1 / 15

IPN Orsay CEA, DAM, DIF Observatoire de Paris,

IPN Orsay CEA, DAM, DIF Observatoire de Paris, Meudon. Università degli Studi di Milano Dipartimento di Fisica Université Libre de Bruxelles IAA. e nergie a tomique . e nergies a lternatives.

gavril
Télécharger la présentation

IPN Orsay CEA, DAM, DIF Observatoire de Paris,

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. IPN Orsay CEA, DAM, DIF Observatoire de Paris, Meudon Università degli Studi di Milano Dipartimento di Fisica Université Libre de Bruxelles IAA energie atomique . energies alternatives Impact of electro-weak processes in Type II Supernovae collapse Patrick BLOTTIAU &Anthea F. FANTINA (CEA/DAM/DIF) (IAA – ULB Brussels) Dr. E. Khan, Dr. J. Margueron (IPN Orsay) Dr. Ph. Mellor (CEA, DAM, DIF) Dr. J. Novak, Dr. Micaela Oertel (Luth, Meudon) Prof. P. Pizzochero & Dr. P. Donati (Univ. Milano & INFN) MODE, Bordeaux, November 15-17, 2010

  2. Neutrino transport Symmetry energy(T) Nucleon effective mass Hydrodynamics Outline MICROPHYSICS MACROPHYSICS Weak-processes SN Simulations Equation of State One-zone General Relativity Newtonian MODE 2010

  3. Part I:intro & 1D Newtonian code (with n transport) MODE 2010

  4. Condition in the core during collapse : Motivations: nuclear physics in SN Esym (T) 15 solar mass progenitor MODE 2010

  5. T-dependence of Esym Theoretical studies on influence of T-dependence of nuclear symmetry energy on collapse trajectory: • Donati P. et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2835 (1994) Esym(T) obtained in analogy with Fermi gas model via m*(T): PVC dynamical effects beyond mean field (E-dependence of MF) • Dean D.J. et al, Phys. Rev. C66, 31801 (2002) MODE 2010

  6. EoS in SN simulations (see M. Oertel’s talk) • Lattimer and Swesty, Nucl. Phys. A 535, 331 (1991) - based on a liquid drop model - • Shen et al., Nucl. Phys. A 637, 435 (1998) - based on RMF - and : ? (or Esym(T) as in Donati et al.?) but : not easy to implement Esym(T) in these EoS • Bethe H.A. et al., Nucl. Phys. A 324, 487 (1979) (BBAL) • based on a liquid drop model • analytical EoS • m*(T) has been implemented according to calculations by Donati et al. Outlooks: include this “thermal” effect in modern EoS MODE 2010

  7. on free protons on nuclei m*(T)Esym Yl,tr Shock wave energy Effect of Esym(T) on CCSN larger values of Yleptat trapping  less deleptonization  less energy dissipated In one-zone model m*(T) leads to systematic reduction of deleptonization in the core: dTYlept ≈ 0.006 ⇒ dT Ediss ≈0.4 foe ( A.F.Fantina, P. Donati and P. M. Pizzochero, Phys. Lett. B676, 140 (2009) ) MODE 2010

  8. Results of collapse simulation at bounce: impact of Esym(T), BBAL EoS (1D Newtonian) Systematic effect! ( A.F.Fantina, P. Blottiau, J. Margueron, Ph. Mellor, and P. Pizzochero, in preparation) MODE 2010

  9. Conclusions & Outlook (I) • Influence of T-dependence of Esym on the evolution of collapse • → systematic reduction of neutronization of the core • (increasing of final lepton fraction) & less energy dissipated by shock wave • - one zone model - • → position of shock wave formation: bigger homologous core • - 1D Newtonian code - •  even if no dramatic effect on dynamics of the collapse is expected • (see fluid instabilities, SASI, magnetic field, …) • effects are not negligible! MODE 2010

  10. Part II:1D GR (+ Newtonian vers.) code (no n transport) MODE 2010

  11. Results of collapse simulation at bounce: “std” trapping (1D GR), LS EoS K=180MeV Bruenn 1985 rates MODE 2010

  12. GR vs Newtonian simulation at bounce MODE 2010

  13. Conclusions (II) • GR code : improvements • → introduction of a trapping scheme • → implementation of the Newtonian version • → results in global agreement with the literature • Influence of neutrinos in GR framework : • → multi-group + trapping scheme allows for a first spectral information • but : - trapping on density (same treatment for different neutrino energy) • - processes other than capture (e.g. scattering) missing! MODE 2010

  14. Microphysics Macrophysics nuclear physics dynamics of collapse General Conclusions & Outlooks • Nuclear inputs(microscopic calculation): • EoS: extension of LS; different tables (J. Margueron, M. Oertel, S. Goriely, N. Chamel) • deleptonization processes electron capture rates (E. Khan) • symmetry energy nucleon effective mass and their T-dependence (RPA) (P. Donati, J. Margueron, P. Pizzochero) • neutrino physics (P. Blottiau, J. Margueron, Ph. Mellor) • Hydrodynamics: • One-zone (P. Donati, P. Pizzochero) • 1D Newtonian (P. Blottiau, Ph. Mellor) • 1D General Relativistic: ntransport (J. Novak, J. Pons, P. Blottiau, Ph. Mellor) MODE 2010

  15. Thank you

More Related