The uncertain masses of progenitors of core-collapse supernovae and direct-collapse black holes

Farrell, Eoin; Groh, J. H.; Meynet, Georges; Eldridge, J. J.

doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa035

Cited by 40 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These stars may explode as a Type IIP SN but there is a lack of observational evidence to confirm this (see, e.g., [6]), and there is considerable debate whether the absence of Type IIP progenitors with a mass greater than 20 M is real, or simply an artifact of low number statistics (see, e.g., [7]). Further, due to uncertainties in stellar evolution, it has been argued that it is impossible to infer the progenitor mass from the properties of the progenitor at the time of the explosion [8]. Likewise, it is difficult to estimate the progenitor mass from modelling of the light curve [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

UV Spectroscopy of Massive Stars

Hillier

2020

Galaxies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a review of UV observations of massive stars and their analysis. We discuss O stars, luminous blue variables, and Wolf–Rayet stars. Because of their effective temperature, the UV (912−3200 Å) provides invaluable diagnostics not available at other wavebands. Enormous progress has been made in interpreting and analysing UV data, but much work remains. To facilitate the review, we provide a brief discussion on the structure of stellar winds, and on the different techniques used to model and interpret UV spectra. We discuss several important results that have arisen from UV studies including weak-wind stars and the importance of clumping and porosity. We also discuss errors in determining wind terminal velocities and mass-loss rates.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

UV Spectroscopy of Massive Stars

Hillier

2020

Galaxies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5.1) are particularly important for high-mass stars and this may have a strong impact on the estimated masses, not just the uncertainty. To complicate matters more, Farrell et al (2020) has carried out a parametric study showing that the luminosity of RSGs is determined by the mass of their helium core, and that a strong degeneracy exists between the stellar luminosity and the hydrogen envelope mass. If confirmed, this would imply that estimating the mass of the progenitor would require an independent determination of the mass of the hydrogen envelope by modelling of the SN light curve.…”

Section: Mass Estimates For Core-collapse Supernovae Progenitorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Weighing stars from birth to death: mass determination methods across the HRD

Serenelli

Weiß

Aerts

et al. 2021

Astron Astrophys Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mass of a star is the most fundamental parameter for its structure, evolution, and final fate. It is particularly important for any kind of stellar archaeology and characterization of exoplanets. There exist a variety of methods in astronomy to estimate or determine it. In this review we present a significant number of such methods, beginning with the most direct and model-independent approach using detached eclipsing binaries. We then move to more indirect and model-dependent methods, such as the quite commonly used isochrone or stellar track fitting. The arrival of quantitative asteroseismology has opened a completely new approach to determine stellar masses and to complement and improve the accuracy of other methods. We include methods for different evolutionary stages, from the pre-main sequence to evolved (super)giants and final remnants. For all methods uncertainties and restrictions will be discussed. We provide lists of altogether more than 200 benchmark stars with relative mass accuracies between ½0:3; 2% for the covered mass range of M 2 ½0:1; 16 M , 75% of which are stars burning hydrogen in their core and the other 25% covering all other evolved stages. We close with a recommendation how to combine various methods to arrive at a ''mass-ladder'' for stars.

show abstract

“…Thus, it is stronger for more luminous, more massive stars. Stellar mass loss has been a subject of study for a long time (Lamers et al 1999;Vink 2011), but the details of the implementation in models still gives rise to significant uncertainties (Farrell et al 2020). The H-burning contribution to 26 Al is most-important for massive stars with initial mass >30 M for which stellar winds are strong enough to remove material from the H burning regions below the H envelope (Limongi & Chieffi 2006b).…”

Section: H Core and Shell Burningmentioning

confidence: 99%

The radioactive nuclei and in the Cosmos and in the solar system

Diehl

Lugaro

Heger

et al. 2021

Publ. Astron. Soc. Aust.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cosmic evolution of the chemical elements from the Big Bang to the present time is driven by nuclear fusion reactions inside stars and stellar explosions. A cycle of matter recurrently re-processes metal-enriched stellar ejecta into the next generation of stars. The study of cosmic nucleosynthesis and this matter cycle requires the understanding of the physics of nuclear reactions, of the conditions at which the nuclear reactions are activated inside the stars and stellar explosions, of the stellar ejection mechanisms through winds and explosions, and of the transport of the ejecta towards the next cycle, from hot plasma to cold, star-forming gas. Due to the long timescales of stellar evolution, and because of the infrequent occurrence of stellar explosions, observational studies are challenging, as they have biases in time and space as well as different sensitivities related to the various astronomical methods. Here, we describe in detail the astrophysical and nuclear-physical processes involved in creating two radioactive isotopes useful in such studies, $^{26}\mathrm{Al}$ and $^{60}\mathrm{Fe}$ . Due to their radioactive lifetime of the order of a million years, these isotopes are suitable to characterise simultaneously the processes of nuclear fusion reactions and of interstellar transport. We describe and discuss the nuclear reactions involved in the production and destruction of $^{26}\mathrm{Al}$ and $^{60}\mathrm{Fe}$ , the key characteristics of the stellar sites of their nucleosynthesis and their interstellar journey after ejection from the nucleosynthesis sites. This allows us to connect the theoretical astrophysical aspects to the variety of astronomical messengers presented here, from stardust and cosmic-ray composition measurements, through observation of $\gamma$ rays produced by radioactivity, to material deposited in deep-sea ocean crusts and to the inferred composition of the first solids that have formed in the Solar System. We show that considering measurements of the isotopic ratio of $^{26}\mathrm{Al}$ to $^{60}\mathrm{Fe}$ eliminate some of the unknowns when interpreting astronomical results, and discuss the lessons learned from these two isotopes on cosmic chemical evolution. This review paper has emerged from an ISSI-BJ Team project in 2017–2019, bringing together nuclear physicists, astronomers, and astrophysicists in this inter-disciplinary discussion.

show abstract

The uncertain masses of progenitors of core-collapse supernovae and direct-collapse black holes

Cited by 40 publications

References 36 publications

UV Spectroscopy of Massive Stars

UV Spectroscopy of Massive Stars

Weighing stars from birth to death: mass determination methods across the HRD

The radioactive nuclei and in the Cosmos and in the solar system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About