We present detailed optical photometry for 25 Type Ibc supernovae (SNe Ibc) within d ≈ 150 Mpc obtained with the robotic Palomar 60 inch telescope in 2004–2007. This study represents the first uniform, systematic, and statistical sample of multi-band SNe Ibc light curves available to date. We correct the light curves for host galaxy extinction using a new technique based on the photometric color evolution, namely, we show that the ( V − R ) color of extinction-corrected SNe Ibc at Δ t ≈ 10 days after V -band maximum is tightly distributed, 〈( V − R ) V 10 〉 = 0.26 ± 0.06 mag. Using this technique, we find that SNe Ibc typically suffer from significant host galaxy extinction, 〈 E ( B − V )〉 ≈ 0.4 mag. A comparison of the extinction-corrected light curves for helium-rich (Type Ib) and helium-poor (Type Ic) SNe reveals that they are statistically indistinguishable, both in luminosity and decline rate. We report peak absolute magnitudes of 〈 M R 〉 = −17.9 ± 0.9 mag and 〈 M R 〉 = −18.3 ± 0.6 mag for SNe Ib and Ic, respectively. Focusing on the broad-lined (BL) SNe Ic, we find that they are more luminous than the normal SNe Ibc sample, 〈 M R 〉 = −19.0 ± 1.1 mag, with a probability of only 1.6% that they are drawn from the same population of explosions. By comparing the peak absolute magnitudes of SNe Ic-BL with those inferred for local engine-driven explosions (GRB-SN 1998bw, XRF-SN 2006aj, and SN 2009bb) we find a 25% probability that relativistic SNe are drawn from the overall SNe Ic-BL population. Finally, we fit analytic models to the light curves to derive typical 56 Ni masses of M Ni ≈ 0.2 and 0.5 M ☉ for SNe Ibc and SNe Ic-BL, respectively. With reasonable assumptions for the photospheric velocities, we further extract kinetic energy and ejecta mass values of M ej ≈ 2 M ☉ and E K ≈ 10 51 erg for SNe Ibc, while for SNe Ic-BL we find higher values, M ej ≈ 5 M ☉ and E K ≈ 10 52 erg. We discuss the implications for the progenitors of SNe Ibc and their relation to those of engine-driven explosions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Drout et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: