TY - JOUR
T1 - SHOULD ONE USE the RAY-BY-RAY APPROXIMATION in CORE-COLLAPSE SUPERNOVA SIMULATIONS?
AU - Skinner, M. Aaron
AU - Burrows, Adam S.
AU - Dolence, Joshua C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/11/1
Y1 - 2016/11/1
N2 - We perform the first self-consistent, time-dependent, multi-group calculations in two dimensions (2D) to address the consequences of using the ray-by-ray+ transport simplification in core-collapse supernova simulations. Such a dimensional reduction is employed by many researchers to facilitate their resource-intensive calculations. Our new code (Fornax) implements multi-D transport, and can, by zeroing out transverse flux terms, emulate the ray-by-ray+ scheme. Using the same microphysics, initial models, resolution, and code, we compare the results of simulating 12, 15, 20, and 25 M⊙ progenitor models using these two transport methods. Our findings call into question the wisdom of the pervasive use of the ray-by-ray+ approach. Employing it leads to maximum post-bounce/pre-explosion shock radii that are almost universally larger by tens of kilometers than those derived using the more accurate scheme, typically leaving the post-bounce matter less bound and artificially more "explodable." In fact, for our 25 M⊙ progenitor, the ray-by-ray+ model explodes, while the corresponding multi-D transport model does not. Therefore, in two dimensions, the combination of ray-by-ray+ with the axial sloshing hydrodynamics that is a feature of 2D supernova dynamics can result in quantitatively, and perhaps qualitatively, incorrect results.
AB - We perform the first self-consistent, time-dependent, multi-group calculations in two dimensions (2D) to address the consequences of using the ray-by-ray+ transport simplification in core-collapse supernova simulations. Such a dimensional reduction is employed by many researchers to facilitate their resource-intensive calculations. Our new code (Fornax) implements multi-D transport, and can, by zeroing out transverse flux terms, emulate the ray-by-ray+ scheme. Using the same microphysics, initial models, resolution, and code, we compare the results of simulating 12, 15, 20, and 25 M⊙ progenitor models using these two transport methods. Our findings call into question the wisdom of the pervasive use of the ray-by-ray+ approach. Employing it leads to maximum post-bounce/pre-explosion shock radii that are almost universally larger by tens of kilometers than those derived using the more accurate scheme, typically leaving the post-bounce matter less bound and artificially more "explodable." In fact, for our 25 M⊙ progenitor, the ray-by-ray+ model explodes, while the corresponding multi-D transport model does not. Therefore, in two dimensions, the combination of ray-by-ray+ with the axial sloshing hydrodynamics that is a feature of 2D supernova dynamics can result in quantitatively, and perhaps qualitatively, incorrect results.
KW - supernovae: general
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994274859&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994274859&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3847/0004-637X/831/1/81
DO - 10.3847/0004-637X/831/1/81
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84994274859
SN - 0004-637X
VL - 831
JO - Astrophysical Journal
JF - Astrophysical Journal
IS - 1
M1 - 81
ER -