1 / 49

The Astrophysical Origins of the Short-Lived Radionuclides in the Early Solar System

The Astrophysical Origins of the Short-Lived Radionuclides in the Early Solar System. Steve Desch September 15, 2006 U. of Toronto. with a shout-out to my ASU supernova posse: Jeff Hester, Nicolas Ouellette, Carola Ellinger. Outline. Short-lived radionuclides: What are they?

gerek
Télécharger la présentation

The Astrophysical Origins of the Short-Lived Radionuclides in the Early Solar System

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Astrophysical Origins of the Short-Lived Radionuclides in the Early Solar System Steve Desch September 15, 2006 U. of Toronto with a shout-out to my ASU supernova posse: Jeff Hester, Nicolas Ouellette, Carola Ellinger

  2. Outline • Short-lived radionuclides: • What are they? • How are they measured? • Possible sources: • Inheritance • Irradiation • Injection • “Aerogel” model: • Astrophysical context • SLR predictions

  3. Short-Lived Radionuclides “SLRs” = Radionuclides with half-lives t1/2 < 16 Myr Early Solar System SLRs Confirmed by Isotopic Analyses of Meteorites: 41Ca (t1/2 = 0.1 Myr) (Srinivasan et al. 1994, 1996) 36Cl (t1/2 = 0.3 Myr) (Murty et al. 1997; Lin et al. 2004) 26Al (t1/2 = 0.7 Myr) (Lee et al. 1976) 60Fe (t1/2 = 1.5 Myr) (Tachibana & Huss 2003; Mostefaoui et al. 2004) 10Be (t1/2 = 1.5 Myr) (McKeegan et al. 2000; Sugiura et al. 2001) 53Mn (t1/2 = 3.7 Myr) (Birck & Allegre 1985) 107Pd(t1/2 = 6.5 Myr) (Kelly & Wasserburg 1978) 182Hf (t1/2 = 9 Myr) (Harper & Jacobsen 1994) 129I (t1/2 = 15.7 Myr) (Jeffery & Reynolds 1961)

  4. Isotopic analyses of meteorites show they once held SLRs: Excess 10B is from decay of 10Be Slope gives original 10Be/9Be ratio “Natural” 10B / 11B ratio McKeegan et al. (2000)

  5. Initial Abundances of Confirmed SLRs: Possibly 60Fe/56Fe = 1.6x10-6 irons

  6. Unconfirmed SLRs: 7Be (t1/2 = 57 days) (Chaussidon et al. 2004) 63Ni (t1/2 = 101 years) (Luck et al. 2003) 97Tc(t1/2 = 2.6 Myr) (Yin& Jacobsen 1998) 99Tc (t1/2 = 0.21 Myr) (Yin et al. 1992) 135Cs (t1/2 = 2.3 Myr) (McCulloch & Wasserburg 1978; Hidaka et al. 2001) 205Pb (t1/2 = 15 Myr) (Chen & Wasserburg 1981) Chaussidon et al (2006) Luck et al (2003)

  7. Inheritance • Sun and Protoplanetary Disk may have inherited SLRs as a result of Galactic processes: • Ongoing Galactic Nucleosynthesis • Supernovae, Wolf-Rayet winds, novae, etc., eject newly created radionuclides into Galaxy • Galactic Cosmic Rays • Proton, alpha particle Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) spall ambient nuclei, producing SLRs • Some GCR nuclei are SLRs, get trapped in gas that forms Solar System (Clayton & Jin 1995)

  8. Ongoing Galactic Nucleosynthesis? supernovae (and Wolf-Rayet winds) eject radionuclides supernova Stars form in the spiral arms of spiral galaxies radionuclide-laden gas orbits Galaxy for ~100 Myr, until next spiral arm new stars form with radionuclides M 109

  9. 182Hf 129I 26Al 53Mn 60Fe Harper (1996)

  10. More sophisticated mixing models show 41Ca, 26Al, 60Fe definitely not inherited from ISM. Predicted ratios if only sources are type II SNe. Jacobsen (2005)

  11. Ongoing Galactic Nucleosynthesis • Could explain abundance of 129I and longer-lived radio-nuclides with ~100 Myr delay consistent with Galactic dynamics. • Definitely does not explain 41Ca, 26Al or 60Fe abundances [Harper (1996); Wasserburg et al. (1996); Meyer & Clayton (2000); Jacobsen (2005)]. • If the majority of 60Fe really was due to ongoing Galactic nucleosynthesis, 53Mn, 107Pd, 182Hf and 129I would be vastly overproduced.

  12. Galactic Cosmic Rays • Most GCRs are protons; other nuclei present in near-solar proportions • Spacecraft have accurately measured fluxes of GCRs of different nuclei and energies (10 MeV/n to > 10 GeV/n) • Beryllium GCRs 106 times more abundant than expected from solar abundances (i.e., 1 in 103 instead of 1 in 109). • Flux of 10Be GCRs is known and is large • Fluxes of all GCRs scale linearly with star formation rate, which was almost certainly a factor of 2 higher 4.5 Gyr ago

  13. Galactic Cosmic Rays Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) follow magnetic field lines Magnetic field lines observed to converge in star-forming cores GCRs funneled into cloud cores Schleuning (1998)

  14. Some GCRs mirrored out of cloud core by B fields B fields funnel some GCRs into cloud core GCRs in cloud core can be trapped if column density ∑ is high enough Cloud core B, ∑ taken from Desch & Mouschovias (2001)

  15. Column Density ∑(t), Magnetic Field Strength B(t) calculated (Desch & Mouschovias 2001; Desch, Connolly & Srinivasan 2004) GCRs ionize gas passing through cloud core, lose energy, slow down (Bethe formula) Low-energy (< 100 MeV/n) 10Be GCRs are trapped when ∑ ~ 0.01 g cm-2

  16. Desch, Connolly & Srinivasan (2004) total 10Be/9Be 10Be GCRs trapped in cloud core 10Be/9Be in meteorites GCR protons spall local CNO nuclei, produce 10Be

  17. Galactic Cosmic Rays • 10Be in meteorites entirely attributable to trapped 10Be GCRs • Biggest uncertainty is GCR flux 4.5 Gyr ago (factor of 2); probably all but at least half of 10Be is trapped GCRs • Trapped GCRs do not explain any other SLR, but 10Be is known to be decoupled from other SLRs (Marhas et al. 2002) • Inheritance –– Conclusions • At least half, and probably all, 10Be is inherited • 129I may be inherited • Other SLRs, esp. 41Ca, 26Al and 60Fe, are not inherited.

  18. Irradiation Energetic particles (accelerated by solar flares within the Solar System) may have irradiated material, inducing nuclear reactions and creating SLRs Solar flares accelerate p, 4He, 3He to E > 10 MeV/n Particle fluxes ~105 times larger around T Tauri stars; in 1 Myr, 1048 (!) energetic particles emitted Irradiation within the Disk Gas and dust in the protoplanetary disk (~ 1 AU) Irradiation within the Sun’s Magnetosphere Solids only, inside ~ 0.1 AU

  19. Irradiation in the Disk If gas is present, energetic particles lose > 99% of their energy ionizing gas, not inducing nuclear reactions (Nath & Biermann 1994) Consider 26Al: 26Al / 27Al = 5 x 10-5 implies 104526Al atoms in a 0.01 M disk Only 1048 particles emitted in 1 Myr; only 1047 intercept disk To make a 26Al atom by 26Mg(p,n)26Al, a proton must travel through ∑ ~ 1.4 mH / (xMg26) > 3 x 106 g cm-2 of gas But protons stopped by << 10 g cm-2 of gas (Bethe formula): fewer than 1 proton in 105 reacts (Clayton & Jin 1995) Even including other energetic particles, other targets, can’t make more than ~ 104226Al atoms Similar results for other SLRs, including 10Be

  20. Irradiation inside the Sun’s Magnetosphere very little gas -- it’s ionized and part of the corona e.g., “X-wind” model Shu et al. (2001) only solids (CAIs) are irradiated a fraction of the solids are returned to asteroid belt

  21. Six problems with the X-wind model: Launching of solids from 0.1 AU to asteroid belt problematic: winds probably launched from 1 AU, not 0.1 AU [Coffey et al.(2004)]; trajectories very sensitive to particle size [Shu et al. (1996)] CAIs formed in near-solar f O2, but “reconnection ring” is >104 times more oxidizing than solar [using values in Shu et al. (2001)] Concordant production of 26Al, 41Ca requires Fe,Mg silicate mantle to surround Ca,Al-rich core, but real minerals do not separate this way (e.g., Simon et al. 2002) Production of 26Al or 41Ca at meteoritic levels will overproduce 10Be, using best-case scenario [Gounelle et al. (2001)] and new measured reaction rate for 3He(24Mg,p)26Al [Fitoussi et al. (2004)], especially if most 10Be is inherited [Desch et al. (2004)]. [See also Marhas & Goswami (2004)]

  22. Six problems with the X-wind model (continued): Temperatures inside magnetosphere at least 750 K, and usually > 1200 K [Shu et al. (1996)]. Chlorine (including 36Cl) requires T < 970 K to condense [Lodders (2003)] Many other SLRs cannot be produced by spallation, including 60Fe, 107Pd and 182Hf [Gounelle et al. (2001); Leya et al. (2003)] Many of these problems pertain to any model of irradiation in the Sun’s magnetosphere

  23. Irradiation –– Conclusions • Energetic-particle irradiation occurs and can produce 7Be, 10Be, 41Ca, 26Al, 53Mn, if irradiation occurs in Sun’s magnetosphere (to minimize ionization energy losses) • Confirmation of 7Be would demand irradiation • Concordant production of 41Ca, 26Al difficult, 10Be probably overproduced, and 36Cl hard to condense • 60Fe, 107Pd, 182Hf (and 36Cl?) demand external source

  24. Injection Stellar nucleosynthesis products ejected by an evolved star and enter the Solar System material shortly before, or soon after, Solar System formation: AGB star Contaminates Sun’s molecular cloud [wind possibly triggers collapse of cloud core] (Wasserburg et al. 1994) Nearby (Type II) Supernova Contaminates Sun’s molecular cloud core and triggers its collapse (Cameron & Truran 1977) ... or .... Injects into already-formed protoplanetary disk...

  25. AGB Star Stars at least as massive as the Sun at the ends of their lives enter Asymptotic-Giant Branch stage SLRs created within star are dredged up to the surface and ejected in a powerful wind Eskimo nebula: after AGB winds expose white dwarf

  26. Problems with the AGB Scenario: AGB stars do produce 41Ca, 36Cl, 26Al, 60Fe, 107Pd, 135Cs and 205Pb [Wasserburg et al. 1994, 1995, 1996, 1998; Gallino et al. 1998, 2004]. But they do not produce 129I, 53Mn, or 182Hf. AGB stars are extremely unlikely to be associated with the early Solar System. Kastner & Myers (1994) conservatively calculate probability of contamination of Sun’s molecular cloud core at < 3 x 10-6

  27. Supernovae • Supernovae do produce all the confirmed SLRs: 41Ca, 36Cl, 26Al, 53Mn, 60Fe, 107Pd, 182Hf, 129I. • (Except for 10Be, which is known to have a separate origin.) • Relative abundances of SLRs in outermost ~18 M of a 25 M supernova match meteoritic values very well [Meyer et al. 2003] • Order-of-magnitude agreement sufficient, considering real supernova ejecta highly heterogeneous Cassiopeia A supernova remnant

  28. time delay = 0.9 Myr Meyer et al (2003), LPSC abstract

  29. Supernova and Star Formation • Meteoritic values require Solar System disk to be 0.01% SN ejecta • Requires supernova < 10 pc away, ~ 1 Myr before CAIs formed (see Fields et al. 2007) • What are the odds our Solar System “happened” be near supernova? Like case of AGB star: too low. There must be a causal connection. • One way in which SN could be causally connected is if the SN shock triggered the collapse of our cloud core [Cameron (1963), Cameron & Truran (1977)]: “supernova trigger” model

  30. Supernova shock can inject right amounts of SLRs, and trigger collapse of cloud core if... Supernova shock can be slowed to 20 - 50 km/s Requires a lot of intervening gas, but travel times t ~ 105 yr Vanhala & Boss (2002)

  31. Are these conditions met? Preceding state must include H II region! low-density, ionized gas dense molecular gas n ~ 104 cm-3 n ~ 10 cm-3 cloud core shocked gas supernova progenitor UV photons ionization front = sharp density discontinuity shock ~ 0.2 pc

  32. supernova ejecta cloud core ionization front = sharp density discontinuity

  33. ejecta cloud core Vej ~ 2000 km/s

  34. Ejecta transfers its momentum: shock propagates to cloud core, slowed to < 20 km/s cloud core The actual ejecta (and SLRs) do not penetrate into cloud: they bounce! (Hester et al. 1994) Does this gas contain any radioactivities?

  35. Injection –– Conclusions so far... • Injection by AGB stars highly unlikely, and cannot explain all isotopes anyway (esp. 53Mn, 182Hf) • Injection by supernovae explains all isotopes well, but causal link to Solar System formation must be explained • Supernova trigger viable, but needed conditions may not exist where supernovae happen • Alternative supernova scenario...

  36. “Aerogel” Model Very close (< 1 pc) supernova injected SLRs into the Solar System, after it had formed a disk (Gold 1977; Clayton 1977; Chevalier 2000; Ouellette et al 2005) 1 Ori C: 40 M O6 star; will supernova in 1-2 Myr Protostars with disks Orion Nebula

  37. When 1 Ori C goes supernova, all the disks in the Orion Nebula will be pelted with radioactive ejecta Same scenario even more likely for disks observed in Carina Nebula, with sixty O stars [Smith et al. (2003)], or NGC 6611 [Oliveira et al. 2005] or NGC 6357 [Healy et al. 2007, in prep] Ejecta dust grains penetrate disk, evaporate on entry, but leave SLRs lodged in disk like aerogel: “Aerogel Model”

  38. Initial abundance of 26Al (26Al/27Al = 5 x 10-5) is explained by homogeneous injection of 5 x 10-6 M of a 25 M supernova’s ejecta into a minimum-mass (0.01 M)disk. 5 x 10-6M is the ejecta mass intercepted by a 40 AU-radius disk 0.2 pc from a 25 Msupernova But will a disk this close survive? Will ejecta be mixed in? To answer these questions, we have written a 2-D hydro code based on the Zeus algorithms. Includes tensor artificial viscosity and a cooling term.

  39. Canonical Simulation • Disk • Minimum mass (0.01 M) disk truncated at 30 AU • Disk allowed to dynamically relax for 1000 years • Final radius ~ 40 AU • Supernova • 0.3 pc away • 1051 ergs (1 foe) explosion energy • 20 M ejected isotropically with time dependence of density and velocity consistent with Matzner & McKee (1999) and uniform-density star* • Isotopic composition assumed homogeneous, that of 25 M supernova from Woosley & Weaver (1995)

  40. Relaxed Disk

  41. Canonical Run

  42. Reverse Shock

  43. Disk Stripping

  44. Stripping and Mixing: KH Rolls

  45. Aerogel Model: Conclusions • Protoplanetary disks will survive nearby supernova explosions • Gas-phase supernova ejecta is mixed into the disk, but with low efficiency (~ 1%), too low to explain SLR ratios • Dust injection is the best candidate for SLR injection and will be the subject of future work • Preliminary calculations show the dust will travel roughly 100 AU before being deviated by the bow shock, and will be mixed in with ~ 100% efficiency • All SLRs inferred from meteorites were in solid phase...

  46. Allowing supernova ejecta to be injected inhomogeneously allows an almost perfect match to meteoritic abundances

  47. Conclusions • Inheritance: 10Be likely inherited (trapped cosmic rays), 129I may be inherited, but no others, especially not 60Fe! • Irradiation: would be necessary for 7Be, but overproduces 10Be, can’t explain 182Hf, 107Pd, (36Cl?), and especially 60Fe! • Injection: AGB star can’t explain 53Mn, 182Hf, and is very unlikely; supernova can explain all SLRs if link to Solar System formation made; supernova trigger viable but may not pertain to real supernova environments • Aerogel Model: Inevitable in supernova environments; at first cut is consistent with data. Refinements underway!

More Related