1: \documentclass[preprint]{aastex}
2: %
3: % Time-stamp: <2000-08-25 13:37:51 baron>
4: %
5:
6:
7: %\usepackage{lmacs}
8: % GENERAL DEFINITIONS
9: % Time-stamp: <2000-01-27 15:34:57 baron>
10:
11: \def\ifundefined#1{\expandafter\ifx\csname#1\endcsname\relax}
12:
13: \newif\ifpdf
14: \ifx\pdfoutput\undefined
15: \pdffalse % we aren't running pdflatex
16: \else
17: \pdfoutput=1 % we are running pdflatex
18: \pdftrue
19: \fi
20:
21:
22: \def\la{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$<$}}}}
23: \def\ga{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$>$}}}}
24:
25: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}}
26: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}
27:
28: \ifundefined{ensuremath}\def\ensuremath#1{\relax\ifmmode{#1}}
29: \else${#1}$\fi\else\relax\fi
30: \ifundefined{nuc}\def\nuc#1#2{\relax\ifmmode{}^{#1}{\protect\text{#2}}
31: \else${}^{#1}$#2\fi}\else\relax\fi
32: %\ifundefined{nuc}\def\nuc#1#2{\relax\ensuremath{{}^{#1}}}%
33: %{\protect\text{#2}}\else${}^{#1}$#2\fi}\else\relax\fi
34: \def\doublespace{\setlength{\baselineskip}{23pt}}
35: \def\singlespace{\setlength{\baselineskip}{14pt}}
36: \newcommand{\etal}{et al.}
37: \newcommand{\gcm}{g~cm$^{-3}$}
38: \newcommand{\kmps}{km~s$^{-1}$}
39: \newcommand{\is}{s$^{-1}$}
40: \newcommand{\iyr}{yr$^{-1}$}
41: \newcommand{\msol}{\ensuremath{{\textrm{M}_\odot}}}
42: \newcommand{\foe}{\ensuremath{10^{51}}}
43: \newcommand{\nni}{\nuc{56}{Ni}}
44: \newcommand{\xni}{\ensuremath{\textrm{X}_{\textrm{Ni}}}}
45: \def\ang{\hbox{\AA}}
46: \def\Tmod{\ensuremath{T_{\textrm{model}}}}
47: \def\Teff{\ensuremath{T_{\textrm{model}}}}
48: \def\teff{\ensuremath{T_{\textrm{model}}}}
49: \def\tstd{\ensuremath{\tau_{\textrm{std}}}}
50: \def\Rzero{\ensuremath{R_0}}
51: \newcommand{\vno}{\ensuremath{v_0}}
52: \def\alog#1{\times 10^{#1}}
53: \newcommand{\phx}{\texttt{PHOENIX}}
54: \newcommand{\articlesize}{
55: \doublespace
56: \setlength{\textwidth}{6.5in}
57: \setlength{\textheight}{8.4in}
58: \voffset=-0.75in
59: \hoffset=-0.55in}
60:
61:
62:
63: \citestyle{aa}
64:
65: \begin{document}
66:
67: %
68: %
69: \bibliographystyle{apj}
70:
71: \title{Analysis of the Type IIn Supernova 1998S: Effects of
72: Circumstellar Interaction on Observed Spectra}
73:
74: \author{{Eric~J.~Lentz\altaffilmark{1}}, {E.~Baron\altaffilmark{1}}, {Peter Lundqvist\altaffilmark{2}},
75: {David~Branch\altaffilmark{1}}, {Peter~H. Hauschildt\altaffilmark{3}},
76: {Claes Fransson\altaffilmark{2}},
77: {Peter Garnavich\altaffilmark{4}},
78: {Nate Bastian\altaffilmark{1,5}},
79: {Alexei~V.~Filippenko\altaffilmark{6}}, {R.~P.~Kirshner\altaffilmark{7}},
80: {P.~M.~Challis\altaffilmark{7}}, {S.~Jha\altaffilmark{7}},
81: {Bruno Leibundgut\altaffilmark{8}}, {R. McCray\altaffilmark{9}},
82: {E. Michael \altaffilmark{9}},
83: {Nino Panagia\altaffilmark{10}}, {M.~M.~Phillips\altaffilmark{11}},
84: {C.~S.~J.~Pun\altaffilmark{12}}, {Brian Schmidt\altaffilmark{13}},
85: {George Sonneborn\altaffilmark{12}},
86: {N.~B.~Suntzeff\altaffilmark{14}},
87: {L.~Wang\altaffilmark{15}}, and {J.~C.~Wheeler\altaffilmark{15}}}
88:
89:
90: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of
91: Oklahoma, 440 W. Brooks, Norman, OK~73019-0261}
92:
93: \altaffiltext{2}{Stockholm Observatory, SE--133~36 Saltsj\"obaden,
94: Sweden}
95:
96: \altaffiltext{3}{Department of Physics and Astronomy \& Center for
97: Simulational Physics,
98: University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602}
99:
100:
101: \altaffiltext{4}{Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Notre Dame, 225 Nieuwland
102: Science Hall, Notre Dame, IN 45656}
103:
104: \altaffiltext{5}{Dept. of Astronomy, Univ. of Wisconsin,
105: 475 N. Charter St., Madison, WI 53706}
106:
107:
108: \altaffiltext{6}{Department of Astronomy, University of California,
109: Berkeley, CA~94720--3411}
110:
111: \altaffiltext{7}{Harvard--Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics,
112: 60~Garden St., Cambridge, MA~02138}
113:
114: %\altaffiltext{8}{Dept. of Astronomy, Univ. of Virginia, P.O. Box 3818,
115: %Charlottesville, VA 22903}
116:
117: \altaffiltext{8}{European Southern Observatory,
118: Karl-Schwarzschild-Strasse 2, D-85748 Garching, Germany}
119:
120: \altaffiltext{9}{JILA, Univ. of Colorado,
121: Boulder, CO 80309}
122:
123: \altaffiltext{10}{Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin
124: Drive, Baltimore, MD~21218 (on assignment from Space Science
125: Department of ESA)}
126:
127: \altaffiltext{11}{Carnegie Inst. of Washington,
128: Las Campanas Obs.,
129: Casilla 601, Chile}
130:
131: \altaffiltext{12}{Laboratory for Astronomy and Solar Physics,
132: NASA/GSFC, Code~681, Greenbelt, MD~20771}
133:
134: \altaffiltext{13}{Mount Stromlo Obs, Australian National Univ.
135: Private Bag,
136: Weston Creek P.O, ACT 2611, Australia}
137:
138: \altaffiltext{14}{CTIO, NOAO, Casilla~603, La~Serena, Chile}
139:
140: \altaffiltext{15}{Department of Astronomy, University of Texas,
141: Austin, TX~78712}
142:
143: \begin{abstract}
144: We present spectral analysis of early observations of the Type~IIn
145: supernova 1998S using the general non-local thermodynamic equilibrium
146: atmosphere code {\tt PHOENIX}. We model both the underlying
147: supernova spectrum and the overlying circumstellar interaction region
148: and produce spectra in good agreement with observations.
149: The early spectra are well fit by lines produced primarily in the
150: circumstellar region itself, and later spectra are due primarily
151: to the supernova ejecta. Intermediate spectra are affected by both
152: regions. A mass-loss rate of order $\dot M \sim
153: 0.0001-0.001$\msol~yr$^{-1}$ is inferred for a wind speed of
154: $100-1000$~\kmps. We
155: discuss how future self-consistent models will better clarify the
156: underlying progenitor structure.
157: \end{abstract}
158:
159: \section{Introduction}
160: SN 1998S was discovered on Mar. 3 UT by Zhou Wan \citep{IAUC6829}
161: as part of the Beijing Astronomical Observatory (BAO) Supernova Survey
162: \citep{IAUC6612}. The discovery was confirmed by the Katzman
163: Automatic Imaging Telescope (KAIT) during the Lick Observatory
164: Supernova Search \citep{IAUC6627,flipper00}. SN 1998S is located in
165: NGC 3877, a
166: spiral galaxy classified as SA, with a heliocentric velocity of
167: 902~\kmps\ \citep{UGC73} and a Galactic extinction of $A_B=0.01$~mag
168: \citep{burheilred}.
169:
170: Filippenko \& Moran \citep{IAUC6829} obtained a
171: high-resolution spectrum of SN 1998S on Mar. 4 with the Keck-1
172: telescope and classified SN 1998S as a Type~II supernova (SN~II) on
173: the basis of broad H$\alpha$ emission superposed on a featureless
174: continuum. Further spectra were obtained at the Fred L.~Whipple
175: Observatory (FLWO) \citep{Garn98S00} and a campaign to monitor
176: SN~1998S in the UV from the \emph{Hubble Space Telescope} (\emph{HST})
177: was mounted by the Supernova INtensive Study (SINS) team. Three epochs
178: have been observed with \emph{HST} --- March 16, March 30, and May
179: 13. SN~1998S is a Type~IIn supernova \citep[SN
180: IIn;][]{schlegel2n90}, a classification which shows wide variations in
181: the spectra \citep{filarev97}, but includes narrow lines on top of an
182: underlying broad-line supernova spectrum. This has been taken as
183: strong evidence that the supernova ejecta were interacting with a
184: slow-moving circumstellar wind \citep{leon98S00}, probably in a
185: fashion similar to (but possibly more extreme than) that of SN~1979C
186: and SN~1980K \citep{lentz98Saas99,bao98s00}.
187:
188:
189: In order to get an initial understanding and to confirm the basic
190: picture of SNe~IIn as strong circumstellar interacters, a set of
191: parameterized models of SN 1998S was examined with the fully
192: relativistic, NLTE, multi-purpose, expanding atmosphere
193: code, {\tt PHOENIX}, \citep[cf.][and references therein]{hbjcam99}.
194: {\tt PHOENIX} solves the spherically symmetric radiation transport
195: along with the NLTE rate equations and the condition of radiative
196: equilibrium (including deviations due to time dependence of the
197: deposition of non-thermal gamma rays).
198:
199: A modification of {\tt PHOENIX} is underway in order to treat
200: self-consistently both the underlying supernova spectrum and the
201: overlying circumstellar interaction region; here we treat the two regions
202: separately. Figure~\ref{fig:diagram} shows a schematic representation
203: of SN~1998S. Some of the important coupling between the
204: two regions is not included in the calculations and therefore not all
205: of the features observed can be expected to be reproduced by the
206: synthetic spectra. However, our models serve to confirm the basic
207: picture of a SN~IIn as a Type~II supernova that interacts strongly with
208: a near-constant velocity wind. We are able to identify important
209: physical effects that need to be included in future simulations.
210:
211: While our models are spherically symmetric, \citet{leon98S00} have
212: shown that the spectra of SN~1998S are significantly polarized, which
213: could be due
214: to asymmetry in the outermost SN ejecta, the circumstellar medium (CSM), or
215: both. \citet{gerardetal00} suggest that dust and CO are likely to have
216: formed in the SN ejecta while \citet{Fassia98S00} argue that
217: the early dust is likely to come from the CSM.
218:
219: \section{Models}
220:
221: In this paper we focus on three epochs in particular: an early epoch
222: on Mar 16,
223: $\sim 20$~days after explosion,
224: using combined \emph{HST} and ground-based spectra, where effects from
225: the circumstellar region dominate; Mar 30,
226: $\sim 34$~days after explosion,
227: again where there are combined \emph{HST} and ground-based data, and
228: where effects from both
229: photospheric SN ejecta and the circumstellar region are important, and
230: a later ground-based spectrum from April 17, $\sim 50$ days after explosion,
231: where the densest circumstellar gas has been largely, but
232: not completely, overrun by the supernova ejecta. In the earlier spectrum
233: most of the observed lines are
234: formed in the low-velocity circumstellar material, whereas in the
235: later spectrum the lines show the
236: characteristic width of a Type~II supernova. A detailed analysis of
237: the light curve and other observed spectra will be presented elsewhere
238: \citep{Garn98S00}; see also \citet{leon98S00} and \citet{Fassia98S00,Fassia98S01}.
239:
240: \subsection{March 16}
241:
242: We have modeled the circumstellar region as a constant-velocity wind
243: with a density profile $\rho \propto r^{-2}$. While the underlying
244: radiation below the circumstellar region is in fact due to the
245: supernova itself and should show broad P-Cygni profiles as well as a
246: UV deficit due to line blanketing in the differentially expanding
247: supernova atmosphere, we ignore these complications for the present
248: discussion and assume that the underlying radiation is given by a
249: Planck function, with $T_{\textrm{Planck}} = 13250$~K. In future work we will
250: treat the effects of the circumstellar interaction region on the
251: supernova itself, and couple the proper supernova boundary condition
252: into the circumstellar region. Nevertheless, our present
253: decoupled prescription
254: allows us to model the important physics, and to estimate velocities,
255: density profiles, and the radial extent of the circumstellar
256: interaction region and the supernova. The region modeled in these
257: calculations coincides with the region labeled ``High Velocity CS
258: Wind'' in Figure~\ref{fig:diagram}. High-resolution spectra
259: \citep{Fassia98S01} have shown that there may be several velocity
260: components present in the circumstellar medium with velocities as low
261: as 80~\kmps. We focus here on only
262: the higher velocity (but possibly still unresolved) components of the
263: CS spectrum.
264:
265:
266: Figure~\ref{csoverview} presents an overview of our best model fit
267: compared with the observed \emph{HST} UV + FLWO optical spectrum taken
268: on Mar 16, 1998. The observed spectrum has been dereddened using the
269: reddening law of \citet*{card89} and a color excess $E_{B-V}
270: =0.15$~mag \citep{Garn98S00}.
271: The assumed extinction is also in agreement with the results of
272: \citet{Fassia98S00}
273: who find $E(B-V)=0.18 \pm 0.10$~mag. The overall agreement in the line
274: positions and shape of the spectrum is excellent, particularly the
275: pseudo-continuum near 2000~\ang. The model consists of a
276: constant-velocity circumstellar wind with $v_{wind} = 1000$~\kmps, an
277: inner density of $\rho_0 = 2.0 \times 10^{-15}$~\gcm, an inner radius
278: $R_{inner} = 1.0 \times 10^{15}$~cm, and an outer radius $R_{outer} =
279: 1.5 \times 10^{15}$~cm. The total continuum optical depth at
280: $5000$~\ang\ (roughly the electron scattering optical depth) is $\tstd
281: = 0.2$, (where $\tstd$ is the total continuum optical depth at
282: 5000~\ang), and the mass of the wind is $6\times
283: 10^{-3}$~\msol. Assuming
284: the \emph{ejected} wind velocity was 100~\kmps\ this corresponds to a
285: mass-loss rate of 0.0012~\msol~yr$^{-1}$, which should be accurate to
286: an order of magnitude. We believe that the high velocity seen here is
287: due to radiative acceleration of a wind that was ejected at a lower
288: velocity. Since the mass-loss rate depends inversely on
289: the wind velocity at ejection and wind velocities typical of
290: red-giants are $v_{wind} \approx 10$~\kmps, we think that assuming an
291: ejection velocity of 100~\kmps\ allows us to estimate the mass loss
292: rate to an order of magnitude.
293:
294: In
295: Figures~\ref{lineidfig}\mbox{a-f} we expand the wavelength scale and
296: identify the features in the observed spectrum. Several of them are
297: clearly pairs of interstellar absorption features where one member is
298: due to absorption in our Galaxy and the other is due to absorption in
299: the parent galaxy (Mg~II h+k shows this effect
300: clearly). Table~\ref{lineidtab} lists the line
301: identifications. We note that the ``interstellar'' absorption lines
302: in the parent galaxy may also have a circumstellar contribution. Close
303: examination of Figure 3 shows that the observed lines are
304: significantly wider than those in the synthetic
305: spectrum. On the other hand, \citet{Fassia98S01} observed IR features with velocities as
306: low as 90~\kmps, and \citet{bowen98S00} observed UV P-Cygni features
307: with velocities of $\sim 100$~\kmps. Convolving the synthetic spectrum
308: with a Gaussian of width 400~\kmps\ improves the fit, but since we
309: have assumed a velocity higher than that of the lowest velocity
310: observed \citep{Fassia98S01}, it is difficult to separate out the
311: instrumental resolution ($\sim 300-400$~\kmps) from the velocity of
312: the circumstellar medium. It could be that the velocity structure of
313: the circumstellar region is quite complicated with a higher velocity
314: component radiatively accelerated by the supernova, as was suggested
315: for SN~1993J \citep{flc96}, and a lower
316: velocity component wind further away from the progenitor star.
317:
318: Our model spectrum clearly does an extremely good job in reproducing
319: the overall shape and position of the observed features; nevertheless,
320: the line features are somewhat weaker in general than
321: those observed. This could be due to the effects of the radiation from
322: the circumstellar interaction.
323: The effects of this radiation are not included in these simple
324: preliminary calculations. The effects of the ``top-lighting'' or
325: ``shine-back'' are not limited to radiative transfer effects alone,
326: but will also affect the ionization state of the matter, particularly
327: if there is significant X-ray emission from a reverse shock.
328: In future work we will include the effects of external
329: irradiation from the circumstellar region and replace the simple inner
330: Planck function boundary condition that we have used here with a model
331: supernova spectrum. Such a spectrum would be hotter, but
332: diluted and contain both the UV deficit of a normal Type~II
333: supernova as well as broad P-Cygni features for which
334: there is evidence in the observed spectrum.
335:
336: \subsection{March 30}
337:
338: Figure~\ref{mar30data} displays the combined \emph{HST} spectra with
339: an optical spectrum obtained at the FLWO. It is interesting
340: to note that the narrow features present on Mar.~16 seem to have
341: disappeared, and the broad lines are all quite weak. A simple
342: analytical explanation of this is presented in \citet{toplight00},
343: which shows that with the additional emission (``toplighting'' or
344: ``shine-back'') from the circumstellar
345: shell, one expects the supernova features to appear
346: muted. Figure~\ref{nate} displays a \phx\ spectrum, along with the
347: results obtained when it has been muted
348: according to the prescription in \citet{toplight00}. The regular \phx\
349: spectrum
350: is based upon the simplest assumptions: homogeneous solar
351: abundances, a model temperature $\Tmod = 6000$~K \citep[the model
352: temperature is simply a way of parameterizing the total bolometric
353: luminosity in the observers frame, see][]{hbjcam99}, a velocity of
354: 5000~\kmps\ at $\tstd=1$, and a density structure $\rho \propto
355: r^{-8}$. Using
356: Eqn.~23 of \citet{toplight00}, we have calculated the
357: muting, using $E=0.9$, where $E$ is the ratio of the CS intensity to that of
358: the SN intensity given in Eqn. 22 of \citet{toplight00}, we have
359: assumed a ratio of $R_{CS}/R_{Ph} =1.5$, where the ratio is the radius
360: of the
361: circumstellar shell to the radius
362: of the ``SN photosphere''. While the fit is
363: not terribly good, the trend is evident. Naturally, a fully consistent
364: model would be better, but it would require significant computational
365: resources to resolve both the ejecta and circumstellar
366: region. \citet{fransson79c84} calculated lineshapes expected from the
367: CS wind and the cool, dense shocked material and compared them with
368: those observed in SN~1979C.
369:
370: \citet{leon98S00} suggest that SN~1998S underwent a significant
371: mass-loss episode that ended about 60 years prior to explosion and
372: that there was a second, weaker mass-loss episode 7 years prior to
373: explosion. Thus, we may be seeing the over-running of the closest CS shell
374: and still observing effects of the more distant CS shells.
375:
376: \subsection{April 17}
377:
378: During the early evolution the nearest circumstellar material is overrun by the
379: supernova ejecta so the effects of the CSM on the optical and UV
380: spectra become smaller. Inspection of the observed optical
381: spectra \citep{leon98S00,Garn98S00} shows an increasing contrast in the broad
382: features typical of Type~II SNe during the time from the initial \emph{HST}
383: observation, March 16, to the FLWO spectrum of April 17.
384: \citet{Blaylock98S00} show that the strengthening of these
385: features during this transition is well reproduced by including the
386: effects of radiation from the circumstellar interaction region along
387: with the scattering of light from the supernova photosphere in the
388: circumstellar region.
389:
390: Figure~\ref{apr17opt} displays our best model fit to the observed
391: optical spectrum taken at the FLWO \citep{Garn98S00}. We again use simple
392: assumptions: homogeneous solar
393: abundances, a model temperature $\Tmod = 5700$~K, a velocity of
394: 5000~\kmps\ at $\tstd=1$, and a density structure $\rho \propto
395: r^{-8}$. The highest velocity in the model is only 6,000~\kmps, which
396: gives an indication that the ejecta are entrained by the circumstellar
397: material, but this is not well constrained by our models. Again,
398: overall the fit is very good.
399: The Na D line in the observed spectrum is too weak in our
400: synthetic spectrum, which may indicate the need to self-consistently
401: include the effect of the circumstellar region or may be due to
402: enhanced sodium.
403: The extended absorption wing of H$\alpha$ is due in
404: our model to blending of weak Fe~II lines, although some of the
405: absorption may be due to Si~II. In any case it is not evidence for
406: high-velocity hydrogen.
407:
408: \section{Conclusions}
409:
410: We have shown that a simple model of an ordinary Type~II supernova
411: atmosphere interacting strongly with a radiatively accelerated
412: wind reasonably well reproduces the observed
413: line-widths and many of the observed features in both the UV and the
414: optical spectra. This model is robust in that it works well at both very early
415: times and more than a month after the explosion. This confirms the
416: general picture of SNe~IIn as being the core collapse of massive stars
417: that have experienced a significant mass-loss epoch and thus are
418: surrounded by a circumstellar medium with which the supernova ejecta
419: interact. As expected from our models \citep{lentz98Saas99}, SN~1998S has been
420: detected about 600 days after explosion at 6~cm
421: \citep{IAUC7322}. Although SN~1998S is about 5 times less luminous than
422: SN 1988Z, further monitoring of the radio light curve will be very
423: interesting and will help determine the mass-loss rate. From the
424: light curve \citet{Fassia98S00} find that the mass of the ejected
425: envelope was quite low and the wind was weaker than that of
426: SN~1988Z. SN~1998S may well be more closely related to SN~1979C and
427: SN~1980K. In
428: future work we will develop a more self-consistent model of the
429: supernova circumstellar interaction, and will be able to constrain
430: mass-loss rates and total mass loss which are of great interest for
431: the theory of stellar evolution.
432:
433: \acknowledgments We thank the anonymous referee for suggestions which
434: considerably improved the presentation of this paper. PHH was
435: supported in part by the P\^ole Scientifique de Mod\'elisation
436: Num\'erique at ENS-Lyon. NB was supported in part by an NSF REU
437: supplement to the Univ. of Oklahoma. This work was supported in part
438: by NSF grants AST-9731450, AST-9417102, AST-9987438, and AST-9417213;
439: by NASA grant NAG5-3505 and an IBM SUR grant to the University of
440: Oklahoma; by NSF grant AST-9720704, NASA ATP grant NAG 5-8425, and
441: LTSA grant NAG 5-3619 to the University of Georgia; and by NASA
442: GO--2563.001 to the SINS group from the Space Telescope Science
443: Institute, which is operated by AURA, Inc.~under NASA contract NAS
444: 5--26555. Some of the calculations presented in this paper were
445: performed at the San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC), supported by
446: the NSF, and at the National Energy Research Supercomputer Center
447: (NERSC), supported by the U.S. DOE; we thank both these institutions
448: for a generous allocation of computer time. This research has made
449: use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by
450: the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
451: under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
452:
453: %\bibliography{refs,baron,snii,sn98s,sn93j,rte,gals,crossrefs}
454: \begin{thebibliography}{23}
455: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
456:
457: \bibitem[{Blaylock {et~al.}(2000)}]{Blaylock98S00}
458: Blaylock, M. {et~al.} 2000, ApJ, in preparation
459:
460: \bibitem[{Bowen {et~al.}(2000)Bowen, Roth, Meyer, \& Blades}]{bowen98S00}
461: Bowen, D., Roth, K., Meyer, D., \& Blades, J. 2000, ApJ, 536, 225
462:
463: \bibitem[{Branch {et~al.}(2000)Branch, Jeffery, Blaylock, \&
464: Hatano}]{toplight00}
465: Branch, D., Jeffery, D., Blaylock, M., \& Hatano, K. 2000, PASP, 112, 217
466:
467: \bibitem[{Burstein \& Heiles(1982)}]{burheilred}
468: Burstein, D. \& Heiles, C. 1982, AJ, 87, 1165
469:
470: \bibitem[{Cardelli {et~al.}(1989)Cardelli, Clayton, \& Mathis}]{card89}
471: Cardelli, J.~A., Clayton, G.~C., \& Mathis, J.~S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245
472:
473: \bibitem[{Fassia {et~al.}(2000)}]{Fassia98S00}
474: Fassia, A. {et~al.} 2000, MNRAS, in press, astro-ph/0006080
475:
476: \bibitem[{Fassia {et~al.}(2001)}]{Fassia98S01}
477: ---. 2001, MNRAS, in preparation
478:
479: \bibitem[{Filippenko(1997)}]{filarev97}
480: Filippenko, A.~V. 1997, Ann. Rev. Astr. Ap., 35, 309
481:
482: \bibitem[{Filippenko {et~al.}(2000)}]{flipper00}
483: Filippenko, A.~V. {et~al.} 2000, ApJ, in preparation
484:
485: \bibitem[{{Fransson}(1984)}]{fransson79c84}
486: {Fransson}, C. 1984, A\&A, 132, 115
487:
488: \bibitem[{Fransson {et~al.}(1996)Fransson, Lundqvist, \& Chevalier}]{flc96}
489: Fransson, C., Lundqvist, P., \& Chevalier, R. 1996, ApJ, 461, 993
490:
491: \bibitem[{Garnavich {et~al.}(2000)}]{Garn98S00}
492: Garnavich, P. {et~al.} 2000, in preparation
493:
494: \bibitem[{Gerardy {et~al.}(2000)Gerardy, Fesen, H{\"o}flich, \&
495: Wheeler}]{gerardetal00}
496: Gerardy, C., Fesen, R., H{\"o}flich, P., \& Wheeler, J.~C. 2000, AJ, 119, 2968
497:
498: \bibitem[{Hauschildt \& Baron(1999)}]{hbjcam99}
499: Hauschildt, P.~H. \& Baron, E. 1999, J. Comp. Applied Math., 109, 41
500:
501: \bibitem[{Lentz {et~al.}(1999)Lentz, Baron, Branch, Hauschildt, Fransson,
502: Lundqvist, Garnavich, \& Kirshner}]{lentz98Saas99}
503: Lentz, E., Baron, E., Branch, D., Hauschildt, P.~H., Fransson, C., Lundqvist,
504: P., Garnavich, P., \& Kirshner, R.~P. 1999, BAAS, 30, 1324
505:
506: \bibitem[{Leonard {et~al.}(2000)Leonard, Filippenko, Barth, \&
507: Matheson}]{leon98S00}
508: Leonard, D., Filippenko, A.~V., Barth, A., \& Matheson, T. 2000, ApJ, 536, 239
509:
510: \bibitem[{{Li} {et~al.}(1998){Li}, {Li}, {Filippenko}, \& {Moran}}]{IAUC6829}
511: {Li}, W.~D., {Li}, C., {Filippenko}, A.~V., \& {Moran}, E.~C. 1998, IAU Circ.,
512: 6829
513:
514: \bibitem[{Liu {et~al.}(2000)Liu, Hu, Hang, Qiu, Zhu, \& Qiao}]{bao98s00}
515: Liu, Q., Hu, J., Hang, H., Qiu, Y., Zhu, Z., \& Qiao, Q. 2000, A\&A, 144, 219
516:
517: \bibitem[{Nilson(1973)}]{UGC73}
518: Nilson, P. 1973, V, Vol.~1, Uppsala General Catalogue of Galaxies (Uppsala,
519: Sweden: Nova Regiae Societatis Upsaliensis)
520:
521: \bibitem[{Qiao {et~al.}(1997)Qiao, Li, Qiu, Zhang, \& Hu}]{IAUC6612}
522: Qiao, Q., Li, W., Qiu, Y., Zhang, Y., \& Hu, J. 1997, IAU Circ., 6612
523:
524: \bibitem[{Schlegel(1990)}]{schlegel2n90}
525: Schlegel, E.~M. 1990, MNRAS, 224, 269
526:
527: \bibitem[{Treffers {et~al.}(1997)Treffers, Peng, \& Filippenko}]{IAUC6627}
528: Treffers, R.~R., Peng, C.~Y., \& Filippenko, A.~V. 1997, IAU Circ., 6627
529:
530: \bibitem[{{Van Dyk} {et~al.}(1999){Van Dyk}, {Lacey}, {Sramek}, \&
531: {Weiler}}]{IAUC7322}
532: {Van Dyk}, S.~D., {Lacey}, C.~K., {Sramek}, R.~A., \& {Weiler}, K.~W. 1999, IAU
533: Circ., 7322
534:
535: \end{thebibliography}
536:
537: % INSERT TABLE HERE!!!!
538: \begin{deluxetable}{llll}
539: \footnotesize
540: \tablecaption{Line IDs \label{lineidtab}}
541: \tablewidth{0pt}
542: \tablehead{\colhead{$\lambda$ (\ang)} &\colhead{Species} &
543: \colhead{$\lambda$ (\ang)} &\colhead{Species}
544: }
545: \startdata
546: 1168& N I 1168?& 1550& C IV 1550\\
547: 1668& S II 1668& 1561& C I 1561?\\
548: 1176& C III 1176& 1601& Fe III 1601,1607\\
549: 1192& Si II 1192, S III 1198& 1625& Fe II 1625\\
550: 1216& Ly alpha & 1657& C I 1657\\
551: 1234& S II 1324& 1666& S I 1666?, O III 1665, Al II 1671\\
552: 1243& N I 1243? & 1698& Si I 1698?\\
553: 1227& C III 1247& 1719& N IV 1719\\
554: 1249.5& Si II 1250, 1263& 1750& N III 1750\\
555: 1252& S II 1256& 1805& S II 1805\\
556: 1299& Si III 1299& 1815& Si II 1815\\
557: 1304& O I 1304& 1854& Al III 1854,1862\\
558: 1335& C II 1335& 1892& Si III 1982?\\
559: 1338& O IV 1338& 1930& C I 1930?\\
560: 1342& Si III 1342& 2287& Co II 2287\\
561: 1346& N II 1346?& 2297& C III 2297\\
562: 1364.3& Si III 1364& 2344& Fe II 2344\\
563: 1371& O V 1371?& 2374& Fe II 2374\\
564: 1394& S IV 1394& 2383& Fe II 2383\\
565: 1403& S IV 1403& 2396& Fe II 2396\\
566: 1428& C III 1428?& 2406& Fe II 2406\\
567: 1493& N I 1493?& 2586& Fe II 2586,2600\\
568: 1527& Si II 1527,1533?& 2798& Mg II h+k 2796,2804\\
569: \nodata& \nodata& 2853& Mg I 2853\\
570: \enddata
571: \end{deluxetable}
572:
573:
574: \clearpage
575:
576: \begin{figure}
577: \epsscale{0.7}
578: \plotone{98sdiagram.eps}
579: \caption{\label{fig:diagram} Schematic diagram of SN~1998S.
580: hvCS stands for high velocity circumstellar material which was likely
581: radiatively accelerated to the high velocities seen in SN~1998S. The Red
582: Giant wind is assumed to have been ejected at low velocity ($\approx 10$~\kmps).}
583: \end{figure}
584:
585: \begin{figure}
586: \epsscale{0.8}
587: \plotone{fig1.8087.ps}
588: \caption{\label{csoverview}The calculated synthetic spectrum (dashed
589: line) from the
590: circumstellar shell is compared with the \emph{HST} UV observations and the
591: optical spectra taken at the FLW Observatory on Mar. 16, 1998. The
592: observed spectrum has been dereddened assuming $E(B-V)
593: =0.15$~mag and deredshifted assuming a heliocentric velocity of
594: 902~\kmps\ in this and subsequent figures that include synthetic spectra.}
595: \end{figure}
596:
597: \begin{figure}
598: \epsscale{0.8}
599: \plotone{fig2_0.ps}
600: \caption{\label{lineidfig}The calculated synthetic spectrum (dashed
601: line) from the
602: circumstellar shell is compared with the \emph{HST} UV observations of Mar.
603: 16, 1998 and lines
604: are identified. Careful examination of the figure reveals that there
605: is an underlying broad component to the lineshapes due to the faster
606: supernova ejecta. However, this is not included in the present model.
607: }
608: \end{figure}
609:
610: \begin{figure}
611: \epsscale{0.8}
612: \plotone{fig2_1.ps}
613: \end{figure}
614:
615:
616: \begin{figure}
617: \epsscale{0.8}
618: \plotone{fig2_2.ps}
619: \end{figure}
620:
621:
622: \begin{figure}
623: \epsscale{0.8}
624: \plotone{fig2_3.ps}
625: \end{figure}
626:
627:
628: \begin{figure}
629: \epsscale{0.8}
630: \plotone{fig2_4.ps}
631: \end{figure}
632:
633: \begin{figure}
634: \epsscale{0.8}
635: \plotone{fig2_5.ps}
636: \end{figure}
637:
638: \begin{figure}
639: \epsscale{0.8}
640: \plotone{mar30bw.lab.eps}
641: \caption{\label{mar30data}The observed spectra from \emph{HST} and the
642: FLWO on Mar 30. The spectra have been smoothed using a 40 point boxcar
643: average, but no dereddening or deredshifting has been applied.}
644: \end{figure}
645:
646: \begin{figure}
647: \epsscale{0.8}
648: \plotone{dered.top.ns.5000.6000.4.lab.eps}
649: \caption{\label{nate}Calculated synthetic spectra from the
650: supernova are compared with the
651: observed spectra in Figure~\protect\ref{mar30data}. Three spectra are
652: shown: the observed spectrum; a raw ``supernova only'' synthetic
653: spectrum (denoted ``regular model''); and
654: a ``toplit'' spectrum (denoted ``$E=0.9$''). Toplighting significantly
655: mutes the features, as expected \protect\cite[see][for a clear
656: explanation]{toplight00}. $E=0.9$ is the ratio of the CS continuum
657: intensity to the supernova intensity at a wavelength near H$\alpha$.}
658: \end{figure}
659:
660: \begin{figure}
661: \epsscale{0.8}
662: \plotone{apr17.7029.lab.eps}
663: \caption{\label{apr17opt}The calculated synthetic spectrum from the
664: supernova (dashed line) is compared the
665: optical spectrum taken at the FLWO on Apr 17, 1998.}
666: \end{figure}
667:
668: \end{document}
669: