Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Ejecta Wakes from Companion Interaction in Type Ia Supernova Remnants

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The reverse shock races down the low-density wake carved by a surviving companion, converges off-center, and pulls interstellar gas into the remnant's core, leaving an X-ray asymmetry that lasts thousands of years.

desk verdict Solid 3D study of companion wakes in Ia remnants, but the flashiest claim—ISM drawn to the center—rests on an untested density floor and a questionable wake extrapolation to r=0. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.18226 v1 pith:PBAANJ2D submitted 2024-12-24 astro-ph.HE

Logan J. Prust , Gabriel Kumar , Lars Bildsten This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords TypeIasupernovaesupernovaremnantscompanioninteractionreverseshockinterstellarmediumentrainmentX-rayemissionhydrodynamicsimulationwhitedwarfbinaries
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to show that the conical wake a surviving companion carves out of type Ia supernova ejecta controls the remnant's late-time appearance. In hydrodynamical simulations, the wake is underdense, so the reverse shock crosses it early, converges off-center, and draws interstellar medium all the way to the remnant's center. That inward channel plus a ring vortex around the wake keeps the remnant's X-ray emission measurably asymmetric for thousands of years, even after the forward shock itself has become spherical. If correct, this gives an observational route to identifying which type Ia remnants had a surviving companion rather than a merger.

What carries the argument

The central object is the companion-interaction wake: the cone of low-density, higher-velocity ejecta left behind after the supernova blast collides with the surviving donor star. Its underdensity is the mechanism that lets the reverse shock travel quickly into the remnant, converge off-center, and entrain interstellar gas toward the center. A second mechanism, transverse flow of shocked ejecta driven by pressure gradients, refills the wake on roughly a sound-crossing time and restores sphericity to the forward shock without erasing the asymmetry in the core. The numerical machinery is a two-stage calculation: Athena++ for the ejecta-companion collision, followed by the uniformly expanding-grid code Sprout for the 3-D remnant evolution to 3000 years.

What would settle it

High-resolution X-ray spectroscopy of the central few parsecs of a young type Ia remnant, such as SNR 0509-67.5, should detect ISM line emission if the claim holds; if no interstellar material is found at the center and the reverse-shock ring is centered on the explosion point instead of offset, the claim would be ruled out.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the companion-interaction wake, not the forward shock, determines the long-lived asymmetry of a type Ia supernova remnant. In both the double-degenerate model simulated with Athena++ and the single-degenerate model built from the Kasen (2010) wake fit, the wake is a cone of low-density, shock-heated, slightly accelerated ejecta. Because it is underdense, the reverse shock traverses the wake sooner than elsewhere, converges off-center (colliding with the reverse shock from the other side roughly 2 pc from the explosion), rebounds, and drives high-velocity gas back up the wake. A passive tracer shows interstellar gas is pulled through the wake and reaches the center of the remnant in both models. The forward shock becomes spherical by about a thousand years because transverse pressure gradients push shocked ejecta into the wake, but the reverse shock, the ejecta distribution, and the X-ray emission remain asymmetric.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the fitted wake density never falls below 1% of the unperturbed ejecta density in the double-degenerate model (and 10% in the single-degenerate model); if a real wake is denser than that floor, the reverse shock would slow down and interstellar gas might not reach the remnant's center.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Thermal X-ray maps of type Ia remnants can remain measurably asymmetric for more than a thousand years, so the absence of an early spherical remnant does not by itself require a merger.
  • Interstellar gas can be transported to the center of a young type Ia remnant through the wake, so central X-ray spectra may show ISM-like abundances mixed with ejecta.
  • A forward shock that is spherical at late times does not imply the underlying ejecta are spherically distributed; the contact discontinuity and reverse shock stay off-center.
  • The X-ray asymmetry is strongest when the remnant is viewed perpendicular to the wake, but it is still visible from other angles, so viewing geometry must be folded into any comparison with observations.
  • Wider binaries with smaller donor solid angles produce increasingly spherical X-ray morphologies, meaning a symmetric remnant does not rule out a surviving companion.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If interstellar gas really reaches the center through the wake, then spatially resolved X-ray line-ratio maps of the cores of nearby type Ia remnants could directly test the surviving-companion scenario, because a merger remnant should lack this inward ISM channel.
  • The finding that the reverse shock converges off-center predicts a central hot region offset from the explosion point; high-resolution Doppler mapping of X-ray lines could locate the companion's original direction.
  • A natural numerical extension is to repeat the remnant evolution with the density floor in the wake fit raised or lowered, since the ISM-to-center result depends on how empty the wake is allowed to become.
  • Analogous wake dynamics may appear in other transients with a surviving companion, although the different ejecta structure would change the timing of reverse-shock convergence.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the late-time evolution of Type Ia supernova remnants that contain a low-density wake carved by the interaction of the supernova ejecta with a surviving binary companion. The authors first run Athena++ simulations of the ejecta-companion collision for a double-degenerate (double-detonation) model, construct analytic fits to the resulting density structure, and compare with the Kasen (2010) single-degenerate fit. These structures are mapped into the expanding-grid code Sprout and evolved from 10 yr to 3000 yr. The reported results are that the forward shock becomes spherical by roughly 1000 yr owing to transverse flow, the reverse shock crosses the low-density wake, converges off-center, and draws interstellar medium into the remnant center, and that Rayleigh-Taylor plumes at the wake edge create a toroidal ejecta structure with observable thermal X-ray asymmetries persisting for thousands of years.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides a concrete observational discriminant between remnants of Type Ia supernovae with a surviving companion and remnants from mergers, at ages of order 10^3 yr, tied to off-center reverse-shock convergence and deep ISM ingress. The work is a forward simulation rather than a fit to observed remnants, uses standard publicly available codes, and is transparent about its free parameters and numerical choices; the code forks are made available for reproduction. The main value is the falsifiable prediction of a long-lived X-ray asymmetry and its viewing-angle dependence. The strength of the claim is currently limited by the sensitivity of the initial wake structure to unverified assumptions, as detailed below.

major comments (2)
  1. [Appendix A, §5.3] The ad hoc density floor and the extrapolation of the fitted low-density cone to r = 0 are load-bearing for the central claim of §5.3 that the reverse shock traverses the wake and draws ISM to the remnant center. Physically, the wake is carved downstream of the donor at a = 0.269 R_sun and should not extend interior to the homologously expanded donor radius (about 0.002 pc at 10 yr and 0.2 pc at 1000 yr); in that interior region, unperturbed ejecta is roughly 100 times denser than the imposed floor. Because the reverse-shock speed and the advection of ISM into the center are controlled by this axial density contrast, the center-reaching behavior is not robust until at least one sensitivity test is provided: for example, a higher floor, a wake truncated at the donor radius, or a direct mapping of the Athena++ profile instead of the fitted form.
  2. [§2, §4] No resolution study is presented for either code. The Athena++ collision run uses only 10 azimuthal cells, and the Sprout remnant runs use a single 512x512x1024 grid. The claims of large Rayleigh-Taylor plumes around the wake edge and a toroidal ejecta structure (§5.3 and Figs. 6, 7, 11) are morphological results that could depend on resolution and on the suppression of non-axisymmetric modes. Please add a resolution test (for example, at least one coarser and one finer Sprout run, and ideally a check of the Athena++ azimuthal resolution) or otherwise bound the numerical uncertainty of these features.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title] The title contains a stray space: 'Ejecta W akes' should be 'Ejecta Wakes'.
  2. [§4] The sentence defining 'unperturbed' appears to have reversed wording: it says the term refers to the portion of the ejecta altered by the companion interaction, but the subsequent usage refers to ejecta unaffected by the companion.
  3. [§5.3] The text contains a typo, 'morpohology', which should be 'morphology'.
  4. [§2, Eq. (6)] Equation (6) is followed by an empty equation number (7); the numbering should be checked.
  5. [§5.4] The statement that the semi-analytic model gives the correct reverse-shock convergence time 'only due to our choice of aRS' is an important limitation and should be flagged more prominently in the discussion, since Figure 10 could otherwise be read as independent validation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central remnant-phase claims are emergent outputs of a forward simulation, not fits to those claims.

full rationale

The derivation chain is a forward calculation: Athena++ simulations of the ejecta-companion collision produce the wake structure; Appendix A fits map that structure into the Sprout initial condition; Sprout evolves the remnant to 3000 yr; X-ray maps are line integrals of rho^2. The claims that the reverse shock traverses the wake, converges off-center, and draws ISM to the center are outputs of this evolution, not parameters fitted to those outputs. The paper explicitly flags its semi-analytic free parameters: 'The semi-analytic model still gives the correct convergence time, but only due to our choice of ˜aRS' (Sec 5.4), so no fitted prediction is disguised as a result. The Appendix A floor 'We also enforce ρ(r, θ) ≥ 0.01ρG(r) so that the density does not drop too low at θ = 0' is an imposed initial-condition regularization whose sensitivity is not studied; that is a modeling-robustness limitation, not a circular step, because the floor is not tuned to the predicted ISM-to-center outcome. The Gaussian ejecta profile is taken from Wong et al. (2024), a same-group citation (Bildsten is a coauthor), but this profile is not the source of the wake asymmetry—the wake is simulated here—and the citation is not used to forbid alternatives or to import a uniqueness theorem. The paper also checks against independent prior simulations (García-Senz et al. 2012; Gray et al. 2016; Ferrand et al. 2022), supporting the external content of the result.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the numerically simulated wake density profile, which is approximated by fitted functions with an ad hoc density floor, and on standard hydrodynamic modeling assumptions. The semi-analytic comparison parameters are free but not used to support the central claim beyond validation.

free parameters (5)
  • wake density floor = 0.01 rho_G (relative to unperturbed ejecta density)
    Ad hoc floor imposed in the fitted ejecta profile (Appendix A) to keep the density from dropping too low at theta=0. Directly affects reverse shock speed and ISM penetration into the wake.
  • SD wake filling factor fh = 0.1
    From the Kasen (2010) fit used for the SD model; sets the density inside the wake, controlling how fast the reverse shock traverses it.
  • lED (lead factor) = 1.1
    Free parameter in the Truelove & McKee (1999) semi-analytic model used for comparison; not part of the central claim.
  • phiED (pressure ratio) = 0.5
    Free parameter in the semi-analytic ED model; chosen rather than derived.
  • aRS (reverse shock acceleration) = -0.12 Eej Mej^(-4/3) rho_ISM^(1/3)
    Free parameter in the ST-phase semi-analytic model. The authors note the convergence time is only correct due to this choice.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The SNIa ejecta is well-described by the Gaussian velocity profile of Wong et al. (2024) with Mej=0.9 Msun and Eej=0.97e51 erg.
    Used as the initial condition for the Athena++ collision simulation (Section 2.1). If the real ejecta structure differs (e.g., broken power law or clumpy), the wake properties change.
  • domain assumption The companion can be modeled as a rigid, reflective sphere that survives the explosion.
    Section 2.2 neglects donor transverse motion, mass stripping, and internal shocks. Justified by Wong et al. (2024) but not tested here.
  • domain assumption At t=1000 s the ejecta is homologous and can be extrapolated ballistically to t=10 yr.
    Section 3.1 assumes internal energy is negligible by the remnant phase and each parcel expands homologously (rho ~ t^-3).
  • domain assumption The ISM is uniform with density 6.31e-25 g/cm3 (n ~ 0.38 cm^-3), matched to SNR 0509-67.5.
    Section 4. Real ISM gradients or clumps would alter shock trajectories and morphology.
  • standard math The Euler equations with ideal gas plus radiation pressure closure are an adequate description.
    Standard hydrodynamics; the code solves these equations. The EOS includes LTE radiation pressure.
  • ad hoc to paper Post-shock RT instabilities and mixing are adequately captured at the chosen resolution and without the low-Mach correction.
    Section 4: the authors disabled the LM HLLC solver because it erroneously triggered in the wake, and did not run a resolution study. Carbuncles form at grid-aligned shocks but are asserted to have negligible impact.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Ejecta Wakes from Companion Interaction in Type Ia Supernova Remnants." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PBAANJ2D

@misc{pith2026241218226,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Ejecta Wakes from Companion Interaction in Type Ia Supernova Remnants},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PBAANJ2D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.18226}
}
read the original abstract

Type Ia supernovae are triggered by accretion onto a white dwarf from a companion which is most likely Roche lobe-filling at the time of the explosion. The collision between the ejecta and a surviving companion carves out a conical wake, which could manifest as an asymmetry when the ejecta reaches the remnant phase. We simulate the companion interaction using the Athena++ hydrodynamics solver to determine the ejecta structure for a double-degenerate type Ia supernova. Ejecta in the wake is of lower density and higher velocity than the unperturbed ejecta. We then evolve the ejecta for several thousand years using the expanding-grid code Sprout. The forward shock within the wake is initially indented, but becomes spherical after roughly a thousand years due to transverse motion of shocked ejecta that fills the wake. The reverse shock travels quickly within the wake, leading to an off-center convergence of the reverse shock and leaving the remnant with an asymmetrical core. This also draws material from the interstellar medium deep into the remnant, eventually reaching the center. Large Rayleigh-Taylor plumes are found around the edge of the wake, creating a toroidal structure composed primarily of ejecta. Estimates of the thermal X-ray emission show that such remnants exhibit observable asymmetries for thousands of years.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.18226 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Ratio of total pressure (gas + radiation) to ram pressure (solid green line, left axis) and gas pressure to total pressure (dashed blue line, right axis) at the outer radial boundary of the domain at t = 500 s. The total pressure is negligible compared to the ram pressure for all θ, confirming that the gas is in homology. The gas outside of the wake remains firmly gas-pressure dominated, while much of the wake is ra… view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Slices of density (top) and temperature (bottom) at the ϕ = 0 plane in our fiducial Athena++ run, showing the bow shock and recompression shock. (gas + radiation) to ram pressure which is low for all of the ejecta, confirming that it is in homology as it exits the domain. The fluid velocity in the polar direction ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Ratio of polar to radial velocities at t = 500 s, showing discontinuities at both shocks with a rarefaction wave in between. For large r, vθ/vr < 0.01 is satisfied. ternal energy is far more complicated due to radioactive heating from 56Ni, though for our purposes this is irrele￾vant as the internal energy is effectively zero by the start of the remnant phase. The results of this extrapolation are shown in [PITH_FU… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Homologously-evolved ejecta and our fit for the ejecta surface (red line). The velocity of the unperturbed ejecta is exceeded by the ejecta which passed through the bow shock, and is higher still for ejecta which passed through both shocks. with a fitting function (red…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Density, z-velocity, ejecta fraction, and X-ray emission measure for the fiducial DD model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Density, z-velocity, ejecta fraction, and X-ray emission measure for the SD model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Shock surfaces and contact discontinuity (defined here as χ = 0.5) at t = 130 yr (solid lines) and t = 542 yr (dotted lines) in the DD model. At both times, the indenta￾tion of the FS and protrusion of the CD toward the FS are visible. 5.3. Contact Discontinuity The sh…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison between our 1-D (solid lines), 3-D (dots), and semi-analytic (dashed lines) predictions for the shock trajectories within the wake of the SD model. Also shown are the transition from the ED phase to the ST phase (blue line) and the sound-crossing time of th…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Emission measure for the DD model at θobs = 90◦ (left), θobs = 45◦ (center), and θobs = 0◦ (right). For reference, at this time the FS has a radius of 10 pc [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: X-ray emission measures for our Athena++ models with orbital separation increasing to the right: η = 1 (left), η = √ 3 (center), and η = 3 (right). As the orbital separation increases, the X-ray morphology becomes spherical, as expected. The viewing angle is θobs = 90…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Positions of important features in the density profiles at t = 10000 s in our fiducial Athena++ model, all of which can be fit to power laws (solid lines). A. FITTING FUNCTIONS FOR EJECTA STRUCTURE To map our Athena++ data into Sprout, we fit the density structure, th…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Histogram of density fluctuations at t = tf for the HLLC solver (orange) and the HLLC solver with the upwind-preserving scheme (blue). Godinaud, L., Acero, F., Decourchelle, A., & Ballet, J. 2023, A&A, 680, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346954 Gray, W. J., Raskin, C.…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    44z ޿aÆѿ /_N2eX =m ( X9 6ԅt-#ZEr8x 5kfR 34ȨMp 0x`4i= |l DӦMYbEώ8J* :u :8;;ӬY3 9b ;B V ݻw _ t=**JӇS ^|E SvF :ĥK ^(( !Sd

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    P., Hovey , L., & Eriksen , K

    Arunachalam , P., Hughes , J. P., Hovey , L., & Eriksen , K. 2022, , 938, 121, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac927c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac927c 2022

  5. [5]

    B., White , C

    Bauer , E. B., White , C. J., & Bildsten , L. 2019, , 887, 68, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4ea4

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4ea4 2019

  6. [6]

    2017, , 465, 2060, 10.1093/mnras/stw2737

    Boehner , P., Plewa , T., & Langer , N. 2017, , 465, 2060, 10.1093/mnras/stw2737

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2737 2017

  7. [7]

    J., Deems, S., Furlani, T

    Boerner, T. J., Deems, S., Furlani, T. R., Knuth, S. L., & Towns, J. 2023, in Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing, PEARC '23 (New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery), 173–176, 10.1145/3569951.3597559

    arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    J., Townsley , D

    Boos , S. J., Townsley , D. M., & Shen , K. J. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.08011, 10.48550/arXiv.2401.08011

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.08011 2024

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Duffell , P. C. 2016, , 821, 76, 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/76

    2016 doi

  2. [10]

    J., Chandra , V., et al

    El-Badry , K., Shen , K. J., Chandra , V., et al. 2023, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 6, 28, 10.21105/astro.2306.03914

    2023 arXiv

  3. [11]

    C., et al

    Ferrand , G., Tanikawa , A., Warren , D. C., et al. 2022, , 930, 92, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5c58

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    Fleischmann , N., Adami , S., & Adams , N. A. 2020, Journal of Computational Physics, 423, 109762, 10.1016/j.jcp.2020.109762

    2020

  5. [13]

    2012, , 745, 75, 10.1088/0004-637X/745/1/75

    Garc \' a-Senz , D., Badenes , C., & Serichol , N. 2012, , 745, 75, 10.1088/0004-637X/745/1/75

    2012 doi

  6. [14]

    2023, , 680, A80, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346954

    Godinaud , L., Acero , F., Decourchelle , A., & Ballet , J. 2023, , 680, A80, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346954

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    J., Raskin , C., & Owen , J

    Gray , W. J., Raskin , C., & Owen , J. M. 2016, , 833, 62, 10.3847/1538-4357/833/1/62

    2016 doi

  8. [16]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    2018, , 864, 119, 10.3847/1538-4357/aad6a0

    Hirai , R., Podsiadlowski , P., & Yamada , S. 2018, , 864, 119, 10.3847/1538-4357/aad6a0

    2018 doi

  10. [18]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  11. [19]

    2010, , 708, 1025, 10.1088/0004-637X/708/2/1025

    Kasen , D. 2010, , 708, 1025, 10.1088/0004-637X/708/2/1025

    2010 doi

  12. [20]

    K., & Han , Z

    Liu , Z.-W., R \"o pke , F. K., & Han , Z. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 082001, 10.1088/1674-4527/acd89e

    2023 doi

  13. [21]

    M., R \"o pke , F

    Liu , Z.-W., Tauris , T. M., R \"o pke , F. K., et al. 2015, , 584, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/201526757

    2015 doi

  14. [22]

    A., Ramirez-Ruiz , E., Huppenkothen , D., Badenes , C., & Pooley , D

    Lopez , L. A., Ramirez-Ruiz , E., Huppenkothen , D., Badenes , C., & Pooley , D. A. 2011, , 732, 114, 10.1088/0004-637X/732/2/114

    2011 doi

  15. [23]

    Mandal , S., & Duffell , P. C. 2023, , 269, 30, 10.3847/1538-4365/acfc19

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    C., Polin , A., & Milisavljevic , D

    Mandal , S., Duffell , P. C., Polin , A., & Milisavljevic , D. 2023, , 956, 130, 10.3847/1538-4357/acf9fb

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.12264, 10.48550/arXiv.2403.12264

    ---. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.12264, 10.48550/arXiv.2403.12264

    2024 doi arXiv

  18. [26]

    2000, , 128, 615, 10.1086/313392

    Marietta , E., Burrows , A., & Fryxell , B. 2000, , 128, 615, 10.1086/313392

    2000 doi

  19. [27]

    2014, Journal of Computational Physics, 270, 784, 10.1016/j.jcp.2014.04.001

    Mignone , A. 2014, Journal of Computational Physics, 270, 784, 10.1016/j.jcp.2014.04.001

    2014 doi

  20. [28]

    Mihalas , D., & Mihalas , B. W. 1984, Foundations of radiation hydrodynamics

    1984

  21. [29]

    Q., Moon , D.-S., Drout , M

    Ni , Y. Q., Moon , D.-S., Drout , M. R., et al. 2023, , 959, 132, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0640

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    P., Mushotzky , R., Shaya , E

    Olling , R. P., Mushotzky , R., Shaya , E. J., et al. 2015, , 521, 332, 10.1038/nature14455

    2015 doi

  23. [31]

    2015, , 449, 942, 10.1093/mnras/stv337

    Papish , O., Soker , N., Garc \' a-Berro , E., & Aznar-Sigu \'a n , G. 2015, , 449, 942, 10.1093/mnras/stv337

    2015 doi

  24. [32]

    Picquenot , A., Holland-Ashford , T., & Williams , B. J. 2024, , 687, A28, 10.1051/0004-6361/202449155

    2024 doi

  25. [33]

    R., Ghavamian , P., Laming , J

    Seitenzahl , I. R., Ghavamian , P., Laming , J. M., & Vogt , F. P. A. 2019, , 123, 041101, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.041101

    2019 doi

  26. [34]

    J., Kasen , D., Miles , B

    Shen , K. J., Kasen , D., Miles , B. J., & Townsley , D. M. 2018 a , , 854, 52, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa8de

    2018 doi

  27. [35]

    J., Boubert , D., G \"a nsicke , B

    Shen , K. J., Boubert , D., G \"a nsicke , B. T., et al. 2018 b , , 865, 15, 10.3847/1538-4357/aad55b

    2018 doi

  28. [36]

    V., Arunachalam , P., Kerzendorf , W., et al

    Shields , J. V., Arunachalam , P., Kerzendorf , W., et al. 2023, , 950, L10, 10.3847/2041-8213/acd6a0

    2023 doi

  29. [37]

    M., Tomida, K., White, C

    Stone, J. M., Tomida, K., White, C. J., & Felker, K. G. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 249, 4, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab929b

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    2018, , 868, 90, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae9ee

    Tanikawa , A., Nomoto , K., & Nakasato , N. 2018, , 868, 90, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae9ee

    2018 doi

  31. [39]

    2019, , 885, 103, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab46b6

    Tanikawa , A., Nomoto , K., Nakasato , N., & Maeda , K. 2019, , 885, 103, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab46b6

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    1950, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 201, 159, 10.1098/rspa.1950.0049

    Taylor , G. 1950, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 201, 159, 10.1098/rspa.1950.0049

    1950

  33. [41]

    2002, , 385, 337, 10.1051/0004-6361:20011817

    Teyssier , R. 2002, , 385, 337, 10.1051/0004-6361:20011817

    2002 doi

  34. [42]

    F., Spruce , M., & Speares , W

    Toro , E. F., Spruce , M., & Speares , W. 1994, Shock Waves, 4, 25, 10.1007/BF01414629

    1994 doi

  35. [43]

    K., & McKee , C

    Truelove , J. K., & McKee , C. F. 1999, , 120, 299, 10.1086/313176

    1999 doi

  36. [44]

    2012, , 20, 49, 10.1007/s00159-011-0049-1

    Vink , J. 2012, , 20, 49, 10.1007/s00159-011-0049-1

    2012 doi

  37. [45]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  38. [46]

    J., Chomiuk , L., Hewitt , J

    Williams , B. J., Chomiuk , L., Hewitt , J. W., et al. 2016, , 823, L32, 10.3847/2041-8205/823/2/L32

    2016 doi

  39. [47]

    Wong , T. L. S., White , C., & Bildsten , L. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.00125. 2408.00125

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.14301, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.14301

    XRISM Collaboration . 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.14301, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.14301

    2024 doi arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.