2022
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stac016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Proto-neutron star evolution with improved charged-current neutrino–nucleon interactions

Abstract: We perform simulations of the Kelvin-Helmholtz cooling phase of proto-neutron stars with a new numerical code in spherical symmetry and using the quasi-static approximation. We use for the first time the full set of charged-current neutrino-nucleon reactions, including neutron decay and modified Urca processes, together with the energy-dependent numerical representation for the inclusion of nuclear correlations with random-phase approximation. Moreover, convective motions are taken into account within the mixi… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
0
15
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 4 (bottom row) shows that by t ∼ 100 ms, Y e,eq abs has settled close to a value of ∼0.35, with Y e approaching this value as well, from below. These Y e values are lower than predicted by detailed PNS cooling calculations at epochs of comparable neutrino luminosities to those of our solutions (e.g., Martínez-Pinedo et al 2012;Pascal et al 2022); this is not surprising because our initial conditions are not based on the self-consistent outcome of a successful supernova and because the decoupling region which determines the neutrino luminosities and energies is not well resolved (Figure 1).…”
Section: Nonrotating Pns Windcontrasting
confidence: 67%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Figure 4 (bottom row) shows that by t ∼ 100 ms, Y e,eq abs has settled close to a value of ∼0.35, with Y e approaching this value as well, from below. These Y e values are lower than predicted by detailed PNS cooling calculations at epochs of comparable neutrino luminosities to those of our solutions (e.g., Martínez-Pinedo et al 2012;Pascal et al 2022); this is not surprising because our initial conditions are not based on the self-consistent outcome of a successful supernova and because the decoupling region which determines the neutrino luminosities and energies is not well resolved (Figure 1).…”
Section: Nonrotating Pns Windcontrasting
confidence: 67%
“…As a consequence of this, as well as of our idealized initial temperature/Y e structure, the partitioning between ν e and e n ¯luminosities and their energies in our simulations do not match those predicted by supernova simulations, nor the resulting wind electron fractions Y e  Y e,eq abs (L , e e n n ¯, E , e e n n ¯). Specifically, our nonrotating wind solutions achieve values Y e ; 0.34 (Figure 4) significantly lower than those found by detailed PNS cooling calculations, Y e ≈ 0.45-0.55 (e.g., Roberts & Reddy 2017;Pascal et al 2022). Nevertheless, our simulations can still be used to explore the relative effects of rotation on Y e through a comparison to otherwise equivalent nonrotating models with similar neutrino emission properties.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 58%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The formation of hot and neutrino-rich compact objects is predicted by numerical simulations of core-collapse supernova (SN) and BNS mergers. In the core-collapse supernova context, a hot proto-neutron star is formed during the contraction of the supernova progenitor and subsequent gravitational detachment of the remnant from the expanding ejecta [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. A transient formation of dense hot matter arises in the case when the progenitor mass is large (typically tens of solar masses) and the matter collapses into a black hole [11][12][13][14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%