Wave heating from proto-neutron star convection and the core-collapse supernova explosion mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Our understanding of the core-collapse supernova explosion mechanism is incomplete. While the favoured scenario is delayed revival of the stalled shock by neutrino heating, it is difficult to reliably compute explosion outcomes and energies, which depend sensitively on the complex radiation hydrodynamics of the post-shock region. The dynamics of the (non-)explosion depend sensitively on how energy is transported from inside and near the proto-neutron star (PNS) to material just behind the supernova shock. Although most of the PNS energy is lost in the form of neutrinos, hydrodynamic and hydromagnetic waves can also carry energy from the PNS to the shock. We show that gravity waves excited by core PNS convection can couple with outgoing acoustic waves that present an appreciable source of energy and pressure in the post-shock region. Using one-dimensional simulations, we estimate the gravity wave energy flux excited by PNS convection and the fraction of this energy transmitted upwards to the post-shock region as acoustic waves. We find wave energy fluxes near $10^{51}\, \mathrm{erg}\, \mathrm{s}^{-1}\,$ are likely to persist for $\sim \! 1\, \mathrm{s}$ post-bounce. The wave pressure on the shock may exceed $10{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ of the thermal pressure, potentially contributing to shock revival and, subsequently, a successful and energetic explosion. We also discuss how future simulations can better capture the effects of waves, and more accurately quantify wave heating rates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".