1 / 45

Faint Supernovae from Double White Dwarfs

Faint Supernovae from Double White Dwarfs. Binary evolution predicts a plethora of double WD binaries, some close enough to come into contact. I will explain our theoretical work on the outcomes when stable transfer of Helium results, predicting a new kind of faint and fast “.Ia” Supernova.

taryn
Télécharger la présentation

Faint Supernovae from Double White Dwarfs

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. Faint Supernovae from Double White Dwarfs Binary evolution predicts a plethora of double WD binaries, some close enough to come into contact. I will explain our theoretical work on the outcomes when stable transfer of Helium results, predicting a new kind of faint and fast “.Ia” Supernova. Dan Kasen (UCB), Kevin Moore (UCSB), Gijs Nelemans (U. Nijmegen), Bill Paxton (KITP), Evan Scannapieco (ASU), Ken Shen (UCSB=>UCB), Justin Steinfadt (UCSB) and Nevin Weinberg (UCB)

  2. Stars with < 6-8 M make 0.5-1.0 M Carbon/Oxygen white dwarfs, and likely 1.0-1.2 M Oxygen /Neon PN image from HST Ring Nebulae (M 57) 1.05 M Kalirai et al ‘07 Kalirai et al ‘07 Stellar Lifetime (Myr) Young White Dwarf 500 100 50

  3. Making Helium White Dwarfs • Wind mass loss near the tip of the Red Giant Branch creates isolated He WDs of M>0.4 M (D’Cruz et al ‘96, Hansen ‘05; Kalirai et al. ‘07) • Binaries tight enough so that the <2.5 M fills the Roche lobe on the red giant branch reveals a He core 0.15-0.48 M • Most of the first known, lower mass, He WDs were in binaries, often with M stars (Marsh et al…) de Kool ‘92; de Kool & Ritter ‘93; Iben & Tutukov ’93. Politano ’96; Nelemans et al. 2001

  4. Binary White Dwarfs

  5. Extremely Low-Mass He WDs • SDSS is revealing a large population of <0.2M He WDs (Kilic, Brown, . . ) • These stay bright longer due to a stably burning H envelope (Panei et al ‘07) • Expectation that they are in binaries. Many found to be with WDs in tight orbits (Badenes, Kilic, Mullally, . . ) to reach contact in 10 Gyr Brown et al. 2010 (posted Monday night!)

  6. ZZ Ceti Searches: Do they Pulsate? Steinfadt, Bildsten & Arras ‘10

  7. A New Object. . . . From Faulkes North (LCOGT)

  8. NLTT 11748 First measurement of low mass He WD Radius=0.039-0.043 R

  9. Many Double White Dwarfs that Will Come into Contact

  10. Stability at Contact: Open Issue NLTT 11748

  11. WD-WD Mergers: R Cor Bor stars • Variable stars at Mv=-4 to -5. No hydrogen present, He+Carbon. Lines due to C2 and CN. Variability due to dust formation episodes. • MACHO found many, rough numbers for our galaxy are 3000 (Alcock et al. 2001). OGLE, EROS as well • Current hypothesis is He+C/O mergers, followed by burning for 100,000 years=> birthrate is 3 in 100 years in our galaxy. . . .

  12. Stably Accreting White Dwarfs Donor star of pure He White Dwarf of Carbon/Oxygen Or Oxygen / Neon Piro ‘05

  13. The fate of ~1 in 2000 white dwarfs in our galactic disk are AM CVn binaries GP COM These are VERY LOUD sources for Space-Based Gravitational Wave Detectors (e.g. LISA)

  14. AM CVn Binaries: Pure Helium Accretors! • Found by Humason and Zwicky (‘47) as faint blue stars, spectra by Greenstein & Matthews (‘57) only showed helium lines. • Later work found 17 minutes orbital period • The accretor is a C/O or O/Ne WD, where the donor is a Helium WD. • Giving an orbital period-donor mass relation, • and donor masses ranging from 0.006-0.12M, interesting for stellar structure (Deloye et al ’05. ’07) + > 15 more!

  15. Helium Burning He burning is thermally stable when donor mass is 0.20-0.27M, with Porb =2.5-3.5 minutes (Tutukov & Yungelson ‘96). As the accretion rate drops, the burning becomes unstable, and flashes commence. Unstable Helium Burning of Interest Thick= Cold Donors Thin= Hotter Donors CR Boo, KL Dra V407 Vul RXJ0806? V803 Cen AM CVn CP Eri ES Cet GP Com HP Lib CE 315 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Orbital Period (Minutes)

  16. September 2, 2010 Santa Barbara, California

  17. Jesusita Fire, May 2009 Photo: K. Paxton

  18. MESA Overall Philosophy MESA is open source: anyone can download the source code, compile it, and run it for their own research or education purposes. It is meant to engage the broader community of astrophysicists in related fields and encourage contributions in the form of testing, finding and fixing bugs, adding new capabilities, and, generally, sharing experience with the MESA community. http://mesa.sourceforge.net/

  19. Many He novae at early times, followed by one last flash with helium mass of 0.03-0.1M, likely large enough to trigger an explosion (L.B, Shen, Weinberg & Nelemans ‘07, Shen and LB ’09) Evolution in time Evolution in time Helium Donor Mass These MESA calculations of accumulated masses are preliminary ! Iben & Tutukov ‘89 He Ignition Mass

  20. Preliminary MESA Calculations for an AM CVn scenario • Series of weak He flashes: basically He Novae (e.g. V445 Puppis) • Mass loss occurs due to Roche Lobe overflow that • Final flash has a minimum heating time of 10 seconds!

  21. MESA He Flash Calculation Accretion onto a 1.0 M at 3.7x10-8 M/year. Accumulated He was 0.093M whereas convective shell has 0.022 M

  22. The radial expansion of the convective region allows the pressure at the base to drop. For low shell masses, this quenches burning. For a massive shell, however, the heating timescale set by nuclear reactions: Path to Dynamical Helium Shells will become less than the dynamical time, So that the heat cannot escape during the burn, potentially triggering a detonation of the helium shell. This condition sets a minimum shell mass. Shen & LB ‘09

  23. Evolution Naturally Yields Dynamical He Shell • The intersection of the ignition masses with that of the donor yields the hatched region, most of which lie above the dynamical event line  • For WD masses > 0.9M, likely outcome is dynamical • For lower WD masses, the outcome may be less violent. L. B., Shen, Weinberg & Nelemans ‘07 Must understand the dynamic outcome and nucleosynthetic yields from these low pressure burns, a new regime.

  24. Shen et al. ’10 Sample Detonation sample Yields are 0.012 M of 56Ni, 0.0071M of 48Cr, and 0.0076M of 52Fe. Much He unburned. Shock (blue arrow) goes into the C/O and a He detonation (red arrow) moves outward. The shocked C/O under the layer is not ignited. Underlying WD remains unless converging shocks detonate it (see Livne & Glasner; Fink, Ropke & Hillebrandt)

  25. Thermonuclear Supernova Lightcurves • Type Ia result from burning 1.3M of C/O to ~ 0.6M of 56Ni (rest burned to Si, Ca, Fe) and ejected at 10,000 km/sec. • This matter would cool by adiabatic expansion, but instead is heated by the radioactive decay chain 56Ni 56Co 56Fe • Arnett (1982) (also Pinto & Eastman 2000) showed that the peak in the light-curve occurs when the radiation diffusion time through the envelope equals the time since explosion, giving • The luminosity at peak is set by the instantaneous radioactive decay heating rate  can measure the 56Ni mass via the peak luminosity, yielding 0.10-1.1 M for Type Ia Supernovae

  26. .Ia Supernovae L. B., Shen, Weinberg & Nelemans ’07 Shen et al 2010 • The 0.02-0.10M ignition masses only burns the helium, which leaves the WD at 10,000 km/sec, leading to brief events • The radioactive decays of the freshly synthesized 48Cr (1.3 d), 52Fe (0.5 d) and 56Ni (8.8 d) provide power on this short timescale!! x10

  27. Faint and Fast Events as a Challenge to the Observers! Shen et al ‘10

  28. Two WDs are made per year in a 1011 Melliptical galaxy. The observed rates for thermonuclear events are: Some numbers: M87 in Virgo • 20 Classical Novae (Hydrogen fuel) per year, implying a white dwarf/main sequence contact binary birthrate (Townsley & LB 2005) of one every 400 years. • One Type Ia Supernovae every 250 years, or one in 500 WDs explode! Predicted rates are: Helium novae (Eddington-limited) every ~250 years, one large He explosion every ~5,000 years, and WD-WD mergers of all kinds every 200 years.

  29. 2002bj: Poznanski et al. ‘09

  30. Helium, Carbon and maybe V!

  31. Surveys, Surveys, Surveys! Sloan Digital Sky Survey (Dilday et al 2008) ROTSE (V=18, 200 deg2) Completed survey (V=22.5, 260 deg2)

  32. SkyMapper (‘10; V=19, 1000 deg2 every 3-4 d) Pan-Starrs1 (‘09) Medium deep survey (V=24, 50 deg2)

  33. Palomar Transient Factory • A 100 Mega-pixel CCD camera on the 48 inch Schmidt Telescope at Palomar (near San Diego) that: • -- scans 10% of the sky every week • -- finds nearly 1000 transients per year that are tracked by small telescopes for photometry and larger (3-10m) for spectroscopy • -- Is creating a deep sky image in 2 bands (g and R) that will have lasting value for galactic science

  34. Survey Volumes and Expectations • The boxes plot the volume rate * duration for Type Ia (30 d), Type IIp (100 d) and .Ia (5 d) • Densities rough for LSNe, ‘Super-Chandra’ and Faint Ia (bg) • Lines show the 1 event per “exposure” line for • ROTSE (green) • SKYM (blue-dotted) • SNLS (dashed) • SDSS (long-dashed) • PS1 (blue-dashed) • PTF (blue-solid) • DES (red) • LSST (heavy-black) Bildsten ‘09 Bildsten ‘10

  35. PTF 10bhp=2010X • Peaks at 1042 • Decay time is 5 days • Velocities of 10,000 km/second • Spectra shows Ca, C, Ti, Fe • Maybe He, Na and Al? Kasliwal et al. ‘10

  36. Comparisons to Predictions Comparison to .Ia models from Shen et al. (2010) imply an ejected mass of ~0.06-0.09Mwith roughly 1/2 being 56Ni, and the rest mostly Helium. . .

  37. Fink shock plots Fink, Hillebrandt and Ropke 2007

  38. Fink shock plots Fink, Hillebrandt and Ropke 2007

  39. Where we Stand! • Many remaining theoretical issues: • What are the final He ignition masses? • How does a transverse detonation propagate, especially in the differentiated He layer? • Does the C/O core ignite? If so, what does it make? • What’s the event rate for either case? Bildsten et al. 2007

  40. Kasliwal 2010

  41. WHY NOW? Stellar evolution calculations remain a basic tool of broad impact for astrophysics. New observations constantly test the models, even those living in 1D. The continued demand requires the construction of a general, modern stellar evolution code that combines the following advantages: • Openness: should be open to any researcher, both to advance the pace of scientific discovery, but also to share the load of updating physics, fine-tuning, and further development. • Modularity: should provide independent, reusable modules. • Wide Applicability: should be capable of calculating the evolution of stars in a wide range of environments, enabling multi-problem, multi-object physics validation.

  42. WHY NOW? (continued) • Modern techniques: should employ modern numerical approaches, including high-order interpolation schemes, advanced AMR, simultaneous operator solution; should support well defined interfaces for related applications (e.g. atmospheres, winds) • Microphysics: should allow for up-to-date, wide-ranging, flexible and modular micro-physics. • Performance: should parallelize on present and future shared-memory, multi-core/thread and possibly hybrid architectures, so that performance continues to grow within the new computational paradigm.

  43. What Can it Do? Run time=2hr, 22 minutes on mac with gfortran, 4 threads

  44. MESA Code of Conduct • That all publications and presentations (research, educational, or outreach) deriving from the use of MESA acknowledge the Paxton et al. (2010) publication and MESA website. • That user modifications and additions are given back to the community. • That users alert the MESA Council about their publications, either pre-release or at the time of publication. • That users make available in a timely fashion (e.g., online at the MESA website) all information needed for others to recreate their MESA results -- ``open know how'' to match ``open source.'’ • That users agree to help others learn MESA, giving back as the project progresses.

More Related