4.6 Article

THE YELLOW SUPERGIANT PROGENITOR OF THE TYPE II SUPERNOVA 2011dh IN M51

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
Volume 739, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/739/2/L37

Keywords

supernovae: general; supernovae: individual (2011dh)

Funding

  1. Sophie & Tycho Brahe Fellowship
  2. DNRF
  3. NSF [GN-2011A-Q-22]
  4. PRIN-INAF
  5. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/I001123/1, ST/G009465/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. STFC [ST/I001123/1, ST/G009465/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present the detection of the putative progenitor of the Type IIb SN 2011dh in archival pre-explosion Hubble Space Telescope images. Using post-explosion Adaptive Optics imaging with Gemini NIRI+ALTAIR, the position of the supernova (SN) in the pre-explosion images was determined to within 23 mas. The progenitor candidate is consistent with an F8 supergiant star (logL/L(circle dot) = 4.92 +/- 0.20 and T(eff) = 6000 +/- 280 K). Through comparison with stellar evolution tracks, this corresponds to a single star at the end of core C-burning with an initial mass of M(ZAMS) = 13 +/- 3 M(circle dot). The possibility of the progenitor source being a cluster is rejected, on the basis of: (1) the source not being spatially extended, (2) the absence of excess H alpha emission, and (3) the poor fit to synthetic cluster spectral energy distributions (SEDs). It is unclear if a binary companion is contributing to the observed SED, although given the excellent correspondence of the observed photometry to a single star SED we suggest that the companion does not contribute significantly. Early photometric and spectroscopic observations show fast evolution similar to the transitional Type IIb SN 2008ax and suggest that a large amount of the progenitor's hydrogen envelope was removed before explosion. Late-time observations will reveal if the yellow supergiant or the putative companion star were responsible for this SN explosion.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available