A TWO-PARAMETER CRITERION FOR CLASSIFYING THE EXPLODABILITY OF MASSIVE STARS BY THE NEUTRINO-DRIVEN MECHANISM

By T. Ertl, Hans-Thomas Janka, Stan Woosley, T. Sukhbold, M. R. M. Astrophysics, Garching, Physik Dept., Tum, U. Cruz, Tu Darmstadt. 2015

225 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Thus far, judging the fate of a massive star (either a neutron star [NS] or a black hole) solely by its structure prior to core collapse has been ambiguous. Our work and previous attempts find a nonmonotonic variation of successful and failed supernovae with zero-age main-sequence mass, for which no single structural parameter can serve as a good predictive measure. However, we identify two parameters computed from the pre-collapse structure of the progenitor, which in combination allow for a clear separation of exploding and nonexploding cases with only a few exceptions (∼1%–2.5%) in our set of 621 investigated stellar models. One parameter is M4, defining the normalized enclosed mass for a dimensionless entropy per nucleon of s = 4, and the other is &mgr; 4 ≡ ( dm / M ⊙ ) / ( dr / 1000 km ) ∣ s = 4 ?> , being the normalized mass derivative at this location. The two parameters μ4 and M4μ4 can be directly linked to the mass-infall rate, M ˙ ?> , of the collapsing star and the electron-type neutrino luminosity of the accreting proto-NS, L &ngr; e ∝ M ns M ˙ ?> , which play a crucial role in the “critical luminosity” concept for the theoretical description of neutrino-driven explosions as runaway phenomena of the stalled accretion shock. All models were evolved employing the approach of Ugliano et al. for simulating neutrino-driven explosions in spherical symmetry. The neutrino emission of the accretion layer is approximated by a gray transport solver, while the uncertain neutrino emission of the 1.1 M⊙ proto-NS core is parameterized by an analytic model. The free parameters connected to the core-boundary prescription are calibrated to reproduce the observables of SN 1987A for five different progenitor models.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cdb6f2cbe353190a5b7b6dc135654c7dad49d43a

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 Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

A High-resolution Study of Presupernova Core Structure (2017, methodology): “The “N20” engine parameterization was used to make the comparison with Ertl et al. (2016) and the “standard” choices of five parameters were used for Müller et al. (2016) method.”
Merging black hole binaries: the effects of progenitor's metallicity, mass-loss rate and Eddington factor (2017, background): “In particular, it is crucial to assess what are the conditions for a star to directly collapse into a BH, without an explosion (e.g. Bethe 1990; Fryer 1999; Fryer et al. 2001; Janka et al. 2007; O’Connor & Ott 2011; Janka 2012; Burrows 2013; Ertl et al. 2016).”
What can be learned from a future supernova neutrino detection (2017, background): “Various authors have confirmed this prediction, sometimes refining / replacing the criteria for explodability by replacing compactness with another quantity which measures something similar [166, 156, 167, 164, 168, 169].”
Formation of Double Neutron Star Systems (2017, background): “Since stellar cores with low compactness also typically produce lower-mass NSs (see Ugliano et al. 2012; Ertl et al. 2016; Sukhbold et al. 2016), a relation between SN kick and NS mass seems plausible.”
Three-dimensional simulations of neutrino-driven core-collapse supernovae from low-mass single and binary star progenitors (2018, unknown): “More phenomenological models (Ugliano et al. 2012; Ertl et al. 2016; Pejcha & Thompson 2015; Müller et al. 2016a; Sukhbold et al. 2016) are presently the only viable theoretical approach for this purpose, but it is imperative that they be put on a firmer footing with the help of select…”
Chemical evolution with rotating massive star yields - I. The solar neighbourhood and the s-process elements (2018, background): “…of the ejecta in a sample of Type IIP supernovae never exceeds 3 foes while on the theoretical one Sukhbold et al. (2016), O’Connor & Ott (2011) and Ertl et al. (2016) find that stellar models more massive than 25 − 30 M fail to explode (even if some massive stars -randomly distributed in mass-…”
Neutron Star Kicks by the Gravitational Tug-boat Mechanism in Asymmetric Supernova Explosions: Progenitor and Explosion Dependence (2016, background): “…gravitational tug-boat mechanism would mean that BH formation events with significant SN fallback are rare in the Galactic neighborhood, compatible with conclusions drawn from recent theoretical studies of the progenitor-SN connection (Ugliano et al. 2012; Ertl et al. 2016; Sukhbold et al. 2016).”
Delay-time distribution of core-collapse supernovae with late events resulting from binary interaction (2017, background): “Core-collapse supernovae (ccSNe) are bright explosions that mark the end of the lives of massive stars (e.g., Heger et al. 2003; Smartt 2009) and the birth of neutron stars or black holes (e.g., Ertl et al. 2016).”
Binary Population and Spectral Synthesis Version 2.1: Construction, Observational Verification, and New Results (2017, result): “Ours is a relatively simple method but does produce similar island of stability to that found by other authors (Ugliano et al. 2012; Sukhbold & Woosley 2014; Ertl et al. 2016).”
A simple approach to the supernova progenitor–explosion connection (2016, methodology): “Ertl et al. (2016) therefore proposed a different criterion with higher discriminating power which is based on the structure of the progenitor near the outer edge of the Si core, whose infall typically results in a considerable improvement in heating conditions and is often closely associated with…”
The effect of pair-instability mass loss on black-hole mergers (2016, background): “Some recent hydrodynamical simulations of core collapse seem to indicate that even for single stars (initial mass range MZAMS ≈ 15−40 M ), one may expect non-monotonic behavior in neutron-star and black-hole formation (O’Connor & Ott 2011; Ertl et al. 2016).”
Merging black hole binaries with the SEVN code (2018, methodology): “…review), several studies (Fryer 1999; Fryer, Woosley & Heger 2001; Heger et al. 2003; O’Connor & Ott 2011; Fryer et al. 2012; Ugliano et al. 2012; Ertl et al. 2016) suggest that if the mass and/or the compactness of the star at the onset of collapse are sufficiently large, then the star can…”