Paper detail

The white dwarf's carbon fraction as a secondary parameter of Type Ia supernovae

Binary stellar evolution calculations predict that Chandrasekhar-mass carbon/oxygen white dwarfs (WDs) show a radially varying profile for the composition with a carbon depleted core. Many recent multi-dimensional simulations of Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia), however, assume the progenitor WD has a homogeneous chemical composition. In this work, we explore the impact of different initial carbon profiles of the progenitor WD on the explosion phase and on synthetic observables in the Chandrasekhar-mass delayed detonation model. Spectra and light curves are compared to observations to judge the validity of the model. The explosion phase is simulated using the finite volume supernova code LEAFS, which is extended to treat different compositions of the progenitor WD. The synthetic observables are computed with the Monte Carlo radiative transfer code ARTIS. Differences in binding energies of carbon and oxygen lead to a lower nuclear energy release for carbon depleted material; thus, the burning fronts that develop are weaker and the total nuclear energy release is smaller. For otherwise identical conditions, carbon depleted models produce less Ni-56. Comparing different models with similar Ni-56 yields shows lower kinetic energies in the ejecta for carbon depleted models, but only small differences in velocity distributions and line velocities in spectra. The light curve width-luminosity relation (WLR) obtained for models with differing carbon depletion is roughly perpendicular to the observed WLR, hence the carbon mass fraction is probably only a secondary parameter in the family of SNe Ia.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 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.