JWST Spectroscopy of GRB 250702B: An Extremely Rare and Exceptionally Energetic Burst in a Dusty, Massive Galaxy at z = 1.036
Résumé fourni par la source
Abstract We present follow-up observations of the day-long, repeating gamma-ray burst (GRB) GRB 250702B with the Near Infrared Spectrograph on board the James Webb Space Telescope. Through the identification of narrow hydrogen emission lines at a consistent redshift of z = 1.036 ± 0.004, we calibrate the distance scale, and therefore the energetics, of this unique extragalactic transient. At this distance, the resulting γ -ray energy release is at least E γ ,iso = 2.2 × 10 54 erg. We find no evidence for ongoing transient emission at the GRB position and exclude any accompanying supernova (SN) with a luminosity comparable to the Type Ic broad-line SN 2023lcr, though we are unable to rule out a fainter SN counterpart owing to high extinction. The inferred rate of such events, assuming at most one in the lifetime of Fermi, suggests that such bursts are very rare, with volumetric rates over 1000 times lower than normal high-luminosity long GRBs and >10 5 times lower than core-collapse SNe, when corrected for beaming. Furthermore, we find that the host galaxy is unique among GRB host galaxies and extremely rare in the general galaxy population, being extremely large and dusty and with high stellar mass. The identification of such an exotic GRB in such an unusual galaxy raises the possibility that the environment was important in the progenitor channel creating GRB 250702B.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé, mais le titre doit être comparé manuellement.
- Titre Crossref
- JWST Spectroscopy of GRB 250702B: An Extremely Rare and Exceptionally Energetic Burst in a Dusty, Massive Galaxy at <i>z</i> = 1.036
- Date Crossref
- 12/01/2026
- Éditeur
- American Astronomical Society
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.