Paper detail

Supernovae with Two Peaks in the Optical Light Curve and the Signature of Progenitors with Low-mass Extended Envelopes

Early observations of supernova light curves are powerful tools for shedding light on the pre-explosion structures of their progenitors and their mass-loss histories just prior to explosion. Some core-collapse supernovae that are detected during the first days after the explosion prominently show two peaks in the optical bands, including the $R$ and $I$ bands, where the first peak appears to be powered by the cooling of shocked surface material and the second peak is clearly powered by radioactive decay. Such light curves have been explored in detail theoretically for SN 1993J and 2011dh, where it was found that they may be explained by progenitors with extended, low-mass envelopes. Here we generalize these results. We explore, first, whether any double-peaked light curve of this type can be generated by a progenitor with a "standard" density profile, such as a red supergiant or a Wolf-Rayet star. We show that a standard progenitor (1) cannot produce a double-peaked light curve in the $R$ and $I$ bands, and (2) cannot exhibit a fast drop in the bolometric luminosity as is seen after the first peak. We then explore the signature of a progenitor with a compact core surrounded by extended, low-mass material. This may be a hydrostatic low-mass envelope or material ejected just prior to the explosion. We show that it naturally produces both of these features. We use this result to provide simple formulae to estimate (1) the mass of the extended material from the time of the first peak, (2) the extended material radius from the luminosity of the first peak, and (3) an upper limit on the core radius from the luminosity minimum between the two peaks.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.