Paper detail

The influence of model parameters on the prediction of gravitational wave signals from stellar core collapse

We present the gravitational wave (GW) analysis of an extensive series of 3D MHD core-collapse simulations. Our 25 models are launched from a 15 solar mass progenitor, a spherically symmetric effective general relativistic potential, the Lattimer-Swesty or the Shen equation of state (EoS), and a neutrino parametrisation scheme which is accurate until about 5ms postbounce. For 3 representative models, we also include long-term neutrino physics by means of a leakage scheme. Non- or only slowly rotating models show GW emission due to prompt and proto-neutron star convection, allowing the distinction between the two different nuclear EoS. For moderately or fast rotation rates models, we find, in agreement with recent results, only a type I GW signature at core bounce. Models which are set up with an initial central angular velocity of >~ 2pi rad/s emit GWs due to the low T/|W| dynamical instability during the postbounce phase. Weak B-fields do not notably influence the dynamical evolution of the core and thus the GW emission. However, for strong initial poloidal B-fields (~1e12 G),flux-freezing and field winding leads to conditions where P_{mag}/P_{mat} ~ 1, causing the onset of a jet-like supernova explosion and hence the emission of a type IV GW signal. In contradiction to axisymmetric simulations, we find evidence that nonaxisymmetric fluid modes can counteract or even suppress jet formation for models with strong initial toroidal B-fields. We point out that the inclusion of the deleptonisation during the postbounce phase is an indispensable issue for the quantitative prediction of GWs from core-collapse supernovae, as it can alter the GW amplitude up to a factor of 10 compared to a pure hydrodynamical treatment.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.