![]() |
Figure 1:
Diagram of the convective engine for supernova explosions. |
![]() |
Figure 2:
Accretion rates of different mass stars. The more massive stars have higher accretion rates and are, hence, harder to explode. Figure 1 from Fryer [97]. |
![]() |
Figure 3:
Supernova explosion energies (dotted lines) based on simulation (solid circles) and observation (solid dot of SN 1987A) as a function of progenitor mass. The binding energy of the envelop (material beyond the ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 4:
Fate of massive stars as a function of mass and metallicity. Figure 1 from Heger et al. [136]. |
![]() |
Figure 5:
Explosion energy as a function of launch time of the supernova shock for four differently-massed stars assuming the energy is stored in the convective region. The energy is then limited by the ram pressure of the infalling stellar material. Note that it is difficult to make a strong explosion after a long delay. For more details, see [99] and Fryer et al. (in preparation). |
![]() |
Figure 6:
Left-hand panel: Evolution of the core-collapse supernova rate with redshift. The dashed line shows the intrinsic total supernova rate derived from the star formation density. The supernova rate that can be recovered by optical searches is shown in light gray, and is compared with the data points from Cappellaro et al. [44] (squares) and Dahlen et al. [59] (circles). Right-hand panel: Fraction of CC SNe that are not present in the optical and near-IR searches as a function of redshift. (Figure 2 of Mannucci et al. [193]; used with permission.) |
![]() |
Figure 7:
Six snapshots in time of the convection in the collapse of a ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 8:
Images of the gas entropy (red is higher than the equilibrium value, blue is lower) illustrate the instability of a spherical standing accretion shock. This model has ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 9:
Mean angular momenta vs. mass for both merged stars just after the merger and at collapse. The thick solid line at the top of the graph is the angular momentum just after merger. Dotted lines correspond to different mappings of the 3-dimensional merger calculation into the 1-dimensional stellar evolution code. We also plotted the angular momentum for material at the innermost stable circular orbit for a non-rotating black hole vs. mass (thin solid line). Figure 5 of [104]. |
![]() |
Figure 10:
Type I waveform (quadrupole amplitude ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 11:
Type II waveform (quadrupole amplitude ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 12:
Type III waveform (quadrupole amplitude ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 13:
Movie: The evolution of the regular collapse model A3B2G4 of Dimmelmeier et al. [67]. The left frame contains the 2D evolution of the logarithmic density. The upper and lower right frames display the evolutions of the gravitational wave amplitude and the maximum density, respectively. |
![]() |
Figure 14:
Movie: Same as Movie 13, but for rapid collapse model A3B2G5 of Dimmelmeier et al. [67]. |
![]() |
Figure 15:
Movie: Same as Movie 13, but for multiple collapse model A2B4G1 of Dimmelmeier et al. [67]. |
![]() |
Figure 16:
Movie: Same as Movie 13, but for rapid, differentially-rotating collapse model A4B5G5 of Dimmelmeier et al. [67]. |
![]() |
Figure 17:
The gravitational waveform (including separate matter and neutrino contributions) from the collapse simulations of Burrows and Hayes [37]. The curves plot the GW amplitude of the source as a function of time. (Figure 3 of [37]; used with permission.) |
![]() |
Figure 18:
The gravitational waveform for matter contributions from the asymmetric collapse simulations of Fryer et al. [107]. The curves plot the GW amplitude of the source as a function of time. (Figure 3 of [107]; used with permission.) |
![]() |
Figure 19:
Convective instabilities inside the proto neutron star in the 2D simulation of Müller and Janka [208]. The evolutions of the temperature (left panels) and logarithmic density (right panels) distributions are shown for the radial region 15 – 95 km. The upper and lower panels correspond to times 12 and 21 ms, respectively, after the start of the simulation. The temperature values range from 2.5 × 1010 to 1.8 × 1011 K. The values of the logarithm of the density range from 10.5 to 13.3 g cm–3. The temperature and density both increase as the colors change from blue to green, yellow, and red. (Figure 7 of [208]; used with permission.) |
![]() |
Figure 20:
Quadrupole amplitudes ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 21:
Movie: Isosurface of material with radial velocities of 1000 km s–1 for three different simulation resolutions. The isosurface outlines the outward moving convective bubbles. The open spaces mark the downflows. Note that the upwelling bubbles are large and have very similar size scales to the two-dimensional simulations. From Fryer & Warren [112]. |
![]() |
Figure 22:
Movie: The oscillation of the proto neutron star caused by downstreams in the SASI-induced convective region above the proto neutron star. From Burrows et al. [40]. |
![]() |
Figure 23:
A comparison between the GW amplitude ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 24:
Movie: Evolution of a secular bar instability, see Ou et al. [236] for details. |
![]() |
Figure 25:
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 26:
The GW signal from convection in a proto neutron star. The top panel shows the GW quadrupole amplitude ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 27:
Detection limits of TAMA, first LIGO, advanced LIGO, and Large-scale Cryogenic Gravitational wave Telescope (LCGT) with the expected GW spectrum obtained from the numerical simulations. The left panel shows the GW spectrum contributed from neutrinos (solid) and from the matter (dashed) in a rotating model with ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 28:
The gravitational waveform for neutrino contributions from the asymmetric collapse simulations of Fryer et al. [107]. The curves plot the product of the GW amplitude to the source as a function of time. (Figures from [107]; used with permission.) |
![]() |
Figure 29:
The matter density in the equatorial plane of the rapidly-rotating collapsar simulation, 0.44 s after collapse. The spiral wave forms near the center of the collapsar 0.29 s after collapse and moves outward through the star. (Figure 4 of [250]; used with permission.) |
![]() |
Figure 30:
A comparison between the GW amplitude ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 31:
Meridional plane density contours from the SMS collapse simulation of Saijo, Baumgarte, Shapiro, and Shibata [259]. The contour lines denote densities ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Figure 32:
GW signals from matter motions in the bounce and convection phases of stellar collapse. These limits and estimates have not changed from the previous publication of this Living Reviews article [111]. Uncertainties in the estimates still allow variations within an order of magnitude of these results. The LIGO and advanced LIGO sensitivities are included for reference. The limits are not upper limits of a single signal, but upper limits of all possible signals (varying the conditions of the collapse). This figure does not represent a single signal. |
![]() |
Figure 33:
GW signals from asymmetric neutrino emission in the bounce and convection phases of stellar collapse. These limits and estimates have not changed from the previous publication of this Living Reviews article [111]. Uncertainties in the estimates still allow variations within an order of magnitude of these results. The LIGO and advanced LIGO sensitivities are included for reference. The limits are not upper limits of a single signal, but upper limits of all possible signals (varying the conditions of the collapse). This figure does not represent a single signal. |
http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2011-1 |
Living Rev. Relativity 14, (2011), 1
![]() This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. E-mail us: |