A new method for estimating the bolometric properties of Ibc supernovae

By Z. Cano. 2013

134 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The bolometric properties (nickel mass, ejecta mass and kinetic energies) of 61 Ibc supernovae (SNe), including 20 gamma-ray burst and X-rayflash (GRB/XRF), 19 Ib, 13 Ic and nine Ic-BL (broad-lined) SNe are presented. All of the available BVRI photometry in the literature have been collected and used in a new method that utilizes a template supernova (SN 1998bw) and an analytical model to accurately estimate the bolometric properties of each SN. A statistical analysis of the bolometric properties is then performed, where it is found that GRB/XRF SNe are the most energetic, and eject more mass (including nickel content) than Ib, Ic and Ic-BL SNe. The results are then compared to the existing progenitor models of Ibc SNe, where it is concluded that it is highly likely that at least two progenitor channels exist for producing a Ibc SN: most Ibc SNe arise via binary interactions, where the mass of the stellar progenitor is less than what is attributed to a Wolf‐Rayet star. Conversely, the progenitors of Ic-BL and GRB/XRF are more massive than those of Ib and Ic SNe, and a key difference between GRB/XRF SNe and Ic-BL SNe is progenitor metallicity, where it is observed that the latter arise from more metal-rich progenitors. As mass loss in massive stars is influenced by metal content, theprogenitors ofIc-BLSNelosemoremass,and thereforemoreangular momentum, before exploding. It is expected that the explosion mechanism in Ic-BL and GRB/XRF SNe is ‘engine-driven’(i.e.anaccretingblackhole,oramillisecondmagnetar),buttheincreasedmass loss of Ic-BL SNe means the central engine is less powerful than in GRB/XRF SNe. Finally, it is found that the SNe that accompany GRBs and XRFs are statistically indistinguishable, and some mechanism other than metallicity is needed to explain the differences in the high-energy components in these events.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/91f5685a02ffbdcb3e0bb01ded712e8bb4b5a265

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. Smith
  3. A. Filippenko
  4. S. Valenti
  5. D. Schneider
  6. Z. Cano
  7. A. Gal-yam
  8. E. Berger

Citations in the corpus