Multi-wavelength Observations of Composite Supernova Remnants

Tea Temim(NASA GSFC/ORAU)

Collaborators:Patrick Slane (CfA)Eli Dwek (GSFC)George Sonneborn (GSFC)Richard Arendt (GSFC)Yosi Gelfand (NYU Abu Dhabi)Paul Plucinsky (CfA)Daniel Castro (MIT)

Gaensler & Slane 2006

Evolution of PWNe inside SNRsEarly Evolution:

• SNR is in the free expansion stage

• PWN expands supersonically inside the SNR and is bounded by a strong shock

• The PWN shocks the inner SN ejecta that have not been re-heated by the reverse shock

Late Evolution:

• The reverse shock heats the inner SN ejecta and crushes the expanding PWN

• PWN expansion becomes unstable and reverberates

• PWN continues to expand subsonically through SNR

• Reverse shock encounters one side of PWN first and disrupts the nebula – moving pulsar or a density gradient in the ISM

• After passage of the reverse shock relic PWN remains (typically observed in the radio) and a new PWN forms around the pulsar

van der Swaluw et al. 2004

tSNR = 1000 yr

tSNR = 1800 yr

tSNR = 3000 yr

tSNR = 11 400 yr

When pulsar’s motion becomes supersonic, new PWN deforms into a bow shock - occurs when a pulsar has traveled 0.67RSNR (van der Swaluw 2004)

Bow Shock Nebula

NASA/CXC/M.Weiss

Asymmetric Reverse Shock Interaction

Herschel 70 mm,Chandra X-ray

VLJHK (Mignani et al. 2012)

B0540-69.3

Chandra X-ray image

G21.5-0.9

[Fe II]

Zajczyk et al. 2012

G54.1+0.3

Crab Nebula

Kes 75

Early Evolution – SN Dust and Ejecta

3C 58Slane et al. 2004

• Dust radiatively heated by the PWN broadband spectrum of the heating source well known

Hester 2008

• Information about grain properties can provide clues on the progenitor type

• Dust surrounding PWNe is ejecta dust, not mixed with the ISM material

• Dust not been processed by the reverse shock, no dust destruction

Dust around PWNe

Dust formation in SN ejecta: Theoretical Predictions

(Kozasa et al. 1989, 1991; Clayton et al. 1999, 2001; Todini and Ferrara 2001; Nozawa et al. 2003; Bianchi and Schneider 2007; Kozasa et al. 2009, Cherchneff and Dwek 2010)

Mass dominated by grains:

> 0.03 μm in Type IIP SNe

< 0.006 μm in Type IIb SNe

(Kozasa,Nozawa et al. 2009)

Kozasa et al. 2009

Type IIP Type IIb

• High amount of can form in dense cooling SN ejecta within the first 600–1000 days - consists primarily of the most abundant refractory elements (e.g., C, Mg, Si, S, and Fe)

• Total dust masses range between 0.1 – 1 M with 2-20% surviving the reverse shock

• Forms in the He envelope where density is high and velocity low – grain properties depend on mass of the hydrogen envelope

H

€

H =πa2 Lυ∫ Q(υ ,a)dυ

4πd2

€

L = 4πa2 πBυ (T)∫ Q(υ ,a)dυ

Heating rate

Cooling rate

Ln non-thermal spectrum of the PWN

Hester 2008

Temim & Dwek 2013

Crab Nebula: Dust Heating Model

Power-law grain size distributionsF(a) = a-a

amin = 0.001 mm amax = 0.03-5.0 mm

a = 0.0-4.0 Distance = 0.5-1.5 pc (location of the ejecta filaments in 3D models of Cadez et al. 2004)Qabs silicates, carbon (Zubko et al. 2004), carbon (Rouleau & Martin 1991)

Silicates: Carbon:

a = 3.5 a = 4.0 amax > 0.6 mm amax > 0.1 mm

Best-fit parameters:

C2 Contours (amax vs. a)

Temim & Dwek 2013

• Size distribution index of 3.5-4.0 and larger grain size cut-offs are favored

• Larger grains are consistent with a Type IIP SN – Mass dominated by grains with radii larger than 0.03 μm in Type IIP, and less than 0.006 μm in Type IIb SNe (Kozasa,Nozawa et al. 2009)

Md = 0.13 +/- 0.01 M for silicates

Md = 0.02 +/- 0.04 M for carbon

Late Evolution – Interaction with the Reverse Shock

• Composite SNR with a shell and an off-center pulsar wind nebula

• Complex morphology likely produced by a combination of an asymmetric reverse shock and the pulsar’s motion

Temim et al. 2009MOST Radio, ATCA Radio, Chandra

SNR Shell

Radio PWN

Neutron Star

X-ray PWN

Outflow – bubble?

Reverse Shock Interaction: G327.1-1.1

Sedov model (for d = 9 kpc):R = 22 pc n0 = 0.12 cm-3

t = 1.8 x 104 yr Mtot = 31 Msol

T = 0.3 keV vs = 500 km/s

• A compact core is embedded in a cometary PWN• Prong-like structures originate from the vicinity of the core and extend to the NW – outflow from the pulsar wind?

350 ks Chandra observation

Gaensler et al. 2004

Prongs

Cometary PWN

Compact PWN

TrailCompact PWN is more extended than a point source

G327.1-1.1: X-ray Morphology

Two possible scenarios may give rise to cometary structure:1. Asymmetric passage of the reverse shock from

the NW – PWN expanding subsonically2. Bow shock formation due to pulsar’s motion in

the NW direction pulsar velocity ~ 770 km/s

Temim et al. 2009, 2014 (in prep)

RS Interaction: MSH 15-56 X-ray, Radio

Chandra X-ray

XMM3-colorimage

Temim et al. 2013

Sedov model (for d = 4 kpc):R = 21 pc n0 = 0.1 cm-3 t = 16.5 kyrMtot = 100 Msol T = 0.3 keV vs = 500 km/s

Pulsar velocity = 410 km/s

• Composite SNRs serve as unique laboratories for the study of • SNR/PWN evolution• Interaction of the PWN with the SNR and surroundings• Properties of progenitor, pulsar, SN ejecta, freshly formed SN dust• Nature and evolution of energetic particles in PWNe

• Evolution can be divided into three stages• Expansion of the PWN into cold SN ejecta (ejecta and dust properties, mass,

dynamics, progenitor type)• Interaction with the SNR reverse shock (complex morphologies and mixing of

PWN with ejecta)• Post-reverse shock, subsonic expansion (bow shock formation if pulsar is moving

at a high velocity)

Summary

Collaborators: Patrick Slane (CfA) Eli Dwek (GSFC)

George Sonneborn (GSFC) Richard Arendt (GSFC) Yosi Gelfand (NYU Abu Dhabi) Paul Plucinsky (CfA) Daniel Castro (MIT)