> The authors found previously that GRBs are more frequent in low-mass galaxies such as the Small Magellanic Cloud with a small fraction of elements heavier than hydrogen and helium. This reduces the GRB hazard in the Milky Way by a factor of 10 compared with the overall rate.
Smaller galaxies are deadlier, got it. Is this because GRBs tend to emanate from the galactic centre? And larger galaxies, having more stars further from the centre, have more "habitable" space? Or does it have to do with the higher frequency of heavy elements in large galaxies? If the latter, how do heavy element concentrations cause or moderate GRB activity?
> There are at least two different types of progenitors (sources) of GRBs: one responsible for the long-duration, soft-spectrum bursts and one (or possibly more) responsible for short-duration, hard-spectrum bursts. The progenitors of long GRBs are believed to be massive, low-metallicity stars exploding due to the collapse of their cores. The progenitors of short GRBs are still unknown but mergers of neutron stars is probably the most popular model as of 2007.
I am not an expert, but my understanding is that long GRBs are expected as the result of the collapse of very massive stars. These stars are short lived (few million years) and very luminous. Metals (in astrophysics anything heavier than Helium) in the envelope of such a massive star would drive strong radiation-pressure driven mass losses (because of the increased opacity). Only very metal poor stars are able to remain sufficiently compact and massive at the onset of collapse to be able to trigger a GRB.
Smaller galaxies are deadlier, got it. Is this because GRBs tend to emanate from the galactic centre? And larger galaxies, having more stars further from the centre, have more "habitable" space? Or does it have to do with the higher frequency of heavy elements in large galaxies? If the latter, how do heavy element concentrations cause or moderate GRB activity?