THE DEVELOPMENT OF EXPLOSIONS IN AXISYMMETRIC AB INITIO CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA SIMULATIONS OF 12–25 M ⊙ ?> STARS

By S. Bruenn, E. Lentz, W. Hix, A. Mezzacappa, J. A. Harris, O. E. Bronson Messer, E. Endeve, J. Blondin, M. A. Chertkow, E. Lingerfelt and 2 more. 2012

215 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present four ab initio axisymmetric core-collapse supernova simulations initiated from 12, 15, 20, and 25 M ⊙ ?> zero-age main sequence progenitors. All of the simulations yield explosions and have been evolved for at least 1.2 s after core bounce and 1 s after material first becomes unbound. These simulations were computed with our Chimera code employing RbR spectral neutrino transport, special and general relativistic transport effects, and state-of-the-art neutrino interactions. Continuing the evolution beyond 1 s after core bounce allows the explosions to develop more fully and the processes involved in powering the explosions to become more clearly evident. We compute explosion energy estimates, including the negative gravitational binding energy of the stellar envelope outside the expanding shock, of 0.34, 0.88, 0.38, and 0.70 Bethe (B ≡ 10 51 ?> erg) and increasing at 0.03, 0.15, 0.19, and 0.52 B s - 1 ?> , respectively, for the 12, 15, 20, and 25 M ⊙ ?> models at the endpoint of this report. We examine the growth of the explosion energy in our models through detailed analyses of the energy sources and flows. We discuss how the explosion energies may be subject to stochastic variations as exemplfied by the effect of the explosion geometry of the 20 M ⊙ ?> model in reducing its explosion energy. We compute the proto-neutron star masses and kick velocities. We compare our results for the explosion energies and ejected 56 Ni ?> masses against some observational standards despite the large error bars in both models and observations.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5bb45c195cfaa9e44ebea32d37a92bee59318615

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

NEUTRINO-DRIVEN SUPERNOVA OF A LOW-MASS IRON-CORE PROGENITOR BOOSTED BY THREE-DIMENSIONAL TURBULENT CONVECTION (2015, background): “Explosions of 2D models, however, start late and their energies tend to be fairly low (except for those of Bruenn et al. 2013, 2014, whose results still need better explanation and confirmation by detailed comparisons with other recent simulations).”
Symmetry energy impact in simulations of core-collapse supernovae (2013, unknown): “he related energy loss. This, in combination with Newtonian gravity, may be responsible for the very early onset of explosion in comparison to simulations that include more sophisticated microphysics [11, 13]. 10 Fischer et al.: Symmetry energy impact in simulations of core-collapse supernovae 10 1 ”
A TWO-PARAMETER CRITERION FOR CLASSIFYING THE EXPLODABILITY OF MASSIVE STARS BY THE NEUTRINO-DRIVEN MECHANISM (2015, result): “On the other hand, the Oak Ridge group obtained explosions much earlier after bounce with shock evolutions being astonishingly similar for 12, 15, 20, and 25 M stars and explosion energies fairly compatible with observations (Bruenn et al. 2013, 2014).”
Supernova simulations from a 3D progenitor model - Impact of perturbations and evolution of explosion properties (2017, background): “Ediag does not include any correction for the binding energy of the material outside the shock (for which Bruenn et al. 2013, 2016 introduced the convenient term “overburden”).”
The Status of Multi-Dimensional Core-Collapse Supernova Models (2016, methodology): “…interactions can be modelled with the same rigour as in spherical symmetry (Livne et al. 2004; Buras et al. 2006a; Müller et al. 2010; Bruenn et al. 2013; Just et al. 2015; Skinner et al. 2015), or with, still with acceptable accuracy for many purposes (see PASA (2016)…”
THE ROLE OF TURBULENCE IN NEUTRINO-DRIVEN CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA EXPLOSIONS (2014, background): “…dynamics on the neutrino mechanism (e.g., Burrows et al. 1995; Murphy & Burrows 2008; Marek & Janka 2009; Dolence et al. 2013; Müller et al. 2012b; Bruenn et al. 2013; Takiwaki et al. 2014): multi-dimensional motions increase the dwell time of material in the gain region, enhance the efficiency…”
What can be learned from a future supernova neutrino detection (2017, background): “At the locations where the downflows meet the PNS, hotspots of neutrino emission occur [116, 132].”
Formation of Double Neutron Star Systems (2017, background): “…non-radial hydrodynamic instabilities in the collapsing stellar core (i.e. neutrino-driven convection and the standing accretion-shock instability, Blondin & Mezzacappa 2006; Scheck et al. 2006; Foglizzo et al. 2007; Marek & Janka 2009; Janka 2012, 2013; Bruenn et al. 2014; Foglizzo et al. 2015).”
THE LANDSCAPE OF THE NEUTRINO MECHANISM OF CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVAE: NEUTRON STAR AND BLACK HOLE MASS FUNCTIONS, EXPLOSION ENERGIES, AND NICKEL YIELDS (2014, methodology): “…progenitors and 2D simulations of different groups using similar physics and performed on the same four progenitors show qualitative differences ranging from full success to complete failure (Müller et al. 2012a; Müller et al., 2013, YITP conference; Bruenn et al. 2013; Dolence et al. 2014).”