Paper detail

From supernova to supernova remnant: comparison of thermonuclear explosion models

Progress in the three-dimensional modeling of supernovae (SN) prompts us to revisit the supernova remnant (SNR) phase. We continue our study of the imprint of a thermonuclear explosion on the SNR it produces, that we started with a delayed-detonation model of a Chandrasekhar-mass white dwarf. Here we compare two different types of explosion models, each with two variants: two delayed detonation models (N100ddt, N5ddt) and two pure deflagration models (N100def, N5def), where the N number parametrizes the ignition. The output of each SN simulation is used as input of a SNR simulation carried on until 500 yr after the explosion. While all SNR models become more spherical over time and overall display the theoretical structure expected for a young SNR, clear differences are visible amongst the models, depending on the geometry of the ignition and on the presence or not of detonation fronts. Compared to N100 models, N5 models have a strong dipole component, and produce asymmetric remnants. N5def produces a regular-looking, but offset remnant, while N5ddt produces a two-sided remnant. Pure deflagration models exhibit specific traits: a central over-density, because of the incomplete explosion, and a network of seam lines across the surface, boundaries between burning cells. Signatures from the SN dominate the morphology of the SNR up to 100 yr to 300 yr after the explosion, depending on the model, and are still measurable at 500 yr, which may provide a way of testing explosion models.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.

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.