Skip to main content

A Challenging Object: Supernova Impostor SN 2009ip Is Back

We recently released a significant update to the backend systems for the AAVSO website. While most of the bugs introduced by this update have been fixed, there may still be problems we haven't fixed. If you run into a problem, please email webmaster@aavso.org
53 replies [Last post]
Larger Errors Due to Increased Sky Brightness
uis01's picture
uis01
Offline
Joined: 2010-07-25

We haven't noted any verifiable short term activity before this point in time.  Frankly the up and down in our data over the last few days probably isn't real.  We've had larger errors in the solution because of how faint the target has gotten and higher sky brightness  (the moon).

Powering the Second 2012 Outburst of SN 2009ip by Repeating Bina
SXN's picture
SXN
Offline
Joined: 2010-03-12

There is a new paper out on this interesting object- the authors propose a merger between an LBV and a smaller compact companion- wild!

Powering the Second 2012 Outburst of SN 2009ip by Repeating Binary Interaction

Abstract: We propose that the major 2012 outburst of the supernova impostor SN 2009ip was powered by an extended and repeated interaction between the Luminous Blue Variable (LBV) and a more compact companion. Motivated by the recent analysis of Margutti et al. (2013) of ejected clumps and shells we consider two scenarios. In both scenarios the major 2012b outburst of ~5 * 10^{49} erg was powered by accretion of ~ 2-5 solar masses onto the companion during a periastron passage (the first passage) of the binary system approximately 20 days before the observed maximum of the light curve. In the first, the surviving companion scenario, the companion was not destructed and still exists in the system after the outburst. It ejected partial shells (or collimated outflows or clumps) for two consecutive periastron passages after the major one. The orbital period was reduced from ~38 days to ~25 days as a result of the mass transfer process that took place during the first periastron passage. In the second, the merger scenario, some partial shells/clumps were ejected also in a second periastron passage that took place ~20 days after the first one. After this second periastron passage the companion dived too deep into the LBV envelope to launch more outflows, and merged with the LBV.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.7681

Thanks Mike. I'm getting
uis01's picture
uis01
Offline
Joined: 2010-07-25

Thanks Mike.

I'm getting close to finishing a paper with Josch Hambsch, TG Tan, and Ivan Curtis as co-authors.  We've been in touch with Kashi and Soker and you'll notice our paper in prep is referenced in that work.

AAVSO 49 Bay State Rd. Cambridge, MA 02138 aavso@aavso.org 617-354-0484