1 / 48

Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU) Davide Lazzati (NCSU) Brian Morsony (UWM)

Numerical simulations of photospheric emission from variable jets. Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU) Davide Lazzati (NCSU) Brian Morsony (UWM). 0 / 12. Numerical simulations of photospheric emission from variable jets. Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU) Davide Lazzati (NCSU) Brian Morsony (UWM). 0 / 12.

joella
Télécharger la présentation

Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU) Davide Lazzati (NCSU) Brian Morsony (UWM)

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. Numerical simulations of photospheric emission from variable jets Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU) Davide Lazzati (NCSU) Brian Morsony (UWM) 0 / 12

  2. Numerical simulations of photospheric emission from variable jets Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU) Davide Lazzati (NCSU) Brian Morsony (UWM) 0 / 12

  3. 3D AMR simulations of long-GRBs jets inside massive progenitor stars Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU) Davide Lazzati (NCSU) Brian Morsony (UWM) Mitch Begelman (JILA) (DLC, BM, MB, DL, ApJ, 2013) 0 / 12

  4. 3D AMR simulations of long-GRBs jets inside massive progenitor stars Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU) Davide Lazzati (NCSU) Brian Morsony (UWM) Mitch Begelman (JILA) Representing the minority. (not the latino) … GRBs (DLC, BM, MB, DL, ApJ, 2013) 0 / 12

  5. 1.1/3 GRBs (all different, but…) GRB - SN same location… GRB980425 - SN1998bw SN (Galama, et al., 1998) 1 / 12

  6. 1.2/3 SNIb( 30 days) GRBs (all different, but…) GRB - SN same location… Spectrum GRB980425 - SN1998bw GRB030329 (Hjorth et al., 2003) GRB GRB980425 (Galama et al., 1998) SN (Galama, et al., 1998) 1 / 12

  7. 1.3/3 SNIb( 30 days) GRBs (all different, but…) Light curve GRB - SN same location… Spectrum GRB980425 - SN1998bw GRB GRB030329 (Hjorth et al., 2003) GRB (Castro Tirado et al., 2001) GRB980425 (Galama et al., 1998) SN (Galama, et al., 1998) SN 1 / 12

  8. 2.1/2 GRBs(GRB-SN association) Same location. Spectroscopic. Light curve. Collapsar model (for some of the long GRBs) 2 / 12

  9. 2.2/2 Collapsar (in a nutshell) He C Ne O Si Fe 2 / 12

  10. Collapsar (motivation) Focusing on this part… (jet vs progenitor) 3 / 12

  11. Collapsar(motivation) 2D Simulations: (MacFadyen & Woosley 1999; Aloy et al. 2000; MacFadyen et al. 2001; Zhang et al. 2003; Mizuta et al. 2006; Morsony et al. 2007, 2010; Lazzati et al. 2009, 2010, 2011; Nagakura et al. 2011) Imposed symmetry evident. No 3D instabilities can form (RT). Only two previous 3D studies: Only the stellar cortex (Ri ≈ 1010 cm ; ΔM ≈ 3 M) (Zhang et al. 2003) No convergence wrt resolution (Wang et al. 2008) This part needs to be fully understood 4 / 12

  12. Our model (DLC+BM+MB+DL, ApJ, 2013) 3D non symmetric jet - realistic progenitor - ISM Keep in mind: No rotation. No self-gravity. No B field. 2. 2. 1. Progenitor. 16TI (W&H 2006) Jet. L = 5.33 x 1050 erg s-1 Ri = 109 cm θ0 = 10° Γ0 = 5 Γ∞ = 400 3. ρISM = (10-13 g cm-3) Keep in mind: No progenitor rotation. No self-gravity. No magnetic fields. 5 / 12

  13. Results (3D density stratification) (http://www4.ncsu.edu/~dlopezc/Simulations_(published)_files/f1a.mov) 6 / 12

  14. 7.1/2 Results (3D density stratification) Low density jet. Breaks out of the star. Cocoon. 7 / 12

  15. 7.2/2 Results (3D density isocontours) Low density jet. Breaks out of the star. Cocoon. 2 phases. tbo = 4.2 s pre-tbo vjet ≈ 0.32 c post-tbo vjet ≈ 0.99 c 7 / 12

  16. Results (Lorentz factor stratification) pre-tbo Jet is ~relativistic. Γjet ≈ 1-10 post-tbo Jet is ultra-relativistic. Γjet ≈ 50 (http://www4.ncsu.edu/~dlopezc/Simulations_(published)_files/f7.mov) 8 / 12

  17. 9.1/2 Results (HR vs LR) Low density jet. Breaks out of the star. Cocoon. 2 phases. No mayor dif LR-HR. LR HR 9 / 12

  18. 9.2/2 Results (HR vs LR) Low density jet. Breaks out of the star. Cocoon. 2 phases. No mayor dif LR-HR. LR HR: More turbulence. Slower jet. tbo-HR = 5.7 s vjet-HR≈ 0.24 c HR 9 / 12

  19. 10.1/2 Results (2D vs 3D) Low density jet. Breaks out of the star. Cocoon. 2 phases. 2D 3D 10 / 12

  20. 10.2/2 Results (2D vs 3D) Low density jet. Breaks out of the star. Cocoon. 2 phases. 2D • 2D: • Symmetry evident. • density plumes. • Slower in 2D. tbo-2D = 7.0 s vjet-2D≈ 0.19 c 3D 10 / 12

  21. Results (2D vs 3D) Low density jet. Breaks out of the star. Cocoon. 2 phases. 3D jet finds the least resistive path. (2D jet does not) • 2D: • Symmetry evident. • density plumes. • Slower in 2D. tbo-2D = 7.0 s vjet-2D≈ 0.19 c 11 / 12

  22. 12.1/2 Conclusions • Low density jet breaks out. • 2 phases (pre-tbo , & post-tbo). t < tboΓjet ≈ 1 ; t > tboΓjet ≈ 50. • HR same behavior but has more turbulence and the jet is slower. • 2D same behavior but axis-symmetric is evident and the jet is slower. • 3D jet find the least resistive path. 12 / 12

  23. 12.2/2 Conclusions • Low density jet breaks out. • 2 phases (pre-tbo , & post-tbo). t < tboΓjet ≈ 1 ; t > tboΓjet ≈ 50. • HR same behavior but has more turbulence and the jet is slower. • 2D same behavior but axis-symmetric is evident and the jet is slower. • 3D jet find the least resistive path. • Not a minority… happy to see that the numerical sims in the SN community is big! (Lamb, Nagataki, Morsony, Giacomazzo, Townsley, Roepke, Couch, Mezzacappa, Abdikamalov, Mueller, Katz, Jacobs, Irwin, Zingale, Goodson, Tsebrenko…) 12 / 12

  24. The end

  25. Limitations • Star is static. Must include J(R) from W&H16TI. τdin ≈ 2 h vs tsims = 20 s • L = constant. (include L variable) • ISM density constant (collapsar winds give a ρISM ≈ R-2 profile) Jet is ultra-relativistic so ISM effects are very small. • P = k ρ4\3Radiation, ions, electrons, positrons, neutrinos. Helmholtz EOS. • No self-gravity. (τdin ≈ 2 h vs tsims = 20 s) • No relativistic effects from the BH Rin = 103 Rg • Magnetic effects.

  26. Results (symmetry break) Why does the asymmetry form? Since jet is launched Jet-envelope effect ρ from same solid angle, but different radial paths. ρ (R , θ = θ0 , φ )

  27. …Results (symmetry break) t < tbo t = tbo

  28. …Results (symmetry break) Forward and reverse shock

  29. …Results (symmetry break) Forward and reverse shock Shocked material is not symmetric. Asymmetries: jet-envelope consequence.

  30. Previous studies (Zhang et al. 2003) 2D jet moving through the progenitor. Jet. L = (0.3 ; 1) x 1051 erg s-1 θ0 = 5° ; 10° Γ0 = 5 ; 50 f0 = 0.025 ; 0.33 Keep in mind: Rin ≈ 2 x 108 cm. Δ ≈ 108 cm. No progenitor rotation. No self-gravity. No magnetic fields. Progenitor. 15 Mo (HL&W 2000) 2 Mo Iron core (BH) Polytrope EOS (P = k ρ4\3). Zhang et al. 2003 movie ISM ρISM ≈ R-2 9 / 30

  31. …Previous studies (Zhang et al. 2003) L = 1051 erg s-1 ; θ0 = 10° ; Γ0 = 50 ; f0 = 0.33 Jet breaks out of the star. Gamma up to 150. But this is 2D… 10 / 30

  32. Previous studies (Zhang et al. 2004) 3D jet moving through the progenitor. Jet. L = 3 x 1050 erg s-1 θ0 = 5° Γ0 = 5 f0 = 0.40 Keep in mind: No progenitor rotation. No self-gravity. No magnetic fields. Progenitor. 15 Mo (W&H 2003) 2 Mo Iron core (BH) Polytrope EOS (P = k ρ4\3). Zhang et al. 2004 movie ISM ρISM ≈ R-2 11 / 30

  33. …Previous studies (Zhang et al. 2004) Different asymmetries imposed & precessing jet… Jet breaks out of the star. Asymmetries present. Gamma up to 20. But… Rin = 1010 cm (≈11 M0) Δ ≈ 108 cm No more analysis. 12 / 30

  34. Previous studies (Wang et al. 2008) 3D jet moving through the progenitor. Jet. L = 3 x 1050 erg s-1 θ0 = 5° Γ0 = 5 f0 = 0.40 Keep in mind: No progenitor rotation. No self-gravity. No magnetic fields. Progenitor. 16 Mo (HE16TA W&H 2006) 1.7 Mo Iron core (BH) Polytrope EOS (P = k ρ4\3). ISM ρISM ≈ R-2 13 / 30

  35. …Previous studies (Wang et al. 2008) LR vs HR Jet breaks out of the star. Asymmetries present. But… Rin = 5x109 cm (≈9 M0) Δ ≈ 108 cm Not convergent. No further analysis. 14 / 30

  36. Progenitors (example: 16TI)

  37. Progenitors (example: 16TI) Fe 0.8 O 0.6 Si fraction 0.4 S Cr 0.2 Ni Ar Mg Ca 10 7 8 9 log[R (cm)]

  38. Progenitors (example: 16TI) 18 Angular momentum powers the GRB 17 J(R)LSO-Shw log[J (cm2 s-1)] 16 J(R)16TI 15 8 10 9 7 log[R (cm)]

  39. …GRB - SN (spectroscopic) GRB980425 + SN1998bw (Galama et al., 1998) GRB030329 + SN2003dh (Hjorth et al., 2003, Stanek et al., 2003) XRF020903 + SN1998bw type (Soderberg et al., 2004) GRB021211 + SN2002lt (Della Valle et al., 2003) GRB031203 + SN2003lw(Malesani et al., 2004) GRB050525a + SN2005nc(Della Valle et al., 2006a) GRB060218 + SN2006aj (Campana et al., 2006; Pian et al., 2006). 8. GRB081007 + SN2008hw (Della Valle et al., 2008). 9. GRB091127 + SN2009nz (Berger et al., 2011). 10. XRF100316D + SN2010bh (Olivares et al., 2011). GRB030329 (Hjorth et al., 2003) GRB980425 (Galama et al., 1998) 12 / 32

  40. …GRB - SN (light curve) GRB 980326 + SN1998bw type(Castro Tirado et al., 2001) GRB970228 + SN1998bw type (Reichart, 1999) GRB011121 + SN1998bw type (Bloom et al., 1999) GRB020405 + SN1998bw type(Price et al., 2003) GRB040924 + SN1998bw type(Soderberg et al., 2006) GRB041006 + SN1998bw type(Stanek et al., 2005; Soderberg et al., 2006) GRB050824 +SN2006aj type(Sollerman et al., 2007) GRB060729 + SN2010bh type(Cano et al., 2011) GRB090618 + SN2010bh type(Cano et al., 2011) (Castro Tirado et al., 2001) (Reichart, 1999)

More Related