Paper detail

Hydrodynamical evolution of merging carbon-oxygen white dwarfs: their pre-supernova structure and observational counterparts

We perform smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) simulations for merging binary carbon-oxygen (CO) white dwarfs (WDs) with masses of $1.1$ and $1.0$ $M_\odot$, until the merger remnant reaches a dynamically steady state. Using these results, we assess whether the binary could induce a thermonuclear explosion, and whether the explosion could be observed as a type Ia supernova (SN Ia). We investigate three explosion mechanisms: a helium-ignition following the dynamical merger (`helium-ignited violent merger model&#39;), a carbon-ignition (`carbon-ignited violent merger model&#39;), and an explosion following the formation of the Chandrasekhar mass WD (`Chandrasekhar mass model&#39;). An explosion of the helium-ignited violent merger model is possible, while we predict that the resulting SN ejecta are highly asymmetric since its companion star is fully intact at the time of the explosion. The carbon-ignited violent merger model can also lead to an explosion. However, the envelope of the exploding WD spreads out to $\sim 0.1R_\odot$; it is much larger than that inferred for SN 2011fe ($< 0.1R_\odot $) while much smaller than that for SN 2014J ($\sim 1R_\odot$). For the particular combination of the WD masses studied in this work, the Chandrasekhar mass model is not successful to lead to an SN Ia explosion. Besides these assessments, we investigate the evolution of unbound materials ejected through the merging process (`merger ejecta&#39;), assuming a case where the SN Ia explosion is not triggered by the helium- or carbon-ignition during the merger. The merger ejecta interact with the surrounding interstellar medium, and form a shell. The shell has a bolometric luminosity of more than $2 \times 10^{35}$ ergs$^{-1}$ lasting for $\sim 2 \times 10^4$ yr. If this is the case, Milky Way should harbor about $10$ such shells at any given time.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.