in which the most outstanding one is FRB 121102 with the average waiting time of about 100 s and a peak burst rate more than 122 h −1 (Li et al 2021a;Zhang et al 2021;Jahns et al 2022). In this work, we propose that the plate collision model can be used to explain repeating FRBs with high burst rates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Notably, the first repeater, FRB 121102, is characterised by a possible ∼ 160 days periodic activity (Rajwade et al 2020;Cruces et al 2021), and the high burst rate with a peak burst rate of about 122 h −1 or even higher (Li et al 2021a;Jahns et al 2022). Recently, there is another active FRB, FRB 20201124A, also having a high burst rate of about 45.8 h −1 (e.g., Nimmo et al 2022;Xu et al 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%