in the garden of flux variables - uvicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~m-2.5 result: wd formation...

21

Upload: others

Post on 03-Oct-2020

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−
Page 2: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

In the Garden of Flux Variables

CC SNe .Ia's?

LRNe?

Kulkarni et al. 2007

LRNe=luminous red novae like the M85 transient

SN Ia

Page 3: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

brightness 1010 Lsun, Std candle

progenitor 1 or 2 white dwarfs:

mechanism mass transfer or merger

progenitor age ~109-10 yr evolution with z Little? Remnant (ns/bh) no Metals ejected Fe, Ni …

109 Lsun Not std candle massive star

core collapse:

~107 yr

(1+z) 2-4 : yes O, Ne, Si …

or

SNe Ia CC SNe

Page 4: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

SN Ia Progenitors - 2 Broad Classes

Single Degenerate - white dwarf + evolving secondary (M ~ 1.4 Msun at explosion)

Double Degenerate - 2 white dwarfs (Mtot >= 1.4 Msun at explosion)

Key point: white dwarf maximum mass M = 1.4 Msun (Chandrasekhar mass)

Page 5: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

  D2   Cosmos   ACS

imaging   ~7 x 7

arcsec +-

  Note diversity

Page 6: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

SN Ia rate depends on SFR

Mannucci et al 2006 Sullivan et al 2006

SNR/M

SFR/M

Page 7: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

Meaning

  Only physics is evol-utionary timescales + SD assumption

  Single component model – not A+B   Same model for active and

passive   Single free parameter

normalization - fSN Ia   Continuous distribution of

delay times

Page 8: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

Evidence for SD vs DD   Delay time distribution ~ 1/t

(continuous)

  predicted #s of DDs vs SDs from pop models

  obs of DD binaries that will merge

  lack of X ray emission prior to explosion

  no “Kasen effect”

  super-Chandra events

Page 9: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−
Page 10: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

Other Obs

  old pops – fast, faint Ia’s

  stretch-L and colour-L relations

  intrinsic dispersion 0.12 mag

Page 11: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−
Page 12: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

In the Garden of Flux Variables

TD=tidal disruption CN=classical novae

Bildsten 2008

Page 13: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

SN Ia progenitors

  Why important?   Among the most powerful explosions in the Universe

(next to GRBs)   SNe Ia and cosmology   Role in chemical evolution and gas dynamics

  Scenario: exploding CO white dwarf near 1.4 Msun.   Energy released (~0.5Msun CO --> 56Ni)   No H in spectrum   Light curve shape (radioactive decay)   Presence in old stellar pops (what else could they be?)

Page 14: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

Two Basic Questions

  What is the “delay time distribution” of SNe Ia? •  What is the main sequence mass of SNe Ia

progenitors?

  By what evolutionary path(s) do white dwarfs become SNe Ia?

Basic questions, but no clear answers …

Page 15: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

SN Ia rate depends on SFR

SFR½

cf . SNR /M = A + B(SFR /M)

Page 16: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

DTD ~ t-0.5±0.2

  Independent of SD model or assumptions re efficiency   t-0.5 what you expect for SD + constant conversion

efficiency

Page 17: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

Assume

  Salpeter IMF   tevol~M-2.5

Result:   WD formation rate ~ t-0.5

Simple Model for WD

formation

±−

+−

⋅=

∝∝

−≅−≅

5.0

/)1(

1/1/1 ,

5.2,35.2 timescaleevol

fcn mass

τ

τττ

ττ

τ

τ

bba

bb

b

a

ddM

dMdN

ddN

ddMM

baM

MdMdN

Page 18: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

WD Formation Rate vs Time

  Simple SFR(t) ~ t-η to allow for range of ages   Correct ages

+1

-1 -1

+1

Page 19: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

SNLS-03D3bb (Howell et al. 2006)   z=0.24, star-forming host

  Most luminous SNIa ever discovered (MV=-20.0, 10 billion Lsun)

  Lies off the stretch-L relation - too bright for its stretch s=1.13 by 4.4 sigma

Page 20: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

03D3bb

  Requires 1.3 Msun of 56Ni to power light curve, 2Msun total mass

  “normal” SNIa – 0.6 Msun of 56Ni

  03D3bb is 2.2x brighter, therefore has 2.2x Ni mass

  Detailed calculation using Arnett models agrees well

  Mass > Chandra mass of 1.4 Msun!

Page 21: In the Garden of Flux Variables - UVicastrofherwig/startalk... · evol~M-2.5 Result: WD formation rate ~ t-0.5 Simple Model for WD formation −± −+ − ∝ ∝ =⋅ ∝ ≅−≅−

03D3bb

  Low velocity of ejecta (8000 km/s)

  Also implies super-Chandra mass

  Conclusion: either (i) a rapidly rotating WD, or (ii) WD-WD merger

  Implications for cosmology (this object was not used in Astier et al 2006)