Paper detail

Abundance stratification in Type Ia supernovae - V. SN 1986G bridging the gap between normal and subluminous SNe Ia

A detailed spectroscopic analysis of SN 1986G has been performed. SN 1986G `bridges the gap' between normal and sub luminous type Ia supernova (SNe Ia). The abundance tomography technique is used to determine the abundance distribution of the elements in the ejecta. SN 1986G was found to be a low energy Chandrasekhar mass explosion. Its kinetic energy was 70% of the standard W7 model (0.9x10$^{51}$erg). Oxygen dominates the ejecta from the outermost layers down to $\sim$9000kms$^{-1}$ , intermediate mass elements (IME) dominate from $\sim$ 9000kms$^{-1}$ to $\sim$ 3500kms$^{-1}$ with Ni and Fe dominating the inner layers $<\sim$ 3500kms$^{-1}$. The final masses of the main elements in the ejecta were found to be, O=0.33M, IME=0.69M, stable NSE=0.21M, $^{56}$Ni=0.14M. An upper limit of the carbon mass is set at C=0.02M. The spectra of SN1986G consist of almost exclusively singly ionised species. SN1986G can be thought of as a low luminosity extension of the main population of SN Ia, with a large deflagration phase that produced more IMEs than a standard SN Ia.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.