Comparison of the Core-collapse Evolution of Two Nearly Equal-mass Progenitors

  • Bruenn S
  • Sieverding A
  • Lentz E
  • et al.
6Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

We compare the core-collapse evolution of a pair of 15.8 M ☉ stars with significantly different internal structures, a consequence of the bimodal variability exhibited by massive stars during their late evolutionary stages. The 15.78 and 15.79 M ☉ progenitors have core masses (masses interior to an entropy of 4 k B baryon −1 ) of 1.47 and 1.78 M ☉ and compactness parameters ξ 1.75 of 0.302 and 0.604, respectively. The core-collapse simulations are carried out in 2D to nearly 3 s postbounce and show substantial differences in the times of shock revival and explosion energies. The 15.78 M ☉ model begins exploding promptly at 120 ms postbounce when a strong density decrement at the Si–Si/O shell interface, not present in the 15.79 M ☉ progenitor, encounters the stalled shock. The 15.79 M ☉ model takes 100 ms longer to explode but ultimately produces a more powerful explosion. Both the larger mass accretion rate and the more massive core of the 15.79 M ☉ model during the first 0.8 s postbounce time result in larger ν e / ν ¯ e luminosities and RMS energies along with a flatter and higher-density heating region. The more-energetic explosion of the 15.79 M ☉ model resulted in the ejection of twice as much 56 Ni. Most of the ejecta in both models are moderately proton rich, though counterintuitively the highest electron fraction ( Y e = 0.61) ejecta in either model are in the less-energetic 15.78 M ☉ model, while the lowest electron fraction ( Y e = 0.45) ejecta in either model are in the 15.79 M ☉ model.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bruenn, S. W., Sieverding, A., Lentz, E. J., Sukhbold, T., Hix, W. R., Huk, L. N., … Mezzacappa, A. (2023). Comparison of the Core-collapse Evolution of Two Nearly Equal-mass Progenitors. The Astrophysical Journal, 947(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acbb65

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free