Paper detail

On the nuclear robustness of the r process in neutron-star mergers

We have performed r-process calculations for matter ejected dynamically in neutron star mergers based on a complete set of trajectories from a three-dimensional relativistic smoothed particle hydrodynamic simulation. Our calculations consider an extended nuclear network, including spontaneous, $β$- and neutron-induced fission and adopting fission yield distributions from the ABLA code. We have studied the sensitivity of the r-process abundances to nuclear masses by using different models. Most of the trajectories, corresponding to 90% of the ejected mass, follow a relatively slow expansion allowing for all neutrons to be captured. The resulting abundances are very similar to each other and reproduce the general features of the observed r-process abundance (the second and third peaks, the rare-earth peak and the lead peak) for all mass models as they are mainly determined by the fission yields. We find distinct differences in the abundance yields at and just above the third peak, which can be traced back to different predictions of neutron separation energies for r-process nuclei around neutron number $N=130$. The remaining trajectories, which contribute 10% by mass to the total integrated abundances, follow such a fast expansion that the r process does not use all the neutrons. This also leads to a larger variation of abundances among trajectories as fission does not dominate the r-process dynamics. The total integrated abundances are dominated by contributions from the slow abundances and hence reproduce the general features of the observed r-process abundances. We find that at timescales of weeks relevant for kilonova light curve calculations, the abundance of actinides is larger than the one of lanthanides. Hence actinides can be even more important than lanthanides to determine the photon opacities under kilonova conditions. (Abridged)

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.