Editing SSC/Virial/PolytropesSummary (section)

===Borrowing from Bipolytrope Discussion===
In an accompanying chapter that presents the [[User:Tohline/SSC/Structure/BiPolytropes/Analytic5_1#BiPolytrope_with_nc_.3D_5_and_ne_.3D_1|detailed force-balanced models of <math>~(n_c, n_e) = (5, 1)</math> bipolytropes]] we explicitly show that, for configurations with the correct equilibrium radius, the virial theorem is satisfied.  In the case of bipolytropes, which are not embedded in an external medium, the relevant normalized virial theorem states that,
<div align="center">
<math>
~(2{S}_\mathrm{therm}^* + W_\mathrm{grav}^*)_\mathrm{core} + (2{S}_\mathrm{therm}^* + W_\mathrm{grav}^*)_\mathrm{env} = 0 \, .
</math>
</div>

In the bipolytrope, the (truncated) <math>~n=5</math> core is confined by an <math>~n=1</math> envelope; in addition to demanding that the relevant virial theorem be satisfied, there is also a constraint that the pressure at the inner edge of the envelope be equal to the pressure at the (truncated) outer edge of the core.  As we have just discussed, for a (truncated) <math>~n=5</math> polytrope that is confined by a hot, tenuous external medium instead of by an enveloping envelope, the relevant normalized virial theorem is,
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="5">

<tr>
  <td align="right">
<math>~(2{S}_\mathrm{therm}^* + W_\mathrm{grav}^*)_\mathrm{core} - \frac{3P_e V_\mathrm{eq}}{E_\mathrm{norm}}</math>
  </td>
  <td align="center">
<math>~=</math>
  </td>
  <td align="left">
<math>~0  </math>
  </td>
</tr>

<tr>
  <td align="right">
<math>~\Rightarrow ~~~ (2{S}_\mathrm{therm}^* + W_\mathrm{grav}^*)_\mathrm{core} </math>
  </td>
  <td align="center">
<math>~=</math>
  </td>
  <td align="left">
<math>~\frac{3P_e }{(K^5/G^3)^{1/2}} \biggl( \frac{4\pi}{3} R_\mathrm{eq}^3 \biggr) </math>
  </td>
</tr>

<tr>
  <td align="right">
&nbsp;
 </td>
  <td align="center">
<math>~=</math>
  </td>
  <td align="left">
<math>~4\pi \biggl( \frac{2\cdot 3}{5} \biggr)^{3/2}  \biggl( \frac{R_\mathrm{eq}}{R_\mathrm{SWS}}\biggr)^3 \, ,</math>
  </td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
where,  [[User:Tohline/SSC/Structure/PolytropesEmbedded#Stahler.27s_Presentation|as discussed/defined in an accompanying chapter of this H_Book]], we have adopted the normalization radius, <math>~R_\mathrm{SWS}</math>, first introduced by [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983ApJ...268..165S Steven W. Stahler (1983)].  For <math>~n=5</math> configurations, its definition is,
<div align="center">
<math>
R_\mathrm{SWS}\biggr|_{n=5} = \biggl( \frac{2\cdot 3}{5} \biggr)^{1/2} \biggl[ \frac{(K^{5}/G^3)^{1/2}}{P_\mathrm{e}}\biggr]^{1/3} \, .
</math>
</div>
As has [[User:Tohline/SSC/Structure/PolytropesEmbedded#Stahler.27s_Presentation|also been discussed in the accompanying chapter]], we can deduce from Stahler's detailed force-balanced models that the equilibrium radius of embedded, <math>~n=5</math> polytropes is given in terms of the dimensionless, ''truncated'' Lane-Emden radius, <math>~\tilde\xi</math> &#8212; and our corresponding variable, <math>\ell</math> &#8212; by the expression,
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="3">

<tr>
  <td align="right">
<math>
~\frac{R_\mathrm{eq}}{R_\mathrm{SWS} }\biggr|_{n=5}
</math>
  </td>
  <td align="center">
<math>~=~</math>
  </td>
  <td align="left">
<math>
\biggl( \frac{5}{4\pi} \biggr)^{1/2} \tilde\xi \tilde\theta^2 
= \biggl( \frac{5}{4\pi} \biggr)^{1/2} \tilde\xi \biggl(1 + \frac{\tilde\xi^2}{3}\biggr)^{-1} 
</math>
  </td>
</tr>

<tr>
  <td align="right">
&nbsp;
  </td>
  <td align="center">
<math>~=~</math>
  </td>
  <td align="left">
<math>
\biggl( \frac{5\cdot 3}{2^2\pi} \biggr)^{1/2} \ell (1 + \ell^2)^{-1} \, .
</math>
  </td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
Hence, upon careful evaluation of the thermal energy and gravitational potential energy of truncated <math>~n=5</math> polytropes, we should find that,
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="5">

<tr>
  <td align="right">
<math>~(2{S}_\mathrm{therm}^* + W_\mathrm{grav}^*)_\mathrm{core} </math>
  </td>
  <td align="center">
<math>~=</math>
  </td>
  <td align="left">
<math>~4\pi \biggl( \frac{2\cdot 3}{5} \biggr)^{3/2}  \biggl[ \biggl( \frac{5\cdot 3}{2^2\pi} \biggr)^{1/2} \ell (1 + \ell^2)^{-1}
\biggr]^3 </math>
  </td>
</tr>

<tr>
  <td align="right">
&nbsp;
  </td>
  <td align="center">
<math>~=</math>
  </td>
  <td align="left">
<math>~\biggl( \frac{2\cdot 3^6}{\pi} \biggr)^{1/2} \ell^3 (1 + \ell^2)^{-3} \, .
</math>
  </td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
Well, it just so happens that, in our [[User:Tohline/SSC/Structure/BiPolytropes/Analytic5_1#twoSplusWcore|accompanying chapter that presents the detailed force-balanced models of <math>~(n_c, n_e) = (5, 1)</math> bipolytropes]], we explicitly carried out the volume integrals defining these two key components of the free energy expression with the results being,
<div align="center">
<table border="0" cellpadding="4">

<tr>
  <td align="right">
<math>~(2S^* + W^*)_\mathrm{core}</math>
  </td>
  <td align="center">
<math>~=~</math>
  </td>
  <td align="left">
<math>~\biggl( \frac{2\cdot 3^6}{\pi} \biggr)^{1/2} \biggl[ x_i ^3 (1 + x_i^2)^{-3} \biggr] \, .
</math>
  </td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
Realizing that the variable, <math>~x_i</math>, in that context is the same as <math>~\ell</math>, in the present context, we see that the two separately derived results are identical to one another.