2012
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637x/755/2/138
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Is Strong Sasi Activity the Key to Successful Neutrino-Driven Supernova Explosions?

Abstract: Following a simulation approach of recent publications we explore the viability of the neutrino-heating explosion mechanism in dependence on the spatial dimension. Our results disagree with previous findings. While we also observe that two-dimensional (2D) models explode for lower driving neutrino luminosity than spherically symmetric (1D) models, we do not find that explosions in 3D occur easier and earlier than in 2D. Moreover, we find that the average entropy of matter in the gain layer hardly depends on th… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

62
411
7

Year Published

2014
2014
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 207 publications
(480 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
62
411
7
Order By: Relevance
“…It should be noted that the mass accretion rate of the WW15 model shows a sudden drop from 0.8 M ⊙ s −1 to 0.3 M ⊙ s −1 at t pb ∼ 150 ms (t pb ; postbounce time) then gradually decreases to 0.2 M ⊙ s −1 . This is in a good agreement with the previous results using the same progenitor model (e.g., Figure 1 in Murphy & Burrows (2008) and Figure 1 in Hanke et al (2012)). All of these facts support that our boundary conditions well imitate the density structure out of the boundary of these three 15 M ⊙ models and the boundary effect is not significant for these models.…”
Section: Boundary Conditionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It should be noted that the mass accretion rate of the WW15 model shows a sudden drop from 0.8 M ⊙ s −1 to 0.3 M ⊙ s −1 at t pb ∼ 150 ms (t pb ; postbounce time) then gradually decreases to 0.2 M ⊙ s −1 . This is in a good agreement with the previous results using the same progenitor model (e.g., Figure 1 in Murphy & Burrows (2008) and Figure 1 in Hanke et al (2012)). All of these facts support that our boundary conditions well imitate the density structure out of the boundary of these three 15 M ⊙ models and the boundary effect is not significant for these models.…”
Section: Boundary Conditionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…After that, the accretion rate gradually decreases to ∼ 0.1 M ⊙ s −1 till t 400 = 420 ms at this time the revived shock has expanded to an average ra-dius of r = 400 km. Here t 400 is a useful measure to qualify the vigor of the shock revival (e.g., Hanke et al 2012). On the other hand, model s21.0 has high compactness (ξ 2.0 = 0.46), which leads to the high accretion rate (black dashed line in Figure 8).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…convection and the SASI lead to a reduction of the critical luminosity (see, e.g. Janka & Müller 1996;Herant et al 1992;Nordhaus et al 2010;Hanke et al 2012;Couch 2013).…”
Section: Explosion In Dependence Of the Magnetic Fieldmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Imposing symmetries on simulations of CCSNe can have significant consequences for their evolution (e.g., Hanke et al 2012;Couch 2013;Murphy et al 2013). Detailed spherically symmetric one-dimensional (1D) simulations do not explode (Liebendörfer et al 2001), except when particular low-mass progenitor models are used (e.g., Fischer et al 2010;Hüdepohl et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%