We report the discovery by the Robotic Optical Transient Search Experiment (ROTSE-IIIb) telescope of SN 2008es, an overluminous supernova (SN) at z = 0.205 with a peak visual magnitude of −22.2. We present multiwavelength follow-up observations with the Swift satellite and several ground-based optical telescopes. The ROTSE-IIIb observations constrain the time of explosion to be 23 ± 1 rest-frame days before maximum. The linear decay of the optical light curve, and the combination of a symmetric, broad Hα emission line profile with broad P Cygni Hβ and Na i λ5892 profiles, are properties reminiscent of the bright Type II-L SNe 1979C and 1980K, although SN 2008es is greater than 10 times more luminous. The host galaxy is undetected in pre-supernova Sloan Digital Sky Survey images, and similar to Type II-L SN 2005ap (the most luminous SN ever observed), the host is most likely a dwarf galaxy with M r > − 17. Swift Ultraviolet/Optical Telescope observations in combination with Palomar 60 inch photometry measure the spectral energy distribution of the SN from 200 to 800 nm to be a blackbody that cools from 14000 K at the time of the optical peak to 6400 K 65 days later. The inferred blackbody radius is in good agreement with the radius expected for the expansion speed measured from the broad lines (10000 km s −1 ). The bolometric luminosity at the optical peak is 2.8 × 10 44 erg s −1 , with a total energy radiated over the next 65 days of 5.6 × 10 50 erg. The exceptional luminosity of SN 2008es requires an efficient conversion of kinetic energy produced from the core-collapse explosion into radiation. We favor a model in which the large peak luminosity is a consequence of the core collapse of a progenitor star with a low-mass extended hydrogen envelope and a stellar wind with a density close to the upper limit on the mass-loss rate measured from the lack of an X-ray detection by the Swift X-Ray Telescope.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2008 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: