Modeling Supernova-like Explosions Associated with Gamma-ray Bursts with Short Durations

By Shrinivas R. Kulkarni. 2005

141 citations recorded by the source corpus.

There is now good evidence linking short-hard GRBs with both elliptical and spiral galaxies at relatively low redshifts, redshift of about 0.2. This contrasts with the average redshift of about 2 of long-duration events, which also occur only in star-forming galaxies. The diversity of hosts is reminiscent of type Ia supernovae, which are widely (but not universally) believed to originate from the coalescence of white dwarfs. By analogy, it has been postulated that short-hard bursts originate from neutron star mergers. Mergers, as well as stellar core-collapse events (type II SNe and long-duration GRBs) are accompanied by long-lived sub-relativistic components powered by radioactive decay of unstable elements produced in the explosion. It is therefore interesting to explore whether short duration events also have ejecta powered by radioactivity (i.e. that are supernova-like). Observations already inform us that any supernova like component in the first few well studied short hard bursts must be fainter than those typical of type Ia or core-collapse supernovae. Rather than refer to weaker supernova-like component as ``mini-super nova'', an etymologically indefensible term, I use the term {\it macronova}. I investigate the observability of macronovae powered by neutron decay and by radioactive Nickel. Separately, I note that a macronova will reprocess energetic emission arising from a long lived central source. I find that surprisingly interesting limits on the basic parameters of macronovae can be obtained provided observations are obtained with current 10-m class telescopes over a range of one hour to one day following the burst.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3482d8507ff29d6c1a278aa276d5e705a90af968

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

Citations in the corpus

Time-dependent models of accretion discs formed from compact object mergers (2008, methodology): “For Mtot = 0.1M⊙ this constrains the ejected Ni mass to be MNi ∼ 10 −2M⊙ (see also Kulkarni 2005).”
The cocoon emission - an electromagnetic counterpart to gravitational waves from neutron star mergers (2017, background): “The ejected matter is enriched by heavy unstable nuclei whose radioactive decay power a macronova (also called kilonova) (Li & Paczyński 1998; Kulkarni 2005; Metzger et al. 2010).”
Systematic opacity calculations for kilonovae (2019, background): “…(Kasen et al. 2017; Tanaka et al. 2017; Rosswog et al. 2017), thermal emission powered by radioactive decays of newly synthesized r-process elements (Li & Paczyński 1998; Kulkarni 2005; Metzger et al. 2010, see Rosswog 2015; Tanaka 2016; Fernández & Metzger 2016; Metzger 2017 for reviews).”
SYSTEMATICS OF DYNAMICAL MASS EJECTION, NUCLEOSYNTHESIS, AND RADIOACTIVELY POWERED ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNALS FROM NEUTRON-STAR MERGERS (2013, background): “This is in particular important because the radioactive heating provides the energy source for an optical counterpart associated with NS mergers (see Li & Paczyński (1998), Kulkarni (2005) and Metzger et al. (2010b) and Sect.”
EARLY X-RAY AND OPTICAL AFTERGLOW OF GRAVITATIONAL WAVE BURSTS FROM MERGERS OF BINARY NEUTRON STARS (2012, background): “In the literature, an optical “macronova” (Li & Paczyński 1998; Kulkarni 2005; Metzger et al. 2010) due to decay of the ejecta launched during the merger4 and a long-lasting radio afterglow due to interaction between the ejecta and the ambient medium (Nakar & Piran 2011; Metzger & Berger 2012;…”
Binary Neutron Star Mergers: Mass Ejection, Electromagnetic Counterparts, and Nucleosynthesis (2018, background): “The decay of the neutrons in the outermost part of the ejecta would then produce a bright UV/optical counterpart to the merger on a timescale of several minutes to an hour (Kulkarni 2005; Metzger et al. 2015).”
r-PROCESS NUCLEOSYNTHESIS IN DYNAMICALLY EJECTED MATTER OF NEUTRON STAR MERGERS (2011, methodology): “…we obtain vexp ≈ 0.28c for the symmetric and vexp ≈ 0.24c for the asymmetric binary. such events by employing a semi-analytic, simplified onezone model of Kulkarni (2005) (see also Arnett 1982; Li & Paczyński 1998), assuming that asymmetries of the emission remain modest (cf. Roberts et al. 2011).”
Light curves of the neutron star merger GW170817/SSS17a: Implications for r-process nucleosynthesis (2017, background): “a macronova or kilonova was then re-popularized by newer models that invoked the decay of radioactive species, without making the connection to r-process nucleosynthesis (13, 84).”
Dynamical Mass Ejection from Binary Neutron Star Mergers (2016, background): “…be explained by the radioactive decay of by-products of the rprocess in a macronova (sometimes also called kilonova) (e.g., Li & Paczynski 1998; Kulkarni 2005; Metzger et al. 2010; Roberts et al. 2011; Kasen et al. 2013; Barnes & Kasen 2013; Tanaka & Hotokezaka 2013; Rosswog et al. 2014;…”
Gravitational waves from neutron star mergers and their relation to the nuclear equation of state (2019, background): “ils will be given in Sect. 3.1. A macronova [72] is an astronomical source of electromagnetic radiation about one to three orders of magnitudes brighter than a regular nova3, hence the name macronova [73] or kilonova [74] (the term mergernova has also been recently used [75]). In the standard scenar”
r-PROCESS LANTHANIDE PRODUCTION AND HEATING RATES IN KILONOVAE (2015, background): “Additionally, radioactive decay of unstable nuclides formed during decompression of the ejecta can power a transient in the optical or infrared that peaks on a timescale of a day to a week (Li & Paczyński 1998; Kulkarni 2005; Metzger et al. 2010; Kasen et al. 2013; Tanaka & Hotokezaka 2013).”
The long-term evolution of neutron star merger remnants – I. The impact of r-process nucleosynthesis (2013, background): “They are believed to also trigger short-lived electromagnetic transients powered by radioactivity, so-called ‘macronovae’ (Li & Paczyński 1998; Kulkarni 2005; Rosswog 2005; Metzger et al. 2010; Roberts et al. 2011; Goriely et al. 2011a; Metzger & Berger 2012; Kelley et al. 2012; Rosswog et al.…”
RADIATIVE TRANSFER SIMULATIONS OF NEUTRON STAR MERGER EJECTA (2013, methodology): “This emission, which is similar to the emission of supernovae (SNe) powered by 56Ni, has been called “macronova” (Kulkarni 2005), “kilonova” (Metzger et al. 2010; Metzger & Berger 2012), or “mini-SN.””
WHAT IS THE MOST PROMISING ELECTROMAGNETIC COUNTERPART OF A NEUTRON STAR BINARY MERGER? (2011, background): “However, independent of this association, the mergers are expected to be accompanied by isotropic thermal emission, powered by the radioactive decay of heavy elements in the merger ejecta (Li & Paczyński 1998; hereafter LP98; Kulkarni 2005; Rosswog 2005; Metzger et al. 2010; Roberts et al. 2011; Go”
The Observer's Guide to the Gamma-Ray Burst-Supernova Connection (2016, background): “As well as the expected AG emission, emission from a SN-like transient was also predicted [335, 336, 337, 338, 339], which have been referred to as a “kilonova” (KN), “mergernova”, or “macronova” (see the recent review by [340]), where we have adopted the former terminology in this review.”
The physics of gamma-ray bursts & relativistic jets (2014, background): “Mao, S., Paczynski, B., Apr. 1992.”
Comprehensive nucleosynthesis analysis for ejecta of compact binary mergers (2014, background): “…out to lead to long-term decay heating of the material ejected by compact binary mergers and thus to thermal radiation that can potentially be observed as electromagnetic transient (Li & Paczyński 1998) termed ‘macronova’ (Kulkarni 2005) or ‘kilonova’ (Metzger et al. 2010; Metzger & Berger 2012).”