Paper detail

Modelling light curves of bipolar core collapse supernovae from the equatorial plane

We use the two-components bipolar toy model of core collapse supernova (CCSN) ejecta to fit the rapid decline from maximum luminosity in the light curve of the type IIb CCSN SN 2018gk (ASASSN-18am). In this toy model we use a template light curve from a different CCSN that is similar to SN 2018gk, but that has no rapid drop in its light curve. The bipolar morphology that we model with a polar ejecta and an equatorial ejecta increases the maximum luminosity and causes a steeper decline for an equatorial observer, relative to a similar spherical explosion. The total energy and mass of our toy model for SN 2018gk are E=5e51 erg and M=2.7Mo. This explosion energy is more than what a neutrino-driven explosion mechanism can supply, implying that jets exploded SN 2018gk. These energetic jets likely shaped the ejecta to a bipolar morphology, as our toy model requires. We crudely estimate that f=2-5% of all CCSNe show this behavior, most being hydrogen deficient (stripped-envelope) CCSNe, as we observe them from the equatorial plane. We estimate the overall fraction of CCSNe that have a pronounced bipolar morphology to be 5-15% of all CCSNe.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.