Hardness Test of GRB 950830 as a Gravitationally Lensed Echo. (arXiv:2105.05764v1 [astro-ph.HE])
<a href="http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph/1/au:+Mukherjee_O/0/1/0/all/0/1">Oindabi Mukherjee</a>, <a href="http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph/1/au:+Nemiroff_R/0/1/0/all/0/1">Robert J. Nemiroff</a>
Cumulative hardness comparisons are a simple but statistically powerful test
for the presence of gravitational lensing in gamma-ray bursts (GRBs). Since
gravitational lensing does not change photon energies, all source images should
have the same spectra — and hence hardness. Applied to the recent claim that
the two pulses in GRB 950830 are lensed images of the same pulse, the measured
flux ratio between the two main pulses should be the same at all energies.
After summing up all the counts in both of GRB 950830’s two pulses in all four
BATSE energy bands, it was found that in energy channel 3, the second pulse
appears somewhat weak. In comparison with the other BATSE energy channels, the
difference was statistically significant at above 90%. This model-independent
test indicates that the case for GRB 950830 involving a gravitational lens may
be intriguing — but should not be considered proven.
Cumulative hardness comparisons are a simple but statistically powerful test
for the presence of gravitational lensing in gamma-ray bursts (GRBs). Since
gravitational lensing does not change photon energies, all source images should
have the same spectra — and hence hardness. Applied to the recent claim that
the two pulses in GRB 950830 are lensed images of the same pulse, the measured
flux ratio between the two main pulses should be the same at all energies.
After summing up all the counts in both of GRB 950830’s two pulses in all four
BATSE energy bands, it was found that in energy channel 3, the second pulse
appears somewhat weak. In comparison with the other BATSE energy channels, the
difference was statistically significant at above 90%. This model-independent
test indicates that the case for GRB 950830 involving a gravitational lens may
be intriguing — but should not be considered proven.
http://arxiv.org/icons/sfx.gif
