The Effect of Massive Binaries on Stellar Populations and Supernova Progenitors

By J. Eldridge, Robert G. Izzard, C. Tout. Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, 2007

368 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract We have calculated a large set of detailed binary models and used them to test the observed stellar population ratios that compare the relative populations of blue supergiants, red supergiants and Wolf-Rayet stars at different metallicities. We have also used our models to estimate the relative rate of type Ib/c to type II supernovae. We find, with an interacting binary fraction of about two thirds, that we obtain better agreement between our models and observations than with single stars. We discuss the use of models in determining the nature of supernova progenitors and show the surprising result that many type Ib/c supernova progenitors are less luminous and less massive in our models than the observed population of Wolf-Rayet stars.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3ecb01bec31390ea46449c5cc89875a653689f6b

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. S. Smartt
2. N. Langer
3. N. Smith
4. C. Conroy
5. J. Eldridge
6. Stan Woosley
7. Robert G. Izzard
8. Selma de Mink

In Instrumentation

1. S. Smartt
2. C. Conroy
3. N. Smith
4. N. Langer
5. J. Eldridge
6. Robert G. Izzard
7. G. Meynet
8. Benjamin D. Johnson

Citations in the corpus

• THE TYPE IIb SUPERNOVA 2011dh FROM A SUPERGIANT PROGENITOR (2012, result): “This is supported for example by population studies compared with the observed rates of SNe (Eldridge et al. 2008; Smith et al. 2011).”
• Progenitors of Core-Collapse Supernovae (2009, background): “Eldridge, Izzard, and Tout (2008) illustrate that by mixing single stars and interacting binaries in massive stellar populations they can reproduce the Ibc ratio at solar metallicity and get a lower value of NIbc/NII ∼ 0.1 at 0.3Z⊙, as suggested in the surveys discussed in Section 2.2.”
• Binary Population and Spectral Synthesis Version 2.1: Construction, Observational Verification, and New Results (2017, methodology): “Our numerical method to account for binary evolution is inspired by the method of Hurley et al. (2002) and was first described in detail in Eldridge et al. (2008).”
• The spin of the second-born black hole in coalescing binary black holes (2018, methodology): “In this context, the tidal spin-up of a He-rich star from a compact companion in a close binary system has been investigated in several studies (Brown et al. 2000; Izzard et al. 2004; Petrovic et al. 2005; Cantiello et al. 2007; van den Heuvel & Yoon 2007; Detmers et al. 2008;Eldridge et al.2008).”
• The Carnegie Supernova Project I: analysis of stripped-envelope supernova light curves (2017, background): “…the approach by Lyman et al. (2016), we consider that single progenitor star models with initial masses above 20 M⊙, computed by the binary population and spectral synthesis (BPASS) code (Eldridge et al. 2008; Eldridge & Stanway 2009), cannot produce ejecta masses below a value of about five M⊙.”
• THE ULTRA-LONG GAMMA-RAY BURST 111209A: THE COLLAPSE OF A BLUE SUPERGIANT? (2012, background): “In comparison, the fraction of blue supergiants compared to Wolf–Rayet stars is typically 10:1 (Eldridge et al. 2008)—therefore ultra-long GRBs should be more frequent than normal long GRBs.”
• Stellar population effects on the inferred photon density at reionization (2015, methodology): “In total each metallicity synthetic stellar population is based on between 15000 to 19000 individual detailed stellar evolution models using the Cambridge STARS evolution code outlined in Eldridge et al. (2008).”
• MESA ISOCHRONES AND STELLAR TRACKS (MIST). I. SOLAR-SCALED MODELS (2016, methodology): “…there are physical mechanisms that have not been taken into account in our models, such as mass loss and gain from binary mass transfer (see e.g., Eldridge et al. 2008; de Mink et al. 2009, 2013), and typical measurement uncertainties are quite large: 1000 K for Teff, 0.1–0.2 dex for log(g), and…”
• Fundamental properties of core-collapse Supernova and GRB progenitors: predicting the look of massive stars before death (2013, result): “Our results present a paradigm shift in the sense that for the most massive models, we find a WO spectral type before core collapse, and not a WC spectral type as has been widely assumed based on the chemical composition of the progenitor (Georgy et al. 2009, 2012; Eldridge et al. 2008).”
• Dawes Review 6: The Impact of Companions on Stellar Evolution (2016, background): “Because a massive star must lose much of its mass to expose its helium or carbon–oxygen core, binaries are naturally invoked as a cause (Podsiadlowski et al., 1992; Eldridge et al., 2008).”
• Observational Constraints on the Progenitors of Core-Collapse Supernovae: The Case for Missing High-Mass Stars (2015, background): “The first is their relatively high rate which has been explained with binary population models (for example as discussed in Podsiadlowski et al. 1992; Eldridge et al. 2008).”
• Ultra-stripped supernovae: progenitors and fate (2015, background): “…Ib/Ic SNe are expected to originate in binary systems from the initially more massive star which has lost its hydrogen envelope by mass-transfer to its companion (Podsiadlowski et al. 1992; Eldridge et al. 2008); these pre-SN stars typically have an envelope mass of1 M⊙ or more (Yoon et al. 2010).”