Light Travel Time Effects in Kilonova Models

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.09261
• Title: Light Travel Time Effects in Kilonova Models
• Authors: F. McNeill, S. A. Sim, C. E. Collins, L. J. Shingles, R. Damgaard, A. Sneppen, J. H. Gillanders
• Classification: astro-ph.HE (High Energy Astrophysics), astro-ph.SR (Stellar and Stellar Physics)
• Submission Date: October 10, 2025 (arXiv submission)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09261

Abstract

The rapid evolution of kilonovae causes their spectra to change on hourly timescales. These spectra are crucial for understanding the internal processes of the event, but such rapid evolution represents an unfamiliar regime compared to other explosive transient events such as supernovae. In particular, the most prominent P Cygni feature in the AT2017gfo spectrum (commonly attributed to strontium) exhibits an emission component that appears after the associated absorption trough and ultimately persists longer than the absorption trough. This delay is believed to be caused by reverberation effects, wherein photons emitted early in kilonova evolution are scattered before reaching the observer, causing them to be detected at later times. This study aims to examine how the finite speed of light—and consequently the light travel time to the observer—affects the shape and evolution of kilonova spectral features.

Research Background and Motivation

Research Questions

1. Effects of light travel time on kilonova spectra: The extremely high expansion velocities of kilonovae (≲0.3c, reaching up to 0.7-0.8c) make light travel time effects important, contrasting sharply with supernovae (expansion velocities ≲0.1c).
2. Anomalous evolution of P Cygni features: The feature attributed to Sr II in AT2017gfo exhibits the phenomenon where the emission component is more persistent than the absorption component, requiring theoretical explanation.
3. Necessity of time-dependent modeling: Existing time-independent radiative transfer codes (such as TARDIS) may have limitations in kilonova modeling.

Significance

• Understanding kilonova physics: Accurate modeling of spectral features is crucial for understanding neutron star merger processes
• Gravitational wave astronomy: With the discovery of more kilonova events, more precise theoretical models are needed
• Nucleosynthesis processes: Correct identification of spectral features is important for understanding heavy element synthesis

Limitations of Existing Methods

• Time-independent radiative transfer codes assume infinite light speed
• Neglect reverberation effects on spectral evolution
• May produce systematic errors in rapidly evolving events

Core Contributions

1. Quantified light travel time effects: First systematic study of how light travel time affects kilonova spectral formation and evolution
2. Explained anomalous P Cygni feature behavior: Provided theoretical explanation for the persistence of the Sr II emission component in AT2017gfo
3. Validated the importance of reverberation effects: Demonstrated the contribution of delayed scattered photon arrival to spectral redshift evolution
4. Provided guidance for time-dependent modeling: Established quantitative criteria for when time-dependent effects must be considered
5. Developed simplified correction methods: Proposed simple temperature correction schemes for time-independent codes

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Investigate how time delays caused by finite light speed and scattering effects during photon propagation from the kilonova photosphere to the observer affect the shape and evolution of observed spectra.

Model Architecture

Geometric Model

• Dual-sphere model: Inner sphere represents the photosphere, outer sphere represents the ejecta boundary
• Uniform expansion: Follows the uniform expansion law $v = r/t_{ph}$
• Observer position: Located at 40 Mpc distance from the kilonova (matching AT2017gfo distance)

Time Systems

Two clock systems are defined:

• $t_{ph}$: Time of photon emission at the photosphere
• $t_{det}$: Time of photon arrival at the observer

Relationship: $t_{det} = t_{ph} + d/c$

where $d$ is the distance relative to the origin to the observer.

Monte Carlo Radiative Transfer

1. Photon initialization: Randomly sample wavelengths (2000-18000 Å) from blackbody distribution at the photosphere
2. Resonance determination: Determine whether photons can Doppler shift into Sr II line resonance
3. Scattering probability: Probabilistically determine scattering events based on Sobolev optical depth
4. Frequency change: Frequency after scattering changes according to: $\nu' = \nu \frac{1 - \frac{v}{c}\mu_i}{1 - \frac{v}{c}\mu_e}$

Optical Depth Model

Power-law distribution is adopted: $\tau = \alpha \left(\frac{r}{R}\right)^{-\beta}$

where $\alpha$ evolves with time and $\beta = 3$ (based on hydrodynamic simulations).

Technical Innovations

1. Time-dependent path tracing: Precisely calculate propagation path length and arrival time for each photon
2. Continuous photon stream modeling: Simulate continuous evolution by releasing new photon batches hourly
3. Geometric corrections: Account for additional distance of photons emitted from different locations to the observer
4. Temperature evolution coupling: Combine photosphere temperature evolution with light travel time effects

Experimental Setup

Model Parameters

• Temperature evolution: Based on empirical fit from Gillanders et al. (2022), declining from 10000 K (0.5 days) to 3200 K (4.4 days)
• Velocity evolution: Photosphere velocity decreases from 0.30c to 0.12c, maximum velocity fixed at 0.35c
• Sr II line parameters: Rest wavelength 10500 Å, pure scattering approximation
• Time range: Observation time 1.4-4.4 days, photon emission time 0.5-8 days

Evaluation Methods

1. Spectral comparison: Compare with X-shooter observations of AT2017gfo
2. Time delay analysis: Statistical analysis of average time delays for photons at different wavelengths
3. Scattering contribution analysis: Quantify the proportion of scattered versus unscattered photons
4. Time-dependent vs. time-independent comparison: Compare model results with and without light travel time effects

Experimental Results

Main Results

Photon Arrival Time Distribution

• Photons emitted at the same time ($t_{ph} = 1.4$ days) span an arrival time range of 1.25 days
• Light travel time constitutes a significant fraction of kilonova lifetime (approximately 35%)
• Spectra from different time windows exhibit distinctly different colors and features

P Cygni Feature Evolution

1. Absorption vs. emission timing:
   • Blue-shifted absorption trough forms first
   • Red-shifted emission peak appears subsequently and persists longer
   • Emission peak gradually drifts toward longer wavelengths
2. Scattered photon contribution:
   • Scattered photon fraction reaches 20% at 1.4 days
   • Doubles by 2.4 days
   • Time delay of scattered photons exceeds 1.5 days by 4.4 days

Spectral Redshift Evolution

• Feature peak position redshifts with time: from slightly blue of rest wavelength in early phases to significantly redshifted in later phases
• Redshift magnitude reaches approximately 1000 Å by 4.4 days
• Consistent with redshift trends observed by Gillanders et al. (2024)

Time-Dependent vs. Time-Independent Modeling Comparison

Periods of Significant Difference

1. 1.4 days: Peak flux in time-dependent model is approximately 50% of time-independent model
2. 3.4 days: Ratio between continuum peak and feature peak differs
3. 2.4 and 4.4 days: Results from both methods are relatively consistent

Simple Temperature Correction Effectiveness

• Adding average light travel time delay significantly improves time-independent model
• Correction is more effective in the red wavelength region
• Simple correction remains insufficient during rapid temperature evolution periods

Comparison with Observational Data

• Successfully reproduces basic morphology and evolution trends of Sr II features
• Scattered photon peak position is slightly blue (due to obscuration effects)
• Late-phase emission intensity is weaker, suggesting reverberation effects alone cannot fully explain observations

Related Work

Kilonova Radiative Transfer Studies

• Time-dependent codes: Kasen et al. (2013, 2017), Bulla et al. (2019), Tanaka et al. (2017, 2018)
• Time-independent methods: Watson et al. (2019), Gillanders et al. (2022) using TARDIS and similar codes
• Spectral feature identification: Sr II (Watson et al. 2019), Y II (Sneppen & Watson 2023), La III, Ce III, etc.

Light Travel Time Effects Studies

• Supernova research: Kasen et al. (2006) demonstrated that this effect is minor in supernovae
• Kilonova reverberation: Sneppen et al. (2024b) first proposed the importance of reverberation effects in kilonovae
• Relativistic effects: Sadeh (2025) discusses the necessity of relativistic corrections

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Light travel time effects are significant: In the high-velocity expansion environment of kilonovae, light travel time effects cannot be neglected
2. P Cygni feature evolution mechanism: Reverberation effects partially explain the persistence and redshift evolution of emission components
3. Necessity of time-dependent modeling: Time-dependent effects must be considered during rapid temperature evolution periods
4. Feasibility of simple corrections: Simple time delay corrections can improve time-independent models during slowly evolving phases

Limitations

1. Model simplifications: Single-line approximation, pure scattering assumption, simplified temperature evolution
2. Incomplete reverberation effects: Cannot fully explain the sustained intensity of emission features in AT2017gfo
3. Geometric constraints: Spherical symmetry assumption may not apply to actual asymmetric ejecta
4. Relativistic effects: Only first-order corrections ($v/c$) are considered

Future Directions

1. Multi-line modeling: Consider Sr II multiplets and other elemental lines
2. Three-dimensional geometry: Non-spherically symmetric ejecta geometry
3. Complete relativistic treatment: Higher-order relativistic corrections
4. Coupling with hydrodynamics: Integration with detailed explosion models

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Problem importance: First systematic study of light travel time effects in kilonovae, filling a theoretical gap
2. Methodological innovation: Cleverly combines time-dependent effects with Monte Carlo radiative transfer
3. Physical insights: Provides reasonable explanation for anomalous spectral evolution observed in AT2017gfo
4. Practical value: Provides guidance and correction schemes for the use of time-independent codes
5. Computational efficiency: Offers computationally more economical research methods compared to complete time-dependent codes

Shortcomings

1. Excessive model simplification: Single-line and spherical symmetry assumptions limit the generalizability of results
2. Parameter dependence: Parameter choices such as optical depth evolution may affect conclusions
3. Limited observational validation: Comparison with only one event (AT2017gfo) lacks statistical samples
4. Limited quantitative predictive power: Cannot accurately predict absolute intensity of emission features

Impact

1. Theoretical contribution: Provides new physical considerations for kilonova spectral modeling
2. Observational guidance: Aids in spectral interpretation of future kilonova observations
3. Methodological value: Provides an example for modeling rapidly evolving celestial objects
4. Software development: May promote development of more time-dependent radiative transfer codes

Applicable Scenarios

• Modeling of high-velocity expanding transient objects (kilonovae, superluminous supernovae, etc.)
• Theoretical explanation of rapidly evolving spectra
• Correction and validation of time-independent code results
• Electromagnetic counterpart studies of gravitational wave events

References

This paper cites extensive literature on kilonovae and radiative transfer, primarily including:

• AT2017gfo observations: Pian et al. (2017), Smartt et al. (2017), etc.
• Radiative transfer theory: Kasen et al. (2006, 2013), Noebauer & Sim (2019)
• Kilonova modeling: Watson et al. (2019), Gillanders et al. (2022)
• Reverberation effects: Sneppen et al. (2024b)

This research provides an important theoretical foundation for understanding the complex spectral evolution of kilonovae, particularly regarding light travel time effects—a previously overlooked physical process. Although the model is relatively simplified, the physical mechanisms it reveals are of significant importance for accurately interpreting and predicting kilonova observations.