400 likes | 416 Views
This study explores the delay time distribution (DTD) of Type Ia supernovae (SNe) and its implications on progenitor models. The DTD, which represents the rate of SNe as a function of time, provides insights into the nature of progenitors. The research utilizes observations from various surveys and compares the DTD with different theoretical models. Results suggest that the DTD may be more complex than a simple power-law and further investigations are needed to understand the progenitor systems of Type Ia SNe.
E N D
The Delay Time Distribution of Type Ia Supernovae: Constraints on Progenitors Chris Pritchet (U. Victoria), Mark Sullivan (Oxford), Damien LeBorgne (IAP), Matt Taylor (PUC Chile), + SNLS Collaboration
In the Garden of Flux Variables CC SNe LRNe? .Ia's? SN Ia Kulkarni et al. 2007 LRNe=luminous red novae like the M85 transient UWO Sep 2009
SNe Ia CC SNe or UWO Sep 2009 Mt Wash Feb 2009
SNe Ia progenitor mechanism – 2 broad classes or energy release COFe no H in spectrum light curve shape presence in old stellar pops UWO Sep 2009 Mt Wash Feb 2009
Single Degenerate - white dwarf + 2ndary evol. (M ~ 1.4 Msun at explosion) SN Ia Progenitors - 2 Broad Classes Double Degenerate - 2 white dwarfs (Mtot >= 1.4 Msun at explosion) Key point: white dwarf maximum mass M = 1.4 Msun (Chandrasekhar mass)
SNe Ia progenitor mechanism – 2 broad classes or energy release COFe no H in spectrum light curve shape presence in old stellar pops UWO Sep 2009 Mt Wash Feb 2009
Type Ia SNe as Standard Candles • Bright - seen to cosmological distances • Max brightness makes an excellent standard candle - ±6% distance errors • Standard candle seems to have a physical basis • SNeIa are “well-understood” - thermonuclear disruptions of C+O white dwarfs - std physics • Systematics – possibly, but ample opportunity to study with potentially hundreds of objects • But … • explanation of stretch – L relation • explanation of colour – L relation • nature of scatter in L after calibration • nature of progenitor
Delay time distribution • DTD(t) = rate of supernovae as a function of time from a burst of star formation • SNR(t) = SFR(t) ★ DTD(t) DTD(t) SNe/yr/1010 M SFR(t) log t
Importance of DTD(t) • potential to discriminate among progenitor models Greggio 2005
DTD History • pre-1990 – “prevailing wisdom” was that all SN Ia were old because they occur in E/S0 galaxies • by 2004 – SNe Ia have higher rates in young galaxies – both young and old progenitors
Recent DTD Determinations • from age/SFH estimates of SN host and field galaxies (SN age ~ galaxy age) Totani et al 2008: Subaru/XMM survey 65 variable objects ages from SED fitting
Recent DTD Determinations • from age/SFH estimates of SN host and field galaxies Maoz et al 2010: LOSS survey 82 SNeIa SFH from SDSS Maoz
Supernova Legacy Survey (SNLS) • 2003-2008, 4 deg2, ugriz, 4d samples, CFHT 3.6m+MegaCam • spec types and z (VLT, Gemini, Keck) - 370 SNeIa (0.2<z<1)
DTD from SNLS • completeness estimate and weight for each supernova • host galaxy age for each supernova … • assumes host age = SN progenitor age • … and an age for all other objects too • gives total available mass at a given age
z distribution and completeness SNIa* SNIa • Perrett et al 2011
SN weighting SNe / year (all fields, rest-frame) Perrett et al 2011 # of observing seasons length of each observing season
Pegase/zpeg ages and redshifts • mass, SFR, age, z for different evol scenarios
DTD Calculation • Use only SNe with hosts in magnitude-limited catalogue • assumes that SN DTD does not depend on host galaxy mass • In each time bin of DTD t1t2, sum wi values for SNe with t1<ti<t2; normalize by host mass in time bin:
2 different M(t) methods • 0.2 < z < 0.75, 4 SNLS fields (3.6 deg2) • dashed=SFR(z), solid=zpeg SED fits SFR(z) log M log M(t) Hopkins and Beacom 2006 log t
DTD • other z ranges give the same result
DTD from 2 different M(t) methods • 0.2 < z < 0.75, red=SFR(z), black=obs
Comparison with Totani et al 2008 t-1 Totani Mannucci
Power-law fit t-1.35
Two power laws t-0.7 t-3 cutoff real
Comparison with DD solid – Mennekens et al 2010 dotted – Ruiter et al 2009 dashed – Yungelson and Livio 2000
Comparison with SD solid – Mennekens et al 2010 dotted – Ruiter et al 2009 dashed – Hachisu et al 1999 dash dot – Han and Podsiadlowski 2004
Further corrections • Have assumed that TSN=<Thost>. Not necessarily true • iterative approach to correct statistically • correction for dead stars • slope steeper by ~0.1 • effects of bursts • effects of catastrophic errors in M or age
Supernova light curve stretch s Making a standard candle aka Phillips relation
Stretch dependence of DTD • not due to age systematics • two types of progenitors?? or …
Conclusions • SNIa DTD may be more complex than a simple ~ 1/t power-law • match to DD population synthesis models • pop syn needs further work • s<1 and >1 show differences in DTD below 109 yr – different progenitors? or PDF of ages?
t-1 Totani Mannucci
t-1 Totani Mannucci