Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Teraelectronvolt emission from the γ-ray burst GRB 190114C

Abstract

Long-duration γ-ray bursts (GRBs) are the most luminous sources of electromagnetic radiation known in the Universe. They arise from outflows of plasma with velocities near the speed of light that are ejected by newly formed neutron stars or black holes (of stellar mass) at cosmological distances1,2. Prompt flashes of megaelectronvolt-energy γ-rays are followed by a longer-lasting afterglow emission in a wide range of energies (from radio waves to gigaelectronvolt γ-rays), which originates from synchrotron radiation generated by energetic electrons in the accompanying shock waves3,4. Although emission of γ-rays at even higher (teraelectronvolt) energies by other radiation mechanisms has been theoretically predicted5,6,7,8, it has not been previously detected7,8. Here we report observations of teraelectronvolt emission from the γ-ray burst GRB 190114C. γ-rays were observed in the energy range 0.2–1 teraelectronvolt from about one minute after the burst (at more than 50 standard deviations in the first 20 minutes), revealing a distinct emission component of the afterglow with power comparable to that of the synchrotron component. The observed similarity in the radiated power and temporal behaviour of the teraelectronvolt and X-ray bands points to processes such as inverse Compton upscattering as the mechanism of the teraelectronvolt emission9,10,11. By contrast, processes such as synchrotron emission by ultrahigh-energy protons10,12,13 are not favoured because of their low radiative efficiency. These results are anticipated to be a step towards a deeper understanding of the physics of GRBs and relativistic shock waves.

Access options

from\$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Data availability

Raw data were generated at the MAGIC telescopes large-scale facility. Derived data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon request. Source data for Figs. 13 are provided with the paper.

Code availability

Proprietary data reconstruction codes were generated at the MAGIC telescope large-scale facility. Information supporting the findings of this study is available from the corresponding authors upon request.

References

1. 1.

Gehrels, N. & Mészáros, P. Gamma-ray bursts. Science 337, 932–936 (2012).

2. 2.

Kumar, P. & Zhang, B. The physics of gamma-ray bursts & relativistic jets. Phys. Rep. 561, 1–109 (2015).

3. 3.

Mészáros, P. Theories of gamma-ray bursts. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 40, 137–169 (2002).

4. 4.

Piran, T. The physics of gamma-ray bursts. Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 1143–1210 (2005).

5. 5.

Mészáros, P., Razzaque, S. & Zhang, B. GeV–TeV emission from γ-ray bursts. New Astron. Rev. 48, 445–451 (2004).

6. 6.

Fan, Y.-Z. & Piran, T. High-energy γ-ray emission from gamma-ray bursts – before GLAST. Front. Phys. China 3, 306–330 (2008).

7. 7.

Inoue, S. et al. Gamma-ray burst science in the era of the Cherenkov Telescope Array. Astropart. Phys. 43, 252–275 (2013).

8. 8.

Nava, L. High-energy emission from gamma-ray bursts. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 27, 1842003 (2018).

9. 9.

Mészáros, P., Rees, M. J. & Papathanassiou, H. Spectral properties of blast-wave models of gamma-ray burst sources. Astrophys. J. 432, 181–193 (1994).

10. 10.

Zhang, B. & Mészáros, P. High-energy spectral components in gamma-ray burst afterglows. Astrophys. J. 559, 110–122 (2001).

11. 11.

Beniamini, P., Nava, L., Duran, R. B. & Piran, T. Energies of GRB blast waves and prompt efficiencies as implied by modelling of X-ray and GeV afterglows. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 454, 1073–1085 (2015).

12. 12.

Vietri, M. GeV photons from ultrahigh energy cosmic rays accelerated in gamma-ray bursts. Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 4328–4331 (1997).

13. 13.

Böttcher, M. & Dermer, C. D. High-energy gamma rays from ultra-high-energy cosmic-ray protons in gamma-ray bursts. Astrophys. J. Lett. 499, 131–134 (1998).

14. 14.

Gropp, J. D. GRB 190114C: Swift detection of a very bright burst with a bright optical counterpart. GCN Circulars 23688 https://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/23688.gcn3 (2019).

15. 15.

Hamburg, R. GRB 190114C: Fermi GBM detection. GCN Circulars 23707 https://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/23707.gcn3 (2019).

16. 16.

Krimm, H. A. et al. GRB 190114C: Swift-BAT refined analysis. GCN Circulars 23724 https://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/23724.gcn3 (2019).

17. 17.

MAGIC Collaboration et al. Observation of inverse Compton emission from a long γ-ray burst. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1754-6 (2019).

18. 18.

Selsing, J. GRB 190114C: NOT optical counterpart and redshift. GCN Circulars 23695 https://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/23695.gcn3 (2019).

19. 19.

Castro-Tirado, A. GRB 190114C: refined redshift by the 10.4m GTC. GCN Circulars 23708 https://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/23708.gcn3 (2019).

20. 20.

Aleksić, J. et al. The major upgrade of the MAGIC telescopes, part I: the hardware improvements and the commissioning of the system. Astropart. Phys. 72, 61–75 (2016).

21. 21.

Aleksić, J. et al. The major upgrade of the MAGIC telescopes, part II: a performance study using observations of the Crab Nebula. Astropart. Phys. 72, 76–94 (2016).

22. 22.

Mirzoyan, R. First time detection of a GRB at sub-TeV energies; MAGIC detects the GRB 190114C. The Astronomer’s Telegram 12390 http://www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=12390 (2019).

23. 23.

Mirzoyan, R. et al. MAGIC detects the GRB 190114C in the TeV energy domain. GCN Circulars 23701 https://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/23701.gcn3 (2019).

24. 24.

Dwek, E. & Krennrich, F. The extragalactic background light and the gamma-ray opacity of the universe. Astropart. Phys. 43, 112–133 (2013).

25. 25.

Domínguez, A. et al. Extragalactic background light inferred from AEGIS galaxy-SED-type fractions. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 410, 2556–2578 (2011).

26. 26.

Ravasio, M. E. et al. GRB 190114C: from prompt to afterglow? Astron. Astrophys. 626, A12 (2019).

27. 27.

Wang, X.-Y., Liu, R.-Y., Zhang, H.-M., Xi, S.-Q. & Zhang, B. Synchrotron self-Compton emission from afterglow shocks as the origin of the sub-TeV emission in GRB 180720B and GRB 190114C. Astrophys. J. (in the press).

28. 28.

Ackermann, M. et al. The first Fermi-LAT gamma-ray burst catalog. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 209, 11 (2013).

29. 29.

Piran, T. & Nakar, E. On the external shock synchrotron model for gamma-ray bursts’ GeV emission. Astrophys. J. Lett. 718, 63–67 (2010).

30. 30.

Ackermann, M. et al. Fermi-LAT observations of the gamma-ray burst GRB 130427A. Science 343, 42–47 (2014).

31. 31.

Kouveliotou, C. et al. NuSTAR observations of GRB 130427A establish a single component synchrotron afterglow origin for the late optical to multi-GeV emission. Astrophys. J. Lett. 779, L1 (2013).

32. 32.

Amati, L. et al. Intrinsic spectra and energetics of BeppoSAX gamma-ray bursts with known redshifts. Astron. Astrophys. 390, 81–89 (2002).

33. 33.

Yonetoku, D. et al. Gamma-ray burst formation rate inferred from the spectral peak energy-peak luminosity relation. Astrophys. J. 609, 935–951 (2004).

34. 34.

Nava, L. et al. A complete sample of bright Swift long gamma-ray bursts: testing the spectral-energy correlations. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 421, 1256–1264 (2012).

35. 35.

Vandenbroucke, J. GRB 190114C: Search for high-energy neutrinos with IceCube. The Astronomer’s Telegram 12395 http://www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=12395 (2019).

36. 36.

Barthelmy, S. GCN capabilities and status, and the incorporation of LIGO/Virgo. In APS Meeting Abstracts, M13.004 (APS, 2016).

37. 37.

Carosi, A. et al. Recent follow-up observations of GRBs in the very high energy band with the MAGIC Telescopes. In 34th International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC2015) 34 (eds Borisov, A. S. et al.) 809 (POS, 2015).

38. 38.

MAGIC GRB group. Search for high energy emission from GRBs with MAGIC. Proc. Int. Astron. Union 12, 70–73 (2016).

39. 39.

Fomin, V. et al. New methods of atmospheric Cherenkov imaging for gamma-ray astronomy. I. The false source method. Astropart. Phys. 2, 137–150 (1994).

40. 40.

Ahnen, M. L. et al. Performance of the MAGIC telescopes under moonlight. Astropart. Phys. 94, 29–41 (2017).

41. 41.

Fruck, C. et al. A novel LIDAR-based atmospheric calibration method for improving the data analysis of MAGIC. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.3591 (2014).

42. 42.

Li, T. P. & Ma, Y. Q. Analysis methods for results in gamma-ray astronomy. Astrophys. J. 272, 317–324 (1983).

43. 43.

Schmelling, M. The method of reduced cross-entropy. A general approach to unfold probability distributions. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 340, 400–412 (1994).

44. 44.

Franceschini, A., Rodighiero, G. & Vaccari, M. Extragalactic optical-infrared background radiation, its time evolution and the cosmic photon-photon opacity. Astron. Astrophys. 487, 837–852 (2008).

45. 45.

Finke, J. D., Razzaque, S. & Dermer, C. D. Modeling the extragalactic background light from stars and dust. Astrophys. J. 712, 238–249 (2010).

46. 46.

Gilmore, R. C., Somerville, R. S., Primack, J. R. & Domínguez, A. Semi-analytic modelling of the extragalactic background light and consequences for extragalactic gamma-ray spectra. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 422, 3189–3207 (2012).

47. 47.

Beardmore, A. The Swift-XRT WT mode spectrum of GRB190114C. GCN Circulars 23736 https://gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/23736.gcn3 (2019).

48. 48.

Nava, L., Sironi, L., Ghisellini, G., Celotti, A. & Ghirlanda, G. Afterglow emission in gamma-ray bursts – I. Pair-enriched ambient medium and radiative blast waves. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 433, 2107–2121 (2013).

49. 49.

Totani, T. Very strong TeV emission as gamma-ray burst afterglows. Astrophys. J. Lett. 502, 13–16 (1998).

50. 50.

Razzaque, S. A leptonic–hadronic model for the afterglow of gamma-ray burst 090510. Astrophys. J. Lett. 724, 109–112 (2010).

51. 51.

Galli, A. & Piro, L. Prospects for detection of very high-energy emission from GRB in the context of the external shock model. Astron. Astrophys. 489, 1073–1077 (2008).

52. 52.

Connaughton, V. & VERITAS Collaboration. Gamma-ray bursts at VERITAS energies. Astropart. Phys. 11, 255–257 (1999).

53. 53.

Atkins, R. et al. Evidence for TEV Emission from GRB 970417A. Astrophys. J. Lett. 533, 119–122 (2000).

54. 54.

Atkins, R. et al. Limits on very high energy emission from gamma-ray bursts with the milagro observatory. Astrophys. J. Lett. 604, 25–28 (2004).

55. 55.

Abdo, A. A. et al. Milagro constraints on very high energy emission from short-duration gamma-ray bursts. Astrophys. J. 666, 361–367 (2007).

56. 56.

Horan, D. et al. Very high energy observations of gamma-ray burst locations with the Whipple telescope. Astrophys. J. 655, 396–405 (2007).

57. 57.

Aharonian, F. et al. HESS observations of the prompt and afterglow phases of GRB 060602B. Astrophys. J. 690, 1068–1073 (2009).

58. 58.

Aharonian, F. et al. HESS observations of γ-ray bursts in 2003–2007. Astron. Astrophys. 495, 505–512 (2009).

59. 59.

Acciari, V. A. et al. VERITAS observations of gamma-ray bursts detected by Swift. Astrophys. J. 743, 62 (2011).

60. 60.

H.E.S.S. Collaboration. Search for TeV gamma-ray emission from GRB 100621A, an extremely bright GRB in X-rays, with H.E.S.S. Astron. Astrophys. 565, A16 (2014).

61. 61.

Alfaro, R. et al. Search for very-high-energy emission from gamma-ray bursts using the first 18 months of data from the HAWC gamma-ray observatory. Astrophys. J. 843, 88 (2017).

62. 62.

Hoischen, C. et al. GRB Observations with H.E.S.S. II. In International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC2017) (2017); https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.01088.

63. 63.

Abeysekara, A. U. et al. A strong limit on the very-high-energy emission from GRB 150323A. Astrophys. J. 857, 33 (2018).

64. 64.

Albert, J. et al. MAGIC upper limits on the very high energy emission from gamma-ray bursts. Astrophys. J. 667, 358–366 (2007).

65. 65.

Aleksić, J. et al. MAGIC observation of the GRB 080430 afterglow. Astron. Astrophys. 517, A5 (2010).

66. 66.

Aleksić, J. et al. MAGIC upper limits on the GRB 090102 afterglow. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 437, 3103–3111 (2014).

67. 67.

Ghirlanda, G. et al. Short gamma-ray bursts at the dawn of the gravitational wave era. Astron. Astrophys. 594, A84 (2016).

68. 68.

Perley, D. A. et al. The Swift gamma-ray burst host galaxy legacy survey. I. Sample selection and redshift distribution. Astrophys. J. 817, 7 (2016).

69. 69.

Lennarz, D. et al. Searching for TeV emission from GRBs: the status of the H.E.S.S. GRB programme. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1307.6897 (2013).

70. 70.

Smith, A. J. et al. Results from the Milagrito experiment. AIP Conf. Proc. 515, 441–447 (2000).

71. 71.

Aune, T. A search for GeV–TeV emission from GRBs using the Milagro detector. AIP Conf. Proc. 1133, 385–387 (2009).

72. 72.

Saz Parkinson, P. M. A search for GeV–TeV emission from gamma-ray bursts using the Milagro detector. AIP Conf. Proc. 1112, 181–186 (2009).

73. 73.

Evans, P. A. et al. The Swift Burst Analyser. I. BAT and XRT spectral and flux evolution of gamma-ray bursts. Astron. Astrophys. 519, A102 (2010).

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to G. Sinnis for remarks that helped us improve the format and content of this manuscript. We dedicate this paper to the memory of E. Lorenz. With his innovative spirit, infinite enthusiasm and vast knowledge of experimental methods, techniques and materials, he played a key role in optimizing the design of MAGIC, specifically for observations of GRBs. We thank the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias for the excellent working conditions at the Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos in La Palma. We acknowledge financial support by the German BMBF and MPG, the Italian INFN and INAF, the Swiss National Fund (SNF), the ERDF under the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (FPA2017-87859-P, FPA2017-85668-P,FPA2017-82729-C6-2-R, FPA2017-82729-C6-6-R, FPA2017-82729-C6-5-R, AYA2015-71042-P,AYA2016-76012-C3-1-P,ESP2017-87055-C2-2-P,FPA2017-90566-REDC), the Indian Department of Atomic Energy, the Japanese JSPS and MEXT, the Bulgarian Ministry of Education and Science, National RI Roadmap Project DO1-153/28.08.2018, and the Academy of Finland for grant number 320045. This work was also supported by the Spanish Centro de Excelencia ‘Severo Ochoa’ SEV-2016-0588 and SEV-2015-0548 and Unidad de Excelencia ‘María de Maeztu’ MDM-2014-0369, by the Croatian Science Foundation (HrZZ) Project IP-2016-06-9782 and the University of Rijeka Project 13.12.1.3.02, by the DFG Collaborative Research Centers SFB823/C4 and SFB876/C3, the Polish National Research Centre grant UMO-2016/22/M/ST9/00382, and by the Brazilian MCTIC, CNPq and FAPERJ. S.I. is supported by JSPS KAKENHI grant number JP17K05460, MEXT, Japan, the RIKEN iTHEMS programme and the joint research programme of ICRR, University of Tokyo. L. Nava acknowledges funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement number 664931. K. Noda is supported by JSPS KAKENHI grant number JP19K21043, MEXT, Japan. A. Berti acknowledges support from the Physics Department of the University of Torino (through funding from the Department of Excellence) and from the Torino division of the Italian INFN. E. Moretti acknowledges funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement number 665919.

Author information

Contributions

The MAGIC telescope system was designed and constructed by the MAGIC Collaboration. The operation, data processing, calibration, Monte Carlo simulations of the detector and of theoretical models, and data analyses were performed by the members of the MAGIC Collaboration, who also discussed and approved the scientific results. All MAGIC collaborators contributed to the editing and comments to the final version of the manuscript. S.I. and L. Nava coordinated the interpretation of the data and, together with S. Covino, wrote the corresponding sections and contributed to the structuring and editing of the rest of the paper. K. Noda and A. Berti coordinated the analysis of the MAGIC data; together with E. Moretti they contributed to the analysis and the writing of the relevant sections. I.V. performed the Fermi-LAT analysis and, together with D. Miceli contributed to the calculation of limits, excesses and the curves in Fig. 3. R.M. contributed to coordinating, structuring and editing this paper.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Peer review information Nature thanks Gus Sinnis and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 Light curves in the teraelectronvolt and kiloelectronvolt bands for GRB 190114C.

Photon flux light curve above 0.3 TeV measured by MAGIC (red; from T0 + 62 s to T0 + 210 s), compared with that between 15 keV and 50 keV measured by Swift-BAT73 (grey; from T0 to T0 + 210 s) and the photon flux above 0.3 TeV of the Crab Nebula (blue dashed line). The errors on the MAGIC photon fluxes correspond to one standard deviation. Vertical lines indicate the times when the alert was received (T0 + 22 s) by MAGIC, when the tracking of the GRB by the telescopes started (T0 + 50 s), when the data acquisition started (T0 + 57 s), and when the data acquisition system (DAQ) became stable (T0 + 62 s; dotted line).

Extended Data Fig. 2 Significance of the γ-ray signal between T0 + 62 s and T0 + 1,227 s for GRB 190114C.

Distribution of the squared angular distance, θ2, for the MAGIC data (points) and background events (grey shaded area). θ2 is defined as the squared angular distance between the nominal position of the source and the reconstructed arrival direction of the events. The dashed vertical line represents the value of the cut on θ2. This defines the signal region, where the number of events coming from the source (Non) and from the background (Noff) are computed. The errors for ‘on’ events are derived from Poissonian statistics. From Non and Noff, the number of excess events (Nex) is computed. The significance is calculated using the Li & Ma method42.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

MAGIC Collaboration., Acciari, V.A., Ansoldi, S. et al. Teraelectronvolt emission from the γ-ray burst GRB 190114C. Nature 575, 455–458 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1750-x

• Accepted:

• Published:

• Issue Date:

• Testing fundamental physics with astrophysical transients

• Jun-Jie Wei
•  & Xue-Feng Wu

Frontiers of Physics (2021)

• The Southern Wide‐Field Gamma‐ray Observatory

• Ulisses Barres de Almeida

Astronomische Nachrichten (2021)

• Electromagnetic counterparts of compact binary mergers

• Stefano Ascenzi
• , Gor Oganesyan
• , Marica Branchesi
•  & Riccardo Ciolfi

Journal of Plasma Physics (2021)

• Looking for the possible gluon condensation signature in sub-TeV gamma-ray spectra: from active galactic nuclei to gamma ray bursts

• Wei Zhu
• , Zechun Zheng
• , Peng Liu
• , Lihong Wan
• , Jianhong Ruan
•  & Fan Wang

Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics (2021)

• The H.E.S.S. gravitational wave rapid follow-up program

• Halim Ashkar
• , Francois Brun
• , Matthias Füßling
• , Clemens Hoischen
• , Stefan Ohm
• , Heike Prokoph
• , Patrick Reichherzer
• , Fabian Schüssler
•  & Monica Seglar-Arroyo

Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics (2021)