Constraints on the Progenitor of Cassiopeia A

Young, Patrick; Fryer, Chris L.; Hungerford, Aimee; Arnett, David; Rockefeller, Gabriel; Timmes, F. X.; Voit, Benedict; Meakin, Casey; Eriksen, Kristoffer A.

doi:10.1086/500108

Cited by 181 publications

(217 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

200

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is not clear whether the low ejecta mass is due to heavy mass loss of a single massive star that was on its way, or just entered the WR phase, or whether mass loss was induced by a common envelope phase in a binary system (Young et al 2006). Also the presence of a jet-counterjet system in Cas A (Vink 2004;Hwang et al 2004) puts strong constraints on the duration of a possible WR phase (Schure et al 2008).…”

Section: Send Offprint Requests To: B Van Veelenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…García-Segura et al (1996) suggested that these knots are the remnants of the broken up WR shell. Note that also a binary common envelope phase is likely to be followed by a WR-like mass loss phase (Young et al 2006). Both the fact that the QSF lie within the boundary of the forward shock, and the inferred density behind the forward shock of Cas A, limits the possible duration of a WR phase to ∼ 10 4 yr (García-Segura et al 1996).…”

Section: Send Offprint Requests To: B Van Veelenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The hydrodynamics of the supernova remnant Cassiopeia A

Veelen

Langer

Vink

et al. 2009

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims. There are large differences in the proposed progenitor models for the Cas A SNR. One of these differences is the presence or absence of a Wolf-Rayet (WR) phase of the progenitor star. The mass loss history of the progenitor star strongly affects the shape of the Supernova remnant (SNR). In this paper we investigate whether the progenitor star of Cas A had a WR phase or not and how long it may have lasted.Methods. We performed two-dimensional multi-species hydrodynamical simulations of the CSM around the progenitor star for several WR life times, each followed by the interaction of the supernova ejecta with the CSM. We then looked at the influence of the length of the WR phase and compared the results of the simulations with the observations of Cas A. Results. The difference in the structure of the CSM, for models with different WR life times, has a strong impact on the resulting SNR. With an increasing WR life time the reverse shock velocity of the SNR decreases and the range of observed velocities in the shocked material increases. Furthermore, if a WR phase occurs, the remainders of the WR shell will be visible in the resulting SNR. Conclusions. Comparing our results with the observations suggests that the progenitor star of Cas A did not have a WR phase. We also find that the quasi-stationary flocculi (QSF) in Cas A are not consistent with the clumps from a WR shell that have been shocked and accelerated by the interaction with the SN ejecta. We can also conclude that for a SN explosion taking place in a CSM that is shaped by the wind during a short (≤ 15000 yr) WR phase, the clumps from the WR shell will be visible inside the SNR.

show abstract

Section: Send Offprint Requests To: B Van Veelenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Send Offprint Requests To: B Van Veelenmentioning

confidence: 99%

The hydrodynamics of the supernova remnant Cassiopeia A

Veelen

Langer

Vink

et al. 2009

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, given the association of a SN remnant with a relativistic object, one can attempt to infer the properties of the progenitor object from the former; a classic example being the Crab nebula (Nomoto et al 1982). However, this approach is model dependent, with Cas A, for example, being interpreted as originating from both single and binary progenitors of differing masses (Laming & Hwang 2003;Young et al 2006). Second, theoretical reconstruction of the evolutionary history of (high-mass) X-ray binaries such as GX301-2 (=BP Cru) and 4U1700-37 (=HD 153919) from their current physical properties may be attempted (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A VLT/FLAMES survey for massive binaries in Westerlund 1

Clark

Ritchie

Najarro

et al. 2014

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. The first soft gamma-ray repeater was discovered over three decades ago, and was subsequently identified as a magnetar, a class of highly magnetised neutron star. It has been hypothesised that these stars power some of the brightest supernovae known, and that they may form the central engines of some long duration gamma-ray bursts. However there is currently no consenus on the formation channel(s) of these objects. Aims. The presence of a magnetar in the starburst cluster Westerlund 1 implies a progenitor with a mass ≥40 M , which favours its formation in a binary that was disrupted at supernova. To test this hypothesis we conducted a search for the putative pre-SN companion.Methods. This was accomplished via a radial velocity survey to identify high-velocity runaways, with subsequent non-LTE model atmosphere analysis of the resultant candidate, Wd1-5. Results. Wd1-5 closely resembles the primaries in the short-period binaries, Wd1-13 and 44, suggesting a similar evolutionary history, although it currently appears single. It is overluminous for its spectroscopic mass and we find evidence of He-and N-enrichement, O-depletion, and critically C-enrichment, a combination of properties that is difficult to explain under single star evolutionary paradigms. We infer a pre-SN history for Wd1-5 which supposes an initial close binary comprising two stars of comparable (∼41 M + 35 M ) masses. Efficient mass transfer from the initially more massive component leads to the mass-gainer evolving more rapidly, initiating luminous blue variable/common envelope evolution. Reverse, wind-driven mass transfer during its subsequent WC Wolf-Rayet phase leads to the carbon pollution of Wd1-5, before a type Ibc supernova disrupts the binary system. Under the assumption of a physical association between Wd1-5 and J1647-45, the secondary is identified as the magnetar progenitor; its common envelope evolutionary phase prevents spin-down of its core prior to SN and the seed magnetic field for the magnetar forms either in this phase or during the earlier episode of mass transfer in which it was spun-up. Conclusions. Our results suggest that binarity is a key ingredient in the formation of at least a subset of magnetars by preventing spin-down via core-coupling and potentially generating a seed magnetic field. The apparent formation of a magnetar in a Type Ibc supernova is consistent with recent suggestions that superluminous Type Ibc supernovae are powered by the rapid spin-down of these objects.

show abstract

“…Energy to eject the envelope is extracted from the orbital energy, but a small layer of hydrogen may remain on the surface of the merger product until the moment of explosion as a supernova type IIb. This scenario was recently considered by Young et al (2006) for Cassiopeia A, in which no evidence for a companion star was found, despite numerous attempts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Binary progenitor models of type IIb supernovae

Claeys

Mink

Pols

et al. 2011

A&A

121

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Massive stars that lose their hydrogen-rich envelope down to a few tenths of a solar mass explode as extended type IIb supernovae, an intriguing subtype that links the hydrogen-rich type II supernovae with the hydrogen-poor type Ib and Ic. The progenitors may be very massive single stars that lose their envelope due to their stellar wind, but mass stripping due to interaction with a companion star in a binary system is currently considered to be the dominant formation channel. Anticipating the upcoming automated transient surveys, we computed an extensive grid of binary models with the Eggleton binary evolution code. We identify the limited range of initial orbital periods and mass ratios required to produce type IIb binary progenitors. The rate we predict from our standard models, which assume conservative mass transfer, is about six times smaller than the current rate indicated by observations. It is larger but still comparable to the rate expected from massive single stars. We evaluate extensively the effect of various assumptions such as the adopted accretion efficiency, the binary fraction and distributions for the initial binary parameters. To recover the observed rate we must generously allow for uncertainties and consider low accretion efficiencies in combination with limited angular momentum loss from the system. Motivated by the claims of detection and non-detection of companions for a few IIb supernovae, we investigate the properties of the secondary star at the moment of explosion. We identify three cases: (1) the companion is predicted to appear as a hot O star in about 90% of the cases, as a result of mass accretion during its main sequence evolution, (2) the companion becomes an over-luminous B star in about 3% of the cases, if mass accretion occurred while crossing the Hertzsprung gap or (3) in systems with very similar initial masses the companion will appear as a K supergiant. The second case, which applies to the well-studied case of SN 1993J and possibly to SN 2001ig, is the least common case and requires that the companion very efficiently accretes the transferred material -in contrast to what is required to recover the overall IIb rate. We note that relative rates quoted above depend on the assumed efficiency of semi-convective mixing: for inefficient semi-convection the presence of blue supergiant companions is expected to be more common, occurring in up to about 40% of the cases. Our study demonstrates that type IIb supernovae have the potential to teach us about the physics of binary interaction and about stellar processes such as internal mixing and possibly stellar-wind mass loss. The fast increasing number of type IIb detections from automated surveys may lead to more solid constraints on these model uncertainties in the near future.

show abstract

Constraints on the Progenitor of Cassiopeia A

Cited by 181 publications

References 48 publications

The hydrodynamics of the supernova remnant Cassiopeia A

The hydrodynamics of the supernova remnant Cassiopeia A

A VLT/FLAMES survey for massive binaries in Westerlund 1

Binary progenitor models of type IIb supernovae

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About