Probing the Equation of State

Transcription

1 Probing the Equation of State with Neutrinos from Core-collapse Supernovae (?) Tobias Fischer University of Wrocław, Poland Dense Phases of Matter INT Workshop, Seattle WA, July 2016

2 Wrocław: 3 rd largest city in Poland, located in the heart of Europe

3 0 miles... at the south-west end of Poland

4 ~ people living here.

5 7 Nobel Prize winners: 1. Theodor Mommsen ( ) 1902 (literature) 2. Phillip Lénàrd ( ) 1905 (physics) 3. Eduard Buchner ( ) 1907 (chemistry) 4. Paul Ehrlich ( ) 1908 (medicine) 5. Gerhart Hauptmann ( ) 1912 (literature) 6. Fritz Haber ( ) 1918 (chemistry) 7. Max Born ( ) 1954 (physics)

6 Probing the Equation of State with Neutrinos from Core-collapse Supernovae (?) Contents: Motivation Modeling core collapse supernovae Supernova phenomenology Equation of state dependence of the neutrino signal Summary

7 Constraints (?) A neutron stars is born in a core-collapse supernova explosion as hot & lepton-rich protoneutron star (PNS) e PNSs develop (deleptonize & cool) towards neutron stars via the emission of neutrinos of all flavors for about 30 s Some insights from SN1987A: Eexpl ~ 51 erg, Ev ~ 3 x 53 erg All current supernova models (that include accurate neutrino transport!!!) are in agreement with SN1987A e e e Blum & Kushnir (2016) ApJ SN1987A (Feb. 23 rd, 1987)

8 Neutrino detection current and future

9 Supernova equation of state Conditions: T ' 2 50 MeV T [MeV] NSE (Nuclear Statistical Equilibrium) µ (A,Z) = Zµ p +(A Z) µ n Y e ' 0 2 n 0 Y e ' (charge fraction/density) Extends beyond a simple relation between pressure and energy Nuclear clustering; 2 H, 3 H, 3 He, 4 He non-nse (time-dependent nuclear processes) [g cm 3 ] T =0.5 MeV n 0 Mott-transition to homogeneous phase Nuclear medium modifies nucleon properties/nuclear masses (binding energy shifts) TF. et al.,(2011) ApJS 194, 39

10 Modeling core-collapse supernovae

11 General picture massive stars (& 9M ) (proto)neutron stars (strong gravity) Core-collapse supernova converts iron-core of massive star into protoneutron star (weak gravity) 4E G ' erg! ( e, e, µ/, µ/ ) B i n d i n g e n e r g y g a i n a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m o f neutrinos of all flavors Strong gravity of PNS requires general relativity R G µ = R µ 2 g µ =8appleT µ (Einstein equation) r ds 2 = (t, a) 2 dt (t, a) + da 2 + r(t, a) 2 d (t, a) matter microphysics T tt = (1 + e + J) T ta = T at = H T aa = p + K T = T = p (J K) Misner & Sharp (1964) PhyRev.136, 571 Lindquist (1966) AnnPhys.37, 487

12 Neutrino transport... Lindquist (1966) AnnPhys.37, 487 Neutrinos are light-like geodesics in curved spacetime; massless ultra-relativistic particles. F (t, ~x, ~v)! F (t, a, µ = cos, E) = f (t, a, µ, E) dn = F (t, a, µ, E) E 2 de (µ, E) 4 r2 F 1 µ 2 @ + µ 1 µ 2 F + µ 1 E E3 F apple µ + 3u coll (µ, E) Liebendörfer et al.,(2004) ApJS 150, 263 u r 1 E3 F propagation of the neutrinos along geodesics with changing local angle µ Doppler shift and the angular aberration between adjacent comoving observers for µ 0 red/blueshift spectra

13 Collision integral Mezzacappa & Bruenn (1993) ApJ 405, 669 Mezzacappa & Bruenn (1993) ApJ (µ, E) collision 1 = j(e) + 1 E 2 Z emissivity c (hc) c 1 c E 2 (hc) 3 1 E 2 F (µ, E) (hc) 3 F (µ, E) 1 (E) F (µ, E) dµ 0 R N (µ 0,µ,E) F (µ 0,E) Z F (µ, E) Z opacity/absorptivity 1 c E 2 F (µ, E) (hc) 3 dµ 0 de 0 E 02 R OUT e ± (µ, µ 0,E,E 0 ) Z dµ 0 R N (µ 0,µ,E) dµ 0 de 0 E 02 R e IN (µ, µ 0,E,E 0 ) F (µ 0,E 0 ) ± 1 F (µ 0,E 0 ) Charged current e + p n + e 8 e + e + + e + ha, Zi ha, Z 1i + e Juodagalvis et al. (20), NPA 848, 454 e + + n p + e >< pair reactions 8 >: + N + N (N = n, p) >< scattering + ha, Zi + ha, Zi N + N N + N + + (N = n, p, ) Hannestadt & Raffelt, (1998), ApJ 507, 339 e + e µ/ + µ/ ha, Zi ha, Zi + + Fuller & Meyer (1991) ApJ 376, 701 TF. et al. (2013), PRC 88, >: + e ± + e ±

14 Collision integral Mezzacappa & Bruenn (1993) ApJ 405, 669 Mezzacappa & Bruenn (1993) ApJ (µ, E) collision 1 = j(e) + 1 E 2 Z c (hc) c 1 c E 2 (hc) 3 1 E 2 F (µ, E) (hc) 3 F (µ, E) 1 (E) F (µ, E) dµ 0 R N (µ 0,µ,E) F (µ 0,E) Z F (µ, E) Z 1 c E 2 F (µ, E) (hc) 3 dµ 0 de 0 E 02 R OUT e ± (µ, µ 0,E,E 0 ) Z dµ 0 R N (µ 0,µ,E) dµ 0 de 0 E 02 R e IN (µ, µ 0,E,E 0 ) F (µ 0,E 0 ) ± 1 F (µ 0,E 0 ) Charged current e + p n + e 8 e + e + + e + ha, Zi ha, Z 1i + e Juodagalvis et al. (20), NPA 848, 454 e + + n p + e >< pair reactions 8 >: + N + N (N = n, p) >< scattering + ha, Zi + ha, Zi N + N N + N + + (N = n, p, ) Hannestadt & Raffelt, (1998), ApJ 507, 339 e + e µ/ + µ/ ha, Zi ha, Zi + + Fuller & Meyer (1991) ApJ 376, 701 TF. et al. (2013), PRC 88, >: + e ± + e ±

15 Neutrino opacity and EoS e + n! e + p Here: S V = S A S(q 0,q) (density and spin response functions) 1/ (E e )= G2 F V ud 2 Z ~c (g2 V +3gA) 2 q 0 = E E e, q = p p e S(q 0,q)=4 E n = Z p2 n 2 m n + m n + U n E p = d 3 p e (2 ~c) 3 (1 p2 p 2 m p + m p + U p F e(e e )) S(q 0,q) d 3 p n (2 ~c) 3 (q 0 + E n E p )f n (E n )(1 f p (E p )) Roberts et al., (2012) PRC 86, Horowitz et al., (2012) PRC 86, Martinez-Pinedo & TF et al., (2012) PRL9, 2514 U n U p / S F (T, ) Reddy et al.,(1998) PRD 58, Charged-current absorption; nucleons are not free gas Lowest order medium modification of the weak rate; depends on the EoS (symmetry energy): 1/λ [s 1 ] 1/λ [s 1 ] ν e ν e E e = E e +(U n U p ) DD2 (U n U p = 9.4 MeV) =2 13 g cm 3 DD2 (U n U p = 5.3 MeV) T =5MeV, DD2 + (U n UY p = 3.7 MeV) e = E e + = E e (U n U p ) DD2 : U n U p =9.4 MeV DD2 : U n U p =5.3 MeV DD2 + : U n U p =3.7 MeV E ν [MeV ]

16 Core-collapse supernova phenomenology

17 Stellar core collapse (Y e = n p /n B ) (Y e < 0.5 : neutron excess ) M core >M Ch ' 1.44 (Y e > 0.5 : neutron de cient ) log( [g cm 3 ]) Density (x-y) Plane [km] Ye Ye Y e Ye M Z Implosion of the stellar core due to pressure loss; triggered from e captures on protons bound in nuclei 9 e + 56 Mn! 56 Fe + e >= e + 56 Fe! 56 Co + e >; Neutrino losses e + 56 Co! 56 Ni + e... e + ha, Zi!hA, Z 1i + e log [g/cm 3 ]=11.97 T=1.95MeV Y e =0.349 log (X N,Z ) N (Hempel & TF et al.,(2012) ApJ 748, 27) Collapsing stellar core neutronizes; electron fraction drops; collapse proceeds adiabatically/ supersonically

18 Stellar core collapse (Y e = n p /n B ) (Y e < 0.5 : neutron excess ) M core >M Ch ' 1.44 (Y e > 0.5 : neutron de cient ) log( [g cm 3 ]) Density (x-y) Plane [km] Ye Ye Y e Ye M Z Implosion of the stellar core due to pressure loss; triggered from e captures on protons bound in nuclei 9 e + 56 Mn! 56 Fe + e >= e + 56 Fe! 56 Co + e >; Neutrino losses e + 56 Co! 56 Ni + e... e + ha, Zi!hA, Z 1i + e log [g/cm 3 ]=11.97 T=1.95MeV Y e =0.349 log (X N,Z ) N (Hempel & TF et al.,(2012) ApJ 748, 27) Collapsing stellar core neutronizes; electron fraction drops; collapse proceeds adiabatically/ supersonically

19 Neutrino signal infall phase L ν [ 52 erg s 1 ] E ν [MeV] ν e νe ν µ/τ e + ha, Zi ve burst! ha, Z 1i + e stellar collapse 0 0 ν e νe 19 ν µ/τ t t bounce [ms] Fuller & Meyer (1991), ApJ 376, TF et al.,(2013) PRC 88, nuclear de-excitations ha, Zi! ha, Zi + + S u p e r n o v a s h o c k propagation across the sphere of last inelastic scattering (v sphere) ve deleptonization burst is generic feature charged current reactions e + p n + e e + + n p + e

20 Supernova evolution in a nutshell 4 He 12 C core collapse Entropy per baryon [kb] bounce post bounce evolution Collapse halts at saturation density where the core bounces back with the formation of shock wave Rapid shock acceleration to radii of about km Still gravitationally unstable outer layers of the stellar core; stellar collapse continues Radius [km] 16 O 28 Si, 32 S Fe - core infalling heavy nuclei R e Shock (n, p, 4 He, e ± ) standing accretion shock (n, p, e ± ) (proto)neutron star t t bounce [s] Shock stalling due to energy losses no prompt explosions Later evolution determined from energy-balance due to: (a) (b) ram pressure from mass accretion; infalling material ahead of shock energy liberation (transport) deposition behind accretion shock

21 Neutrino signal post-bounce L ν [ 52 erg s 1 ] E ν [MeV] ν e νe ν µ/τ e + ha, Zi! ha, Z 1i + e stellar collapse mass accretion 0 0 ν e νe 19 ν µ/ µ/τ e e t t bounce [ms] charged current reactions e + p n + e e + + n p + e pair processes e + e + + N + N N + N + + e + e µ/ + µ/ elastic scattering + N 0 + N inelastic scattering + e ± 0 + e ± Neutrino-energy hierarchy r e fl e c t s s t r e n g t h o f coupling to matter

22 Triggering the explosion onset Entropy per Baryon, s [kb] s/nb infalling low-entropy material ( 56 Fe, 56 Ni ) (x-y) Plane [km] Neutrino heating (& cooling): E v = 3 6 x 53 erg (available) Eexpl ~ erg (kinetic energy of ejecta) (Bethe & Wilson (1985) ApJ 295, 14) Preliminary Ye Electron Fraction, Ye Alternative scenarios: Magnetic fields (Le Banc & Wilson (1970) ApJ 161, 542) Sound waves (Burrows et al.,(2006) ApJ 640, 878) (11.2 M ) High-density phase transition (Sagert & TF et al.,(2009) PRL 2, 0811) General concept: E n e r g y l i b e r a t i o n f r o m c e n t r a l protoneutron star (PNS) to standing shock Continuous energy deposition that drives shock to increasingly larger radii (timescale: ~0 milliseconds) Ejection of the stellar mantle; leaves bare PNS behind Yam & Leonard (2009) Nature 458 A massive hypergiant star as the progenitor of the supernova SN 2005gl... was a single star and that it indeed vanished following the explosion of SN 2005gl... On the basis of its luminosity, such a star is likely to be an extreme member of the group of luminous blue variable stars (LBVs), which are thought to be very massive (>50 M solar ) shortlived stars.

23 Triggering the explosion onset Entropy per Baryon, s [kb] s/nb infalling low-entropy material ( 56 Fe, 56 Ni ) (x-y) Plane [km] Neutrino heating (& cooling): E v = 3 6 x 53 erg (available) Eexpl ~ erg (kinetic energy of ejecta) (Bethe & Wilson (1985) ApJ 295, 14) Preliminary Ye Electron Fraction, Ye Alternative scenarios: Magnetic fields (Le Banc & Wilson (1970) ApJ 161, 542) Sound waves (Burrows et al.,(2006) ApJ 640, 878) (11.2 M ) High-density phase transition (Sagert & TF et al.,(2009) PRL 2, 0811) General concept: E n e r g y l i b e r a t i o n f r o m c e n t r a l protoneutron star (PNS) to standing shock Continuous energy deposition that drives shock to increasingly larger radii (timescale: ~0 milliseconds) Ejection of the stellar mantle; leaves bare PNS behind Yam & Leonard (2009) Nature 458 A massive hypergiant star as the progenitor of the supernova SN 2005gl... was a single star and that it indeed vanished following the explosion of SN 2005gl... On the basis of its luminosity, such a star is likely to be an extreme member of the group of luminous blue variable stars (LBVs), which are thought to be very massive (>50 M solar ) shortlived stars.

24 Neutrino-driven supernova success stories Müller et al.,(2012) ApJ 756, 22 (2D, energy- and angledependent neutrino transport; ray-by-ray approximation) (9.6, 11.2, 15, 27 M ) Sumiyoshi et al.,(2014) ApJS 216, 37 (static field, angle- and energydependent Boltzmann-like transport; comparison with ray-by-ray approximation) (27 M ) Roberts et al.,(2016) astro-ph/arxiv (full 3D, energy-dependent 3D Cartesian grid) Pan et al.,(2016) ApJ 817, 33 (2D, energydependent isotropic diffusion source approximation) (15, 20 M ) Bruenn et al.,(2013) ApJ 767, L6 (2D, energy-dependent multi-group flux-limited diffusion approximation) (12, 13, 15, 20, 25 M ) Suwa et al.,(2013) ApJ 764, L6 (2D, energy-dependent isotropic diffusion source approximation) (11.2, 13, 15 M ) Not complete story yet supernova problem not fully solved!

25 Magnetically-driven supernova explosions Burrows et al.,(2007) ApJ 669, 585 Rapid rotation and amplification of magnetic field (Le Banc & Wilson (1970) ApJ 161, 542) Energetic bi-polar explosions M a y e x p l a i n e x i s t e n c e o f magnetars Caveat: requires very high core spin and/or initial magnetic field of stellar core Perhaps few rare events Associated with production of r-process elements: 2 Winteler et al.,(2013) ApJ 750, L22 Ejected Mass [M ] Mass Number

26 PNS deleptonization Beyond supernova explosion onset once the stellar mantle is ejected... The supernova story continues for more than seconds! Mildly independent from details of the supernova explosion mechanism Can be modeled in spherical symmetry <!!! 6 14 [g cm 3 ] (> 4 km) ( 0 km) e + n! p + e e + p! n + e + PNS ( km) T =5 30 MeV E 53 erg low-mass outflow: v-driven wind (mass ejection from PNS surface)! neutrino heating at PNS surface PNS deleptonization (neutrino diffusion) Pons et al., (1999) ApJ 513, 780

27 PNS deleptonization proton rich (Ye > 0.5) vp process neutron rich (Ye < 0.5) neutron-capture process formation of heavy nuclei?! <!!! 6 14 [g cm 3 ] (> 4 km) ( 0 km) ( -rich freeze out) e + n! p + e e + p! n + e + PNS ( km) T =5 30 MeV E 53 erg formation of seed nuclei! low-mass outflow: v-driven wind (mass ejection from PNS surface)! neutrino heating at PNS surface PNS deleptonization (neutrino diffusion)

28 PNS deleptonization Nucleosynthesis is determined at v decoupling proton rich (Ye > 0.5) vp process Deleptonization timescale: t = 30 s neutron rich (Ye < 0.5) neutron-capture process formation of heavy nuclei?! <!!! 6 14 [g cm 3 ] (> 4 km) ( 0 km) ( -rich freeze out) e + n! p + e e + p! n + e + PNS ( km) T =5 30 MeV E 53 erg formation of seed nuclei! low-mass outflow: v-driven wind (mass ejection from PNS surface)! neutrino heating at PNS surface PNS deleptonization (neutrino diffusion)

29 TF et al.,(2016) PRD (submitted) L ν [ 52 erg s 1 ] E ν [MeV] ν e burst Neutrino signal mass accretion t t bounce [s] t t bounce [s] deleptonization ν ē νe ν µ/τ ν ē νe ν µ/τ ν µ/τ Roberts et al., (2012) PRC 86, Hüdepohl et al.,(20) PRL 4, Martinez-Pinedo & TF et al., (2014) JPG 41, Current models predict small spectral difference; Y e ' h" e i Integrated Abundances Qian et al., (1996) ApJ 471, " e 2Q +1.2Q 2 /" e " e 2Q +1.2Q 2 /" e (similar neutrino luminosities) h" e i 8 >< >: h" i = he 2 i/he i ) 1 & 5 MeV (Y e < 0.5) neutron rich < 5 MeV (Y e > 0.5) proton rich Light neutron-capture elements 38<Z<45: Zn (gauged to 60 Zn) Sr Zr HD standard weak rates +% ν e spectral differences % ν e spectral differences Ba Pb La Eu Atomic Number, Z (integrated nucleosynthesis)

30 Equation of state dependence of the neutrino signal

31 Excluded volume approach S.Typel (2016) EPJA 52, n B [fm 3 ] HS(DD2 EV) (v = +8.0) HS(DD2) ref. EOS (v=0) HS(DD2 EV) (v = 3.0) Geometric approach; modifying the available volume: V i = V i X i = 1 v j n j j P [MeV fm 3 ] c s [c] ρ 0 stiff ref. EOS soft Excluded volume parameter: v v n =v p ( ;v)=exp v v 2 ( 0) 2 (Gauss-functional) 2 T =3MeV Y e = ρ [ 14 g cm 3 ] DD2 RMF parameters: K = 243 MeV S = MeV L = MeV

32 Excluded volume approach TF (2016) EPJA 52, ρ central [ g cm ] (Evolution of central density and temperature) HS(DD2 EV) (v = +8.0) HS(DD2) ref. case (v=0) HS(DD2 EV) (v = 3.0) T central [MeV] soft ref. EOS stiff Geometric approach; modifying the available volume: V i = V i X i = 1 v j n j Excluded volume parameter: v v n =v p ( ;v)=exp j v v 2 ( 0) 2 (Gauss-functional) t t bounce [s]

33 Excluded volume approach TF (2016) EPJA 52, 54 L ν [ 52 erg s 1 ] ν e ν e ν µ/τ t tbounce [s] ν µ/τ HS(DD2 EV) (v = +8.0) HS(DD2) ref. case (v=0) HS(DD2 EV) (v = 3.0) Supernova neutrino signal is insensitive to supra-saturation ν µ/τ density EOS Geometric approach; modifying the available volume: V i = V i X i = 1 v j n j Excluded volume parameter: v v n =v p ( ;v)=exp j v v 2 ( 0) 2 (Gauss-functional) A f f e c t s o n l y s u p e r - saturation density EoS; all o t h e r n u c l e a r m a t t e r p r o p e r t i e s r e m a i n unchanged

34 L ν [1 E ν [MeV] 3 Excluded volume approach ν µ/τ ν µ/τ ν µ/τ ν e ν e t ttbounce [s] Supernova neutrino signal is insensitive to supra-saturation density EOS TF (2016) EPJA 52, 54 Geometric approach; modifying the available volume: V i = V i X i = 1 v j n j Excluded volume parameter: v v n =v p ( ;v)=exp j v v 2 ( 0) 2 (Gauss-functional) A f f e c t s o n l y s u p e r - saturation density EoS; all o t h e r n u c l e a r m a t t e r p r o p e r t i e s r e m a i n unchanged

35 Quark-hadron phase transition Pressure [MeV/fm 3 ] P [MeV fm 3 ] Baryon Density, ρ [ 14 g/cm 3 ] Extended transition region of instability Onset of quarkhadron mixed phase [ 14 g cm 3 ] s = 1 k B /baryon s = 2 k B /baryon s = 3 k B /baryon s = 4 k B /baryon Baryon Density, n B [fm 3 ] n B [fm 3 ] Pure quarkmatter phase Sagert & TF et al.,(2009) PRL 2, 0811 TF et al., (2011) ApJS 194, 28 Quark matter EoS: bag model with fixed bag pressure Transition from some nuclear model (TM1) Hadron-quark transition region: extended phase of instability; large latent heat

36 Quark-hadron phase transition Sagert & TF et al. (2009), PRL 2, 0811 Mean Energy [MeV] Luminosity [ 52 erg s 1 ] deleptonization burst form core bounce Signal from strong 1st order phase transition at high densities ν ēνe ν µ/τ ν ēνe ν µ/τ time [s] Dasgupta & TF et al. (20), PRC 81 log(density [g/cm 3 ]) Velocity [ 4 km/s] Ye XQ 0 00 Radius [km] 0 00 Radius [km] 0 00 Radius [km] Time After Core Bounce [s]

37 Quark-hadron phase transition Sagert & TF et al. (2009), PRL 2, 0811 Mean Energy [MeV] Luminosity [ 52 erg s 1 ] deleptonization burst form core bounce Signal from strong 1st order phase transition at high densities ν ēνe ν µ/τ ν ēνe ν µ/τ time [s] Dasgupta & TF et al. (20), PRC 81 log(density [g/cm 3 ]) Velocity [ 4 km/s] Ye XQ 0 00 Radius [km] 0 00 Radius [km] 0 00 Radius [km] Time After Core Bounce [s]

38 Summary

39 Summary Neutrino signal from core-collapse supernovae mildly insensitive to supra-saturation density EoS Great progress in modeling, in particular in view of multidimensional nature

40 Summary Neutrino signal from core-collapse supernovae mildly insensitive to supra-saturation density EoS Great progress in modeling, in particular in view of multidimensional nature Massive star explosions (canonical) cannot explain galactic enrichment of heavy neutron-capture elements; 38<Z<45 Puzzle at low metallicity (?) chemical evolution models: (a) Core-collapse supernovae (SNe) rate ~ -2 yr -1 (b) Neutron star merger (NSM) rate ~ -5 yr -1 Elemental abundances Electron fraction, Y e sim. data HD [28] Charge number Z S t t bounce [s] Consistent with metal-poor star observations (HD ) Y e Entropy per baryon, S [k B ] Argast et al., (2004) A&A 416, 997 Yuan et al.,(2016) MNRAS 456, 3253

41 Massive 3 ν e star explosions (canonical) cannot explain galactic 2 H pp e (a) ν 3 e H 3 He e enrichment 2 ν e n pe of heavy neutron-capture elements; 38<Z<45 σ [ 42 cm 2 ] σ [ 42 cm 2 ] ν 0 2 (b) 1 e H nn e + ν 3 e He 3 He + ν 3 e H nnn e + ν e p ne + ( /A i ) Summary Neutrino signal from core-collapse supernovae mildly insensitive to supra-saturation density EoS Great progress in modeling, in particular in view of multidimensional nature Puzzle at low metallicity (?) chemical evolution models: Role of light nuclear clusters (?) Requires consideration of 0 associated weak processes consistent with EoS TF. et al.,(2016) EPJWC F 1 0 E [MeV] ν Nakamura et al.,(2001) PRC63, Furusawa et al.,(2013) ApJ 774, 13 Nasu et al.,(2015) ApJ 801, 12 Baryon Density, log (ρ [g/cm 3 ]) Mass Fractions E ν [MeV] complete v-trapping n p 2 e H ppe 2 e H nne + e nn 2 H e e pp 2 H e + 3 e H nppe 3 e H nnne + 3 e H 3 He e 3 e He 3 H e + 2 H pn 2 H 2 H 3 H 3 H 3 He 3 He ν spheres 1 2 Y e 4 He cooling heating 3 H 2 H 1 2 Radius [km] supernova shock position T ρ Temperature [MeV] Electron Fraction

42 5 4 Summary Neutrino signal from core-collapse supernovae mildly insensitive to supra-saturation density EoS Great progress in modeling, in particular in view of multidimensional nature Massive star explosions (canonical) cannot explain galactic enrichment of heavy neutron-capture elements; 38<Z<45 Puzzle at low metallicity (?) chemical evolution models: Role of light nuclear clusters (?) Requires consideration of associated weak processes consistent with EoS Any chance for quark matter (???) Develop more sophisticated (microscopic) quark matter EoS; chiral physics, finite temperatures and isospin asymmetry T [MeV] B 1/4 dc [MeV] µ B,χ [MeV] 2 1 µ B,χ 1/4 B dc M max ' 2M T [MeV] 150 n B, n B, χ Klähn & TF (2015) ApJ 8, n B [fm ]

43 Summary Neutrino signal from core-collapse supernovae mildly insensitive to supra-saturation density EoS Great progress in modeling, in particular in view of multidimensional nature Massive star explosions (canonical) cannot explain galactic enrichment of heavy neutron-capture elements; 38<Z<45 Puzzle at low metallicity (?) chemical evolution models: Role of light nuclear clusters (?) Requires consideration of associated weak processes consistent with EoS Any chance for quark matter (???) Develop more sophisticated (microscopic) quark matter EoS; chiral physics, finite temperatures and isospin asymmetry In collaboration with: D. Blaschke M. Hempel T. Klähn M. Liebendörfer K. Langanke A. Lohs G. Martínez-Pinedo G. Röpke F.-K. Thielemann Y. Suwa S. Typel M. R. Wu Thanks for your attention

44

45

46 Neutrino detection Neutrino cross section in a water target detector (G.G.Raffelt)

47 >; 9 >= The end of a massive star (& 9M ) ~1 billion km Jupiter orbit Implosion of the stellar core due to pressure loss; triggered from e captures on protons bound in nuclei hydrogen envelope (dilute) e + 56 Mn! 56 Fe + e e + 56 Fe! 56 Co + e e + 56 Co! 56 Ni + e... e + ha, Zi!hA, Z 1i + e C o l l a p s i n g s t e l l a r c o r e neutronizes; electron fraction drops (Y e = n p /n B ) Stellar core Y e > 0.5 : neutron rich Y e > 0.5 : proton rich M Core > M CH

48 Stellar core collapse Entropy per baryon [kb] 50 ν e νe ν µ/τ Radius [km] 4 He 12 C 16 O 28 Si, 32 S Fe - core core collapse neutrino freestreaming regime bounce post bounce evolution nuclear electron captures e + ha, Zi!hA, Z 1i + e nuclear de-excitations ha, Zi! ha, Zi + + Fuller & Meyer (1991), ApJ 376, 701 TF et al.,(2013) PRC 88, (suppressed) (n, p, e ± ) (n, p, 4 He, e ± ) (proto)neutron star t t bounce [s] L ν [ 52 erg s 1 ] E ν [MeV] stellar collapse ν e 50 0 νe 18 ν µ/τ t t tt bounce bounce [s] [ms

49 Stellar core collapse Entropy per baryon [kb] 50 ν e νe ν µ/τ Radius [km] 4 He 12 C 16 O 28 Si, 32 S Fe - core core collapse neutrino freestreaming regime bounce R e neutrino trapping post bounce evolution nuclear electron captures e + ha, Zi!hA, Z 1i + e nuclear de-excitations ha, Zi! ha, Zi + + Fuller & Meyer (1991), ApJ 376, 701 TF et al.,(2013) PRC 88, (suppressed) (n, p, 4 He, e ± ) elastic scattering on nuclei e + ha, (n, Zi p, e ±!ha, ) Zi + e (determines (proto)neutron neutrino star trapping) t t bounce [s] L ν [ 52 erg s 1 ] E ν [MeV] stellar collapse ν e 50 0 νe 18 ν µ/τ t t tt bounce bounce [s] [ms

50 Core bounce and shock formation Radius [km] 4 He 12 C 16 O 28 Si, 32 S Fe - core core collapse Entropy per baryon [kb] neutrino freestreaming regime bounce R e Shock neutrino trapping post bounce evolution nuclear electron captures e + ha, Zi!hA, Z 1i + e nuclear de-excitations ha, Zi! ha, Zi + + Fuller & Meyer (1991), ApJ 376, 701 TF et al.,(2013) PRC 88, S u p e r n o v a s h o c k propagation across the sphere of last inelastic scattering (n, p, (v sphere) 4 He, e ± ) ve deleptonization burst (is generic feature) charged (n, p, current e ± ) reactions (proto)neutron e + p starn + e e + + n p + e t t bounce [s] L ν [ 52 erg s 1 ] E ν [MeV] ν e νe ν µ/τ ve burst stellar collapse ν e 50 0 νe 18 ν µ/τ t t tt bounce bounce [s] [ms

51 Post bounce mass accretion 50 ν e Entropy per baryon [kb] νe ν µ/τ e 5 4 charged current reactions e + p n + e e + + n p + e pair processes e + e + + L ν [ 52 erg s 1 ] bounce ν e νe 19 infalling 18 heavy ν µ/τ nuclei µ/ R e 14 (n, p, 4 He, e ± ) neutrino decoupling e e 9 (n, p, e ± ) 9 8 complete neutrino trapping (proto)neutron star t t bounce [s] t t bounce [ms] t t bounce [s] N + N N + N + + e + e µ/ + µ/ elastic scattering + N 0 + N inelastic scattering + e ± 0 + e ± E ν [MeV] Shock post bounce evolution e µ/ mass accretion 3 2 1

52 vbag approach to quark matter 400 M [MeV] P[MeV fm -3 ] P [MeV fm -3 ] µ * [MeV] TM1 NJL BM χ BM χ-dc 1/4 B eff = MeV 1/4 = MeV B eff µ dc = µ χ µ dc > µ χ µ B [MeV] µ χ

53 Neutrino signal in multi-dim l simulations L [ 52 erg s 1 ] he i [MeV] ( e, e, µ/ ) Müller & Janka (2014) ApJ 788, 82 Presence of millisecond variations of the neutrino signal Induced from convection and associated shock oscillations Persist even in detection on Earth May allow distinction of strong bipolar explosions t t bounce [s]

54 Production of heavy-element Evolution of massive stars Core-collapse supernovae (SN Ib,c II) vs. (too late, not frequent enough) Neutron star mergers Anders & Grevesse (1989) Argast et al.(2004) AA416,997 slow (s) process (n-capture << decay) Stellar evolution neutron - capture processes rapid (r) process (n-capture >> decay) Explosive environment neutrino-induced (intermediate mass elements?)

55 Some relevant current equation of state constraints S... nuclear symmetry energy L... slope of the symmetry energy (Astronomy/Astrophysics; neutron stars) Each EoS has a unique Mass-Radius relation Steiner et al., (20) ApJ 722 (low-mass X-ray binary source analysis) Lattimer & Lim (2013) ApJ 771, 14 Demorest et al.,(20) Nature Antoniadis et al.,(2013) Science 340, 448