Paper detail

Are Models for Core-Collapse Supernova Progenitors Consistent with the Properties of Supernova Remnants?

The recent discovery that the Fe-K line luminosities and energy centroids observed in nearby SNRs are a strong discriminant of both progenitor type and circumstellar environment has implications for our understanding of supernova progenitor evolution. Using models for the chemical composition of core-collapse supernova ejecta, we model the dynamics and thermal X-ray emission from shocked ejecta and circumstellar material, modeled as an $r^{-2}$ wind, to ages of 3000 years. We compare the X-ray spectra expected from these models to observations made with the Suzaku satellite. We also model the dynamics and X-ray emission from Type Ia progenitor models. We find a clear distinction in Fe-K line energy centroid between core-collapse and Type Ia models. The core-collapse supernova models predict higher Fe-K line centroid energies than the Type Ia models, in agreement with observations. We argue that the higher line centroids are a consequence of the increased densities found in the circumstellar environment created by the expansion of the slow-moving wind from the massive progenitors.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors1 topic

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.