2016/11/26 by W. David Arnett, Chris L. Fryer, Christopher L. Fryer +5
Physics and Astronomy · #Astro and Planetary Science #FOS: Physical sciences #Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae #High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena (astro-ph.HE) #Solar and Stellar Astrophysics (astro-ph.SR) #astro-ph.HE #astro-ph.SR
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1611.08746
18 pages, 7 figures; accepted ApJ 2017; expanded comparative discussion of types Ia, b, and c; succinct presentation of light curve algorithm to help users catch implementation errors
openalex publication_date 2016/11/26 · arxiv created 2017/08/13 · arxiv updated 2017/08/15 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
We compare analytic predictions of supernova light curves with recent high quality data from SN2011fe (Ia), from KSN2011b (Ia), and the Palomar Transient Factory (PTF) and the La Silla-QUEST variability survey (LSQ) (Ia). Because of the steady, fast cadence of observations, KSN2011b provides unique new information on SNe Ia: the smoothness of the light curve, which is consistent with significant large-scale mixing during the explosion, possibly due to 3D effects (e.g., Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities), and provides support for a slowly-varying leakage (mean opacity). For a more complex light curve (SN2008D, SNIb), we separate the luminosity due to multiple causes and indicate the possibility of a radioactive plume. The early rise in luminosity is shown to be affected by the opacity (leakage rate) for thermal and non-thermal radiation. A general derivation of Arnett's rule again shows that it depends upon \em all processes heating the plasma, not just radioactive ones, so that SNe Ia will differ from SNe Ibc if the latter have multiple heating processes.