SUPERNOVA LIGHT CURVES POWERED BY YOUNG MAGNETARS

By D. Kasen, L. Bildsten. 2009

501 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We show that energy deposited into an expanding supernova remnant by a highly magnetic (B ∼ 5 × 1014 G) neutron star spinning at an initial period of Pi ≈ 2–20 ms can substantially brighten the light curve. For magnetars with parameters in this range, the rotational energy is released on a timescale of days to weeks, which is comparable to the effective diffusion time through the supernova remnant. The late time energy injection can then be radiated without suffering overwhelming adiabatic expansion losses. The magnetar input also produces a central bubble that sweeps ejecta into an internal dense shell, resulting in a prolonged period of nearly constant photospheric velocity in the observed spectra. We derive analytic expressions for the light curve rise time and peak luminosity as a function of B and Pi, and the properties of the supernova ejecta that allow for direct inferences about the underlying magnetar in bright supernovae. We perform numerical radiation hydrodynamic calculations of a few specific instances and compare the resulting light curves to observed events. Magnetar birth is likely to impact more than a few percent of all core-collapse supernovae, and may naturally explain some of the brightest events ever seen (e.g., SN 2005ap and SN 2008es) at L ≳ 1044 ergs s−1.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/36ec36105509ec353e19721bc78f00e2b78c83d2

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

1. B. Metzger
2. E. Berger
3. Bing Zhang
4. Stan Woosley
5. S. Smartt
6. E. Quataert
7. T. Thompson
8. Hans-Thomas Janka

Citations in the corpus

• ANALYTICAL LIGHT CURVE MODELS OF SUPERLUMINOUS SUPERNOVAE: χ2-MINIMIZATION OF PARAMETER FITS (2013, methodology): “The MINIM fitting results for the MAG model also seem to be in reasonable agreement with the results of Kasen & Bildsten (2010) for the LCs of SN 2007bi and SN 2008es.”
• Rates of superluminous supernovae at z ∼ 0.2 (2013, background): “Some SLSNe may draw their power from a compact object that forms in the collapse of the progenitor star (e.g. Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Woosley 2010; Ouyed et al. 2012).”
• The Magnetar Model for Type I Superluminous Supernovae. I. Bayesian Analysis of the Full Multicolor Light-curve Sample with MOSFiT (2017, methodology): “The basic form of the magnetar engine model has been described numerous times in the literature (Ostriker & Gunn 1971; Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Chatzopoulos et al. 2012; Inserra et al. 2013).7 We implement this in MOSFiT through the module engines.magnetar.”
• Light-curve modelling of superluminous supernova 2006gy: collision between supernova ejecta and a dense circumstellar medium (2012, background): “If the radiation energy released at the magnetar can be converted to thermal energy, the SN ejecta surrounding the magnetar is heated up and the SN can become very bright (Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Woosley 2010; see also Maeda et al. 2007).”
• A bright year for tidal disruptions (2015, methodology): “Our model is similar to that which has been developed for optical emission from stellar explosions powered by a central engine, which is one of the most promising models for superluminous supernovae (SLSNe; Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Woosley 2010; Metzger et al. 2014).”
• An Embedded X-Ray Source Shines through the Aspherical AT 2018cow: Revealing the Inner Workings of the Most Luminous Fast-evolving Optical Transients (2018, background): “This strong B field is in the range of “magnetars” normally invoked as central engines of GRBs (Metzger et al. 2011), but larger than those inferred for SLSNe, which typically require Bd∼10 14 G (e.g., Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Inserra et al. 2013; Nicholl et al. 2017).”
• The Observer's Guide to the Gamma-Ray Burst-Supernova Connection (2016, background): “But what if GRBSNe are not powered by radioactive heating, but instead via another mechanism? Could instead, GRB-SNe be powered by a magnetar central engine [139, 140], as has been proposed for some type I SLSNe [141, 142, 143]? A prediction of the magnetar-driven SN model is that at late-times the ”
• Superluminous supernovae: 56Ni power versus magnetar radiation (2012, methodology): “We already know that with arbitrary choices of ejecta mass, magnetic field, and initial spin, a broad diversity of luminous light curves can be produced (Kasen & Bildsten 2010).”
• Optical and X-ray emission from stable millisecond magnetars formed from the merger of binary neutron stars (2013, methodology): “…the pulsar luminosity at the tim of peak emission, in contradiction to the prediction of simpleth oretical models that deposit the pulsar energy directly into thethermal bath of the nebula (e.g., Kasen & Bildsten 2010 in the contextof supernovae and Yu et al. 2013 in the context of NS mergers).”
• BRIGHT “MERGER-NOVA” FROM THE REMNANT OF A NEUTRON STAR BINARY MERGER: A SIGNATURE OF A NEWLY BORN, MASSIVE, MILLISECOND MAGNETAR (2013, background): “The radiated bolometric luminosity can be derived approximately from the diffusion equation in the comoving frame (Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Kotera et al. 2013) L′e= E′intc τR/Γ = E′intt ′ t′d 2 , for t ≤ tτ , = E′intc R/Γ , for t > tτ , (7) where τ = κ(Mej/V ′)(R/Γ) is the optical depth of the ejecta…”
• Short GRBs with Extended Emission from Magnetar Birth: Jet Formation and Collimation (2011, background): “…the proto-magnetar injects additional energy behind the expanding ejecta, and if this energy is thermalized, this could enhance the luminosity of the predicted kilonova emission, as in analogous models for very luminous core collapse supernova (Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Woosley 2010; Piro & Ott 2011).”
• A TWO-PARAMETER CRITERION FOR CLASSIFYING THE EXPLODABILITY OF MASSIVE STARS BY THE NEUTRINO-DRIVEN MECHANISM (2015, background): “…explosions of rapidly rotating stellar cores, which might be a consequence of magnetar or BH formation and could be associated with hypernovae and gamma-ray burst SNe (see, e.g., Mazzali et al. 2014) as well as ultra-luminous SNe (Woosley 2010; Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Sukhbold & Woosley 2015).”
• The diversity of transients from magnetar birth in core collapse supernovae (2015, methodology): “…E evolves as a function of time t: dE dt = − E Rej vej − LSN + LNi + Lsd, (5) 1 Note that our definition of Bd, which agrees with that most commonly used in the pulsar community, is lower than that value adopted by Kasen & Bildsten (2010) by a factor of √ 12 = 3.46. c© 2014 RAS, MNRAS 000, 1–??”
• HYDROGEN-POOR SUPERLUMINOUS SUPERNOVAE AND LONG-DURATION GAMMA-RAY BURSTS HAVE SIMILAR HOST GALAXIES (2013, background): “…H-poor SLSNe in the scenario where the energy source is a magnetar: in order to reproduce the observed time scales and luminosities, rapid initial neutron star spin is required, as well as a strong magnetic field (Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Chomiuk et al. 2011; Lunnan et al. 2013; Inserra et al. 2013).”
• A burst in a wind bubble and the impact on baryonic ejecta: high-energy gamma-ray flashes and afterglows from fast radio bursts and pulsar-driven supernova remnants (2016, background): “…& Stella 1998; Inoue, Guetta & Pacini 2003), energetic SNe such as super-luminous SNe (SLSNe) (e.g., Thompson, Chang & Quataert 2004; Maeda et al. 2007; Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Woosley 2010; Murase et al. 2015; Kashiyama et al. 2016), and kilonovae/macronovae (e.g., Kisaka, Ioka & Takami 2015; Gao…”
• Pan-STARRS1 DISCOVERY OF TWO ULTRALUMINOUS SUPERNOVAE AT z ≈ 0.9 (2011, background): “Two potential explanations for these SCP 06F6-like sources have surfaced: the interaction of the SN shock with a dense circumstellar shell of H-poor material (e.g., Chevalier & Irwin 2011) or the spin-down of a new-born magnetar embedded in the SN ejecta (Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Woosley 2010).”
• On the diversity of superluminous supernovae: ejected mass as the dominant factor (2015, methodology): “Fit parameters for the rise–decline time-scale correlation. assumed to radiate with the functional form of a magnetic dipole (Kasen & Bildsten 2010): Lmagnetar(t) = Ep τp 1( 1 + t/τp )2 erg s−1, (4) where Ep (the rotational energy, Ins 2/2) and τ p are determined by the spin period, P, and magnetic…”
• Spectroscopy of superluminous supernova host galaxies. A preference of hydrogen-poor events for extreme emission line galaxies (2014, background): “It has been widely suggested that H-poor SLSNe are powered by the spin-down of a rapidly rotating magnetar (Kasen & Bildsten 2010; Inserra et al. 2013; Nicholl et al. 2013; Lunnan et al. 2014a), although the modulations seen in the light curves of individual events (e.g. Leloudas et al. 2012;…”