English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the meeting SN 1987A 30 years later, I presented my minority view that themajority (or even all) of core collapse supernovae (CCSNe) are driven by jetsrather than by neutrinos, and that the majority of type Ia supernovae (SN Ia)reach their explosion via the core degenerate scenario. New simulationspresented at the meeting did not achieve an explosion of CCSNe. I criticallyexamine other arguments that where presented in support of the neutrino-drivenmodel, and present counter arguments that support the jet-driven explosionmechanism. The jets operate via a negative jet feedback mechanism (JFM). Thenegative feedback mechanism explains the explosion energy being several timesthe binding energy of the core in most CCSNe. At the present time when we donot know yet what mechanism explodes massive stars and we do not know yet whatevolutionary route leads white dwarfs to explode as SN Ia, we must be open todifferent ideas and critically examine old notions.

A minority view on the majority: A personal meeting summary on the explosion mechanism of supernovae