deletions | additions       diff --git a/untitled.tex b/untitled.tex  index 284729a..88a8682 100644  --- a/untitled.tex  +++ b/untitled.tex 
...
Neutron stars typically have magnetic fields of $\sim 10^{12} \rm \ G$. However, if a neutron star's rotation period is comparable to the convective overturn time, magnetic fields can be amplified by helical motion in a mean field dynamo. These highly magnetized neutron stars, magnetars, are born with short periods of $\sim 1 \ \rm ms$, which allow them to support an efficient $\alpha-\Omega$ dynamo, resulting in large magnetic dipole fields of $10^{14}-10^{15} \rm \ G$ \cite{Duncan_1992}.  %They were first proposed by \cite{Duncan_1992} to explain Soft Gamma Repeaters (SGRs). A magnetar of mass $1.4 M_{\odot}$, $R = 10 \ \rm km$, and $P = 1 \ \rm ms$ has a rotational energy of   \begin{equation}   E_{\rm rot} = I \omega^2 /2 = \dfrac{1}{5}MR^2 \left(\dfrac{2\pi}{P}\right)^2 \simeq 4 \times 10^{51} \ \rm erg 
...
\label{eqn:timescale}  \tau \simeq 0.6 B_{15}^{-2} (P/1 \ {\rm ms})^2 \ \rm hr  \end{equation} \cite{Duncan_1992}. This amount of energy is similar to that released in $\gamma$-ray bursts and superluminous supernovae (SLSNe), thus making magnetar an attractive candidate for the central engine that power these explosions.   %In In  the past two decades, a connection has been made between supernovae and at least some subclass of long-duration $\gamma$-ray bursts (GRBs), (LGRBs),  supporting the case that they are powered by the same mechanism. \  
...
\   Recent works have shown that while magnetars formed via AIC might be responsible for some GRBs, magnetars formed in the core collapse of massive stars like the one proposed by \citet{Duncan_1992} are probably more prevalent \cite{Metzger_2011}. prevalent.  The modern view of theGRB explosion  mechanism for core-collapse GRB  as laid out by \citet{Metzger_2011} is as following. Shortly after the core bounce, a non-relativistic wind heated by neutrino blows through the cavity carved out by the supernova (SN) shock into a \textit{bipolar jet}. The relativistic jet from the newly formed magnetar follows, and emerge emerges  as a  GRB prompt emission. After $30-100 \ \rm s$, the maximum Lorantz factor increases to $\sigma_{0} \gg 1$ rendering magnetic dissipation and jet acceleration ineffective. This ended the prompt GRB within the observed timescale of $\sim 20 \ \rm s$. After the prompt emission ended, the spin-down of the central magnetar continues to power the GRB into its X-ray plateau phase with a correlation between the plateau luminosity and duration (LT correlation). The observed correlation is given by $ \log L_{\rm X} = a + b \log T_a$ where $L_{\rm X}$ is the plateau luminosity and $T_a$ is the rest frame plateau end time. The magnetar model predicts this correlation with $b = 1$ and $ a = \log (10^{52} I^{-1}_{45} P_{0,-3}^{-2})$ which matches observations \cite{Rowlinson_2014}.   \citet{Metzger_2011} also showed that the magnetar model is able to produce the evolution of $\sigma_{0}$ that matches observations with no need of fine-tuning, unlike models in which GRBs are powered by rapidly accreting BHs \footnote{A lot can be said about the rivalry between these two competing models for the central engine of GRBs. \citet{Metzger_2011} and references therein provide some introduction to both.}.  \   The requirement of collimated relativistic flows leading to bi-polar jets in GRBs limit the central engines to only magnetars having periods of $1 \ \rm ms$ and magnetic fields of $\sim 10^{15} \ \rm G$. However, the less extreme population of magnetars can still power quite fantastic cosmic fireworks. \citet{Duncan_1992} noted that the spin down timescale given in \ref{eqn:timescale} is shorter than the SN shock breakout time, making SNe that create magnetars brighter than usual. These subclasses of brighter Type II SNe are indeed observed (e.g. \citealp{Richardson_2002}). Recently, a number of rare superluminous SNe (SLSNe) are discovered, emitted the total radiation energy of $\sim 10^{51} \ \rm erg$ (e.g. SN\,2005ap \cite{Quimby_2007}; SN\,2008es \cite{Miller_2008}). SN\,2005ap, \citealp{Quimby_2007}; SN\,2008es, \citealp{Miller_2008}). The radioactive decay of $\rm ^{56}Ni$ alone cannot output this amount of energy.  \citet{Kasen_2010} showed that magnetars with $B \sim 10^{14} \ \rm G$ and initial period $P_i \sim 2-20 \ \rm ms$ can release rotational energy via magnetic dipole radiation on the spin-down timescale comparable to the effective diffusion time of the ejecta. They showed that these magnetars can enhance the peak luminosity to what given by Equation (4) in \citet{Kasen_2010}, which is exceeding \begin{equation}  L_{\rm peak} \sim E_{\rm p} t_{\rm p}/t_{\rm d}^2 \sim 5 \times 10^{43} B_{14}^{-2} \kappa_{\rm es}^{-1} M_{5}^{-3/2}E_{51}^{1/2} \ \rm erg s^{-1}   \end{equation}  This exceeds  $10^{43} \rm \ erg/s $, making these events  brighter than normal core-collapse Type II-P SNe. Figure 4 and 5 in \citet{Kasen_2010} show the dependence of peak luminosity and time to peak on $B$ and $P_i$ for ejecta mass of $5$ and $20 \ M_{\odot}$ respectively. If magnetars with different magnetic field strengths and birth periods are responsible for both LGRBs and SLSNe, at least some LGRBs should be accompanied by SNe. These associations between GRBs and SNe are indeed observed, with the first pair of events being SN\,1998bw and GRB 980425 \cite{Kulkarni_1998}. A number of other events have since been observed (see e.g. \citealp{Woosley_2006} for a review). \citet{Metzger_2015} showed that magnetars in the transition region in the $B-P_i$ plane can explain GRB 111209 and SN\,2011kl pair and the SLSN ASASSN-15lh, the most luminous SN ever observed. This association between GRBs and SNe is another evidence that these two classes of events share magnetar as their central engine. As modern transients surveys in all wavelengths continue to discover various types of peculiar events, we will have more data to constrain theoretical models, leading to a better understanding of this messy ending chapter of the stellar evolution.