Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Exclusion of a luminous red giant as a companion star to the progenitor of supernova SN 2011fe

Subjects

Abstract

Type Ia supernovae are thought to result from a thermonuclear explosion of an accreting white dwarf in a binary system1,2, but little is known of the precise nature of the companion star and the physical properties of the progenitor system. There are two classes of models1,3: double-degenerate (involving two white dwarfs in a close binary system2,4) and single-degenerate models5,6. In the latter, the primary white dwarf accretes material from a secondary companion until conditions are such that carbon ignites, at a mass of 1.38 times the mass of the Sun. The type Ia supernova SN 2011fe was recently detected in a nearby galaxy7. Here we report an analysis of archival images of the location of SN 2011fe. The luminosity of the progenitor system (especially the companion star) is 10–100 times fainter than previous limits on other type Ia supernova progenitor systems8,9,10, allowing us to rule out luminous red giants and almost all helium stars as the mass-donating companion to the exploding white dwarf.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: The site of SN 2011fe in galaxy M101 as imaged by the Hubble Space Telescope/Advanced Camera for Surveys.
Figure 2: Progenitor system constraints in a Hertzsprung–Russell diagram.

References

  1. 1

    Nomoto, K. Accreting white dwarf models for type I supernovae. I—Presupernova evolution and triggering mechanisms. Astrophys. J. 253, 798–810 (1982)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Iben, I., Jr & Tutukov, A. V. Supernovae of type I as end products of the evolution of binaries with components of moderate initial mass (M not greater than about 9 solar masses). Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 54, 335–372 (1984)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Whelan, J. & Iben, I., Jr Binaries and supernovae of type I. Astrophys. J. 186, 1007–1014 (1973)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Webbink, R. F. Double white dwarfs as progenitors of R Coronae Borealis stars and type I supernovae. Astrophys. J. 277, 355–360 (1984)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Nomoto, K., Iwamoto, K. & Kishimoto, N. Type Ia supernovae: their origin and possible applications in cosmology. Science 276, 1378–1382 (1997)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Podsiadlowski, P., Mazzali, P., Lesaffre, P., Han, Z. & Förster, F. The nuclear diversity of type Ia supernova explosions. N. Astron. Rev. 52, 381–385 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Nugent, P. et al. Supernova SN 2011fe from an exploding carbon–oxygen white dwarf star. Naturehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature10644 (this issue).

  8. 8

    Maoz, D. & Mannucci, F. A search for the progenitors of two type Ia supernovae in NGC 1316. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 388, 421–428 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Nelemans, G., Voss, R., Roelofs, G. & Bassa, C. Limits on the X-ray and optical luminosity of the progenitor of the type Ia supernova 2007sr. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 388, 487–494 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Voss, R. & Nelemans, G. Discovery of the progenitor of the type Ia supernova 2007on. Nature 451, 802–804 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Munari, U. & Renzini, A. Are symbiotic stars the precursors of type Ia supernovae? Astrophys. J. 397, L87–L90 (1992)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    van den Heuvel, E. P. J., Bhattacharya, D., Nomoto, K. & Rappaport, S. A. Accreting white dwarf models for CAL 83, CAL 87, and other ultrasoft X-ray sources in the LMC. Astron. Astrophys. 262, 97–105 (1992)

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Liu, W.-M., Chen, W.-C., Wang, B. & Han, Z. W. Helium-star evolutionary channel to super-Chandrasekhar mass type Ia supernovae. Astron. Astrophys. 523, A3 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Yoon, S.-C. & Langer, N. The first binary star evolution model producing a Chandrasekhar mass white dwarf. Astron. Astrophys. 412, L53–L56 (2003)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Wizinowich, P. L. et al. The W. M. Keck Observatory laser guide star adaptive optics system: overview. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacif. 118, 297–309 (2006)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Hachisu, I. & Kato, M. Recurrent novae as a progenitor system of type Ia supernovae. I. RS Ophiuchi subclass: systems with a red giant companion. Astrophys. J. 558, 323–350 (2001)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Woudt, P. A. et al. The expanding bipolar shell of the helium nova V445 Puppis. Astrophys. J. 706, 738–746 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Thoroughgood, T. D., Dhillon, V. S., Littlefair, S. P., Marsh, T. R. & Smith, D. A. The mass of the white dwarf in the recurrent nova U Scorpii. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 327, 1323–1333 (2001)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Schaefer, B. E. Comprehensive photometric histories of all known Galactic recurrent novae. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 187, 275–373 (2010)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Greiner, J. Catalog of supersoft X-ray sources. N. Astron. 5, 137–141 (2000)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Di Stefano, R. The progenitors of type Ia supernovae. I. Are they supersoft sources? Astrophys. J. 712, 728–733 (2010)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Di Stefano, R. The progenitors of type Ia supernovae. II. Are they double-degenerate binaries? The symbiotic channel. Astrophys. J. 719, 474–482 (2010)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Yoon, S.-C., Podsiadlowski, P. & Rosswog, S. Remnant evolution after a carbon-oxygen white dwarf merger. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 380, 933–948 (2007)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Shen, K. J., Bildsten, L., Kasen, D. & Quataert, E. The long-term evolution of double white dwarf mergers. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.4036 (2011)

  25. 25

    Kasen, D. Seeing the collision of a supernova with its companion star. Astrophys. J. 708, 1025–1031 (2010)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Fryer, C. L. et al. Spectra of type Ia supernovae from double degenerate mergers. Astrophys. J. 725, 296–308 (2010)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Stetson, P. B. et al. The extragalactic distance scale key project. XVI. Cepheid variables in an inner field of M101. Astrophys. J. 508, 491–517 (1998)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Shappee, B. J. & Stanek, K. Z. A new Cepheid distance to the giant spiral M101 based on image subtraction of Hubble Space Telescope/Advanced Camera for Surveys observations. Astrophys. J. 733, 124–148 (2011)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Hachisu, I., Kato, M., Nomoto, K. & Umeda, H. A new evolutionary path to type Ia supernovae: a helium-rich supersoft x-ray source channel. Astrophys. J. 519, 314–323 (1999)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Torres, G. On the use of empirical bolometric corrections for stars. Astron. J. 140, 1158–1162 (2010)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Maoz and S. Starrfield for comments, and the staff of the W. M. Keck Observatory, especially J. Lyke and R. Campbell, for their assistance in obtaining the NIRC adaptive optics imaging. P.P. acknowledges discussions on symbiotic binaries with J. Mikolajewska. M.M.K. acknowledges support by NASA’s Hubble Fellowship and the Carnegie-Princeton Fellowship. J.S.B.’s group was partially supported by NASA. J.S.B., A.V.F., L.B. and S.W.J. acknowledge support from the US National Science Foundation. A.V.F.’s group at UC Berkeley, and the Katzman Automatic Imaging Telescope (KAIT) and its ongoing operation, have received financial assistance from NASA, Gary and Cynthia Bengier, the Richard & Rhoda Goldman Fund, the Sylvia and Jim Katzman Foundation, and the TABASGO Foundation. E.O.O. is supported by an Einstein Fellowship from NASA. M.M.S. and J.B. acknowledge the support of Hilary Lipsitz and the American Museum of Natural History for essential funding. M.S. acknowledges support from the Royal Society. Some of the data presented here were obtained at the W. M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute of Technology, the University of California, and NASA; the observatory was made possible by the generous financial support of the W. M. Keck Foundation. Observations were obtained with the Samuel Oschin Telescope at the Palomar Observatory as part of the Palomar Transient Factory project, a scientific collaboration between the California Institute of Technology, Columbia University, La Cumbres Observatory, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, the University of Oxford, and the Weizmann Institute of Science. The National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, provided staff, computational resources, and data storage for this project.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

W.L., J.S.B., S.W.J., C.M. and B.P. analysed the Hubble Space Telescope photometry in the context of progenitor limits. P.P. contributed the analysis of progenitor models. A.A.M., J.W.R. and S.B.C. analysed historical imaging from the Palomar Transient Factory (PTF) and KAIT in the context of nova limits. M.M.K. and K.J.S. provided the analysis of Spitzer observations. M.M.S. and J.B. provided analysis of the Hubble Space Telescope imaging. M.M.S. also contributed interpretation of the progenitor limits. N.R.B., E.O.O. and L.B. contributed analysis and interpretation of the historical X-ray imaging. D.P., R.M.Q., S.R.K., N.M.L., E.O.O., S.B.C., M.S., D.A.H., J.S.B., P.E.N., M.M.K., L.B. and K.M. were responsible for obtaining, reducing, and analysing the PTF observations. A.S. and H.-Y.S. obtained the Keck adaptive optics imaging and S.B.C. reduced and analysed those images. A.V.F., M.G., W.L. and J.M.S. were responsible for the KAIT imaging and analysis.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Weidong Li.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

The file contains Supplementary Text and Data, Supplementary Tables 1-5, Supplementary Figures 1-4 and additional references. (PDF 1907 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Li, W., Bloom, J., Podsiadlowski, P. et al. Exclusion of a luminous red giant as a companion star to the progenitor of supernova SN 2011fe. Nature 480, 348–350 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10646

Download citation

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing