Embed
Email

Massive Stars Supernovae Then and Now

Document Sample

Shared by: xiuliliaofz
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
12/14/2011
language:
pages:
67
Massive Stars:

Supernovae Then

and Now



“It is the stars, The stars above us,

govern our conditions”



King Lear, Act IV, Scene 3 and

Burbidge, Burbidge, Fowler, and

Hoyle, first page (1957)









John Poole and

S. Woosley (1983)

slide by Alex Heger

Stellar nucleosynthesis is easy.

It’s the ejection that is hard!









T3

25 M Presupernova Star

900 R 1R



H, He

He









Si, S, Ar, Ca

O, Mg, Ne



Fe







He, C



0.1 R 0.01 R

Hydrostatic equilibrium plus constant density imply:

dP GM

= P = NA k T

dr r μ

GM μ

Tc =

N A kR

1/3

3M

R=

4 If T for a given burning

stage is approximately a

Tc3

M2 constant, this suggests

that stars of higher mass

will burn at lower density.









Stars of higher mass will, at a given burning stage,

have higher entropy. They will be less degenerate.

Density Profiles of Supernova Progenitor Cores





These make the

heavy elements









These should be

easy to explode







2D SASI-aided,

Neutrino-Driven

Explosion?

The outcome of stellar evolution depends

upon four physical quantities



• Mass



• Metallicity

• Mass loss rate - related to metallicity



• Rotation (for today’s talk = 0)





And of course the physics and algorithms in the code

used to calculate it.

Woosley, Heger

and Weaver (2002)

Final States

Rotation = Zero







Binaries WD Ib Ic Faint SN Ibc

BH



Pulsational

Z 2 for A > 130

and absent for A bigger n/seed ratio.

Independent of metallicity…

.55 Proton mass fraction in the wind

(composite artist’s rendering)

.50

Early

Xp

.45



.40 Late





0 0.2 3 10

t(sec)



Early on e has a bigger flux (and the neutron is

heavier than the proton), so weak steady state in the

wind favors a proton excess - Xp > 0.50





Later the neutrino fluxes are similar but the e are

hotter. This makes the wind neutron rich - Xn = 1 - X p > 0.50

Neutrino wind

n-rich





Late times

site of the r-process



Woosley et al. (1994)









Late time solution,

independent of metallicity

S ~ 100 - 400 (not reproduced

since 1994)

Entropies in “realistic” models

are 3 - 4 times less.

Neutrino wind - p-rich

Pruet et al (2006) based see also Fröhlich et al (2006)

on SN models by Buras et al (2006)

Neutrino wind - p-rich

Variation of Entropy

Entropy x 2:

Xseed lower (n/s higher) S = 150, t = 2.15 s, T9 = 0.93

hence flow to higher Z.



<-140









S = 220, t = 0.58 s, T9 = 1.81



Entropy x 3: Flow to even

higher Z now passes

through valley of stability,

<-100

making “r,s” and “r-only”

nuclei in a p-rich

environment!

Loss of light p-nuclei.

26Al and 60Fe





M(60 Fe)/M(26 Al)

Predicted (Timmes et al 1995) 0.38 ± factor of 1.7

Observed (RHESSI, INTEGRAL, 2005) 0.29

Rauscher et al (2002) ~ 1.5 (few stars)

This survey with Rauscher rates 1.8

" with correct rates for 26 Al destruction 0.95

59,60

Still uncertain Fe(n, )60,61Fe, ?

22

Ne( ,n)25 Mg, rotation, WR mass loss

Nucleosynthesis

Outstanding Issues



• Entropy (or flavor mixing or time scale) for the

r-process



• Entropy for the -rp-process



• Cross sections and models that make 60Fe and

26Al consistently







• Some rare isotopes 44,48Ca, 47Ti, 64Zn, 92Mo

Lo Z

Low metallicity can affect the lives (and deaths) of

massive stars in five ways:

• The IMF may be different. In particular, more

massive stars may be created



• Mass loss will be reduced, though it is uncertain

* by how much. Because of this, the heavier stars are

harder to explode (and are different when they do

explode)



• The neutron excess available for nucleosynthesis

will be reduced, thus affecting the production of

odd-Z elements, neutron-rich isotopes, and the

s-process.



• Low Z stars are more compact, bluer presupernovae

• Rotation may be a bigger efect?

Eldridge and Vink (2006)









rotation reduces these limits

(Meynet and Maeder 2006)

Final States

Rotation = Zero







Binaries WD Ib Ic Faint SN Ibc

BH



Pulsational

Crab Pair

Z < Z /4 WD

SN SN IIp/87A SN IIp, BH Pair

SN

SN



Crab Common SN IIp, BH

Z WD Faint SN Ib/BH

SN SN IIp SN II-L



9 10 20 35 90 130



Here Z and binary membership are surrogates for mass loss

in single stars. Below ZO/4 we assume that stars complete their

evolution with at least some hydrogen still on their surfaces.

With some uncertainty about exact demarcations, one can

delineate four kinds of deaths for non-rotating helium stars.

(For rotation decrease main sequence mass 10 - 20%)





He Core Main Seq. Mass Supernova Mechanism



12 M 40 10 M 95 Fe core collapse to neutron star

or a black hole



40 M 60 95 M 130 Pulsational pair instability followed

by Fe core collapse



60 M 137 130 M 260 Pair instability supernova



M 137 M 260 Black hole. Possible GRB

Z = 0; 10 to 100 M

(Heger & Woosley, 2008)



Big Bang initial composition, Fields (2002), 75% H, 25% He





10 12 M M = 0.1M

12 17 M M = 0.2 M

Evolved from main sequence to

17 - 19 M M = 0.1 M

presupernova and then exploded

19 20 M M = 0.2 M with pistons near the edge of the

20 - 35 M M = 0.5 M iron core (S/NAk = 4.0)

35 - 50 M M= 1M

50 - 100 M M =5M Each model exploded with a

variety of energies from 0.3 to

126 Models 10 x 1051 erg.

1030 supernovae

low

metallicity







solar







He cores







CO cores Max M He

Solar ~12

Z=0 unlimited









Woosley, Heger, and Weaver (2002)

Low metallicity stars

are hard to explode





Solar









BE







Low

Metallicity









Mass

Joggerst, Heger, &

Woosley (2008)

Fallback in a 25 M Supernova

Blue - zero metallicity

Red - solar metallicity





Zhang, Woosley and Heger (2008)

Chevalier (1988)









Late time fall back is strongly

influenced by the reverse

shock which happens sooner and

is more pronounced if the

hydrogen envelope is compact.

Above 35 M

black holes form

in Z=0 stars

Zhang, Woosley, and

REMANT MASSES Heger (2008)







Z=0 Max n = 1.7 M Max n = 2.0 M





Av. n* M grav 1.33 ± 0.14 M 1.37 ± 0.20 M

Av. BH M bary 7.93 ± 7.47 8.52 ± 7.59

%n 47% 52%

% BH 53% 48%

Max BH 35.35 35.35



These are for 1.2 B explosions. An upper bound to the

black hole mass at any energy is about 45 solar masses

given by the maximum helium core mass.

Caveat: Primary nitrogen!

(Rotation dependent)









Primary N

Nucleosynthesis 10 - 100 solar masses

Z=0

“Standard model”, 1.2 B, = 1.35 (Salpeter IMF), mix = 0.1,

10 - 100 solar masses = 1.87

Best fit, 0.9 B, = 1.35, mix = 0.0158, 10 - 100 solar masses

= 0.748, (better).

Lai et al, (2008), submitted to ApJ, astroph 0804.1370









28 metal poor stars in the Milky Way Galaxy

-4 < [Fe/H] < -2; 13 are < -.26

E

Cr I and II, non-LTE effects; see also KE = E o (20/M) exp B

Sobeck et al (2007)

mixing 0.1 would have been "normal"

(Frebel)

Best single star fit

E = 0.6 B

21.5 M Mix = 0.0631

= 4.69

Best fit

Gaussian M= 15.0 ± 0.025 dex

1/2

M

E = 0.9 B Mix = 0.0063

20

= 2.74

25 M Pop III star

0.3 B, mildly mixed

Fe = 8 x 10 -6 M









Umeda and Nomoto, Nature, 422, 871, (2003)

Best Gaussian (Christlieb)

M = 17.0 ± 0.05 dex

1/2

M

E = 0.6 B Mix = 0.0251

20

= 1.84

Some general features low Z nucleosynthesis:



• Heavier remnant masses



• More fall back, less mixing

• Large odd-even effect in nucleosynthesis

• Primary B and F

• Above M ~ 40, primary N production

(M lower with rotation)



• No evidence for pair SN or hypernovae

Light curves:



• Typically faint with a maximum dominated by

radioactive decay (like SN 1987A)



• Above 40 solar masses, some are red

supergiants due to primary nitrogen production.

These will make more typical Type II-p

supernovae.

He Core Main Seq. Mass Supernova Mechanism



2 M 40 10 M 95 Fe core collapse to neutron star

or a black hole



40 M 60 95 M 130 Pulsational pair instability followed

by Fe core collapse



60 M 137 130 M 260 Pair instability supernova



M 137 M 260 Black hole. Possible GRB

Pair Instability starts at 80 solar masses









Primary N





pair

instability

110 M star with reduced mass

loss (M/5 on main sequence;

M/10 as RSG)





Final mass 74.56 M ;

ejecta SN 1

helium core 49.89 M





First explosion ejected H

envelope with KE SN II

= 1.4 10 50 erg





6.7 years later, a second

explosion, 7 10 50 erg,

runs into ejecta of the first

explosion at 2 1015 cm

The first supernova outburst is a

faint one, under 1042 erg s-1 lasting

about 6 months. Velocities are

typically under 1000 km s-1.









The second outburst is a

true “hypernova”, much

brighter than a SN Ia. Total

optical light is a few x 1050

erg.



About 8 years later the star

dies and may produce a

final supernova or even a

GRB.

Conclusions

• The known abundances in low metallicity stars

can be fit by “ordinary” supernovae in the 10 - 100

solar mass range. There is no need for “hypernovae”

or pair instability supernovae. Favored masses

are 10 - 20 solar masses. Explosion energies are

~ 1 B and less mixing is indicated.



• Metal deficient stars will produce many more black

holes with masses as high as 40 solar masses.



• Pulsational pair instability can give a wide range

of light curves, from the faintest to the brightest

observed supernovae. These objects can be

“supernovae” up to 6 times.

George Gamow in

My World Line



Related docs
Other docs by xiuliliaofz
Ordinance 525
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
ELGIN HS Education
Views: 8  |  Downloads: 0
DeepBreathing
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
YUI Library Get Utility v2.8
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Life in the Middle Ages Women
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
drvs-import-file-lx-edit-checks-092305
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
I
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
aegean-med-seism
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
List of funded facilities
Views: 8  |  Downloads: 0
CHIEF JOSEPH
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!