Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T15:00:06.536Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The IceCube neutrino observatory: latest results on the search for point sources and status of IceCube construction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2006

Thierry P.A. Castermans
Affiliation:
Université de Mons-Hainaut, B-7000 Mons, Belgium email: Thierry.Castermans@umh.ac.be
Albrecht Karle
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI53706, USA email: jauffenb@uni-wuppertal.de
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The AMANDA neutrino telescope, prototype instrument of the IceCube neutrino observatory at South Pole, has collected data since 2000 in its final configuration. A period of 1001 days of livetime between 2000 and 2004 has been analysed in order to find evidence of a neutrino signal coming from point-like sources such as microquasars, active galactic nuclei, supernovae remnants or gamma ray bursts. A sensitivity to fluxes of νμ + νμ + ντ + ντ of dΦ/dE =1.0 · 10−10 (E/TeV)−2 · TeV−1 cm−2 s−1 was reached in the energy range between 1.6 TeV and 1.6 PeV. No significant excess over the background has been found so far. Flux upper limits infered from this study can constrain certain neutrino emission models of X-ray binaries. IceCube will have a substantially higher sensitivity. Currently at 10% of its final extension, it will comprise 4800 optical sensors deployed along 80 strings by early 2011, instrumenting one cubic kilometre volume of ice and 1 km2 at the surface.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2007

References

Achterberg, A., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2006a, Astroparticle Phys., 26, 129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Achterberg, A., Ackermann, M., Adams, J., et al. 2006b, Astroparticle Phys., 26, 282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackermann, M. 2006, Ph.D. thesis, Humboldt-Universität, BerlinGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, J., Bai, X., Bay, R., et al. 2004a, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. in Phys. Res. A, 524, 169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, J., Bahcall, J. N., Bai, X., et al. 2004b, Astroparticle Phys., 20, 507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andres, E., Askebjer, P., Barwick, S. W., et al. 2000, Astroparticle Phys., 13, 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bednarek, W. 2005, ApJ, 631, 466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Distefano, C., Guetta, D., Waxman, E., & Levinson, A. 2002, ApJ, 575, 378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neronov, A., & Semikoz, D. 2002, Phys. Rev. D, 66 (123003)Google Scholar
Neronov, A., Semikoz, D., Aharonian, F., & Kalashev, O. 2002, Phys. Rev. Lett., 89, 051101CrossRefGoogle Scholar