2003
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2966.2003.07070.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Explosion energies, nickel masses and distances of Type II plateau supernovae

Abstract: The hydrodynamical modelling of Type II plateau supernova (SNIIP) light curves predicts a correlation between three observable parameters (plateau duration, absolute magnitude and photospheric velocity at the middle of the plateau) on the one hand, and three physical parameters (explosion energy E, mass of the envelope expelled and pre‐supernova radius R) on the other. The correlation is used, together with adopted distances from the expanding photosphere method, to estimate and R for a dozen well‐observed S… 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

13
69
2
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(86 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
13
69
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Li et al (2006) and by Maund et al (2005) with an inferred M ZAMS of 7-9 M  and 9 2 3 -+ M  , respectively, for an 8.4 Mpc distance to M51. Takáts & Vinkó (2006) revised the distance to M51 to 7.1 Mpc, which would reduce the above progenitor mass estimates to M 9.6 5.2 ZAMS =  M  using the formula given by Nadyozhin (2003). Similar results were obtained by Tsvetkov et al (2006) from their observations of the supernova and their use of the IIP-analytical model of Popov (1993) and the simulations of Litvinova & Nadezhin (1985).…”
Section: Observational Samplesupporting
confidence: 66%
“…Li et al (2006) and by Maund et al (2005) with an inferred M ZAMS of 7-9 M  and 9 2 3 -+ M  , respectively, for an 8.4 Mpc distance to M51. Takáts & Vinkó (2006) revised the distance to M51 to 7.1 Mpc, which would reduce the above progenitor mass estimates to M 9.6 5.2 ZAMS =  M  using the formula given by Nadyozhin (2003). Similar results were obtained by Tsvetkov et al (2006) from their observations of the supernova and their use of the IIP-analytical model of Popov (1993) and the simulations of Litvinova & Nadezhin (1985).…”
Section: Observational Samplesupporting
confidence: 66%
“…As discussed by many modellers (e.g. Woosley and Weaver 1986, Nomoto 1987, Woosley, Heger, and Weaver 2002, Eldridge and Tout 2004) the computation of evolution, and subsequent explosion, The differences between the observed characteristics of II-P SNe in particular has previously been attributed to large differences in the progenitor mass and radii (Hamuy 2003, Nadyozhin 2003, Utrobin and Chugai 2008. However the ejecta masses have not given good agreement with the direct masses of progenitor stars.…”
Section: Supernova Progenitorsmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…SN 2008ax, see Pastorello et al 2008b, and references therein), but surely less than the several solar masses estimated for a normal type IIP SN (e.g. Nadyozhin 2003). Although the ejecta mass implies a moderate mass star (8−10 M ) at explosion, the initial mass is somewhat uncertain.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%