Type Ia Supernovae Progenitors Type Ia Supernovae Historical

Type Ia Supernovae Progenitors

Type Ia Supernovae Historical defining characteristics: Generally, lack of lines of hydrogen Contain a strong Si II absorption feature (6355Å shifted to ~6100Å)

Observational Characteristics Homogeneity: nearly 60% homogeneous in terms of spectra, light curves, peak absolute magnitudes MB ~ -18. 8+5 log(Ho/74) Inhomogeneity: differences in spectra, light curves, do exist. In terms of explosion strength, order: Very weak, e. g. SN 1991 bg, SN 1992 k Weak, e. g. SN 1986 G Normal, ~60% Very bright, e. g. SN 1991 T, ~20%

The following simple facts Energy: ½(~104 km/s)2 ~ ECO->Fe Degeneracy: Explosive event Spectrum: Generally no hydrogen Delay: Explosions can occur with long delay after cessation of star formation. Basic model: Thermonuclear disruption of mass-accreting white dwarf. Note: Flame physics is still an unsolved problem, deflagration to detonation?

Why is identifying the progenitors so important? The fact that we still don’t know the progenitors of some of the most dramatic explosions – a major embarrassment. For dark energy properties we need to understand the evolution of the luminosity with cosmic time. Feedback – radiative, kinetic, nucleosynthetic input into galaxy evolution.

Composition of accreting WD He C-O • Form at Mwd ≲ 0. 45 M☉ • Can explode at ∼ 0. 7 M☉ central He ignition • But composition of ejected matter: He + 56 Ni + decay products Inconsistent with observations O-Ne-Mg • Form from M ∼ 8 -11. 5 M☉ • But not numerous enough and expected to collapse to NS rather than explode No No Yes

At what mass does the WD explode? Chandrasekhar mass carbon igniters Carbon ignites at center: + Sub-Chandra mass helium igniters − 1. At ~1051 ergs 1. Difficult to reach 2. 56 Ni decay MCh powers 2. For MWD ≳ 1. 2 M☉ lightcurve collapse to NS rather than 3. X; (Vj) consistent explosion may with spectra ensue 4. MCh explains homogeneity Indirect double detonation or “edge lit” detonation One detonation propagates outward (through He), inward pressure wave compresses the C-O, ignites off center, followed by outward detonation.

At what mass does the WD explode? Composition of high velocity ejecta In sub-Chandra mass WDs Intermediate mass elements sandwiched by Ni and He/Ni rich High velocity Ni, He! No high velocity C!

For progenitors we have two possible scenarios Double degenerate Merger of two CO WDs brought together by gravitational radiation Single degenerate A CO WD accretes material from a main sequence or red giant companion Binary WD systems Systems such as: Recurrent novae Supersoft x-ray sources Symbiotic systems

Evolutionary Scenarios

Double degenerate scenario Strengths 1. 2. 3. 4. Population synthesis predicts the right statistics. Double degenerate systems detected observationally. Mergers with some significant consequences appear inevitable. In ellipticals, consistent with observed x-ray flux (~30 x smaller than predicted for SDS). Weaknesses 1. Off-center carbon ignition may lead to ONe-Mg WD and accretion induced collapse rather than SN Ia.

Double degenerate scenario 1. The merger of two 0. 9 M☉ WDs produced a subluminous SN Ia (SN 1991 bg-like).

Double degenerate scenario 2. Simulation of 0. 6 M☉ + 0. 9 M☉ suggested that SNe Ia could be obtained if

Single degenerate scenario Strengths 1. 2. If accreted matter can be retained, natural path to increasing mass. Candidate progenitors exist. Weaknesses 1. 2. 3. It is not absolutely clear that a hydrogen-accreting WD can indeed reach MCh. Limits on the presence of H exclude symbiotics with the highest mass loss rates. In ellipticals, the observed xray flux ~30 x smaller than predicted.

A few recent observational findings 1. Two populations: “Prompt” – SN Ia rate ~ star formation rate “Delayed” – SN Ia rate ~ stellar mass ⇓ a. Rate higher in late type galaxies. b. For higher z prompt dominate sample. c. Prompt are brighter.

Recent observational findings 2. A decrease with redshift in the strength of intermediate mass element features (consistent with higher brightness, which implies larger mass of 56 Ni).

Recent observational findings 3. The luminosity-weighted age of the host galaxy is correlated with the 56 Ni yield ⇒ more massive progenitors give rise to more luminous explosions.

Recent observational findings 4. Super-Chandrasekhar mass progenitors? E. g. SNLS-03 D 3 bb SN 2009 dc.

Serendipity and SNe Ia A short (10 sec) acquisition image by STIS on board HST of the nucleus of the radio-loud galaxy 3 C 78 revealed a point source superposed very near the jet – a SN Ia.

Possibility to Increase SNe Ia Rate? The shocks produced by jets can either: a. b. Heat mass-donor star in binaries containing white dwarfs, thereby increasing the mass transfer rate. or Compress clumps in the interstellar medium thereby increasing the mass accretion rate onto low-velocity white dwarfs. Prediction: The rate of classical novae should increase too, because novae are obtained when white dwarfs accrete at rates

Serendipity and Classical Novae An HST program intended to measure the proper motion of the optical jet in M 87 discovered 11 transient sources in the vicinity of the jet. HST WFPC 2

Conclusions 1. Single degenerate scenario could, in principle, explain everything: prompt are caused by accretion from young main sequence stars (~8 M☉), and delayed are caused by accretion from red giant companions (~1 M☉). However, models involve maybe too many “moving parts. ”

Conclusions 2. Double degenerates could perhaps produce SNe Ia, especially in ellipticals, but many uncertainties remain. 3. Is there something to be learned from gamma-ray bursts? In particular, if indeed both double degenerates and single degenerates contribute to SNe Ia, then it would be hard to believe that mergers and accretion from a red giant, in ellipticals, would appear precisely the same in all twoparameter diagrams (e. g. , the separation between long and short GRBs in duration-hardness diagrams). Consequently, there should be some phase space in which the two progenitor families should separate.