DIMENSION AS A KEY TO THE NEUTRINO MECHANISM OF CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA EXPLOSIONS

By J. Nordhaus, Adam Burrows, A. Almgren, John B. Bell. 2010

165 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We explore the dependence on spatial dimension of the viability of the neutrino heating mechanism of core-collapse supernova explosions. We find that the tendency to explode is a monotonically increasing function of dimension, with three dimensions (3D) requiring ∼40%–50% lower driving neutrino luminosity than one dimension and ∼15%–25% lower driving neutrino luminosity than two dimensions (2D). Moreover, we find that the delay to explosion for a given neutrino luminosity is always shorter in 3D than 2D, sometimes by many hundreds of milliseconds. The magnitude of this dimensional effect is much larger than the purported magnitude of a variety of other effects, such as nuclear burning, inelastic scattering, or general relativity, which are sometimes invoked to bridge the gap between the current ambiguous and uncertain theoretical situation and the fact of robust supernova explosions. Since real supernovae occur in three dimensions, our finding may be an important step toward unraveling one of the most problematic puzzles in stellar astrophysics. In addition, even though in 3D, we do see pre-explosion instabilities and blast asymmetries, unlike the situation in 2D, we do not see an obvious axially symmetric dipolar shock oscillation. Rather, the free energy available to power instabilities seems to be shared by more and more degrees of freedom as the dimension increases. Hence, the strong dipolar axisymmetry seen in 2D and previously identified as a fundamental characteristic of the shock hydrodynamics may not survive in 3D as a prominent feature.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f981509821f2b9c63a8a9cd1cab21565e40d7c85

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

NEW HYPERON EQUATIONS OF STATE FOR SUPERNOVAE AND NEUTRON STARS IN DENSITY-DEPENDENT HADRON FIELD THEORY (2014, background): “Besides the dimensionality of the problem (Nordhaus et al. 2010) and neutrino re- action rates, the EoS of matter plays a tremendous role in a successful CCSN explosion (Janka 2012).”
Colloquium: Perspectives on core-collapse supernova theory (2012, background): “Similar critical curves can be derived that include multi-dimensional turbulence in 2D (Murphy & Burrows 10 2008) and 3D (Nordhaus et al. 2010) and these seem to be lower, facilitating explosion.”
Non-Radial Instabilities and Progenitor Asphericities in Core-Collapse Supernovae (2014, methodology): “Our simple toy model predicts that it should be around 75% of the critical luminosity in 1D, which is roughly consistent with numerical simulations (Murphy & Burrows 2008; Nordhaus et al. 2010; Hanke et al. 2012; Couch 2013b,a).”
Multiple physical elements to determine the gravitational-wave signatures of core-collapse supernovae (2011, background): “The mechanism has been the working hypothesis of supernova theorists f r these∼45 years (see collective references in Janka et al. (2007) [36] that was present d in the Bethe Centennial Volume in Physics Report, and also a summary given in section 2 of Nordhaus et al. (2010) [46]).”
A NEW MULTI-DIMENSIONAL GENERAL RELATIVISTIC NEUTRINO HYDRODYNAMICS CODE FOR CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVAE. II. RELATIVISTIC EXPLOSION MODELS OF CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVAE (2012, background): “The value of K in this EoS has raised some objections (Nordhaus et al. 2010; Dasgupta et al. 2012) because measurements point to K = 240 MeV for symmetric nuclear matter (Shlomo et al. 2006), and because observations have recently pushed the maximum neutron star mass to at least 2M⊙ (Demorest et…”
The Proto-Magnetar Model for Gamma-Ray Bursts (2010, background): “Although multi-dimensional effects not captured by present simulations may be a crucial missing ingredient (e.g. Nordhaus et al. 2010), neutrinos alone may well prove incapable of powering ∼ 1052 erg explosions.”
Progenitor mass constraints for core-collapse supernovae from correlations with host galaxy star formation⋆ (2012, unknown): “The reader is referred to the recent literature which discuss the explosion processes in detail (e.g. Bruenn et al. 2009; Nordhaus et al. 2010; Hanke et al. 2011). from massive stars (e.g. van Dyk et al. 2000; Maund et al. 2006, although see Kochanek, Szczygiel & Stanek 2012).”
PROGENITOR-EXPLOSION CONNECTION AND REMNANT BIRTH MASSES FOR NEUTRINO-DRIVEN SUPERNOVAE OF IRON-CORE PROGENITORS (2012, background): “Nonradial fluid flows in the gain layer have a supportive influence and thus reduce the critical luminosity for driving the explosion (e.g., Janka & Müller 1996; Murphy & Burrows 2008; Nordhaus et al. 2010; Hanke et al. 2011; Murphy & Meakin 2011).”
The Status of Multi-Dimensional Core-Collapse Supernova Models (2016, background): “Although Nordhaus et al. (2010) initially claimed a significant reduction of the critical neutrino luminosity for shock revival in 3D compared to 2D based on such an approach, these results were affected by the gravity treatment (Burrows et al. 2012) and have not been confirmed by subsequent…”
NEUTRINO-DRIVEN EXPLOSION OF A 20 SOLAR-MASS STAR IN THREE DIMENSIONS ENABLED BY STRANGE-QUARK CONTRIBUTIONS TO NEUTRINO–NUCLEON SCATTERING (2015, background): “…pressure, thus reducing the critical threshold for the neutrino luminosity to trigger the explosive runaway of the shock (e.g., Herant et al. 1994; Burrows et al. 1995; Janka & Müller 1996; Murphy & Burrows 2008; Nordhaus et al. 2010; Hanke et al. 2012; Dolence et al. 2013; Murphy et al. 2013).”
BLACK HOLE FORMATION IN FAILING CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVAE (2010, background): “…precise nature of the responsible CCSN mechanism has been a topic of intense research for decades (e.g., Arnett 1966; Colgate & White 1966; Bethe & Wilson 1985; Janka et al. 2007; Burrows et al. 2006, 2007b; Murphy & Burrows 2008; Marek & Janka 2009; Nordhaus et al. 2010, and references therein).”
A TWO-PARAMETER CRITERION FOR CLASSIFYING THE EXPLODABILITY OF MASSIVE STARS BY THE NEUTRINO-DRIVEN MECHANISM (2015, background): “…to 2D calculations or even no explosions (e.g., Hanke et al. 2012, 2013; Tamborra et al. 2014; Mezzacappa et al. 2015; Couch 2013; Couch & O’Connor 2014; Takiwaki et al. 2014) although some studies have proclaimed the opposite behavior (Nordhaus et al. 2010; Burrows 2013; Dolence et al. 2013).”
SELF-SUSTAINED ASYMMETRY OF LEPTON-NUMBER EMISSION: A NEW PHENOMENON DURING THE SUPERNOVA SHOCK-ACCRETION PHASE IN THREE DIMENSIONS (2014, background): “…crucial support to the delayed neutrinoheating mechanism: multi-D simulations can yield explosions even when spherically symmetric models fail (e.g., Janka & Müller 1996; Murphy & Burrows 2008; Nordhaus et al. 2010b; Hanke et al. 2012; Dolence et al. 2013; Couch 2013; Couch & O’Connor 2014).”
A COMPARISON OF TWO- AND THREE-DIMENSIONAL NEUTRINO-HYDRODYNAMICS SIMULATIONS OF CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVAE (2013, result): “This is qualitatively consistent with previous 3D simulations employing different numerical setups (e.g., Nordhaus et al. (2010); Hanke et al. (2012); Burrows et al. (2012); Hanke et al. (2013)).”
THREE-DIMENSIONAL HYDRODYNAMIC CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA SIMULATIONS FOR AN 11.2 M☉ STAR WITH SPECTRAL NEUTRINO TRANSPORT (2011, background): “This is qualitatively consistent with Nordhaus et al. (2010) who did not observe the dominance of the (ℓ,m)=(1,0) mode in their 3D models.”
On the nature of supernovae Ib and Ic (2012, background): “Mixing may also stem from the small-scale structure of the SN shock, associated with convection and slowly developing Rayleigh–Taylor and Kelvin– Helmholtz instabilities (Kifonidis et al. 2003, 2006; Joggerst et al. 2009; Hammer et al. 2010; Nordhaus et al. 2010).”
THREE-DIMENSIONAL CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA SIMULATED USING A 15 M⊙ PROGENITOR (2015, methodology): “…explicitly (Couch 2013; Couch & O’Connor 2014) using simulations with parameterized treatments of neutrino heating and cooling, though other simulations showed only small differences or the opposite pattern (Nordhaus et al. 2010; Dolence et al. 2013; Handy et al. 2014; Fernández 2015).”
THE LANDSCAPE OF THE NEUTRINO MECHANISM OF CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVAE: NEUTRON STAR AND BLACK HOLE MASS FUNCTIONS, EXPLOSION ENERGIES, AND NICKEL YIELDS (2014, background): “In some cases, Lcrit in 3D is slightly higher than in 2D (Iwakami et al. 2008; Nordhaus et al. 2010; Hanke et al. 2012; Takiwaki et al. 2012; Couch 2013b; Couch & O’Connor 2014; Dolence et al. 2013, 2014).”