Paper detail

On the size distribution of supernova remnants in the Magellanic Clouds

The physical sizes of supernova remnants (SNRs) in a number of nearby galaxies follow an approximately linear cumulative distribution, contrary to what is expected for decelerating shock fronts. This has been attributed to selection effects, or to a majority of SNRs propagating in "free expansion", at constant velocity, into a tenuous ambient medium. We compile a list of 77 known SNRs in the Magellanic Clouds (MCs), and argue that they are a fairly complete record of the SNe that have exploded over the last ~20kyr, with most now in the adiabatic, Sedov phase of their expansions. The roughly linear cumulative size distribution (uniform in a differential distribution) can result from the combination of a deceleration during this phase, a transition to a radiation-loss-dominated phase at a radius that depends on the local gas density, and a distribution of ambient densities varying roughly as rho^{-1}. This explanation is supported by the observed -1 power-law distributions of three independent tracers of density: HI column density, Halpha surface brightness, and star formation rate from resolved stellar populations. In this picture, the observed cutoff at r~30 pc in the SNR size distribution is due to a minimum in the mean ambient gas density in the regions where supernovae (SNe) explode. We show that M33 has a SNR size distribution similar to that of the MCs, suggesting these features, and their explanation, may be universal. In a companion paper (Maoz & Badenes 2010), we use our sample of SNRs as an effective "SN survey" to calculate the SN rate and delay time distribution in the MCs. The hypothesis that most SNRs are in free expansion, rather than in the Sedov phase of their evolution, would result in SN rates that are in strong conflict with independent measurements, and with basic stellar evolution theory.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.