Paper detail

Binary neutron star merger simulations with neutrino transport and turbulent viscosity: impact of different schemes and grid resolution

We present a systematic numerical relativity study of the impact of different treatment of microphysics and grid resolution in binary neutron star mergers. We consider series of simulations at multiple resolutions comparing hydrodynamics, neutrino leakage scheme, leakage augmented with the M0 scheme and the more consistent M1 transport scheme. Additionally, we consider the impact of a sub-grid scheme for turbulent viscosity. We find that viscosity helps to stabilise the remnant against gravitational collapse but grid resolution has a larger impact than microphysics on the remnant's stability. The gravitational wave (GW) energy correlates with the maximum remnant density, that can be thus inferred from GW observations. M1 simulations shows the emergence of a neutrino trapped gas that locally decreases the temperature a few percent when compared to the other simulation series. This out-of-thermodynamics equilibrium effect does not alter the GW emission at the typical resolutions considered for mergers. Different microphysics treatments impact significantly mass, geometry and composition of the remnant's disc and ejecta. M1 simulations show systematically larger proton fractions. The different ejecta compositions reflect into the nucleosynthesis yields, that are robust only if both neutrino emission and absorption are simulated. Synthetic kilonova light curves calculated by means of spherically-symmetric radiation-hydrodynamics evolutions up to 15 days post-merger are mostly sensitive to ejecta's mass and composition; they can be reliably predicted only including the various ejecta components. We conclude that advanced microphysics in combination with resolutions higher than current standards appear essential for robust long-term evolutions and astrophysical predictions.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.