Konstantin Yakunin Joint Institute for Computational Sciences Oak - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Konstantin Yakunin Joint Institute for Computational Sciences Oak Ridge National Laboratory Particle Physics and Astro-Cosmology Seminar, UTK 3/29/17 1

Credit: NASA/Dana Berry, Sky Works Digital Credit: LSC Credit: LSC Credit: Emil Ivanov

The first GW signals were detected on 14 September 2015 and 26 December 2015 GW150914 GW151226 Duration 0.2 s Duration 1.0 s Distance 440 ± 160 MPc Distance 440 ± 180 MPc M1 = 36 and M2 = 29 M1 = 14.2 and M2 = 7.5 Frequency: 35 – 250 Hz Frequency: 35 – 450 Hz SNR = 24 (σ =5.1) SNR = 13 (σ =5.0)

CCSNe Observation Formal MOU!

Credit: StudyBlue Strongest GW signal: Rotating progenitor Non-rotating progenitor

SASI Explosion Energy versus Progenitor Mass Wossley-Heger 12, 15, 20, 25 Solar Mass Nonrotating Progenitors; 256 x 256 Spatial Resolution 0.8 W-H 12 solar mass progenitor W-H 15 solar mass progenitor W-H 20 solar mass progenitor Explosion Energy [B] 0.6 W-H 25 solar mass progenitor 0.4 Core Bounce PNS Instabilities Neutrino-Driven 0.2 Convection 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Time from bounce [s] Explosion 3/29/17 6

Non-rotating or slowly rotating progenitors Long signal (> 1 sec), low, moderate amplitude Bruenn et al. 2016, Ap.J . 818 , 123 Richers et al. 200=17, arxiv:1701.02752 Rapidly rotating progenitors Short signal (< 50 ms), high amplitude at bounce Burrows et al. 2007, Ap.J . 664 , 416 3/29/17 7 � - , = - � �

Landscape of CCSNe Slowly Rotating Rapidly Rotating ✴ Prompt convection ✴ Bounce/ringdown of ✴ Neutrino-driven millisecond PNS convection & SASI ✴ low T/|W| instabilities ✴ PNS convection ✴ Rapidly rotating progenitor ~ 1% of expected CCSNe ✴ Rotation profile is parameterized by central angular velocity and a differential rotation

Self-Consistent Supernova Model

2D Explosion Models Bruenn et al. ApJ, 818, 123 (2016) 1.6 E + = Energy sum over positive energy zones B12-WH07 B15-WH07 E + ov = E + 1.4 + Overburden 1000 1000 E + ov, rec = E + ov + Nuclear recombination Distance from symmetry axis [km] 1.2 B12-WH07 500 500 1 Explosion Energy [B] B15-WH07 B20-WH07 0.8 B25-WH07 0 0 0.6 0.4 500 500 0.2 1000 1000 0 0.3 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time After Bounce [ms] -1000 -500 0 500 1000 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 0.12 B20-WH07 B25-WH07 0.1 SN 1993J 1000 1000 SN 2004et 0.08 SN 1987A Distance from symmetry axis [km] 56 Ni Mass [M ☉ ] 500 500 0.06 SN 2004A SN 2012aw 0 0 0.04 SN 2004dj SN 2005cs 0.02 500 500 0 1000 1000 10 15 20 25 ZAMS Progenitor Mass [M ☉ ] -1000 -500 0 500 1000 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 Distance along symmetry axis [km] Distance along symmetry axis [km]

Structure of GW Signal from 2D model Yakunin et al. PRD , 92, 084040 (2015) Prompt convection (30 ms) Explosion and shock expansion (780 SASI and active accretion on PNS ms) (228 ms)

Yakunin et al. 2015 PRD 92 084040 3/29/17 12

Results obtained with the CHIMERA GR multiphysics supernova code with state-of-the-art neutrino interactions. Yakunin et al. 2015 PRD 92 084040 3/29/17 13

• Simulations: signal characteristics (f, A, etc); physical mechanism producing GW signals, bank of waveforms • Signal Search: search algorithms based on the most reliable parts of waveforms, proposal of detector design to observe physical properties of supernovae via GW signals 3/29/17 14

SNR = 41 SNR = 6 Thanks to Marek Szczepanczyk 3/29/17 15

5

Evolution of ground based detectors Third generation: From 10 to 1Hz 10 x lower thermal noise 10 x times lower quantum (shot) noise

aLIGO CCSNe Detection Distance The Search for Waveform cWB Distance (Mpc) @ FC Distance (Mpc) GRB Distance (Mpc) 50% hrss GWs from CCSNe LB1 0.732 5 5 LB2 2.252 5 5 LB3 0.191 5 5 The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file. LB4 3.292 5 5 GW emission from LB5 11.511 15 15 Piro1 0.891 5 5 core-collapse Piro2 4.409 15 15 detectable Piro3 2.445 5 5 out to ~100kpc Piro4 12.569 15 15 3G CCSNe Detection Distance cWB Distance (Mpc) @ Waveform FC Distance (Mpc) GRB Distance (Mpc) 50% hrss Extreme post-core- Muller1-N20-2 0.38 1 5 collapse GW Muller1-L15-3 0.47 1 1 Muller1-W15-4 0.99 N/A 1 emission models Yak1 0.002 0.5 0.1 detectable out to Yak2 0.001 0.5 0.5 ~10-15 Mpc Yak3 0.002 0.1 0.1 Yak4 0.004 0.5 0.5 [3] Gill et al. 2017

CCSNe Rate within 20 Mpc 600 Li 2011 Galaxy Conversion Cappellaro 1996 Galaxy Conversion 500 Rate of CCSNe per Century 400 300 Virgo Cluster 200 M81 Group Local 100 Group 0 5 10 15 20 Distance (Mpc) [3] Gill et al. 2017 Kiranjyot Gill NAME NAME SN Workshop 2017 TALK TITLE TALK TITLE 03/17/2017 DATE DATE

SNEWS: SuperNova Early Warning System snews.bnl.gov Daya Bay LVD Super-K HALO KamLAND Borexino IceCube

Neutrino Detectors Expect time of flight delay for massive neutrinos Distance reach of detectors SK will see ~1 event from Andromeda; HK will get a ~dozen

Summary of supernova neutrino detectors y Detector Type Location Mass Events Status t (kton) @ 10 kpc i v i Super-K Water Japan 32 8000 Running t i s LVD Scintillator Italy 1 300 Running n KamLAND Scintillator Japan 1 300 Running e s Borexino Scintillator Italy 0.3 100 Running c (10 6 ) IceCube Long string South Pole (600) Running i t c Baksan Scintillator Russia 0.33 50 Running a HALO Lead Canada 0.079 20 Running l a Daya Bay Scintillator China 0.33 100 Running G NO ν A Scintillator USA 15 3000 Running MicroBooNE Liquid argon USA 0.17 17 Running Extragalactic SNO+ Scintillator Canada 1 300 Under construction DUNE Liquid argon USA 40 3000 Future Hyper-K Water Japan 540 110,000 Future JUNO Scintillator China 20 6000 Future (10 6 ) PINGU Long string South pole (600) Future plus reactor experiments, DM experiments...

LIGO-CCSN Collaboration LIGO Burst CCSNe CCSNe Data Data Theory Analysis Analysis

From 2D to 3D Ray by Ray structure 3D 2D 512( r ) x 256( θ ) à 256 processors 540( r ) x 180( θ ) x 180( ɸ ) à 32400 processors Angular resolution < 1° Angular resolution ~ 2° Efficiency of the code: 100 ms/month à 100 ms/week

2D vs 3D Supernova Explosion Lentz et al. ApJL, 807, L31 (2015) Shock Radius Explosion Energy 800 0.4 C15-3D 750 a) C15-3D C15-2D 700 C15-1D C15-2D 650 Mean shock radius 600 0.3 Diagnostic energy [B] Minimum/maximum 550 Shock radius [km] 500 450 0.2 400 350 300 250 0.1 200 150 100 50 0 0 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 100 400 450 0 50 150 200 250 300 350 Time [ms] Time [ms]

Comparisons use same time window (from 3D) and temporal resolution (from 2D). Results obtained with the CHIMERA GR multiphysics supernova code with state-of-the-art neutrino interactions. 3/29/17 27 Yakunin et al. 2017, arXiv:1701.07325v1

Yakunin et al. 2017, arXiv:1701.07325v1 3/29/17 28

Most reliable part of signal Most reliable part of signal in frequency domain A + [cm] 2 0 − 2 s11.2 2 A × , 0 − 2 25 125 225 325 Andresen et al. 2016 3/29/17 29

Dimmelmeier et al. PRD, 064056,2008 Kotake et al. PRD, 044023, 2003 Richers et al. arxiv:1701.02752 Schreidegger et al. A&A, 2010 3/29/17 30

A possible bounce signal E GW [Mc 2 ] Duration (ms) f peak [Hz] Typical h at 10 kpc Emission process 3x10 -21 ~10 -8 Core Bounce 10 300 0.3x10 -21 ~10 -12 Prompt convection 50 200 2x10 -9 Δ t/100ms 1x10 -21 SASI/ND convection 450 700 3/29/17 31 0.7x10 -21 2x10 -9 Explosion >400 800

• Simulations help to improve data analysis and increase chances for detection! o We are able to perform realistic 3D simulations and produce reliable waveforms. o Waveforms from 2D simulations have similar characteristics as 3D ones. Thus, 2D simulations can be used to create a bank of waveforms. Now, even realistic 2D simulations are computationally inexpensive. o It would be good to summarize the main characteristics of GW signals into a table in any publication that presents new waveforms o To produce more realistic waveforms we have to perform realistic CCSN simulations with slow-rotating progenitor (bounce signal + neutrino-driven explosion signal) 3/29/17 32

Blondin Mauney Casanova Chu Endeve Funded Hix by Landfield Bruenn Lentz Marronetti Lingerfelt Messer Mezzacappa Roberts Yakunin Harris 3/29/17 33