Paper detail

Supernova progenitor stars in the initial range of 23 to 33 solar masses and their relation with the SNR Cas A

Multi wavelength observations of Cassiopeia A (Cas A) have provided us with a strong evidence for the presence of circumstellar material surrounding the progenitor star. It has been suggested that its progenitor was a massive star with a strong mass loss. But, despite the large amount of observational data from optical, IR, radio and x-ray observations, the identity of Cas A progenitor is still elusive. In this work, we compute stellar and circumstellar numerical models to look for the progenitor of Cas A. The models will be compared with the observational constraints. We have computed stellar evolution models to get time-dependent wind parameters and surface abundances. We have chosen a set of probable progenitor stars, with initial masses of 23, 28, 29, 30 and 33 \Mo, with mass loss. The derived mass loss rates and wind terminal velocities are used to simulate the evolution of the circumstellar medium. Our stellar set gives distinct SN progenitors: RSG, luminous blue super giants (LBSGs) and Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars. The 23 \Mo star explodes as a RSG in a $\rm ρ\sim r^{-2}$ dense, free streaming wind surrounded by a thin, compressed, RSG shell. The 28 $\Mo$ star explodes as a LBSG, and the SN blast wave interacts with a low density, free streaming wind surrounded by an unstable and massive ''RSG+LBSG'' shell. Finally, the 30 and 33 \Mo stars explode as WR stars surrounded by fast, WR winds that terminate in highly fragmented ''WR+RSG shell''. We have compared the surface chemical abundances of our stellar models with the observational abundances in Cas A. The abundance analysis shows that the progenitor was a star with an initial mass of the order of 30 \Mo, while the hydrodynamical analysis favors progenitors of initial masses around 23.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.