Paper detail

Non-Radial Instabilities and Progenitor Asphericities in Core-Collapse Supernovae

Since core-collapse supernova simulations still struggle to produce robust neutrino-driven explosions in 3D, it has been proposed that asphericities caused by convection in the progenitor might facilitate shock revival by boosting the activity of non-radial hydrodynamic instabilities in the post-shock region. We investigate this scenario in depth using 42 relativistic 2D simulations with multi-group neutrino transport to examine the effects of velocity and density perturbations in the progenitor for different perturbation geometries that obey fundamental physical constraints (like the anelastic condition). As a framework for analysing our results, we introduce semi-empirical scaling laws relating neutrino heating, average turbulent velocities in the gain region, and the shock deformation in the saturation limit of non-radial instabilities. The squared turbulent Mach number, <Ma^2>, reflects the violence of aspherical motions in the gain layer, and explosive runaway occurs for <Ma^2>~0.3, corresponding to a reduction of the critical neutrino luminosity by ~25% compared to 1D. In the light of this theory, progenitor asphericities aid shock revival mainly by creating anisotropic mass flux onto the shock: Differential infall efficiently converts velocity perturbations in the progenitor into density perturbations (Delta rho/rho) at the shock of the order of the initial convective Mach number Ma. The anisotropic mass flux and ram pressure deform the shock and thereby amplify post-shock turbulence. Large-scale (l=2,l=1) modes prove most conducive to shock revival, whereas small-scale perturbations require unrealistically high convective Mach numbers. Initial density perturbations in the progenitor are only of order Ma^2 and therefore play a subdominant role.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.