Inma Domínguez Explosive Nucleosynthesis in Type Ia Supernovae Universidad de Granada Dust in...
-
Upload
alban-peter-price -
Category
Documents
-
view
245 -
download
0
Transcript of Inma Domínguez Explosive Nucleosynthesis in Type Ia Supernovae Universidad de Granada Dust in...
Inma Domínguez
Explosive Nucleosynthesis in Type Ia Supernovae
Universidad de Granada
Dust in EuroGENESIS environments: from primitive, massive stars to novae
Perugia, November 11-14 2012
Type Ia Supernovae
Light Curve
L
time
Thermonuclear Explosionof a White Dwarf composed of carbon and oxygen with a mass M~MChandrasekhar 1.4 M
56Ni 56Co 56FeLMAX M56Ni
M < 8 M
CO WDs < 1.1 M
Bright Standard Bombs
Parameterizing SNe Ia, Parameterizing SNe Ia, the Cosmological Light the Cosmological Light HouseHouse, by the Shape of their Light Curves, by the Shape of their Light Curves
Mmax-m15
)(15 Bm
MB
Phillips 1993; 1999
<> ~ 0.2 mag
Nearby SNe !!
15 d
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2011for the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe through observations of distant supernovae
Adam Riess
Saul Perlmutter (PI)
http://www.nobelprize.org/mediaplayer/index.php?id=1745&view=1
SNC Project
High-z Team
Brian Schmidt (PI)
Could we reach the needed precision to understand Dark Energy, ?
Improve the Calibration <> ~ 0.2 mag 0.01 mag
CDM Cosmological Model
Observations: Bright SNIa in Galaxies with Star Formation & in which the SN rate is higher !!
Hamuy et al., 1995, 1996,2000, Ivanov et al. 2000 Branch et al. 1996, Mannucci et al 2005 Cappellaro et al. 2003, Sullivan el at. 2006 …
Identify 2nd parameters for the calibration
Does the calibration depend on redshift ?
Do SNe Ia depend on redshift ? Z/Age of progenitoe system ?
Improve the Local Calibration ?
Understand SNe Ia !!
What we know ?
Explosion of a Chandrasekhar mass CO WD in a binary system
M ~ 1.4 M
R ~ 2000 kmc ~ 2 109 g/cm3
vsound ~ 5000 km/s = R/vsound ~ 1 s
exp ~ 1 s
CO WD
MCh
C-burning O-burning Si-burning NSE
Fuel CO
Burning-scales SNe scales
WD
0.5C + 0.5O
half-reaction length/time scales XC : Cini/2 XO : Oini/2
o < 2 107 g/cm3 No NSE o < 5 106 g/cm3 No Si-burno < 106 g/cm3 No O-burn
O0.6 MeV/nuc
C 0.35
MeV/nuc
Si, NSE0.8 MeV/nuc
Considering WD/explosionscales:
•Burning nucleosynthesis
SNIa spectra at maximum light
Branch et al. 1982
Intermediate mass elements (IME): O, Mg, Ca, Si, SPskovskii 1969, Branch et al. 1982
Incomplete burning in the outer shells
Burning at low < 107 g/cm3
Siobserved
synthetic
EXPLOSIONS
1. Ignition Enuc > E
2. Convection con < nuc simmering phase
3. Runaway nuc < hyd Explosive ignition
4. Propagation of the burning front
Laminar (conductive e-) v << vsound
Deflagrations v < vsound turbulent mixing burn-unburnt
Detonations v vsound
3D ?
Explosion 1D models Nucleosynthesis
Delayed Detonation
C-deflagration
NO
OK
C-detonation
IME missing NO
vburn first slow: Deflagrationthen (at DDT)
accelerates: Detonation
Khokhlov 1991
DetDef
Explosive Nucleosynthesis Delayed Detonations
• Center to 0.4 M (T > 5.5 109 K):
NSE e-captures (Ye )
Bravo & Martínez-Pinedo 2012
Ye depends on initial Z & simmering phase
• 0.4 to 1.1 M QSE Si-burning • 1.1 to 1.2 M O-burning • 1.2 to 1.364 M Ne-burning • 1.364 to 1.366 M C-burning• 1.366 to 1.37 M NO-burning
Chemical layered structure
DDT at 0.2 M
Inner 0.1 M: 54Fe, 58Ni No 56Ni
Explosive Nucleosynthesis
Bravo & Martínez-Pinedo 2012
X > 0.01 M
Arnett, Truran, Woosley 1971Thielemann, Nomoto, Yokoi 1984, 1986Woosley & Weaver 1986Khokhlov, 1991Hoflich, Wheeler, Thielemann, 1998Hoflich, Khokhlov, Wheeler, 1995Iwamoto et al. 1999
SN Ia
“Normal SN Ia” 80% of SNe Ia
Produce ~ 0.6 M56Ni
(full range: 0.1-1 M)
Burn 1.1M to Si and beyond
Consistent with MCh WD Delayed-Detonation Explosions
Khokhlov 1991
total burnt mass: IME + 54Fe + 56Ni
Complete burning NSE 54Fe + 56Ni
Neutron-rich elements, 54Fe
Mazzali et al. Science 2007 Zorro Diagram
Produces 2/3 of the observed Fe in the Universe
56Ni
1D Delayed Detonations Mmax m15
DDT : 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.7 x 107 g/cm3
DDT shorter pre-expansion burn 56Ni IME (Ca, S, Si, Mg) Ek
Höflich et al.
DDT 56Ni mass Lmax
But 1D Delayed Detonation models parameters !!!
• Progenitor system Path to exploding WD ?
• Mechanism that produces the explosion ? 3D numerical simulations fail
Deflagration to Detonation transition in unconfined environments ?
Do SNe Ia depend on redshift ? progenitor ? Z/Age ?
DDT burn 56Ni, IME
We do not know…
Three Dimensional SimulationsDeflagrations
A. Khokhlov
time=1.79 s Problems: • CO at center• No chemical layered structure• Low Ekin
• Ekin 56Ni massChicago, Flash, MPI, NRL, UPC
DDT Gamezo et al. 2005 Ropke 2007, 2011 Jackson et al. 2010
Gravitationally Confined Detonation Plewa 2004, Jordan et al. 2008, Meakin et al. 2009 Pulsating Reverse Detonations
Alternatives
Bravo & García-Senz
Nucleosynthesis: Simplified -network Flame scales not solved !! WD 2000 kmflame thickness cm
High resolution 3D detonations at low densities (outer layers)
L = 200 km W= 25 km 24 m = 106 g/cm3
Khokhlov, Domínguez et al. 2012
C mass fraction
Nucleosynthesis:-network 13 nuclei 18 reactions
Deflagration to Detonation transition ?
Simmering phase ?Convective hydrostatic C-burning
23Na & 25Mg are important at T 4 108 K 1-4 109
g/cm3
Morales-Garoffolo 2011
e-captures over light nuclei ?
Influence ExplosiveC-ignition !!
URCA process ?
Pierre Lessafre, KITP conference1941
Cooling or heating ? ?
Gamov and Shoënberg (1941)Urca pairs
Bruenn 1973
Thermonuclear reaction rates: sensitivity study
Bravo & Martínez Pinedo 2012
3138 nuclear reactions
x10 1/10
12C + 12C16O + 16O
Enuc < 4 %X < factor of 2 for X > 0.02
28Si, 32S, 54Fe, 56Ni & 58Ni Not modified
(p,) 10 species changes 12%
(,) 33 species change 12%
simultaneous modification of nuclear reactions ? weak interactions ? resonances ?
12C + 12C with a Low Energy Resonance
Bravo et al. 2011
Spillane et al. 2007
Influence runaway conditions: LER
-simmering
T
(if central)
off-center ignition
Conv. Cores
12C burnt
Ye (α/p)
12C + 12C 23Na + p12C + 12C 20Ne + α
vs CF88
Dust formation in the ejecta of SNIa ?
Nozawa et al. 2011
Kepler & Tycho SNR
Gómez et al. 2012
400 yrs
Dust observed (Herschel): Mw,d 3 – 8 10-3 M
Early (100 d) formation: 3 10-4 to 0.2 M / SNIa Destruction (106 yr)
Dust in Type Ia Supernova Remnants Poor producers of interstellar dust !! NO clear detection yet !
Gómez et al. 2012
Tycho SNRDust (contours) is coincident with the outermost shockfront swept up ISM or CSM
X-rays Chandra
Williams et al. 2012
Dust from progenitor system !!
Kepler CSM
Silicate dust
Spitzer
Kepler SNR: Massive AGB companion ?
(N/N > 2)Chiotellis et al. 2012Williams et al. 2012
Observations
X, UV, optical, IR
Hsiao et al. 2007, 2012
2001el Krisciunas
Hsiao et al2012
Fe-peak: late IR X-ray (SNR)
Z progenitor: very early U-band
IME: Early Optical spectra IR spectra, X-ray (SNR)
Unburnt Carbon: NIR spectra
SN2011fein M101 at 6.4 Mpc
56Ni & 56Co: -ray no detection yet ! upper limits
SN2011fe: INTEGRAL observations 975419 s
Isern et al. 2012
Dust: MIR & FIR
Kepler SNR
Gómez et al. 2012
Herschel
Proposed 1D Explosion Mechanisms
DET: pure C-detonation
DEF: pure deflagration but …
DDT: delayed detonations DEF DET PDDT: pulsating delayed detonation
Sub-Ch: He-detonation in outer layers shock inward C-O detonation
Super-Chandrasekhar (rotation)
0.8 M
CO0.2 M
He
few
From progenitors to LCs
Mc
h
R ~ 2 108 cmc ~ 2 109 g/cm3
CO WD
< 8M < 1.1M
accretionT & rise at center
Non explosiveC-ignition
Convection(simmering)
ExplosiveC-ignition
1.5 M :
2.2 Gyr7 M :
0.04 Gyr
CoolingGyr
LC: 56Ni 56Co 56Fe
IME (O, Ca, Mg, Si, S)
Enuc > E nuc < hyd
Propagation of burning:IME burning at < 2 107 g/cm3
Pre-expansion of the WDDelayed Detonations (1D) Key parameter: DDT
? 3D ?
3D ?
C-expl
Z = 0.1 Z
Z = 3 Z
Z
Z: Calibration depends on Z !!
Z ( ) Lmax 0.5 mag
WD Age: cooling/crystallization
12C Lmax 0.4 mag t > 1.25 Gyr
Dependence of the transition density on composition ?
Chamulak et al. 2007
Calibration relation vs Z
ApJL Bravo et al. 2010, A&A 2011
SDSS
in agreement with observations
Sullivan et al. 2010
Influence of Z Bravo et al. 2010, Domínguez et al. 2001
56Ni vs Z
Timmes et al. 2003
Z
DDT (12C, )
3Z
Z
MMS : 3 – 7 M
Zini : 10-10 – 0.1
Including simmering: more e-captures
DDT
fixed
eY21
Neutronization
i
ii
ie X
A
ZY
Z 56Ni L
56Ni Mass & Distribution
Further Neutronization: • Simmering: e-cap.• Slow deflagration: e-capt.
Initial Z 22Ne
Our Studies about the influence of Progenitors
Evolution Explosion (1D) of the WD Light Curve
Initial Mass Initial chemical composition c (WD cooling, accretion) Rotation (MT Ubin ig)
MMAX < 0.2 mag
Domínguez et al. ApJ 2001, ApJ 2006, Bravo et al. 2010
The Majority of SNe Ia Standard Bombs Good lighthouses !!
OK for
To progress further Nature of Dark Energy Precision x 10 CONTROL ALL SYSTEMATIC
Numerical Methods STELLAR EVOLUTION & Accretion phase
FRANEC (Chieffi, Domínguez, Imbriani, Limongi, Straniero)
1D Hydrostatic Code
EXPLOSION & LIGHT CURVES
1D Radiation-Hydrodynamic Code (PPM)(Höflich, Khokhlov)
Ray transport Monte Carlo 3D simulations velocity of deflagration
Extended Nuclear Network
Extended Nuclear Network (700 isotopes) Physics and Chemestry coupled Time dependent mixing
(Domínguez, Höflich)
PMS WD Accretion Explosive C-ignition
Light Curves Models
MMS
1.5 7 M
L
WD Progenitors
Z0 0.02 MMAX < 0.05
Z (B-V) < 0.07Extinction
MMAX < 0.2 mag
MMAX < 0.2 mag
14 % in 56Ni mass
Domínguez, Hoflich, Straniero 2001
SNe luminosities
vs host galaxies
Sullivan et al. 2010
After Correction !!!
Low sSFRHigh Mstellar
(High Z)
Brighter by 0.06-0.09 mag
brighter
dimmer
Mste
sSFRbrighter
dimmer
Information about the explosions from Hubble residuals ?
HR = a + Z
= 0.13
= 0.22
Simulations: 200 SNe
M56Ni = 1. - 0.075 Z/Z
M56Ni = 1. - 0.18 Z/Z (1 . - 0.1 Z/Z )Bravo et al. 2010
Gallagher et al. 2008Howell et al 2009!!
observed
Urgent work is demanded on... Progenitors Observations/Theory Galactic chemical enrichment (Fe-peak)
3D Explosions free of parameters
Dust Extinction Different from Milky Way Evolution with z IR Hubble Diagrams
SN properties/Galaxy Properties (Age, Z, SFR)
Large Subsamples with smaller scatter split by properties Hubble diagrams including only passive galaxies
LCs & spectra from early time, including IR More Correlations: SN properties (spectra, colors...)/LC shape and Max
Go tohigher z
Joint Dark Energy Mission – NASA + DOE
Ground Based Telescopes - WorkingBright SNe Survey -CFHT Legacy Survey- Carniege SN Program - ESSENCE- Nearby SNe Factory- Nearby Galaxies SN Search - SN Intensive Study... Near future Pan-STARRS, La Silla SN-search, Skymapper, Palomar Transiente Factory ... and more
from Space under study
SNIa up to z=4
Supernovae
CMBDark MatterBBN
Further information…
Supernova Cosmology Projecthttp://www-supernova.lbl.gov/
The High-Z SN Searchhttp://www.cfa.harvard.edu/supernova//HighZ.html
JDEM-Joint Dark Energy Mission (NASA-DOE)http://jdem.gsfc.nasa.gov/
Dark Cosmology Center at Niels Bohr Institutehttp://dark.nbi.ku.dk/
Peculiar SNe Ia !!
Li et al 2003
Obseved Vexp
extremely lowCaII 6000 km/s broad peak
SN 2002cxSubluminous MB=-17.7m15=1.29
Outside the calibration Identification ? Associated with Star Formation More at high z !!
2001ay 2002cx 2002ic 2003fg
from z=0 to 1.5 SFR x 10Peculiar SNIa x 10
2002cx
Influence of the Progenitor DD Systems Including ROTATION
Steady Accretion
Balance between Angular Momentum deposition
and Angular Momentum lost by GWR
M > MCh Braking and Explosion
Piersanti, Gagliardi, Iben & Tornambé 2003
WD rotation synchronized at the orbital frequency
Rotation determines the decrease of the accretion rate and, hence, it prevents the off-center C-ignition
SN 2003fg: Super-Chandrasekhar ??
z=0.24
Brighter by x 2.2
Normal Spectra !!
Lower expansion velocities
1.3 M of 56Ni Progenitor: 2 M WD
Differential Rotation
Outside Maximum-decline relation !!!! 0.67 mag brighter
Howell et al. Nature 2006
SNLS Team, CFHT
L (erg/s)
MNi
DD Rotating models: LCsDomínguez et al 2006
56Ni: 0.77 0.86 M
Mbol: -19.5 -19.6
ig 46% Ubin
22%
Rigid rotation M < 1.5M
Ellipticals
Spirals
Piersanti et al 2009
Distribution of merging events
If More Massive brighter OK Luminosity distribution OK SN Rates
Differential Rotation M < 2.2 M
work in progress !!
Looking for the companion... Supernova Progenitor Survey -ESO-SPY consortium DD: WD + WD FEW Napiwotzki et al. 2006
Precursors: Recurrent Novae RS Oph MWD~ 1.38 M Hachisu et al.
2006, Selvelli et al. 2003, Sokoloski et al. Nature 2006
X-ray progenitor observations: SN2007on in NGC1404 (E) 4 yr before
Direct hints from the companion ?? SD: WD + MS/RG/AGB Tycho SNR: companion detected (v) Ruiz-Lapuente et al. 2004 Nature - Spectroscopy: No Fe Ihara et al. 2007
+ [Ni/Fe] = 0.16 Hernández, Ruiz-Lapuente et al. 2009
Interaction with the CSM (previous mass loss: SD vs DD) + 2002ic H !! Hamuy et al. 2003 Nature SD/DD + 2006X Patat et al. 2007 Science SD - 27 SNIa NO Radio (VLT) Panagia et al. 2006 NO SD - 2005am 2005cf, No H in nebular spectra Leonard 2007 NO SD Historical SN remnants: Z of the progenitors, explosion etc. Badenes 2008-09
Sprectropolarimetry: asphericals ? disk ? SN 2001el Lifan et al. 2003
Super-Chandrasekhar
SN2007if
Scalzo et al. 2010
2003fg -20.18 0.94 2006gz -19.29 0.69
2007if -20.54 0.71
2009dc -20.09 0.65
MB m15
MWD ~ 2.4 M
MNi ~ 1.6 M
Sub-Chandrasekhar
Sim et al. 2010
Observations: Hicken et al. 2009
1.15 1.060.97
0.88WD (M)
Shen et al. 2010
Rise time: 2-10 daysSpectra: CaII TiII (from He-DET)
Influence of Z Bravo, Domínguez, Badenes, Piersanti, Straniero 2010
Z = 0.1 Z
Z = 3Z
Z
LMAX – width vs Z
Observations (MBol)Contardo et al. 2000, Phillips et al 2006Stanishev et al. 2007, Wang et al. 2009
DDT (12C, ) Assuming: Different calibration for different Z for given m15 :
Z dimmer SNe 0.5 magagreement with observations Sullivan et al. 2010
Z (B-V) < 0.07 Extinction
Effect on colours at MAX
Domínguez et al. 2001Hoflich et al. 1998
SNIaHubble
Diagrams
Expected(before 1998)
Dimmerfurther
Back in time
232 )1()1(
),,,(
zzE
EHzfDMm
km
kOL
t
o
RR
z 1
Relative Distancesi=i/cr
critical density ~ 6 H per m3
12 years: evidence of stronger
m ~ 0.3 ~ 0.7
400 SNe Ia
Observations of SNe Ia alone
> 0 at 99% CL
SNe Ia + Flat Universe (CMB)
Parameterizing SNe Ia by Parameterizing SNe Ia by the Shape of their Light Curvethe Shape of their Light Curve
M. Phillips (1993) & M. Hamuy et al. (1996)
)(15 Bm
MB
<> ~ 0.2 mag
Mmax-m15
LOCAL calibrationValid at High-z ?
Light Curves LCs Radioactive energy
Leibundgut 2003
56Ni 56Co 56 Fe1/2 : 6.1 d 77.7 d
escape
56Ni
0.4M
1.4M
Radioactive Energy: Light Curves
UBVRI Mbol
56Ni -20 1.1 M
-17 0.1 M
To 1st order…
Maximum Lmax 56Ni mass
56Ni 56Co 56 Fe
LC Shape EK = Enuc- Ebin T 56Ni Distribution
Contardo, Leibundgut, Vacca, 2001
Explosion mechanisms DET: pure C-detonation
DEF: pure deflagration
DDT: delayed detonations DEF DET PDDT: pulsating delayed detonation: slow DEF
Sub-Ch: He-detonation in outer layers shock inward C-O detonation
Super-Ch (rotation)
0.8 M
CO
0.2 M
He
tr
EXPLOSIONS
1. Ignition in 1 or several spots ?
2. Runaway ... Explosive ignition
3. Propagation of the burning front
Enuc > E
nuc < hyd
Laminar (conductive e-) v << Deflagrations v < vsound
Detonations v vsound
Influence of MMS & Z Bravo et al. 2010, Domínguez et al. 2001
56Ni vs Z
Timmes et al. 2003
Z
DDT (12C, )
dimmer
Z
3Z
Z
MMS : 3 – 7 M
Zini : 10-10 – 0.1
Including simmering: more e-captures 56Ni L
MMS Lmax
tr
fixed
Z ( ) Lmax
Nucleosynthesis & Light Curves
UBVRI Mbol 56Ni
-20 1.1 M tr: Mmax
-17 0.1 M Mmax-m15
56Ni Mass & Distribution
Contardo, Leibundgut, Vacca, 2001
eY21
i
ii
ie X
A
ZY
Neutronization :
Hoflich, Khokhlov 1996
tr shorter pre-expansion burn 56Ni IME (Ca, S, Si, Mg)
Stellar evolution: Z 22NeSimmering: e-cap.Slow deflagration: e-capt.
56Ni
Piersanti et al. 2003a,b
acc < cond
10-5 M/yr
10-6 M/yr
10-7 M/yr
10-8 M/yr
ONe WD
ONe WD
ONe WD
ONe WD
SNIa
acc > cond
> 10-6 M/yr
< 10-6 M/yr
CO over CO
Distance indicators Cosmology
Nucleosynthesis Origin and evoution of the elements
Physics Laboratories: hydrodynamics, combustion, radiation transport, nuclear physics, high-energy physics…
Numerical simulations testing capabilities of computers
Identify 2nd parameters for the calibration
Does the Calibration depend on redshift ?
Improve the Local Calibration ?
Understand SNe Ia !!
Nuclear Energy
© Rolfs & Rodney 1988
BE/A
C-burning O-burning Si-burning NSE
Explosive burningin SNIa:
Fuel is C-O:
Nuclear burning-scales SNe explosion-scales Specific heat C of degenerate matter decreases when increases
C
QT
T increases when increases
C < O < Si < NSE
XC < XO < XSi < XNSE
o < 2 107 g/cm3 No NSE o < 5 106 g/cm3 No Si-burno < 106 g/cm3 No O-burn
RWD
Burning nucleosynthesis
Resolution: at c cm !
Explosion: Propagation of the burning front
Laminar (conductive e-) spontaneous grad T
C/O vcond (vl) ~ 0.01 vsound
Detonations shock Hyd. eq. + Enuc vDET vsound
Deflagrations turbulent mixing burn-unburnt
Rayleigh-Taylor instability 3D problem in 1D vDEF parametrized vDEF < vsound (0.03 vsound )
0 P
Observed Mass Distribution of WDs
few WDs 1.1 M
Samples
Weidemann 2000
Bergeron, Green, Liebert, Saffer Vennes … & SDSS
Segretain et al 97
0.6 M
ONe WDs or Mergers
298 DA WDs
PG Survey
Liebert et al. 2005
Any Path to the Chandrasekhar Mass ??
RG MS
CO Accretion (DD)
GWR
H/He accretion (SD)
10-5 M/yr
Piersanti & Tornambe
3D Pulsating Reverse Explosions Models
Bravo & García-Senz ApJL2006Bravo & García-Senz ApJ 2009Bravo, García-Senz, Cabezon & Dominguez ApJ 2009
SPH
PRD: Mass of the Hydrostatic core
56Ni massEk
Ek = 1.0 – 1.2 foe56Ni = 0.6 – 0.8 M
Mburnt = 1.1 – 1.2 M
IME = 0.2 M
C < 0.13 M
at low v < 0.08 M
Chemical composition
Explosion & Energy
WD binding energy 5-6 1050 erg (~ 0.4 M)
Fuel C & O Fe/Co/Ni > 107 g/cm3
S/Si > 5 106 g/cm3
Mg/O/Ne > 105 g/cm3
Observations unburnt C < 0.01 – 0.2 M
Nearly all MCh WD is burnt
Similar Ek
~ 2 1051 erg (in ~ 1 s)
Similar ENuc
Magic density ~ 107 g/cm3
Nucleosynthesis & Kinetic Energy
EK ~ 1.4 foe 1 foe = 1051 erg
vexp~ 10000 km/s as observed !!
Homologous expansion Vr r
C/O > 20000 km/sIME < 20000 km/sFe-peak < 10000 km/s 54Fe, 58Ni < 2000 km/s neutronized
elements Hole of 56Ni in the center
Chemical layered … as observed !
Vr = cte.0.6 M 56Ni Erad ~ 0.03 EK