Paper detail

Enhanced mass-loss rate evolution of stars with $\gtrsim 18 M_\odot$ and missing optically-observed type II core-collapse supernovae

We evolve stellar models with zero-age main sequence (ZAMS) mass of $M_{\rm ZAMS} \gtrsim 18 M_\odot$ under the assumption that they experience an enhanced mass-loss rate when crossing the instability strip at high luminosities and conclude that most of them end as type Ibc supernovae (SNe Ibc) or dust-obscured SNe II. We explore what level of enhanced mass-loss rate during the instability strip would be necessary to explain the `red supergiant (RSG) problem'. This problem refers to the dearth of observed core-collapse supernovae progenitors with $M_{\rm ZAMS} \gtrsim 18 M_\odot$. Namely, we examine what enhanced mass loss rate could make it possible for all these stars actually to explode as CCSNe. We find that the mass-loss rate should increase by a factor of at least about ten. We reach this conclusion by analyzing the hydrogen mass in the stellar envelope and the optical depth of the dusty wind at the explosion, and crudely estimate that under our assumptions only about a fifth of these stars explode as unobscured SNe II and SNe IIb. About 10-15 per cent end as obscured SNe II that are infrared-bright but visibly very faint, and the rest, about 65-70 per cent, end as SNe Ibc. However, the statistical uncertainties are still too significant to decide whether many stars with $M_{\rm ZAMS} \gtrsim 18M_\odot$ do not explode as expected in the neutrino driven explosion mechanism, or whether all of them explode as CCSNe, as expected by the jittering jets explosion mechanism.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.