Low-energy core-collapse supernovae in the frame of the jittering jets explosion mechanism

Gofman, Roni Anna; Soker, Noam

doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1197

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our investigation by means of neutrino-hydrodynamical simulations was focused on neutrino-driven explosions, because all of the considered progenitors explode self-consistently and fairly quickly after core bounce by the delayed neutrino-driven mechanism. We therefore did not invoke any additional effects such as "jittering jets" (e.g., Soker 2010), which have been suggested as alternative or additional mechanism to revive the stalled SN shock (e.g., Soker 2019), and whose effects have recently been claimed to play a role in the low-energy explosions of low-mass SN progenitors (Gofman & Soker 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Three-dimensional Models of Core-collapse Supernovae From Low-mass Progenitors With Implications for Crab

Stockinger,

Janka,

Kresse

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present 3D full-sphere supernova simulations of non-rotating low-mass (∼ 9 M ) progenitors, covering the entire evolution from core collapse through bounce and shock revival, through shock breakout from the stellar surface, until fallback is completed several days later. We obtain low-energy explosions (∼0.5-1.0 × 10 50 erg) of iron-core progenitors at the low-mass end of the core-collapse supernova (LMCCSN) domain and compare to a super-AGB (sAGB) progenitor with an oxygen-neon-magnesium core that collapses and explodes as electron-capture supernova (ECSN). The onset of the explosion in the LMCCSN models is modelled self-consistently using the V -P code, whereas the ECSN explosion is modelled using parametric neutrino transport in the P -HOTB code, choosing different explosion energies in the range of previous self-consistent models. The sAGB and LMCCSN progenitors that share structural similarities have almost spherical explosions with little metal mixing into the hydrogen envelope. A LMCCSN with less 2nd dredge-up results in a highly asymmetric explosion. It shows efficient mixing and dramatic shock deceleration in the extended hydrogen envelope. Both properties allow fast nickel plumes to catch up with the shock, leading to extreme shock deformation and aspherical shock breakout. Fallback masses of 5 × 10 −3 M have no significant effects on the neutron star (NS) masses and kicks. The anisotropic fallback carries considerable angular momentum, however, and determines the spin of the newly-born NS. The LMCCSN model with less 2nd dredge-up results in a hydrodynamic and neutrino-induced NS kick of >40 km s −1 and a NS spin period of ∼30 ms, both not largely different from those of the Crab pulsar at birth.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Three-dimensional Models of Core-collapse Supernovae From Low-mass Progenitors With Implications for Crab

Stockinger,

Janka,

Kresse

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most of these have long spin periods, P s ≈ 0.01-0.1 s, and their energy neither dominates the explosion nor the light curve. Gofman & Soker (2020) estimate the spin period of the NS remnants of CCSNe with explosion energies of 10 50 -10 51 erg, which are the majority of CCSNe, to be in the range of P s ≈ 0.01-0.1 s. We expect many of them to have medium to strong magnetic fields as magnetic fields are required for jetlaunching. Namely, the NSs with strong magnetic fields are born as magnetars, but with low energy because of their relatively slow rotation.…”

Section: Superluminous Supernovae (Slsne)mentioning

confidence: 98%

The Role of Jets in Exploding Supernovae and in Shaping their Remnants

Soker

2022

Res. Astron. Astrophys.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I review studies of core collapse supernovae (CCSNe) and similar transient events that attribute major roles to jets in powering most CCSNe and in shaping their ejecta. I start with reviewing the jittering jets explosion mechanism that I take to power most CCSN explosions. Neutrino heating does play a role in boosting the jets. I compare the morphologies of some CCSN remnants to planetary nebulae to conclude that jets and instabilities are behind the shaping of their ejecta. I then discuss CCSNe that are descendants of rapidly rotating collapsing cores that result in fixed-axis jets (with small jittering) that shape bipolar ejecta. A large fraction of the bipolar CCSNe are superluminous supernovae (SLSNe). I conclude that modelling of SLSNe lightcurves and bumps in the lightcurves must include jets, even when considering energetic magnetars and/or ejecta interaction with the circumstellar matter (CSM). I connect the properties of bipolar CCSNe to common envelope jets supernovae (CEJSNe) where an old neutron star or a black hole spirals-in inside the envelope and then inside the core of a red supergiant. I discuss how jets can shape the pre-explosion CSM, as in supernova 1987A, and can power pre-explosion outbursts (precursors) in binary systems progenitors of CCSNe and CEJSNe. Binary interaction facilitate also the launching of post-explosion jets.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, after accretion ceases, rapidly rotating NSs substantially slow-down by blowing winds (e.g., Prasanna et al 2022) in the propeller mechanism (e.g., Ott et al 2006). Therefore, in most, but not in all, cases the JJEM mechanism expects a spin-period of tens of milliseconds shortly after explosion (e.g., Gofman & Soker 2020).…”

Section: The Possible Role Of Core Rotationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classifying Core Collapse Supernova Remnants by Their Morphology as Shaped by the Last Exploding Jets

Soker

2023

Res. Astron. Astrophys.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under the assumption that jets explode all core collapse supernovae (CCSNe), I classify 14 CCSN remnants (CCSNRs) into five groups according to their morphology as shaped by jets, and attribute the classes to the specific angular momentum of the pre-collapse core. Point-symmetry (one CCSNR): According to the jittering jets explosion mechanism (JJEM) when the pre-collapse core rotates very slowly, the newly born neutron star (NS) launches tens of jet-pairs in all directions. The last several jet-pairs might leave an imprint of several pairs of “ears,” i.e., a point-symmetric morphology. One pair of ears (eight CCSNRs): More rapidly rotating cores might force the last pair of jets to be long-lived and shape one pair of jet-inflated ears that dominates the morphology. S-shaped (one CCSNR): The accretion disk might precess, leading to an S-shaped morphology. Barrel-shaped (three CCSNRs): Even more rapidly rotating pre-collapse cores might result in a final energetic pair of jets that clear the region along the axis of the pre-collapse core rotation and form a barrel-shaped morphology. Elongated (one CCSNR): A very rapidly rotating pre-collapse core forces all jets to be along the same axis such that the jets are inefficient in expelling mass from the equatorial plane and the long-lasting accretion process turns the NS into a black hole. The two new results of this study are the classification of CCSNRs into five classes based on jet-shaped morphological features, and the attribution of the morphological classes mainly to the pre-collapse core rotation in the frame of the JJEM.

show abstract

Low-energy core-collapse supernovae in the frame of the jittering jets explosion mechanism

Cited by 10 publications

References 48 publications

Three-dimensional Models of Core-collapse Supernovae From Low-mass Progenitors With Implications for Crab

Three-dimensional Models of Core-collapse Supernovae From Low-mass Progenitors With Implications for Crab

The Role of Jets in Exploding Supernovae and in Shaping their Remnants

Classifying Core Collapse Supernova Remnants by Their Morphology as Shaped by the Last Exploding Jets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About