MOMENTUM INJECTION BY SUPERNOVAE IN THE INTERSTELLAR MEDIUM

By Chang-Goo Kim, E. Ostriker. 2014

218 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Supernova (SN) explosions deposit prodigious energy and momentum in their environments, with the former regulating multiphase thermal structure and the latter regulating turbulence and star formation rates in the interstellar medium (ISM). However, systematic studies quantifying the impact of SNe in realistic inhomogeneous ISM conditions have been lacking. Using three-dimensional hydrodynamic simulations, we investigate the dependence of radial momentum injection on both physical conditions (considering a range of mean density n0 = 0.1– 100 cm - 3 ?> ) and numerical parameters. Our inhomogeneous simulations adopt two-phase background states that result from thermal instability in atomic gas. Although the supernova remnant (SNR) morphology becomes highly complex for inhomogeneous backgrounds, the radial momentum injection is remarkably insensitive to environmental details. For our two-phase simulations, the final momentum produced by a single SN is given by 2.8 × 10 5 M ⊙ km s - 1 n 0 − 0.17 ?> . This is only 5% less than the momentum injection for a homogeneous environment with the same mean density, and only 30% greater than the momentum at the time of shell formation. The maximum mass in hot gas is also quite insensitive to environmental inhomogeneity. Strong magnetic fields alter the hot gas mass at very late times, but the momentum injection remains the same. Initial experiments with multiple spatially correlated SNe show a momentum per event nearly as large as single-SN cases. We also present a full numerical parameter study to assess convergence requirements. For convergence in the momentum and other quantities, we find that the numerical resolution Δ and the initial size of the SNR r init ?> must satisfy Δ , r init < r sf / 3 ?> , where the shell formation radius is given by r sf = 30 pc n 0 − 0.46 ?> for two-phase models (or 30% smaller for a homogeneous medium).

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0a65ed8f52ac7c35efa3bf659d5c4508523a6573

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Citations in the corpus

Modeling UV Radiation Feedback from Massive Stars. II. Dispersal of Star-forming Giant Molecular Clouds by Photoionization and Radiation Pressure (2018, background): “Even with this overestimation, our results show that the momentum injection to the large-scale ISM from both ionizing and non-ionizing radiation feedback is substantially smaller than that from supernovae feedback, p∗/m∗ ∼ 103 km s−1 (e.g., Kim & Ostriker 2015; Kim et al. 2017).”
Raining on black holes and massive galaxies: the top-down multiphase condensation model (2016, methodology): “For the foregoing reasons, we use cold = 10−2 0, where 0 = 2 × 10−26 erg s−1 is the reference value adopted in disc galaxies (e.g. Kim & Ostriker 2015).”
The SILCC project - III. Regulation of star formation and outflows by stellar winds and supernovae (2016, background): “The energy from SN explosions is injected right after the formation of each massive star (see also e.g. Kim et al. 2013; Kim & Ostriker 2015b), thus neglecting the time delay of the explosions corresponding to the stellar lifetime of single stars (typically 5–40 Myr).”
The SILCC (SImulating the LifeCycle of molecular Clouds) project – I. Chemical evolution of the supernova-driven ISM (2014, background): “Previous studies of stratified discs (e.g. Joung & Mac Low 2006; Gent et al. 2013b; Kim & Ostriker 2015), have not employed a chemical network to distinguish between molecular and atomic or ionized gas, and have therefore used temperature cuts to estimate the amount of molecular hydrogen that forms…”
Dark matter cores all the way down (2015, background): “…radiative losses are expected to be important for each discrete SN event, scales as rcool ≈ 30n−0.430 (Zgas/Z + 0.01)−0.18 pc for a supernova explosion with energy ESN = 10 51 erg and ambient gas density n0 (in units of cm −3; e.g. Cioffi et al. 1988; Thornton et al. 1998; Kim & Ostriker 2015).”
The SILCC (SImulating the LifeCycle of molecular Clouds) project - II. Dynamical evolution of the supernova-driven ISM and the launching of outflows (2015, background): “…McKee & Ostriker 1981; Ostriker & McKee 1988; Cioffi, McKee & Bertschinger 1988; Slavin & Cox 1992; Dwarkadas & Gruszko 2012; Rogers & Pittard 2013; Walch & Naab 2015; Kim & Ostriker 2015; Gatto et al. 2015; Iffrig & Hennebelle 2015; Martizzi, Faucher-Giguère & Quataert 2015; Li et al. 2015).”
The Horizon-AGN simulation: evolution of galaxy properties over cosmic time (2016, background): “…medium and the momentum injection from SN populations in the snowplough phase (see also Thornton et al. 1998; Hopkins et al. 2014; Geen et al. 2015; Kim & Ostriker 2015; Martizzi et al. 2015) can produce strong SN-driven outflows that regulate star formation more efficiently than classical…”
The SPHINX Cosmological Simulations of the First Billion Years: the Impact of Binary Stars on Reionization★ (2018, background): “…upper limit for the snowplow momentum comes from the numerical experiments of Blondin et al. (1998) and Thornton et al. (1998) of explosions in a homogeneous medium and has been confirmed more recently by e.g. Kim & Ostriker (2015) and Martizzi, Faucher-Giguère & Quataert (2015).”
Feedback-regulated star formation and escape of LyC photons from mini-haloes during reionization (2016, background): “Based on Thornton et al. (1998, see also Blondin et al. 1998; Kim & Ostriker 2015; Geen et al. 2015; Martizzi et al. 2015), this model captures the correct radial momentum input from SN explosions at the snowplough phase (pSN,snow), pSN,snow = 3× 105 km s−1 M n−2/17H E 16/17 51 Z ′−0.14, (14) by…”
A unified model for galactic discs: star formation, turbulence driving, and mass transport (2017, background): “Simulations suggest the momentum per unit mass is p∗/m∗ ≈ 3000 km s−1 for single supernovae (Cioffi, McKee & Bertschinger 1988; Thornton et al. 1998; Kim & Ostriker 2015a; Martizzi et al. 2015; Walch & Naab 2015; Gentry et al. 2017; Kim, Ostriker & Raileanu 2017).”
Theoretical Challenges in Galaxy Formation (2016, methodology): “…formationas a function of explosion energy E51 in units of 10 51ergs, and the number density of a homogenous ambient medium in cm−3 result in the following relations (taken from Kim & Ostriker (2015a), but see also Draine 2011): Theoretical Challenges in Galaxy Formation 29 tsf = 4.4× 104yrE0.”
Three-phase Interstellar Medium in Galaxies Resolving Evolution with Star Formation and Supernova Feedback (TIGRESS): Algorithms, Fiducial Model, and Convergence (2016, methodology): “…momentum of the SN ejecta is boosted (by more than an order of magnitude) during the energy-conserving stage by the work of the expanding hot bubble on the surrounding ISM, it is crucial to resolve this evolutionary stage (e.g., Cioffi et al. 1988; Thornton et al. 1998; Kim & Ostriker 2015a).”
Gusty, gaseous flows of FIRE: Galactic winds in cosmological simulations with explicit stellar feedback (2015, background): “…encountered the so-called ‘overcooling’ problem, where thermal energy injection from SNe dissipated quickly (Katz 1992), before it could generate a strong dynamical effect within the ISM (see Kim & Ostriker 2015 for a modern interpretation; see also Martizzi, Faucher-Giguère & Quataert 2015).”
FIRE-2 simulations: physics versus numerics in galaxy formation (2017, background): “We therefore have: ∆p′′b ≡∆p′b MIN [√ 1 + mb ∆mb , pt pej ] (D22) pt M kms−1 ≈ 4.8×105 ( Etot, ej 1051 erg ) 13 14 ( nb cm−3 )− 17 f (Zb) 32 (D23) f (Z) = { 2 (Z/Z < 0.01) (Z/Z ) −0.14 (0.01≤ Z/Z ) (D24) The expression for pt comes from high-resolution simulations of individual SNe explosions (see e”