4.7 Article

SN2017jgh: a high-cadence complete shock cooling light curve of a SN IIb with the Kepler telescope

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 507, Issue 3, Pages 3125-3138

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stab2138

Keywords

shock waves; supernovae: general; supernovae: individual; transients: supernovae

Funding

  1. NASA Science Mission directorate
  2. National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NNX08AR22G, NNX12AT65G, NNX14AM74G]
  3. National Optical Astronomy Observatory [NOAO 2017B-0279, NOAO 2017B-0285]
  4. Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship
  5. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for All Sky Astrophysics in 3 Dimensions (ASTRO 3D) [CE170100013]
  6. NASA [80NSSC18K0303, 80NSSC19K0113, 80NSSC19K0119, NNX17AI64G, 80NSSC18K0302, 80NSSC19K0112]
  7. Gordon & Betty Moore Foundation
  8. Heising-Simons Foundation
  9. David and Lucile Packard Foundation
  10. NASA - Space Telescope Science Institute [HST-HF2-51462.001, NAS5-26555]
  11. European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union [852097]
  12. Israel Science Foundation [2752/19]
  13. United States -Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF)
  14. Israeli Council for Higher Education Alon Fellowship
  15. NSERC [RGPIN-2019-06186]
  16. Canada Research Chairs Program
  17. Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR)
  18. Dunlap Institute at the University of Toronto
  19. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship [DGE1339067]
  20. Hungarian Academy of Sciences [LP2018-7]
  21. Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (MICIU) [RYC2019-027683]
  22. Spanish MICIU [PID2020-115253GA-I00]
  23. NSF [AST-1920392, AST-1911074, AST-1911225, AST-1911151, AST-1813176, AST-2008108]
  24. NASA through the NASA Hubble Fellowship - Space Telescope Science Institute [NAS5-26555, HST-HF2-51458.001-A]
  25. Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
  26. National Research, Development and Innovation Office (NKFIH), Hungary - European Union [GINOP 2.3.2-15-2016-00033]
  27. Hungarian National Research, Development and Innovation Office [NKFIH PD-134784]
  28. US National Science Foundation [AST-1615455]
  29. National Science Foundation [AST1238877]
  30. Spanish MINECO [AYA2017-84089]
  31. [GS-2017B-LP-13]
  32. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/T000198/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

SN 2017jgh, discovered by Pan-STARRS during the Kepler/K2 mission, likely had a progenitor yellow supergiant with an envelope radius between 50-290 solar radii and an envelope mass between 0-1.7 solar masses. The shock velocity of SN 2017jgh was estimated to be between 7500-10,300 km/s. The study also showed that estimates of progenitor properties through analytical models may have larger systematic uncertainties than previously calculated.
SN 2017jgh is a type IIb supernova discovered by Pan-STARRS during the C16/C17 campaigns of the Kepler/K2 mission. Here, we present the Kepler/K2 and ground based observations of SN 2017jgh, which captured the shock cooling of the progenitor shock breakout with an unprecedented cadence. This event presents a unique opportunity to investigate the progenitors of stripped envelope supernovae. By fitting analytical models to the SN 2017jgh light curve, we find that the progenitor of SN 2017jgh was likely a yellow supergiant with an envelope radius of similar to 50-290 R-circle dot, and an envelope mass of similar to 0-1.7 M-circle dot. SN 2017jgh likely had a shock velocity of similar to 7500-10 300 km s(-1). Additionally, we use the light curve of SN 2017jgh to investigate how early observations of the rise contribute to constraints on progenitor models. Fitting just the ground based observations, we find an envelope radius of similar to 50-330 R-circle dot, an envelope mass of similar to 0.3-1.7 M-circle dot and a shock velocity of similar to 9000-15 000 km s(-1). Without the rise, the explosion time cannot be well constrained that leads to a systematic offset in the velocity parameter and larger uncertainties in the mass and radius. Therefore, it is likely that progenitor property estimates through these models may have larger systematic uncertainties than previously calculated.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available