Abstract

The blazar PKS 1510-089 has shown intense activity at γ -rays in the recent years. In this work, we discussed the results of our 7 mm radio continuum and optical polarimetric monitoring between 2009 and 2013. In 2009, we detected a large rotation of the optical polarization angle that we attributed to the ejection of new polarized components. In 2011, after the occurrence of several γ -rays flares, the radio emission started to increase, reaching values never observed before. We interpreted this increase as the consequence of the superposition of several new components ejected during the γ -rays flares. A delay was measured between the maximum in the radio emission and the γ -ray flares, which favors models involving expanding components like the shock-in-jet models. Finally, we tried to understand the polarization angle variability behavior filling the gaps in our observations with published results of other polarimetric campaigns, and using the criterion of minimum variation in the polarization angle between successive observations to solve the 180° multiplicity.

Highlights

  • The blazar PKS1510-089 revealed intense activity at γ-rays after 2008 [1,2,3], when theFermi/LAT observatory started its operations monitoring the whole sky between 30 MeV and300 GeV [4]

  • We discuss some details of our radio and optical polarimetric monitoring program of PKS1510-089, which resulted in several publications [7,12,13]

  • We explained the rotation of polarization angle (PA) in PKS1510-089 as due to the ejection of a new jet component

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The blazar PKS1510-089 revealed intense activity at γ-rays after 2008 [1,2,3], when theFermi/LAT observatory started its operations monitoring the whole sky between 30 MeV and300 GeV [4]. We discuss some details of our radio and optical polarimetric monitoring program of PKS1510-089, which resulted in several publications [7,12,13]. We compared our polarimetric data with others available in the literature in a attempt to minimize the gaps between the observations and in order to obtain a better understanding of the emission variability. This is specially important because of the 180o multiplicity in the PA value, which is difficult to assess when the gaps are longer than the typical variability timescale

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call