JWST Observations of Dust inCore-Collapse Supernovae

Ori FoxSTScI@fox_ori

V838 Mon

02/28/2023

Origin
Newly Formed
SN Ejecta
Radioactivity

Post-Shock Gas

Pre-existing CSM
Shock Heating

Radiative Echo

Radioactivity
Collisional Radiation•

Important clues about the supernova explosion and the progenitor system, including:––––Peak luminosity
Shock velocity & circumstellar interaction
Progenitor wind speeds & mass loss rates
Stellar evolution & explosion mechanics

ODF+09a

ODF+09, 10

Fox+11, Szalai+18

SofiaSpitzer

SN 2010jl

Origin
Newly Formed
SN Ejecta
Radioactivity

Post-Shock Gas

Pre-existing CSM
Shock Heating

Radiative Echo

Radioactivity
Collisional Radiation•Are SNe Major Sources of Dust?
––––

Observations reveal large amounts of reddening (i.e. dust) in the early universe (Maiolino et al.
2004)
Dust Mass in J1148+5251 is (1-5)x108 M☉ vs. Dust Mass in Milky Way 3x107 M☉
At less than 1 Gyr (Z>6), the universe was not populated by low-mass AGB stars, which are thedominant sources of dust in our local universe
Some CCSNe show dust formation (e.g., Kotak+06, Andrews+10)

Not a lot of dust was discovered to form in young SNe

Filled are SNe; Open are SNRs

Gall+11

https://nebulousresearch.org/dustmasses/

Sarangai+13, Dwek+19

Three areas revitalized the search for SN dust
• Galactic SNRs show large
dust reservoirs• Large amount of dust in SN1987A• SN 2010jl showed late time
dust formation

Matsuura11

SN 2004etSN 2017eaw

Shahbandeh+23

Strong MIRI detections (5-25um)
Melissa Shahbandeh
STScI Postdoc





Dust emission can be fit as a function ofdust mass, temperature, and geometry
When fitting dust, it is necessary toconsider several geometries, including athin shell and thick shell/sphereAs more and more dust is added, theoptical depth increases to a point where
you can no longer see all of the dust, even
if it is warm and emitting
The best fitting functions, therefore, do notnecessarily represent the most likely
parameters in the optically thick cases
Since you can never really know if you
have optically thick or thin dust, it is better
to work with confidence intervals, rather
than best fits and error bars.

Both graphite andoptically thick silicates
fit equally well

Excess flux at 5.6 um,
likely due to hotter
component (see nextslide)

Excess flux at 25 um,
likely due to hidden
dust.



Note the confidence intervals, which are comparable, but not necessarily thesame as errors (1/sigma).

At the high end, the dust mass is unconstrained. Adding more and more dust
won’t change the fit.

At the low mass end, you can still get relatively good fits going as low as around0.01 \msolar.

Keck spectra show clear signatures of CSM interaction even6500 days post-explosion. No accompanying UV
observations yet.

We present the 90% confidence interval (roughly 1.6 sigma). Notice how thismeans that we are very very confident we have at LEAST 10-2 M_sol dust, but
likely much much more

We can compare the derived blackbody radius (again, a lower limit) to theshock radius, derived from the width of intermediate lines, and find the dust is
likely internal to the shock. Hence…likely newly formed in the ejecta.

The IR luminosity is roughly 10x larger than the optical luminosity, suggesting
either a very high optical depth, or most of the shock emission is coming out atother wavelengths.

Observed dust is radiatively heatedto ~100-150 K by ongoing shock
interaction with the CSM

Inferred dust mass for 04et is thesecond highest (next to 87A) in
extragalactic SNe thus far

These results promote the prospectof Sne as potential significant
sources of dust in the Universe Mid-IR observations of dust provide a uniqueprobe of dust composition, temperature, andmass
 If newly formed, the dust provides animportant probe of supernova contributions
to the dust budget of the universe
 If pre-existing, the dust parameters can beused to constrain the pre-SN mass-loss
properties and potentially identify theprogenitor