Effect of the Nuclear Equation of State on Relativistic Turbulence-induced Core-collapse Supernovae

Abstract

The nuclear equation of state (EOS) is an important component in the evolution of core-collapse supernovae. In this paper we make a survey of various EOSs in the literature and analyze their effect on spherical core-collapse models in which the effects of three-dimensional turbulence is modeled by a general relativistic formulation of Supernova Turbulence In Reduced-dimensionality (STIR). We show that the viability of the explosion is quite EOS dependent and that it best correlates with the early-time interior entropy density of the proto–neutron star. We check that this result is not progenitor dependent, although the lowest-mass progenitors show different explosion properties, due to the different pre-collapse nuclear composition. Larger central entropies also induce more vigorous proto–neutron star convection in our one-dimensional turbulence model, as well as a wider convective layer.

Explosion mechanism of core-collapse supernovae: role of the Si/O interface

“…All of the simulations were per-formed using 700 radial zones extending out to 15000 km, with a uniform spacing of 0.3 km for the inner 20 km and a logarithmic spacing outside. For the neutrino opacities, we used the tables from NuLib (O'Connor 2015), with 18 neutrino energy groups from 1 MeV to ∼ 280 MeV, and the same neutrino-matter interactions used in Boccioli et al (2022). All of the simulations were performed using the SFHo equation of state (Steiner et al 2013).…”

“…To faithfully model the supernova one needs to calibrate the value of α MLT . To do that, we follow the methods of Boccioli et al (2021) and Boccioli et al (2022). In those papers, a range of α MLT between 1.5 and 1.52 was selected, based upon comparisons with 3D simulations and observational constraints on the fraction of stars that collapse to black holes.…”

“…In those papers, a range of α MLT between 1.5 and 1.52 was selected, based upon comparisons with 3D simulations and observational constraints on the fraction of stars that collapse to black holes. Since this best-fit range for α MLT depends on the spatial and energy resolution (Boccioli et al 2021), we used the same setup (described in Section 3) as Boccioli et al (2022). Therefore, the discussion in that work is valid for the present simulations as well.…”

Powering Luminous Core Collapse Supernovae with Jets

“…Recent studies concentrate on two core collapse supernova (CCSN) explosion mechanisms that utilize the gravitational energy that the core of a massive star releases as it collapses to form a neutron star (NS). These are the delayed neutrino mechanism (Bethe & Wilson 1985; for later studies see, e.g., Heger et al 2003;Janka 2012;Nordhaus et al 2012;Couch & Ott 2013;Bruenn et al 2016;Janka et al 2016;O'Connor & Couch 2018;Müller et al 2019;Burrows & Vartanyan 2021;Fujibayashi et al 2021;Boccioli et al 2022;Nakamura et al 2022) and the jittering jets explosion mechanism (Soker 2010; for later papers see, e.g., Papish & Soker 2014;Gilkis & Soker 2015;Soker 2019;Quataert et al 2019;Soker 2020;Antoni & Quataert 2022;Shishkin & Soker 2022;Soker 2022aSoker , 2022b.…”

Postexplosion Positive Jet-feedback Activity in Inner Ejecta of Core Collapse Supernovae

“…In recent years, studies discuss two theoretical explosion mechanisms that are based on gravitational energy. In the delayed neutrino mechanism neutrinos heat the postshock collapsing matter and revive the stalled shock (e.g., Bethe & Wilson 1985;Heger et al 2003;Nordhaus et al 2012;Couch & Ott 2013;Bruenn et al 2016;Janka et al 2016;Müller et al 2019;Burrows & Vartanyan 2021;Fujibayashi et al 2021;Boccioli et al 2022;Nakamura et al 2022). In the jittering jets explosion mechanism the newly born NS (or black hole (BH)) launches jets that deliver the energy to the ejecta (e.g., Soker 2010Soker , 2020bSoker , 2022aPapish & Soker 2011Gilkis & Soker 2014;Quataert et al 2019;Shishkin & Soker 2021Antoni & Quataert 2022).…”