Transcript ppt

Numerical simulations of photospheric
emission from variable jets
Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU)
Davide Lazzati (NCSU)
Brian Morsony (UWM)
0 / 12
Numerical simulations of photospheric
emission from variable jets
Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU)
Davide Lazzati (NCSU)
Brian Morsony (UWM)
0 / 12
3D AMR simulations of long-GRBs jets inside
massive progenitor stars
Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU)
Davide Lazzati (NCSU)
Brian Morsony (UWM)
Mitch Begelman (JILA)
(DLC, BM, MB, DL, ApJ, 2013)
0 / 12
3D AMR simulations of long-GRBs jets inside
massive progenitor stars
Representing
the minority.
(not the latino)
… GRBs
Diego Lopez-Camara (NCSU)
Davide Lazzati (NCSU)
Brian Morsony (UWM)
Mitch Begelman (JILA)
(DLC, BM, MB, DL, ApJ, 2013)
0 / 12
GRBs (all different, but…)
GRB - SN same location…
1.1/3
GRB980425 - SN1998bw
SN
(Galama, et al., 1998)
1 / 12
GRBs (all different, but…)
GRB - SN same location…
1.2/3
GRB980425 - SN1998bw
Spectrum
GRB
GRB030329 (Hjorth et al., 2003)
GRB980425 (Galama et al., 1998)
SN
(Galama, et al., 1998)
SNIb( 30 days)
1 / 12
GRBs (all different, but…)
GRB - SN same location…
1.3/3
GRB980425 - SN1998bw
Spectrum
GRB
GRB030329 (Hjorth et al., 2003)
GRB980425 (Galama et al., 1998)
SN
(Galama, et al., 1998)
Light curve
(Castro Tirado et al., 2001)
GRB
SNIb( 30 days)
SN
1 / 12
2.1/2
GRBs (GRB-SN association)
Same location.
Spectroscopic.
Collapsar model
(for some of the long GRBs)
Light curve.
2 / 12
2.2/2
Collapsar (in a nutshell)
He
C
Ne
O
Si
Fe
2 / 12
Collapsar (motivation)
Focusing on this part…
(jet vs progenitor)
3 / 12
Collapsar (motivation)
2D Simulations:
(MacFadyen & Woosley 1999; Aloy et al. 2000; MacFadyen et al. 2001; Zhang et al. 2003;
Mizuta et al. 2006; Morsony et al. 2007, 2010; Lazzati et al. 2009, 2010, 2011; Nagakura et al. 2011)
Imposed symmetry evident.
No 3D instabilities can form (RT).
Only two previous 3D studies:
Only the stellar cortex (Ri ≈ 1010 cm ; ΔM ≈ 3 M) (Zhang et al. 2003)
No convergence wrt resolution (Wang et al. 2008)
This part needs to be fully understood
4 / 12
Our model (DLC+BM+MB+DL, ApJ, 2013)
3D non symmetric jet - realistic progenitor - ISM
2.
1.
Progenitor.
16TI (W&H 2006)
2.
ρISM = (10-13 g cm-3)
3.
Keep in mind:
No progenitor rotation.
No self-gravity.
No magnetic fields.
Keep in mind:
No rotation.
No self-gravity.
No B field.
Jet.
L = 5.33 x 1050 erg s-1
Ri = 109 cm
θ0 = 10°
Γ0 = 5
Γ∞ = 400
5 / 12
Results (3D density stratification)
(http://www4.ncsu.edu/~dlopezc/Simulations_(published)_files/f1a.mov)
6 / 12
7.1/2
Results (3D density stratification)
Low density jet.
Breaks out of the star.
Cocoon.
7 / 12
7.2/2
Results (3D density isocontours)
Low density jet.
Breaks out of the star.
tbo = 4.2 s
Cocoon.
2 phases.
pre-tbo
vjet ≈ 0.32 c
post-tbo
vjet ≈ 0.99 c
7 / 12
Results (Lorentz factor stratification)
pre-tbo
Jet is ~relativistic.
Γjet ≈ 1-10
post-tbo
Jet is ultra-relativistic.
Γjet ≈ 50
(http://www4.ncsu.edu/~dlopezc/Simulations_(published)_files/f7.mov)
8 / 12
9.1/2
Results (HR vs LR)
LR
Low density jet.
Breaks out of the star.
Cocoon.
2 phases.
No mayor dif LR-HR.
HR
9 / 12
9.2/2
Results (HR vs LR)
LR
Low density jet.
Breaks out of the star.
Cocoon.
2 phases.
No mayor dif LR-HR.
HR:
More turbulence.
Slower jet.
tbo-HR = 5.7 s
vjet-HR≈ 0.24 c
HR
9 / 12
10.1/2
Results (2D vs 3D)
2D
Low density jet.
Breaks out of the star.
Cocoon.
2 phases.
3D
10 / 12
10.2/2
Results (2D vs 3D)
2D
Low density jet.
Breaks out of the star.
Cocoon.
2 phases.
2D:
Symmetry evident.
density plumes.
Slower in 2D.
tbo-2D = 7.0 s
vjet-2D≈ 0.19 c
3D
10 / 12
Results (2D vs 3D)
3D jet finds the least resistive path.
(2D jet does not)
Low density jet.
Breaks out of the star.
Cocoon.
2 phases.
2D:
Symmetry evident.
density plumes.
Slower in 2D.
tbo-2D = 7.0 s
vjet-2D≈ 0.19 c
11 / 12
12.1/2
Conclusions
• Low density jet breaks out.
• 2 phases (pre-tbo , & post-tbo). t < tbo  Γjet ≈ 1 ; t > tbo  Γjet ≈ 50.
• HR same behavior but has more turbulence and the jet is slower.
• 2D same behavior but axis-symmetric is evident and the jet is slower.
• 3D jet find the least resistive path.
12 / 12
12.2/2
Conclusions
• Low density jet breaks out.
• 2 phases (pre-tbo , & post-tbo). t < tbo  Γjet ≈ 1 ; t > tbo  Γjet ≈ 50.
• HR same behavior but has more turbulence and the jet is slower.
• 2D same behavior but axis-symmetric is evident and the jet is slower.
• 3D jet find the least resistive path.
• Not a minority… happy to see that the numerical sims in the SN
community is big! (Lamb, Nagataki, Morsony, Giacomazzo, Townsley, Roepke, Couch,
Mezzacappa, Abdikamalov, Mueller, Katz, Jacobs, Irwin, Zingale, Goodson, Tsebrenko…)
12 / 12
The end
Limitations
• Star is static. Must include J(R) from W&H16TI.
τdin ≈ 2 h
vs
tsims = 20 s
• L = constant. (include L variable)
• ISM density constant (collapsar winds give a ρISM ≈ R-2 profile)
Jet is ultra-relativistic so ISM effects are very small.
• P = k ρ4\3
Radiation, ions, electrons, positrons, neutrinos. Helmholtz EOS.
•No self-gravity. (τdin ≈ 2 h
vs
tsims = 20 s)
• No relativistic effects from the BH
Rin = 103 Rg
• Magnetic effects.
Results (symmetry break)
Why does the asymmetry form?
Since jet is launched
Jet-envelope effect
ρ from same solid angle,
but different radial paths.
ρ (R , θ = θ0 , φ )
…Results (symmetry break)
t < tbo
t = tbo
…Results (symmetry break)
Forward and reverse shock
…Results (symmetry break)
Forward and reverse shock
Shocked material is not
symmetric.
Asymmetries: jet-envelope
consequence.
Previous studies (Zhang et al. 2003)
2D jet moving through the progenitor.
Jet.
L = (0.3 ; 1) x 1051 erg s-1
θ0 = 5° ; 10°
Γ0 = 5 ; 50
f0 = 0.025 ; 0.33
Progenitor.
15 Mo (HL&W 2000)
2 Mo Iron core (BH)
Polytrope EOS (P = k ρ4\3).
ISM
Keep in mind:
Rin ≈ 2 x 108 cm.
Δ ≈ 108 cm.
No progenitor rotation.
No self-gravity.
No magnetic fields.
Zhang et al. 2003 movie
ρISM ≈ R-2
9 / 30
…Previous studies (Zhang et al. 2003)
L = 1051 erg s-1 ; θ0 = 10° ; Γ0 = 50 ; f0 =
0.33
Jet breaks out of the star.
Gamma up to 150.
But this is 2D…
10 / 30
Previous studies (Zhang et al. 2004)
3D jet moving through the progenitor.
Jet.
L = 3 x 1050 erg s-1
θ0 = 5°
Γ0 = 5
f0 = 0.40
Progenitor.
15 Mo (W&H 2003)
2 Mo Iron core (BH)
Polytrope EOS (P = k ρ4\3).
ISM
Keep in mind:
No progenitor rotation.
No self-gravity.
No magnetic fields.
Zhang et al. 2004 movie
ρISM ≈ R-2
11 / 30
…Previous studies (Zhang et al. 2004)
Different asymmetries imposed & precessing jet…
Jet breaks out of the star.
Asymmetries present.
Gamma up to 20.
But… Rin = 1010 cm (≈11 M0)
Δ ≈ 108 cm
No more analysis.
12 / 30
Previous studies (Wang et al. 2008)
3D jet moving through the progenitor.
Jet.
L = 3 x 1050 erg s-1
θ0 = 5°
Γ0 = 5
f0 = 0.40
Keep in mind:
No progenitor rotation.
No self-gravity.
No magnetic fields.
Progenitor.
16 Mo (HE16TA W&H 2006)
1.7 Mo Iron core (BH)
Polytrope EOS (P = k ρ4\3).
ISM
ρISM ≈ R-2
13 / 30
…Previous studies (Wang et al. 2008)
LR
vs
Jet breaks out of the star.
Asymmetries present.
HR
But… Rin = 5x109 cm (≈9 M0)
Δ ≈ 108 cm
Not convergent.
No further analysis.
14 / 30
Progenitors (example: 16TI)
Model
Mass
(MO)
Z
(ZO)
vrot
(km s-1)
Pre-SN
16TI
16
0.01
390
WR
B
M final
(MO)
Fe core
(MO)
yes
13.95
1.60
Progenitors (example: 16TI)
Model
Mass
(MO)
Z
(ZO)
vrot
(km s-1)
Pre-SN
16TI
16
0.01
390
WR
B
M final
(MO)
Fe core
(MO)
yes
13.95
1.60
Fe
0.8
O
fraction
0.6
Si
0.4
S
0.2
Cr
Ni
Ca
7
8
Ar
Mg
9
log[R (cm)]
10
Progenitors (example: 16TI)
Model
Mass
(MO)
Z
(ZO)
vrot
(km s-1)
Pre-SN
16TI
16
0.01
390
WR
B
M final
(MO)
Fe core
(MO)
yes
13.95
1.60
18
log[J (cm2 s-1)]
Angular momentum
powers the GRB
17
J(R)LSO-Shw
16
J(R)16TI
15
7
8
9
log[R (cm)]
10
…GRB - SN (spectroscopic)
1.
GRB980425 + SN1998bw
(Galama et al., 1998)
2.
GRB030329 (Hjorth et al., 2003)
GRB980425 (Galama et al., 1998)
GRB030329 + SN2003dh
(Hjorth et al., 2003, Stanek et al., 2003)
3.
XRF020903 + SN1998bw type
(Soderberg et al., 2004)
4.
GRB021211 + SN2002lt
(Della Valle et al., 2003)
1.
GRB031203 + SN2003lw
(Malesani et al., 2004)
2.
GRB050525a + SN2005nc
(Della Valle et al., 2006a)
3.
GRB060218 + SN2006aj
(Campana et al., 2006; Pian et al., 2006).
8.
GRB081007 + SN2008hw
(Della Valle et al., 2008).
9.
GRB091127 + SN2009nz
(Berger et al., 2011).
10. XRF100316D + SN2010bh
(Olivares et al., 2011).
12 / 32
…GRB - SN (light curve)
(Castro Tirado et al., 2001)
1.
GRB 980326 + SN1998bw type
(Castro Tirado et al., 2001)
1.
GRB970228 + SN1998bw type
(Reichart, 1999)
1.
GRB011121 + SN1998bw type
(Bloom et al., 1999)
1.
GRB020405 + SN1998bw type
(Price et al., 2003)
1.
GRB040924 + SN1998bw type
(Soderberg et al., 2006)
1.
GRB041006 + SN1998bw type
(Stanek et al., 2005; Soderberg et al., 2006)
(Reichart, 1999)
2.
GRB050824 + SN2006aj type
(Sollerman et al., 2007)
3.
GRB060729 + SN2010bh type
(Cano et al., 2011)
4.
GRB090618 + SN2010bh type
(Cano et al., 2011)