Exploring the Efficacy and Limitations of Shock-cooling Models: New Analysis of Type II Supernovae Observed by the Kepler Mission

Adam Rubin, Avishay Gal-Yam

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Modern transient surveys have begun discovering and following supernovae (SNe) shortly after first light-providing systematic measurements of the rise of Type II SNe. We explore how analytic models of early shock-cooling emission from core-collapse SNe can constrain the progenitor's radius, explosion velocity, and local host extinction. We simulate synthetic photometry in several realistic observing scenarios; assuming the models describe the typical explosions well, we find that ultraviolet observations can constrain the progenitor's radius to a statistical uncertainty of +/- 10%-15%, with a systematic uncertainty of +/- 20%. With these observations the local host extinction (A(V)) can be constrained to a factor of two and the shock velocity to +/- 5% with a systematic uncertainty of +/- 10%. We also reanalyze the SN light curves presented by Garnavich et al. (2016) and find that KSN 2011a can be fit by a blue supergiant model with a progenitor radius of R-s <7.7 + 8.8(stat) + 1.9(sys) R-circle dot, while KSN 2011d can be fit with a red supergiant model with a progenitor radius of R-s = 111(-21(stat)-1(sys))(+89(stat)+49(sys)) R-circle dot. Our results do not agree with those of Garnavich et al. Moreover, we re-evaluate their claims and find that there is no statistically significant evidence for a shock-breakout flare in the light curve of KSN 2011d.
Original languageEnglish
Article number8
Number of pages10
JournalAstrophysical Journal
Volume848
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 10 Oct 2017

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Exploring the Efficacy and Limitations of Shock-cooling Models: New Analysis of Type II Supernovae Observed by the Kepler Mission'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this