Paper detail

Empirical Abundance Scaling Laws and Implications for the Gamma-Process in Core-Collapse Supernovae

Analyzing the solar system abundances, we have found two empirical abundance scaling laws concerning the p- and s-nuclei with the same atomic number. The first scaling is s/p ratios are almost constant over a wide range of the atomic number, where the p-nculei are lighter than the s-nuclei by two or four neutrons. The second scaling is p/p ratios are almost constant, where the second $p$-nuclei are lighter than the first p-nucleus by two neutrons. These scalings are a piece of evidence that most p-nuclei are dominantly synthesized by the gamma-process in supernova explosions. The scalings lead to a novel concept of "universality of gamma-process" that the s/p and p/p ratios of nuclei produced by individual gamma-processes are almost constant, respectively. We have calculated the ratios by gamma-process based on core-collapse supernova explosion models under various astrophysical conditions and found that the scalings hold for materials produced by individual gamma-processes independent of the astrophysical conditions assumed. The universality originates from three mechanisms: the shifts of the gamma-process layers to keep their peak temperature, the weak s-process in pre-supernovae, and the independence of the s/p ratios of the nuclear reactions. The results further suggest an extended universality that the s/p ratios in the gamma-process layers are not only constant but also centered on a specific value of 3. With this specific value and the first scaling, we estimate that the ratios of $s$-process abundance contributions from the AGB stars to the massive stars are almost 6.7 for the $s$-nuclei of A > 90. We find that large enhancements of s/p ratios for Ce, Er, and W are a piece of evidence that the weak s-process actually occurred before SNe.

preprint2009arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.