Paper detail

Detonating Failed Deflagration Model of Thermonuclear Supernovae II. Comparison to Observations

We develop and demonstrate the methodology of testing multi-dimensional supernova models against observations by studying the properties of one example of the detonation from failed deflagration (DFD) explosion model of thermonuclear supernovae. Using time-dependent multi-dimensional radiative transfer calculations, we generate the synthetic broadband optical light curves, near-infrared light curves, color evolution curves, full spectral time-series, and spectropolarization of the model, as seen from various viewing angles. All model observables are critically evaluated against examples of well-observed, standard Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia). We explore the consequences of the intrinsic model asphericity by studying the dependence of the model emission on viewing angle, and by quantifying the resulting dispersion in (and internal correlations between) various model observables. These statistical properties of the model are also evaluated against those of the available observational sample of SNe Ia. On the whole, the DFD model shows good agreement with a broad range of SN Ia observations. Certain deficiencies are also apparent, and point to further developments within the basic theoretical framework. We also identify several intriguing orientation effects in the model which suggest ways in which the asphericity of SNe Ia may contribute to their photometric and spectroscopic diversity and, conversely, how the relative homogeneity of SNe Ia constrains the degree of asymmetry allowable in the models. The comprehensive methodology adopted in this work proves an essential component of developing and validating theoretical supernova models, and helps motivate and clearly define future directions in both the modeling and the observation of SNe Ia.

preprint2006arXivOpen 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.