Progenitors, Supernovae, and Neutron Stars Yudai Suwa 1, 2 1 Yukawa - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Progenitors, Supernovae, and Neutron Stars

Yudai Suwa1, 2

1Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto U. 2Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics, Garching

Collaboration with: S. Yamada (Waseda), T. Takiwaki (Riken), K. Kotake (Fukuoka), E. Müller (MPA)

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Progenitor structures-1

2

See also talk by Sukhbold and poster by Thomas

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 Interior Mass (solar masses) Entropy (k/baryon) Density (g/cc) 1 109 108 107 106 105

Woosley & Heger (2007) 20 M⦿

silicon/oxygen shell silicon shell iron core

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Progenitor structures-2

3

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 200 400 600 800 1000 Mass accretion rate at 300 km [M s-1] Time after bounce [ms] s12 s15 s20 s30 s40 s50 s55 s80 s100

12 M⦿ 15 M⦿ 20 M⦿ 30 M⦿ 40 M⦿ 50 M⦿ 55 M⦿ 80 M⦿ 100 M⦿

104 105 106 107 108 109 1010 1011 100 1000 10000 Density [g cm-3] Radius [km] s12 s15 s20 s30 s40 s50 s55 s80 s100

104 105 106 107 108 109 1010 1011 0.5 1 1.5 2 Density [g cm-3] Mass [M] s12 s15 s20 s30 s40 s50 s55 s80 s100

data from Woosley & Heger (2007)

P ρv2∝ Ṁv shock pressure radius

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Progenitor: 12-100 M⦿ (Woosley & Heger 07) 2D (axial symmetry) (ZEUS-2D; Stone & Norman 92) MPI+OpenMP hybrid parallelized Hydrodynamics+neutrino transfer (neutrino-radiation hydrodynamics)

Isotropic difgusion source approximation (IDSA) for neutrino transfer

(Liebendörfer+ 09)

Ray-by-ray plus approximation for multi-D transfer (Buras+ 06)

EOS: Lattimer-Swesty (K=180,220,375MeV) / H. Shen

Explosion simulations-1: setups

4

See Suwa et al., PASJ, 62, L49 (2010) Suwa et al., ApJ, 738, 165 (2011) Suwa et al., ApJ, 764, 99 (2013) Suwa, PASJ, 66, L1 (2014) Suwa et al., arXiv:1406.6414 for more details

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Explosion simulations-2: results

5

Several progenitors lead to shock expansion No monotonic trend with ZAMS mass is found What makes difgerence?

200 400 600 800 1000 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Shock Radius [km] Time after Bounce [ms] s12 s15 s20 s30 s40 s50 s55 s80 s100

YS, Yamada, Takiwaki, Kotake, arXiv:1406.6414

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

What makes difference?: Ṁ-Lν

Low Ṁ and high Lν are achieved for exploding progenitors

Accretion of multiple shells makes difgerent dependence of Lν on Ṁ

6

Burrows & Goshy (1993) explode fail marginal

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Total Neutrino Luminosity [1052 erg s-1] Mass accretion rate at 300 km [M s-1] WH07/s12 WH07/s15 WH07/s20 WH07/s30 WH07/s40 WH07/s50 WH07/s55 WH07/s80 WH07/s100

Time

YS, Yamada, Takiwaki, Kotake, arXiv:1406.6414

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Critical curve and model trajectory

7

• critical curve

model trajectory turning point

Semi-analytic expressions of trajectories available in Suwa et al. (2014)

e.g., Burrows & Goshy (1993) Murphy & Burros (2008) Nordhaus+ (2010) Hanke+ (2012) Couch (2013) Handy+ (2014) Pejcha & Thompson (2012) Keshet & Balberg (2012) Janka (2012) Müller & Janka (2015) Dolence+ (2015) Suwa+ (2014)

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Code comparison

8

Suwa+ 2014 (Kyoto- Tokyo-Fukuoka) Dolence+ 2015 (Princeton) Melson+ 2015 (Garching) Bruenn+ 2014 (Oak Rigde)

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Code comparison

8

Suwa+ 2014 (Kyoto- Tokyo-Fukuoka) Dolence+ 2015 (Princeton) Melson+ 2015 (Garching) Bruenn+ 2014 (Oak Rigde)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 Luminosity of electron neutrinos [1052 erg s-1] Mass accretion rate [M⊙ s-1] s20; ZEUS (Suwa+ 2014) s20; CASTRO (Dolence+ 2015) s20; CHIMERA (Bruenn+ 2014) s20; Prometheus (Melson+ 2015)

PROMETHEUS-VERTEX GR correction variable Eddington factor ray-by-ray plus Lattimer-Swesty EOS explode in 2D CHIMERA GR correction fmux limited difgusion ray-by-ray plus Lattimer-Swesty EOS explode in 2D CASTRO Newton fmux limited difgusion multi-D transfer

• H. Shen EOS

NOT explode in 2D ZEUS Newton isotropic difgusion source app. ray-by-ray plus Lattimer-Swesty EOS NOT explode in 2D

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

How much do initial conditions matter?

Starting from hydrostatic NSE cores 1D, GR, neutrino-radiation hydro code; Agile-IDSA (public code!) Neutrino-driven explosions are possible in 1D

9

• 10
• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2

2 4 1 10 100 1000 10000 Velocity [109 cm s-1] Radius [km] tpb=0ms tpb=1ms tpb=5ms tpb=50ms tpb=100ms 10 100 1000

• 100
• 50

50 100 150 200 Radius [km] Time after boune [ms]

YS, Müller+, in prep.

Preliminary

See also poster by Yu

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Long-term simulations from PNS to NS

NS consists of core and crust When a PNS (w/o crust) becomes a NS (w/ crust)? From core collapse up to NS formation was followed with neut.-

• rad. hydro. simulation, for 67 s

10

(C)NASA YS, PASJ (2014)

mass coordinate shock

T

c ≈ Z2e2

ŴkB 4π 3 ρY

exa

Zmu 1/3

Yudai Suwa, FOE 2015@NCSU /11 6/1/2015

Summary

Progenitor structure is one of the most important ingredients for core-collapse supernova explosion

initial condition mass accretion history

We performed simulations of multi-dimensional neutrino- radiation hydrodynamics

4 of 9 models exploded Low-Ṁ and high Lν are favorable for explosion

By performing further simulations, NS crust formation was reached from precollapse consistently (from supernovae to neutron stars)

11