A&A 459, 229-240 (2006)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065781
D. N. Sauer1,2,3 - T. L. Hoffmann3 - A. W. A. Pauldrach3
1 - INAF, Osservatorio Astronomico di Trieste, via G. B. Tiepolo 11,
34131 Trieste, Italy
2 -
Max-Planck-Institut für Astrophysik,
Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 1, 85741 Garching, Germany
3 -
Universitätssternwarte München, Scheinerstr. 1,
81679 München, Germany
Received 8 June 2006 / Accepted 4 August 2006
Abstract
Context. Realistic atmospheric models that link the properties and the physical conditions of supernova ejecta to observable spectra are required for the quantitative interpretation of observational data of type Ia supernovae (SN Ia) and the assessment of the physical merits of theoretical supernova explosion models. The numerical treatment of the radiation transport - yielding the synthetic spectra - in models of SN Ia ejecta in early phases is usually carried out in analogy to atmospheric models of "normal'' hot stars. Applying this analogy indiscriminately leads to inconsistencies in SN Ia models because a diffusive lower boundary, while justified for hot stars, is invalid for hydrogen and helium-deficient supernova ejecta. In type Ia supernovae the radiation field does not thermalize even at large depths, and large optical depths are not reached at all wavelengths.
Aims. We aim to derive an improved description of the lower boundary that allows a more consistent solution of the radiation transfer in SN Ia and therefore yields more realistic synthetic spectra.
Methods. We analyze the conditions that lead to a breakdown of the conventional diffusion approximation as the lower boundary in SN Ia. For the radiative transfer, we use a full non-LTE code originally developed for radiatively driven winds of hot stars, with adaptations for the physical conditions in SN Ia. In addition to a well-tested treatment of the underlying microphysical processes, this code allows a direct comparison of the results for SN Ia and hot stars.
Results. We develop a semi-analytical description that allows us to overcome some of the limiting assumptions in the conventional treatment of the lower boundary in SN Ia radiative transfer models. We achieve good agreement in a comparison between the synthetic spectrum of our test model and an observed spectrum.
Key words: radiative transfer - methods: numerical - line: formation - supernovae: general - stars: atmospheres - stars: winds, outflows
Type Ia supernovae (SN Ia) have become an invaluable tool for the determination
of the cosmological parameters (Riess et al. 1998,2001; Tonry et al. 2003; Perlmutter et al. 1999)
as their exceptional brightness makes them observable even at large
cosmological distances. Using SN Ia for distance determination requires
knowledge of their absolute luminosities; however, SN Ia are not perfect
"standard candles'' in this respect because they show an intrinsic scatter in
their properties, in particular in the peak brightness. The application of
SN Ia for cosmology therefore relies on empirical relationships between the
peak brightness and other observed characteristics (e.g., Perlmutter et al. 1997; Phillips 1993; Hamuy et al. 1996; Riess et al. 1996). To first order the shape of the light
curves and certain spectral properties is determined by the mass of synthesized
and its distribution within the ejecta
(Nugent et al. 1995b; Pinto & Eastman 2000; Höflich et al. 1995). However, the details of the physical
processes that cause the observed variation are still unclear (see
Hillebrandt & Niemeyer 2000, for a review). This uncertainty is an essential
problem because the different calibration methods used to derive the peak
brightness yield partly different results, implying an unaccounted source of
systematic error (Leibundgut 2004). In addition, the application of SN Ia
for cosmological distance measurement relies on the crucial assumption that
objects observed at high redshifts have the same properties as objects in the
nearby universe, so that the same calibration method for the luminosity
differences can be applied to all objects. It is, therefore, of fundamental
interest to derive a physical model that can explain the explosion mechanism of
SN Ia in detail, including the observed intrinsic variability. This will
allow a more reliable estimate of the systematic errors of the distance
measurement.
The currently favored models for the explosion mechanism of SN Ia involve the
thermonuclear explosion of a carbon-oxygen white dwarf (WD) in a binary system.
Two progenitor scenarios are generally considered: the "single degenerate''
scenario and the "double degenerate'' scenario. In the single degenerate
scenario the WD accretes mass from a red-giant companion star. When the WD
reaches a mass close to the Chandrasekhar mass (
)
the compressional heating at the center of the star triggers carbon burning.
After a period of a few thousand years of quiet burning a thermonuclear runaway
disrupts the star (Iben & Tutukov 1984; Woosley et al. 2004; Han & Podsiadlowski 2004; Webbink 1984). In the "double
degenerate'' scenario the companion star is also a WD with a mass such that the
total mass of the system exceeds
.
Due to energy loss by
gravitational waves the orbital separation of the binary system gradually
decreases, leading to a merger, which triggers the thermonuclear runaway that
explodes the star (Nomoto 1982; Whelan & Iben 1973). Potential progenitor systems have
been found in recent years; their numbers, however, are too low to explain the
observed rates of SN Ia (Cappellaro et al. 1999). Pauldrach (2005) suggests on
basis of the results of Pauldrach et al. (2004) a potential connection of SN Ia
progenitors to a subgroup of central stars of planetary nebulae (CSPN).
The details of the explosion process itself are also still subject to a lively debate. The general picture is that a subsonic deflagration wave ("flame'') is ignited near the center of the star. The flame travels outward, burning part of the star to nuclear statistical equilibrium (NSE). Because the flame propagates subsonically, the star can expand while undergoing burning. This allows partial burning of C and O to intermediate mass elements (Si, S, Mg, Ca) which dominate the composition. In contrast to the deflagration, a prompt, supersonic detonation of the star would generate predominantly iron group elements. This outcome contradicts the observed composition. No agreement has been reached in the debate whether the explosion continues subsonically until the end of the explosion (Reinecke et al. 2002; Woosley et al. 1984; Röpke 2005; Nomoto et al. 1984; Niemeyer & Hillebrandt 1995; Röpke & Hillebrandt 2005) or if a (yet unknown) mechanism triggers the deflagration to turn into a supersonic detonation toward the end of the explosion (delayed detonation transition, DDT) (Höflich & Khokhlov 1996; Iwamoto et al. 1999). At present, the resulting composition of DDT models seem to favor the latter scenario; however, those models are not self-consistent and depend on ad hoc assumptions of the occurrence of the DDT.
Judging the validity of numerical explosion models requires a comparison of the observational consequences predicted by the explosion models to the de facto observations of SN Ia. Realistic radiative transfer models provide the crucial link between explosion models and observations. It is possible to predict the observational implications of the hydrodynamical models only if the radiative transfer models are sufficiently realistic and detailed. Conversely, such radiative transfer models make it possible to establish constraints on the composition and structure of SN Ia from the spectroscopic interpretation of observed spectra.
SN Ia in phases before and shortly after maximum exhibit a spectrum dominated
by a few very broad absorption features in a non-thermal continuum. These
absorption features are mostly due to blends of several lines, while the
"continuum'' itself is formed by the overlap of a large number of
Doppler-broadened metal lines. The true continuum opacities and emissivities
that determine the overall shape of the spectrum in stars are of minor
significance in supernovae. At later epochs, the "pseudo-continuum''
photosphere recedes deeper and deeper into the ejecta and eventually disappears
as the ejecta become transparent. Unlike stars, the radiation in SN Ia is
generated within the expanding medium itself by the deposition of the energy
of -photons that result from the decay chain
(Colgate & McKee 1969).
The early epochs where a photosphere is still present are referred to as the photospheric phase. In the photospheric phase the ejecta can be treated in analogy to hot stars as expanding, extended atmospheres. Only the radiative transfer in the photosphere and in the outer envelope above the photosphere needs to be considered. In this setup a steady state is assumed because the photon escape timescale in the thin medium generally will be much shorter than the expansion timescale.
In principle, a complete radiative transfer model for SN Ia would require
consistent, time-dependent solutions of the populations of all atomic levels
and the continuum and line transfer, including the treatment of energy
deposition by the decay products of
and
.
Current models implement various simplifications according to the specific model's purpose. These simplifications are necessary because the solution of time-dependent radiative transfer in three dimensions, including the full coupling of radiation and matter, is not yet feasible and some of the terms involved in such a consistent solution are shown to be or regarded to be of second order. In recent decades synthetic spectra of SN Ia have been modeled by several groups with a variety of approaches involving different levels of complexity depending on the application (Stehle et al. 2005; Nugent et al. 1995a; Höflich et al. 1995; Mazzali & Lucy 1993; Baron et al. 2006; Kasen et al. 2006; Eastman & Pinto 1993; Nugent et al. 1997; Mazzali et al. 1993; Pauldrach et al. 1996; Lentz et al. 2001; Branch et al. 1985; Höflich 2005).
Highly parametrized models, which implement a simplified treatment of physical processes to achieve short run-times seem to be suitable for the comparative analysis of a large number of observed spectra, while more realistic models are required for a deeper understanding of the physical effects leading to specific observed properties. In particular, judging the validity of hydrodynamic explosion models, as mentioned above, can only be performed using radiative transfer models that include a very detailed treatment of relevant physical processes. Such detailed models may also be used to validate or invalidate specific simplifying assumptions used in less elaborate models.
In spite of the analogy mentioned before, SN Ia ejecta differ from ordinary stellar atmospheres in several important aspects. Techniques and methods that are adopted for stellar atmosphere modeling must be carefully checked to verify whether the applied approximations are still justified for SN Ia. In this work we present an improved description for the lower boundary of the radiative transfer calculation. This is required because the assumption of thermalization at large depths, justified for stellar atmospheres, breaks down for SN Ia.
In the work we present here, we use the computer program WMbasic (Pauldrach et al. 1994,2001) to obtain a consistent solution of the full non-LTE rate equations and a detailed observer's frame solution of the radiative transfer. This code was originally designed for the analysis of the spectra of hot stars with radiatively driven winds, but an earlier version has already been used by Pauldrach et al. (1996) (Paper I) to quantitatively investigate the effects of line blocking in SN Ia. While they used a consistent treatment of line blocking, the back-reaction of the line opacities on the temperature structure (line blanketing) was not taken into account. In our present work the current version of the code has been further adapted to treat the radiative transfer in supernovae in a more sophisticated way.
![]() |
Figure 1:
Overview of the physical equations that must be consistently solved
for the non-LTE model. The input is fixed by an external
explosion model. In the middle-left box the rate equations which
determine the occupation numbers ni of the atomic levels are given. The
middle-right box shows the radiative transfer equation for the radiation
field. The lower-right box gives the energy equation that fixes the
temperature structure within the atmosphere. The energy deposition by
![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
Section 2 describes the setup of the non-LTE model and introduces the numerical scheme used to solve the radiative transfer. In Sect. 3 the physical conditions in the "pseudo-photosphere'' of SN Ia are discussed with respect to the solution of the radiative transfer and are compared to the situation in normal stars (i.e., stars that have a well defined photosphere). Section 4 describes the derivation of an improved treatment of the inner boundary for the numerical solution of the radiative transfer. The results are discussed in Sect. 5, and a comparison of a model spectrum with an observed SN Ia spectrum is shown. The conclusions are provided in Sect. 6.
The code WMbasic has been successfully used to model extended, radiation-driven stellar atmospheres, assuming a homogeneous, stationary, spherically symmetric outflow. Here we provide a brief outline of the main concepts; details relevant to the derivation in Sect. 4 will be discussed as well. A more comprehensive description of the numerical methods can be found in Pauldrach et al. (2001) and Pauldrach (2003) and references therein.
To derive synthetic spectra of supernovae in early phases the analogy to hot stars with extended atmospheres can be used to apply similar concepts for the solution. The radiative transfer model for supernovae requires the following input:
The general concept behind our code, WMbasic, is to first obtain a rough solution with a fast, approximate method, and then, based on this solution, obtain a completely consistent solution with an exact, detailed method. The approximate method should provide a solution that is sufficiently close to the final solution so that only a few iterations with the much more time-consuming detailed method are necessary.
Our fast, approximate method is based on a Doppler-broadened sampling technique for line opacities and emissivities. The idea behind this method is to solve the radiative transfer for a representative sample of frequency points in the relevant spectral range.
In the final iterations, a detailed radiative transfer method that does not suffer from the approximations of the first iteration cycle is used. This method uses an exact observer's frame solution, equivalent to a comoving frame solution, which correctly treats the angular variation of line opacities and emissivities. The line profiles are spatially resolved. Multi-line effects and back-reactions of the line opacities on the model structures are treated correctly.
The temperature structure is in practice obtained from balancing energy gains and losses to the electron gas (heating and cooling rates). This description is equivalent to the condition of radiative equilibrium (indicated in the energy equation in Fig. 1), but is numerically advantageous for physical conditions where the opacity is dominated by scattering events that do not couple the radiation field to the thermal pool (see Pauldrach et al. 2001).
To introduce the nomenclature and equations used later, the solution applied to solve the radiative transfer in the observer's frame employing the fast opacity sampling method is recapitulated in this section.
To determine the radiation field that enters into the Thomson emissivity, an iteration alternating between the ray-by-ray solution and the
angular-integrated moments equation is performed. Both systems are solved with
a Feautrier-type scheme (Feautrier 1964) as discussed, e.g., in
Mihalas (1978). For each frequency point, the iteration is performed twice:
first for a pure continuum model and afterwards for the full problem with
continuum and lines. The solution is carried out in the usual Cartesian-like
p-z-coordinate system where each p-ray at a given radius shell corresponds to a
-direction in spherical coordinates (see
Fig. 2). The transfer equation for each p-ray is
rewritten for the intensities in positive and negative z-direction
![]() |
Figure 2: p-z coordinate system used to solve the transfer equation in spherical symmetry. R denotes the radius of the inner core. |
Open with DEXTER |
To close the system, suitable boundary conditions must be specified.
At the outer boundary the condition
(no radiation
incident from outside) leads to
![]() |
(3) |
![]() |
(5) |
A very similar method can be used to obtain a solution for the moments equation
in spherical symmetry
![]() |
(10) |
![]() |
(15) |
![]() |
(16) |
In normal stellar atmospheres the exponential increase of the density at the bottom of the atmosphere provides a clear definition of a photospheric radius because large optical depths are reached at all wavelengths within a very short spatial distance. In contrast, SN Ia do not have a clearly defined photosphere: because the material is unbound, no exponential density structure comparable to a stellar atmosphere can develop. As a result, the optical depth scale depends strongly on the wavelength. (This makes the concept of a mean optical depth like the Rosseland optical depth much less useful, if not entirely meaningless, in SN Ia.) In addition, the absolute densities are much lower than in stellar atmospheres and the composition in SN Ia is dominated by intermediate-mass and iron-group elements. When compared to stellar atmospheres this behavior leads to very low number densities of ions and electrons, resulting in a significantly weaker free-free continuum. The absence of hydrogen and helium in the ejecta further reduces the contribution of the bound-free continuum in the optical and infrared part of the spectrum. Going from red to blue wavelengths the first strong continuum edge is the O I ionization edge at 911 Å.
![]() |
Figure 3:
Comparison of the different contributions to the total opacity near the
photosphere in a stellar atmosphere (upper panel; model D40 in
Pauldrach et al. 2001) and a SN Ia model (lower panel); note the
logarithmic scale.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
Figure 3 shows a comparison of the contributions to the total opacity in the photospheric region of a hot star (Model D40 from Pauldrach et al. 2001) and a SN Ia. The dotted line shows a blackbody spectrum corresponding to a typical temperature (40 000 K for D40, 12 000 K for the supernova) to indicate the approximate position of the maximum flux in the spectrum. It can be seen that in the supernova, the bound-free continuum opacity is irrelevant compared to the line opacity in the major part of the spectrum. The plot also illustrates the formation of the "pseudo-continuum'' by the overlap of thousands of lines.
The most significant qualitative difference between a supernova and a star, however, is that at wavelengths redward of about 5000 Å, the electron scattering opacity becomes the dominating source of opacity, even in deep layers of the ejecta. Note that this situation cannot be changed significantly by computing down to smaller radii because the mild increase of density does not permit the formation of a significant free-free opacity. On the contrary, one encounters a lower contribution of true opacities because higher ionization stages tend to have less lines, and thus the line opacity decreases inwards. (In addition, the validity of the stationarity assumption needs to be considered because the photon trapping time at deep layers becomes comparable to the escape time.) Figure 4 shows the logarithm of the total opacity as a function of velocity and wavelength for a SN Ia model (epoch: 25 days after explosion) where the effect of decreasing line opacity can be seen clearly.
![]() |
Figure 4: Logarithm of the total opacity in a SN Ia model (sampling iteration) versus velocity and wavelength. Note that the line opacity decreases toward the inside (front) because higher ionization stages with less lines dominate. |
Open with DEXTER |
Compared to a blackbody spectrum at the respective temperature, the radiation
field in the innermost regions is more likely to have a bluer characteristic
because it is the result of radiation from the deposition of rays that
is not entirely thermalized. Furthermore, no emission from down-scattering of
-photons can be generated further out in the ejecta in wavelength
regions that do not have significant continuum or line opacity. This effect
results in the characteristic shape of SN Ia spectra in red and infrared
wavelengths where the slope of the pseudo-continuum is generally steeper than
the slope of a corresponding blackbody spectrum. In synthetic spectra computed
assuming thermalization this effect generally results in an offset of the model
spectrum in the red and infrared wavelengths (see e.g., Pauldrach et al. 1996
and Nugent et al. 1997 and the spectral fits in Stehle et al. 2005).
In summary, the ejecta of early SN Ia form an intermediate object between an extended stellar atmosphere and a planetary nebula. For both extreme cases the choice for the boundary conditions is clear: for the star, the LTE diffusion approximation Eq. (18) is a suitable choice. For a gaseous nebula, the incident radiation field from the illuminating star naturally defines the radiation field at the inner boundary (because there is essentially no back-reaction of the nebula on the stellar atmosphere). In SN Ia neither of these choices can be strictly applied.
In the next section we will discuss an extension to the diffusion approximation that eliminates most of the restrictive requirements of LTE and therefore allows a more consistent description of the inner boundary for supernova conditions.
The numerical solution of the radiative transfer equation requires a set of
boundary conditions. For the objects discussed here, this requires an assumption about the incoming radiation
at the core.
should be chosen so that it describes the radiation field as
accurately as possible under the physical conditions present. Ideally, the
expression for the boundary equation is an analytic extrapolation of the
radiation field at the innermost points.
For the calculations done here, the incident radiation from outside the ejecta
is assumed to be zero. Therefore, the boundary condition for the outer
boundary is
.
The common choice for the
at the inner boundary in stellar atmospheres is derived from the
LTE-diffusion approximation (see, e.g., Mihalas 1978)
For the classical derivation of the LTE diffusion approximation, commonly used
in stellar atmospheres, a Taylor expansion of
in the limit of large
![]() |
(23) | ||
![]() |
(24) |
Part of this work focuses on deriving an analytical expression for the radiation field at the inner boundary that reflects the physical conditions in SN Ia more accurately and reproduces the slope of the pseudo-continuum in the red and infrared wavelengths better.
To constrain the total flux at the inner boundary, the frequency integrated
input flux
is compared to the
total integrated input flux
.
This results in
a (frequency-independent) scaling factor
![]() |
(27) |
With respect to the moments equation for the flux at the inner boundary the
derived flux is actually
![]() |
(29) |
![]() |
Figure 5:
The ratio
![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
As already noted above, in the formulation of Eq. (26) the factor effectively represents a correction to the temperature gradient at the inner
boundary:
Note that the expression Eq. (28) implicitly contains the assumption of thermalization. Only then is the degree of isotropy given that is necessary to make the expansion Eq. (19) meaningful, neglecting quadratic and higher order terms.
In this section we will consider modifications to the inner boundary that allow
deviations of the radiation field from thermal equilibrium conditions, which
reflects the physical situation in SN Ia better. A consistent treatment of
the boundary becomes increasingly important for models of later epochs, as long
as the luminosity emitted at the boundary is still significant compared to the
flux originating from the -ray energy deposition above that boundary.
All modifications must be carried out in such a way that, in the limit of LTE-conditions at the inner points, the standard diffusive boundary condition Eq. (18) is retained. While it will not be possible to determine a boundary condition entirely free of analytical approximations (the model would not be sufficiently constrained) some of the assumptions entering into Eq. (21) can be relaxed without affecting the stability of the solution.
Starting from Eq. (19) one can give up the assumption of strictly
thermal conditions by allowing deviations of the terms
and
from the Planck function. Thus, instead of Eq. (18) we set
more generally
![]() |
(33) |
We have found that the isotropic term
can be determined
numerically by a simple iteration procedure. This does not involve very much
additional computational effort compared to the standard solution for the
boundary condition because the iteration is carried out to determine the
intensity term for the Thomson scattering source function anyway.
In the solution of the moments equation, one can solve for this term implicitly
by writing the boundary equation as
![]() |
(34) | ||
![]() |
(35) |
Compared to the standard diffusion approximation this effectively means that the inner boundary is less strongly constrained, which may lead to numerical instability. To ensure that the boundary condition is still well behaved and to understand its general behavior we have studied this modification on a simple toy model before applying it to the radiative transfer code.
![]() |
Figure 6:
Simple toy model to illustrate the new treatment
of the zeroth term of I+ at the inner boundary for the situation of an optically thin true
continuum. The dotted line represents the run of J if
the traditional setting
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
The results of this toy model are shown in Fig. 6. The basic
parameters are the same for all cases considered. The Thomson-opacity is
and the background opacity (continuum) is
with a corresponding source function of
.
We also consider a line with a source function of
at a certain radius point. (The idea here is that the line is
Doppler-shifted by the velocity field and appears at the
frequency point being considered at that particular radius point.)
The zeroth term of the traditional boundary
condition is set to I0=10 for the first three cases and to I0=2 for the
last. H0 is set equal to 0 in all cases. The radiation field is
obtained by an iteration of a ray-by-ray solution with a solution of the
moments equation in spherical symmetry. A Feautrier scheme similar to the one
in the radiative transfer code is used. Generally, in the main code,
convergence is obtained within less than 15 iterations - depending on the
physical conditions and on the relevance of Thomson-scattering in particular.
(For comparison, the iteration for Thomson-scattering alone with a fixed
boundary usually converges within 5 iterations.) All plots show the comparison
of J as a function of radius obtained from the solution of the moments
equation. The result from the traditional choice of using a pre-specified
(in
practice
)
is shown as a dotted line in red. The result of allowing
I0 to consistently converge to I0=Jis shown as a solid blue line. The black dash-dotted line represents the true
source function (line and background).
Panel a in Fig. 6 shows the situation for an optically thin
model (
). Panel b shows an intermediate case with
.
The last two panels, c and d, show the case
of an optically thick line (
). Here the modification only
influences the radiation field in the inner region as the emergent radiation is
entirely separated from the inner region by the optically thick line.
Compared to the conventional treatment with a small I0,
in the new treatment J is significantly larger inner region. The
physical conditions cannot cause this increase in intensity because of the low
true opacity. Thus, in this situation a shortcoming of this method
becomes apparent: one would expect
to drop to
toward the inner boundary because the absence of emission toward the inner
region means that
.
The model, however, effectively sets
I+=I-. Unfortunately, this situation occurs quite frequently in
SN Ia: at each frequency point where the opacity at the boundary is
low but increases outward as a line is shifted into that frequency
by the large velocity gradient.
Table 1:
Conditions for the correction of enhanced
at the inner
boundary. The reference radius
is set to the radius
of
.
refers to the
radius where
.
All
values are derived
radially from the inside outward.
This behavior follows from the assumption that the conditions and the radiation
field
within the inner zones of the computational grid are
representative for the region below the innermost point. In cases where a strong line is present further out this assumption is, however, not justified.
If this is not taken into account by an additional correction, an artificial
emission will build up in the iteration between the moments equation and the
formal ray-by-ray solution. Eventually this additional emission also affects
the rate equations and the temperature in the inner region because the
respective line transition can pump itself in an unphysical way.
As a first step for an ad hoc correction of this behavior, criteria have to be
established to determine when a correction should be applied. No correction is
needed if the continuum is optically thick or if the local opacity at the first
two radius points is large (e.g., for a strong continuum or if a line
is present at the inner boundary).
Another criterion has to include a comparison of the local opacity to an average opacity over a reference -step. If the average opacity is
higher than the local opacity, a line is likely to be present further out. The
reference
is chosen according to a step
for pure continuum opacity (true and Thomson). The exact conditions for the
correction used in the current implementation are listed in Table 1.
Secondly, a suitable correction has to be used for each frequency point. We
found that a suitable approach was to use a fixed value
with
being
of the previous (redder) uncorrected frequency
point. To prevent excessively large values for
in frequency
regions where many subsequent points have to be corrected, an upper cut-off at
is applied.
Instead of the expansion Eq. (20) of ,
we now start
from a general expression for the source function, which explicitly
takes a contribution from Thomson scattering into account
This result can be used to determine the flux term
from the
moments equation Eq. (6), which leads to
Next we consider the integration constant
in Eq. (40).
This constant can be obtained by considering that in the outer part of
the atmosphere
In the radiative transfer code, a slightly different form was used by solving
Eq. (49) for
because the gradient of the Eddington
factor is numerically less accurate than
itself
![]() |
(51) |
![]() |
Figure 7:
The Eddington factor
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
The crucial modification with respect to the classical formulation
Eq. (22) of the flux term is achieved by the Eddington factor that can deviate substantially from its value of
in the LTE diffusion
limit. This deviation can be seen in Fig. 7 which shows
as a function of wavelength for the four innermost radial grid points of a SN Ia model.
![]() |
Figure 8:
The radiation field ![]() ![]() |
Open with DEXTER |
Figure 8 shows the radiation field
at the
innermost grid point for the case where the new method is used with and without
correction (indicated by the blue solid line and the green dotted line,
respectively). The third model shown in Fig. 8 uses the
standard boundary condition (red solid line). One can see that the
uncorrected new boundary treatment may create large artificial emission peaks.
These peaks occur at wavelengths where a line is present further out within a small
-interval.
Additionally, Fig. 8 clearly shows that the characteristic of the radiation field is far from Planckian, which causes the standard diffusion approximation to be inappropriate. Also it can be seen that the new method produces less radiation in the red and infrared regions compared to the old boundary treatment.
Looking at the structure of the newly derived flux term Eq. (52), we note
that the original flux term of the diffusion approximation Eq. (22) is
obtained in the limit of large
and
,
equivalent to
the requirement of a isotropic radiation field. Under these conditions the
radiation field approaches LTE and the iterated
term will
therefore approach the Planck function
.
This behavior complies with
the requirement that the original diffusion approximation has to be recovered
for LTE conditions.
![]() |
Figure 9: Comparison of two test models using the old and the new treatments of the inner boundary. One can see that the flux in the red wavelengths is diminished in the model using the new boundary treatment. Note that the two models are not strictly comparable because the occupation numbers, ionization, and temperature structure adjust differently. For comparison the observed spectrum of SN 1992A 5 d after maximum is shown (Kirshner et al. 1993). |
Open with DEXTER |
Figure 9 shows a comparison of two full test models with the
old and the new treatments of the boundary. One can see that in the red
wavelength region as well as in the peaks of the spectrum, the radiation field
in the model using the new method is slightly diminished compared to the model
using the standard procedure. A direct comparison of the two models, however,
is difficult because the treatment of the boundary condition has a significant
influence on the occupation numbers, the ionization fractions, and the
temperature structure. This influence can be seen especially in the UV part of
the spectrum. The observed spectrum of SN 1992A 5 d after maximum
(Kirshner et al. 1993), is shown in gray in this figure. Note that even though
these models are test cases only and have not been tuned to fit the observation
in detail, the overall shape of the observed spectrum is reproduced quite well.
The model shown here uses the density distribution of the model f1 by
Röpke & Hillebrandt (2005) which has been averaged over angles to obtain spherical
symmetry. For the velocity field a homologous expansion law
is
assumed. For simplicity, we adopt a "generic'', homogeneous composition,
independent of the predictions of the underlying explosion model. Also, the
luminosity was not determined from the
content of the explosion model
but set to L=1
1043
.
The entire luminosity is emitted at
the lower boundary implying conservation of the radiation flux through the
ejecta. Table 2 summarizes the parameters of this model.
v0 is the velocity at the innermost radius of the computational grid. The
velocity at the "photosphere'',
(where the photosphere is defined
as the point at which
), is actually an output
quantity of the model because it depends on the opacities that change with the
occupation numbers over the course of the iterations. Due to the strong
wavelength-dependence of the opacities, however, this "photospheric velocity''
is not necessarily an observationally meaningful quantity. We note that the
absorption minimum of the Si II
feature in the model
corresponds to a velocity of
8800
which is significantly
larger than the
defined via
.
This should be
kept in mind when using
to track the photospheric
velocity observationally (e.g., Benetti et al. 2005; Hachinger et al. 2006).
Table 2:
Model parameters for the test model shown in
Fig. 9. The composition is given in fractions by mass.
The photospheric velocity
denotes the velocity where
.
v0 is the velocity of the actual innermost
point of the model while
is an output of the calculation.
We have shown that the physical conditions in the expanding atmospheres of SN Ia are such that even at early times a complete thermalization of photons cannot be assumed. Therefore the common approach using an LTE diffusive boundary condition at the inner point of the computational grid does not provide a consistent description of the radiation field and may lead to non-realistic synthetic spectra. Observationally this can be seen in the red and infrared wavelength bands where the spectral slope of typical SN Ia spectra deviates significantly from a thermal continuum. The assumption of such a thermal continuum in radiative transfer models generally results in an overestimate of the radiation flux in those wavelengths. We have developed a theoretical framework to eliminate some of the restrictions that are imposed by the assumption of LTE conditions.
With the formalism discussed in this work we are able to self-consistently derive the isotropic term of the boundary condition. Only the flux term has to be specified analytically by taking the physical conditions in the photospheric region into account. Of course, removing constraints in the boundary conditions may cause the system to become numerically less stable. For this reason the consistency of the solution is much more important than in the classical case where the explicit specification of the Planck-function forces the system into LTE-conditions naturally.
Our modifications to the LTE-diffusion approximation have been derived in a very general way. Therefore, this formalism can also be applied to other objects (such as Wolf-Rayet stars with very extended atmospheres) where the physical conditions are such that the assumption of LTE at the photosphere is not justified.
The comparison of the synthetic spectrum from a SN Ia test model to an observed SN Ia spectrum shows that the overall shape and prominent features of observed SN Ia are well reproduced by the model. A more detailed analysis of observed spectra will be the subject of forthcoming publications.
Late epochs of SN Ia have not been considered here in more detail because the
energy deposition by -photons above the photosphere has not yet been
fully implemented in our code. The description developed here nevertheless
provides a basis for a reliable implementation of this energy deposition, since
even if a fraction of the radiative energy is created above the photosphere the
remaining radiation has to originate from below the computational grid.
However, given that the photospheric conditions are such that thermalization
occurs only partially, it is impossible that the energy deposited in the
outer ejecta will be completely thermalized. Instead, excitation and ionization
by fast electrons and
-photons above the photosphere may provide a non-thermal contribution to the spectrum. This might already be an issue even
for epochs around maximum, as recent three-dimensional explosion models
indicate extensive mixing of
into the outer layers of the ejecta.
Furthermore, to derive a model with a luminosity that is consistently
determined from the
distribution of an explosion model, the
time-dependent effects of photon trapping in earlier epochs have to be
incorporated into the boundary luminosity (Nugent et al. 1997; Höflich & Khokhlov 1996; Arnett 1982).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the Sonderforschungsbereich 375 of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG, the European Union's Human Potential Programme "Gamma-Ray Bursts: An Enigma and a Tool'', under contract HPRN-CT-2002-00294, and the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY99-07949. D. N. S. thanks the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara for its hospitality during the program on "The Supernova Gamma-Ray Burst Connection''. We also want to thank our colleague Wolfgang Hillebrandt for helpful discussions and his support during the course of this work.