THE ROLE OF TURBULENCE IN NEUTRINO-DRIVEN CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA EXPLOSIONS

By Sean M. Couch, Christian D. Ott. 2014

152 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The neutrino-heated “gain layer” immediately behind the stalled shock in a core-collapse supernova is unstable to high-Reynolds-number turbulent convection. We carry out and analyze a new set of 19 high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) simulations with a three-species neutrino leakage/heating scheme and compare with spherically symmetric (one-dimensional, 1D) and axisymmetric (two-dimensional, 2D) simulations carried out with the same methods. We study the postbounce supernova evolution in a 15 M☉ progenitor star and vary the local neutrino heating rate, the magnitude and spatial dependence of asphericity from convective burning in the Si/O shell, and spatial resolution. Our simulations suggest that there is a direct correlation between the strength of turbulence in the gain layer and the susceptibility to explosion. 2D and 3D simulations explode at much lower neutrino heating rates than 1D simulations. This is commonly explained by the fact that nonradial dynamics allows accreting material to stay longer in the gain layer. We show that this explanation is incomplete. Our results indicate that the effective turbulent ram pressure exerted on the shock plays a crucial role by allowing multi-dimensional models to explode at a lower postshock thermal pressure and thus with less neutrino heating than 1D models. We connect the turbulent ram pressure with turbulent energy at large scales and in this way explain why 2D simulations are erroneously exploding more easily than 3D simulations.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cf6df2858cbc4ba0fd8e624de0d3c465ce82dd8f

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

The overarching framework of core-collapse supernova explosions as revealed by 3D fornax simulations (2019, background): “…role of aspherical perturbations in the progenitor models in inaugurating and maintaining turbulent convection behind the stalled shock wave (Couch & Ott 2015; Müller et al. 2017; Burrows et al. 2018; Vartanyan et al. 2018; Müller et al. 2018), shown to be important in igniting…”
NEUTRINO-DRIVEN SUPERNOVA OF A LOW-MASS IRON-CORE PROGENITOR BOOSTED BY THREE-DIMENSIONAL TURBULENT CONVECTION (2015, background): “Turbulent pressure in the gain layer is understood to be supportive for the onset of neutrino-driven explosions (Murphy et al. 2013; Couch & Ott 2014; Müller & Janka 2014b).”
NEUTRINO-DRIVEN EXPLOSION OF A 20 SOLAR-MASS STAR IN THREE DIMENSIONS ENABLED BY STRANGE-QUARK CONTRIBUTIONS TO NEUTRINO–NUCLEON SCATTERING (2015, result): “This is consistent with studies based on parametrized neutrino heating (e.g., Hanke et al. 2012; Couch 2013; Couch & O’Connor 2014; Couch & Ott 2015) and self-consistent simulations with approximate neutrino transport (Takiwaki et al. 2012, 2014), which revealed that the onset of explosion is less…”
THREE-DIMENSIONAL CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA SIMULATED USING A 15 M⊙ PROGENITOR (2015, background): “Both measures are larger for C15-2D than for C15-3D, consistent with Couch & Ott (2015), who posited that stronger turbulent pressure aids the development of explosions in 2D simulations.”
A successful 3D core-collapse supernova explosion model (2018, background): “Parameterized studies in 3D (Nordhaus et al. 2010; Dolence et al. 2013; Hanke et al. 2012; Couch & O’Connor 2014; Couch & Ott 2015) disagreed on the relative difficulty of explosion in 3D vs. 2D.”
The Observer's Guide to the Gamma-Ray Burst-Supernova Connection (2016, background): “, [250, 251]), rather than induced by two-dimensional jet-like asphericity.”
What can be learned from a future supernova neutrino detection (2017, background): “This causes the shock to be pushed outwards compared to 1D simulations increasing the size of the gain region [143].”
Supernova simulations from a 3D progenitor model - Impact of perturbations and evolution of explosion properties (2017, methodology): “Simulations using parameterised initial conditions for the initial perturbations using a leakage scheme (Couch & Ott 2013, 2015) or multi-group neutrino transport (Müller & Janka 2015; Burrows et al. 2016) found a range of effect sizes from nil to a significant impact on shock revival.”
Pre-supernova outbursts via wave heating in massive stars – I. Red supergiants (2017, background): “Remarkably, these estimates of convective velocities and turnover frequencies typically match those seen in 3D simulations of a variety of burning phases (e.g. Meakin & Arnett 2007a; Alvan et al. 2014; Couch & Ott 2015; Lecoanet et al. 2016; Jones et al. 2017) to within a factor of 2.”
The Status of Multi-Dimensional Core-Collapse Supernova Models (2016, methodology): “…and leakage-based multi-D simulations at runaway is smaller than in 1D. Due to a considerably different pressure and density stratification (cf. Figure 3 in Couch & Ott 2015, which shows a very steep pressure gradient behind the shock in the critical 1D model), the gain region needs to…”
A TWO-PARAMETER CRITERION FOR CLASSIFYING THE EXPLODABILITY OF MASSIVE STARS BY THE NEUTRINO-DRIVEN MECHANISM (2015, background): “…2015), and that asymmetries and perturbations in the shell-burning layers of the pre-collapse core might have important consequences for the development of SN explosions by the neutrino-driven mechanism (e.g., Arnett & Meakin 2011; Couch & Ott 2013, 2015; Müller & Janka 2015; Couch et al. 2015).”
The Gravitational Wave Signal from Core-collapse Supernovae (2018, background): “However, it is known that turbulence has different properties in 2D and 3D (Kraichnan 1967), and it has been shown that this difference artificially facilitates explosion (Hanke et al. 2012; Dolence et al. 2013; Takiwaki et al. 2014; Couch & O’Connor 2014; Couch & Ott 2015; Abdikamalov et al. 2015).”
Three-dimensional simulations of neutrino-driven core-collapse supernovae from low-mass single and binary star progenitors (2018, background): “…explosion, such as the softening of the equation of state by muon creation (Bollig et al. 2017), convective seed asymmetries in the progenitors (Couch & Ott 2015; Müller & Janka 2015; Couch et al. 2015; Müller 2016; Müller et al. 2017a), and the reduction of the neutrino scattering opacity…”
Exploring Fundamentally Three-dimensional Phenomena in High-fidelity Simulations of Core-collapse Supernovae (2018, background): “We expect (following Couch & Ott (2015); Müller et al. (2017), and as we see here) that these precollapse asphericity are crucial in helping an explosion develop.”