THE EARLY UV/OPTICAL EMISSION FROM CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVAE

By Itay Rabinak, E. Waxman. 2010

161 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We derive a simple approximate model describing the early, hours to days, UV/optical (UV/O) supernova emission, which is produced by the expansion of the outer ≲10−2 M☉ part of the shock-heated envelope, and precedes optical emission driven by radioactive decay. Our model includes an approximate description of the time dependence of the opacity (mainly due to recombination), and of the deviation of the emitted spectrum from a blackbody spectrum. We show that the characteristics of the early UV/O emission constrain the radius of the progenitor star, R*, its envelope composition, and the ratio of the ejecta energy to its mass, E/M. For He envelopes, neglecting the effect of recombination may lead to an overestimate of R* by more than an order of magnitude. We also show that the relative extinction at different wavelengths (Aλ − AV) may be inferred from the light curves at these wavelengths, removing the uncertainty in the estimate of R* due to reddening (but not the uncertainty in E/M due to uncertainty in absolute extinction). The early UV/O observations of the types Ib SN 2008D and IIp SNLS−04D2dc are consistent with our model predictions. For SN 2008D, we find R* ≈ 1011 cm, and an indication that the He envelope contains a significant C/O fraction.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4f0077cef772ec43036b5bb527cd9ab3e9629c97

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. E. Berger
2. S. Smartt
3. F. Mannucci
4. D. Maoz
5. A. Gal-yam
6. Ryan Chornock
7. B. Metzger
8. A. Riess

In Instrumentation

1. D. Maoz
2. F. Mannucci
3. G. Nelemans
4. A. Riess
5. A. Gal-yam
6. Morgan Fraser
7. J. Silverman
8. R. Kirshner

Citations in the corpus

• The diversity of Type II supernova versus the similarity in their progenitors (2016, unknown): “Gall et al. (2015), following the equations of Rabinak & Waxman (2011), pointed out that the rise time of SNe II is proportional to the progenitor radius to the power 0.55, while it is only marginally dependent on the explosion energy and the ejected mass.”
• DISCOVERY, PROGENITOR AND EARLY EVOLUTION OF A STRIPPED ENVELOPE SUPERNOVA iPTF13bvn (2013, background): “…curve of a supernova, which is sensitive to the progenitor size, explosion energy and the composition of the outer layers (e.g., Nakar & Sari 2010; Rabinak & Waxman 2011; Bersten et al. 2012; Piro & Nakar 2013), and in some propitious cases can even diagnose the presence of a binary companion…”
• SN 2011dh: DISCOVERY OF A TYPE IIb SUPERNOVA FROM A COMPACT PROGENITOR IN THE NEARBY GALAXY M51 (2011, background): “13 from Rabinak & Waxman (2011) with a radius of 1013 cm, we find that two days after explosion the color temperature should be greater than 17000 K (such temperatures are indeed observed for RSG explosions such as PTF10vdl; Gal-Yam et al. 2011), while our spectrum at that time shows a much lower…”
• Light-curve modelling of superluminous supernova 2006gy: collision between supernova ejecta and a dense circumstellar medium (2012, result): “Comparisons of STELLA with other numerical codes are provided in Blinnikov et al. (1998, 2000, 2003) and Woosley et al. (2007a), for example, and analytical models are also compared with the numerical results of STELLA (e.g. Rabinak & Waxman 2011).”
• Observational Clues to the Progenitors of Type Ia Supernovae (2013, methodology): “By comparing their photometry to models by Piro, Chang & Weinberg (2010), Kasen (2010), and Rabinak & Waxman (2011), they translated the limit on the duration of the shock-heated phase to a limit on the radius of the exploding star of R∗ 0.1 R .”
• The first month of evolution of the slow-rising Type IIP SN 2013ej in M74 (2013, methodology): “The explosion epoch has been constrained using the Rabinak & Waxman (2011) model, the pre-explosion non-detection and detections reported in Lee et al. (2013).”
• THE TYPE IIb SUPERNOVA 2011dh FROM A SUPERGIANT PROGENITOR (2012, background): “…was introduced by Arcavi et al. (2011) and is based on the quick decline of the optical light curve (LC) soon after the explosion, as compared with SN 1993J, along with a low temperature derived from an early-time spectrum, as compared with analytic expressions by Rabinak & Waxman (2011).”
• Supernovae from red supergiants with extensive mass loss (2010, result): “Comparisons of STELLA with other numerical codes are provided in, e.g., Blinnikov et al. (1998, 2003); Woosley et al. (2007) and analytical models are also compared to the numerical results of STELLA (e.g., Rabinak & Waxman 2011).”
• Hubble Space Telescope spectra of the type Ia supernova SN 2011fe: a tail of low-density, high-velocity material with Z < Z⊙ (2013, methodology): “Following the analysis of B12 and using the equations of Rabinak & Waxman (2011), we deriveRprog .”
• TOWARD CHARACTERIZATION OF THE TYPE IIP SUPERNOVA PROGENITOR POPULATION: A STATISTICAL SAMPLE OF LIGHT CURVES FROM Pan-STARRS1 (2014, background): “…the nonlinear behavior of the light curve during the rise, due to shock breakout and post-shock breakout cooling envelope effects (see e.g. Nakar & Sari 2010; Rabinak & Waxman 2011) are not captured by the power law rise model, but the explosion epoch itself is fit accurately in the fitted model.”
• RAPIDLY EVOLVING AND LUMINOUS TRANSIENTS FROM PAN-STARRS1 (2014, background): “…the progenitor, with larger progenitors yielding more luminous events (due to both a larger emitting surface and reduced effects of adiabatic cooling), while the timescale of the event is related to the envelope mass that is cooling/recombining (see, e.g., Nakar & Sari 2010; Rabinak & Waxman 2011).”
• A COMPACT DEGENERATE PRIMARY-STAR PROGENITOR OF SN 2011fe (2011, unknown): “A number of analytical models for the early luminosity have been constructed under the assumption of spherical symmetry (e.g., Chevalier 1992; Chevalier & Fransson 2008; Piro et al. 2010; Kasen 2010; Nakar & Sari 2010; Rabinak & Waxman 2011; Rabinak et al. 2011).”