The X-ray information on the progenitors of Core-Collapse Supernovae Today I’d like to talk to you about X-ray appoarch of STM for CWB. Y. Sugawara (Chuo Univ.) Y. Maeda (JAXA), Y. Tsuboi (Chuo Univ.)

Shocked plasma (dominant) Introduction Our Motivation Massive star & binary (e.g., WR, LBV, WR+O, LBV+O) ⇒ a progenitor of a long-duration GRB? ⇒ a GW source candidate? The comparison between the multiwavelength observational results of Core-Collapse Supernovae (e.g., GRB afterglow and Supernova remnant) and the information of the stellar wind of the progenitors will be helpful to give the observational limit about how the progenitor evolved, and to understand the explosion theory of core-collapse supernovae. The abundance & Mass-loss rate are the uncertain parameters in the evolution of massive star. © Jon Lomberg/Gemin Observatory Shocked plasma (dominant) Our target: eccentric CWB => rapid variation of physical parameters => good testing site of stellar wind measurement OK Lets move on Our target is eCWB.

X-ray emission lines and abundance (WR) In the case of WR48 (WC+O) C / Fe ratio ~ 23 solar We could easily give the abundance ratio of stellar wind using grating spectrum.

X-ray absorption and mass-loss rate (WR) In the case of WR140 (WC+O) Observed value ds This figure show orbital phase vs. X-ray absorption As it close periastron, absorption is larger. This increase is consistent with the absorption of WR wind. It’ good qualitatively-correct   NHe[1021cm-2] Orbital phase

Summary ① ② For the details, Please see the poster NHe[1021cm-2]   ② NHe[1021cm-2] Orbital phase For the details, Please see the poster