Protoneutron star evolution and the neutrino-driven wind in general relativistic neutrino radiation hydrodynamics simulations

By Tobias Fischer, S. C.Whitehouse, A. Mezzacappa, Friedrich-Karl Thielemann, M. Liebendorfer. 2009

408 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Massive stars end their lives in explosions with kinetic energies on the order of 10 51 erg. Immediately after the explosion has been launched, a region of low density and high entropy forms behind the ejecta, which is continuously subject to neutrino heating. The neutrinos emitted from the remnant at the center, the protoneutron star (PNS), heat the material above the PNS surface. This heat is partly converted into kinetic energy, and the material accelerates to an outflow that is known as the neutrino-driven wind. For the first time we simulate the collapse, bounce, explosion, and the neutrino-driven wind phases consistently over more than 20 s. Our numerical model is based on spherically symmetric general relativistic radiation hydrodynamics using spectral three-flavor Boltzmann neutrino transport. In simulations where no explosions are obtained naturally, we model neutrino-driven explosions for low- and intermediatemass Fe-core progenitor stars by enhancing the charged current reaction rates. In the case of a special progenitor star, the 8. 8M � O-Ne-Mg-core, the explosion in spherical symmetry was obtained without enhanced opacities. The post-explosion evolution is in qualitative agreement with static steady-state and parametrized dynamic models of the neutrino-driven wind. On the other hand, we generally find lower neutrino luminosities and mean neutrino energies, as well as a different evolutionary behavior of the neutrino luminosities and mean neutrino energies. The neutrino-driven wind is proton-rich for more than 10 s and the contraction of the PNS differs from the assumptions made for the conditions at the inner boundary in previous neutrino-driven wind studies. Despite the moderately high entropies of about 100 kB/baryon and the fast expansion timescales, the conditions found in our models are unlikely to favor r-process nucleosynthesis. The simulations are carried out until the neutrino-driven wind settles down to a quasi-stationary state. About 5 s after the bounce, the peak temperature inside the PNS already starts to decrease because of the continued deleptonization. This moment determines the beginning of a cooling phase dominated by the emission of neutrinos. We discuss the physical conditions of the quasi-static PNS evolution and take the effects of deleptonization and mass accretion from early fallback into account.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/54d61f7bab10bd576af13273277c8dbe56f246fa

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

Symmetry energy impact in simulations of core-collapse supernovae (2013, background): “ simulations, which include threeavor Boltzmann neutrino transport and a detailed nuclear equation of state (EOS), obtain explosions in spherical symmetry only for low-mass progenitor stars with 8 9M [7,8]. This is related to the special structure of such progenitors. Their low-mass core of about 1:”
CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA EQUATIONS OF STATE BASED ON NEUTRON STAR OBSERVATIONS (2012, methodology): “It allows, e.g., for a smooth NSE-to-non-NSE transition as well as to simulate a large domain of the progenitor star (for details, see Fischer et al. 2010).”
The impact of individual nuclear properties on $r$-process nucleosynthesis (2015, background): “on. A combination of moderate neutron richness, high entropy, and fast out ow are required for the nucleosynthesis to reach uranium and thorium| conditions that are not achieved in modern simulations [24, 25, 26]. However, they are not terribly far o, sometimes reaching the second peak of the rproce”
Origin of the heaviest elements: The rapid neutron-capture process (2019, methodology): “(2009) and Fischer et al. (2011), with a quark-hadron phase transition taking place just at the appropriate density/temperature conditions.”
CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA EXPLOSIONS TRIGGERED BY A QUARK–HADRON PHASE TRANSITION DURING THE EARLY POST-BOUNCE PHASE (2010, methodology): “The explosion energy estimates Eexpl and approximate neutron star masses MNS (for a definition of the mass cut and the explosion energy, see Fischer et al. 2010b, following a suggestion by S. Bruenn), are listed in Table 3.”
Global comparison of core-collapse supernova simulations in spherical symmetry (2018, background): “[39] and [40], allowing for the dynamical allocation of computational zones to regions where they are needed, which ensures an accurate shock capture [41, 42].”
THE r-PROCESS NUCLEOSYNTHESIS IN THE VARIOUS JET-LIKE EXPLOSIONS OF MAGNETOROTATIONAL CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVAE (2015, background): “…aside from the long-standing problem of high entropies for a successful r-process, hydrodynamics simulations with detailed microphysics showed that the early neutron-rich ejecta of the winds immediately turn proton-rich (Fischer et al. 2010; Hüdepohl et al. 2010; Arcones & Thielemann 2013).”
What can be learned from a future supernova neutrino detection (2017, methodology): “The most comprehensive set of multi-angle calculations to date are those by Wu et al. [273] which processed the 18 M simulation by Fischer et al. [152] for the IMO.”
SYSTEMATICS OF DYNAMICAL MASS EJECTION, NUCLEOSYNTHESIS, AND RADIOACTIVELY POWERED ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNALS FROM NEUTRON-STAR MERGERS (2013, background): “…may well be a major source of r-process elements and current supernova models cannot provide suitable conditions for the formation of the heaviest r-process elements (Hoffman et al. 2008; Janka et al. 2008; Roberts et al. 2010; Hüdepohl et al. 2010; Fischer et al. 2010; Wanajo et al. 2011).”
On the astrophysical robustness of the neutron star merger r-process (2012, background): “Historically supernovae were considered the “natural” source of r-process elements, but this view has recently been distressed by a slew of investigations (e.g. Arcones et al. (2007); Roberts et al. (2010); Fischer et al. (2010); Hüdepohl c© 2012 RAS ar X iv :1 20 6.”
NEUTRINO-DRIVEN SUPERNOVA OF A LOW-MASS IRON-CORE PROGENITOR BOOSTED BY THREE-DIMENSIONAL TURBULENT CONVECTION (2015, background): “3), similar to (but more delayed than) oxygen-neon-magnesiumcore progenitors exploding as “electron-capture SNe” (Kitaura et al. 2006; Janka et al. 2008; Fischer et al. 2010).”
NEUTRINO-DRIVEN WINDS IN THE AFTERMATH OF A NEUTRON STAR MERGER: NUCLEOSYNTHESIS AND ELECTROMAGNETIC TRANSIENTS (2015, background): “…seems to struggle to produce the conditions required for a successful r-process (Arcones et al. 2007; Hüdepohl et al. 2010; Roberts et al. 2010; Fischer et al. 2010; Arcones & Montes 2011; Arcones & Thielemann 2013), though some rare supernovae may plausibly contribute (Fujimoto et al. 2006,…”
Europium production: neutron star mergers versus core-collapse supernovae (2013, background): “Recently, hydrod - namical simulations with accurate neutrino transport haveshown that the neutrino winds are proton-rich (Arcones et al. 2007; Fischer et al. 2010; Hüdepohl et al. 2010) or slightly neutron-ich (Martı́nez-Pinedo et al. 2012; Roberts et al. 2012), but never very neutron-rich, as…”
MAGNETOROTATIONALLY DRIVEN SUPERNOVAE AS THE ORIGIN OF EARLY GALAXY r-PROCESS ELEMENTS? (2012, background): “…et al. 2001; Wanajo 2006; Arcones et al. 2007), and (b) in addition, the innermost ejecta turned out to be proton-rich instead of neutron-rich (Pruet et al. 2006; Fröhlich et al. 2006), a situation which has now also been shown in long-term simulations (Fischer et al. 2010; Hüdepohl et al. 2010).”
Supernova simulations from a 3D progenitor model - Impact of perturbations and evolution of explosion properties (2017, background): “In all but the lightest supernova progenitors (Kitaura et al. 2006; Janka et al. 2008; Fischer et al. 2010; Melson et al. 2015a), this mechanism appears to hinge on the breaking of spherical symmetry by hydrodynamic instabilities like convection (Herant et al. 1994; Burrows et al. 1995; Janka &…”