Paper detail

Comparative Analysis of Peculiar Type Ia 1991bg-like Supernovae Spectra

Spectroscopic analyses of Type Ia supernovae have shown there exist four spectroscopic groups---cools, broad line, shallow silicon, and core normal---defined by the widths of the Si II features at 5972 Angstroms and 6355 Angstroms. 1991bg-likes are classified as "cools". Cools are dim, undergo a rapid decline in luminosity, and produce significantly less nickel than normal Type Ia supernovae. They also have an unusually deep and wide trough in their spectra around 4200 Angstroms and a relatively strong Si II absorption attributed to the line at 5972 Angstroms. We examine the spectra of supernova (SN) 1991bg and the cools SN 1997cn, SN 1999by, and SN 2005bl using the highly parameterized synthetic spectrum code SYNOW, and find general agreement with similar spectroscopic studies. Our analysis reveals that this group of supernovae is fairly homogeneous, with many of the blue spectral features well fit by Fe II. The nature of the spectroscopic commonalities and the variations in the class are discussed. Finally, we examine intermediates such as SN 2004eo and discuss the spectroscopic subgroup distribution of Type Ia supernovae.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.