Paper detail

The Development of Explosions in Axisymmetric Ab Initio Core-Collapse Supernova Simulations of 12-25 $M_\odot$ Stars

We present four ab initio axisymmetric core-collapse supernova simulations for 12, 15, 20, and 25 $M_\odot$ progenitors. All of the simulations yield explosions and have been evolved for at least 1.2 seconds after core bounce and 1 second after material first becomes unbound. Simulations were computed with our Chimera code employing spectral neutrino transport, special and general relativistic transport effects, and state-of-the-art neutrino interactions. Continuing the evolution beyond 1 second allows explosions to develop more fully and the processes powering the explosions to become more clearly evident. We compute explosion energy estimates, including the binding energy of the stellar envelope outside the shock, of 0.34, 0.88, 0.38, and 0.70 B ($10^{51}$ ergs) and increasing at 0.03, 0.15, 0.19, and 0.52 B s$^{-1}$, respectively, for the 12, 15, 20, and 25 $M_\odot$ models. Three models developed pronounced prolate shock morphologies, while the 20 $M_\odot$ model, though exhibiting lobes and accretion streams like the other models, develops an approximately spherical, off-center shock as the explosion begins and then becomes moderately prolate $\sim$600 ms after bounce. This reduces the explosion energy relative to the other models by reducing mass accretion during the critical explosion power-up phase. We examine the growth of the explosion energy in our models through detailed analyses of the energy sources and flows. We find that the 12 and 20 $M_\odot$ models have explosion energies comparable to that of the lower range of observed explosion energies while the 15 and 25 $M_\odot$ models are within the range of observed explosion energies, particularly considering the rate at which their explosion energies are increasing. The ejected $^{56}$Ni masses given by our models are all within observational limits as are the proto-neutron star masses and kick velocities. (Truncated)

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access12 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.

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.