Paper detail

The Unusual Temporal and Spectral Evolution of SN2011ht. II. Peculiar Type IIn or Impostor?

SN2011ht has been described both as a true supernova and as an impostor. In this paper, we conclude that it does not match some basic expectations for a core-collapse event. We discuss SN2011ht's spectral evolution from a hot dense wind to a cool dense wind, followed by the post-plateau appearance of a faster low density wind during a rapid decline in luminosity. We identify a slow dense wind expanding at only 500--600 km/s, present throughout the eruption. A faster wind speed V ~ 900 km/s may be identified with a second phase of the outburst. There is no direct or significant evidence for any flow speed above 1000 km/s; the broad asymmetric wings of Balmer emission lines in the hot wind phase were due to Thomson scattering, not bulk motion. We estimate a mass loss rate of order 0.04 Msun/yr during the hot dense wind phase of the event. There is no evidence that the kinetic energy substantially exceeded the luminous energy, roughly 2 X 10^49 ergs; so the total energy was far less than a true SN. We suggest that SN2011ht was a giant eruption driven by super-Eddington radiation pressure, perhaps beginning about 6 months before the discovery. A strongly non-spherical SN might also account for the data, at the cost of more free parameters.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 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.