Astronomy & Astrophysics

All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17.3cm,clip]{3218fig1.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 1: Hydrodynamic evolution of the shell collision for models S10- F10, S10- F14, S10- F07, and S10- F05. The solid lines give the rest mass density in units of $\rho _{\rm ext}$ . The dashed lines show the Lorentz factor of the fluid which is moving to the right. The origin of the z-axis corresponds to a distance of 0 cm ( top row), 2.65 $\times$ 10¹⁶ cm ( middle row), and 6.61 $\times$ 10¹⁶ cm ( bottom row), respectively. Times given in the leftmost panels of each row are measured in the laboratory frame.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17.3cm,clip]{3218fig2.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 2: Same as Fig. 1, but for models S14- F10, S07- F10 and S05- F10. Model S10- F10 is shown once again here to allow for an easier comparison.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3218fig3.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 3: Temporal evolution of the conversion efficiency defined by Eq. (3) for all models. T is the time measured in the source frame.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{3218fig4.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 4: Soft ( upper panel; observed photon energies between 0.1 and 1 keV) and hard ( lower panel; 2-10 keV) light curves for all of our seven models. A correlation between the total rest-mass of the shells and the peak photon counts is seen.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.35cm,clip]{3218fig5.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 5: Light curve ( upper panel) and the observer emissivity distribution in xy-coordinates ( lower panel) for a horn-shaped segment with parameters $\Gamma _{\rm b}=8$ , $K_{\rm b}=4$ , $\Gamma _{\rm f}=12$ , $K_{\rm f}=3$ , T₁=30 ks, T₂=100 ks, $T_{\rm e}=200$ ks, $\eta =0.1$ , and $\theta =1$ . The curves delimiting the horn-shaped region corresponding to the front and back edges of the merged shell are denoted by $y_{\rm f}(x)$ and $y_{\rm b}(x)$ , respectively. The edges of the segment corresponding to T₁ and T₂ are indicated by y₁(x) and y₂(x), respectively. The vertical lines correspond to the points $x_{\rm 1f}$ (solid), $x_{\rm 1b}$ (dotted), $x_{\rm 2f}$ (dashed), and $x_{\rm 2b}$ (dot-dashed), respectively. The numbers inside the horn-shaped area denote regions where the emissivity is integrated using different upper and lower limits.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.35cm,clip]{3218fig6.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 6: Two-phase flare model with $\Gamma _{\rm b}=5.5$ , $K_{\rm b}=1.1$ , $\Gamma _{\rm f}=6$ , $K_{\rm f}=4$ , $T_{\rm i}=50$ ks, $T_{\rm e}=100$ ks, $\theta _1=1$ , $\theta _2=1$ and $\eta _1=100$ , and $\eta _2=300$ . The upper panel shows the normalized light curve, and the lower one the emissivity. The vertical lines denote the coordinates x₁ (solid), x₂ (dotted), x₃ (dashed), and x₄ (dot-dashed line) which divide the emissivity distribution into four distinct regions labeled by numbers 1 to 4. The white thick horizontal line separates the two phases of the temporal evolution of the emissivity.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.35cm,clip]{3218fig7.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 7: Same as Fig. 6, but for $\eta _2=101$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.05cm,clip]{3218fig8.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 8: Soft light curve of model S05- F10 (dotted line), and the best fit of the normalized analytic model (full line).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3218fig9.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 9: The distribution of the emissivity in the observer frame in xy-coordinates in the soft photon band ( lower panel), and the corresponding soft light curve ( upper panel) for model S05- F10. The grey contours show the emissivity distribution on a linear scale. The full, dotted, dashed, and dot-dashed lines denote positions of the back edge of the slower shell, the front edge of the slower shell, the back edge of the faster shell, and the front edge of the faster shell, respectively. The full thick and dashed thick lines show the trajectories of the reverse and forward shock, respectively.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17.3cm,clip]{3218fig2.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 2: Same as Fig. 1, but for models S14- F10, S07- F10 and S05- F10. Model S10- F10 is shown once again here to allow for an easier comparison.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{3218fig3.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 3: Temporal evolution of the conversion efficiency defined by Eq. (3) for all models. T is the time measured in the source frame.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{3218fig4.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 4: Soft ( upper panel; observed photon energies between 0.1 and 1 keV) and hard ( lower panel; 2-10 keV) light curves for all of our seven models. A correlation between the total rest-mass of the shells and the peak photon counts is seen.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.35cm,clip]{3218fig7.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 7: Same as Fig. 6, but for $\eta _2=101$ .
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.05cm,clip]{3218fig8.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 8: Soft light curve of model S05- F10 (dotted line), and the best fit of the normalized analytic model (full line).
Open with DEXTER