SSC/Stability/BiPolytropes/RedGiantToPN: Difference between revisions
| Line 1,435: | Line 1,435: | ||
</table> | </table> | ||
For <math>\mu_e/\mu_c = 1.00</math> the <font color="red">solution to this expression is <math>\xi_i = 1.668462981</math></font>. | For <math>\mu_e/\mu_c = 1.00</math> the <font color="red">solution to this expression is <math>\xi_i = 1.668462981</math></font>. | ||
</td></tr></table> | </td></tr></table> | ||
Revision as of 23:40, 29 March 2026
Main Sequence to Red Giant to Planetary Nebula
Part I: Background & Objective
|
Part II:
|
Part III:
|
Part IV:
|
Preface
of Pressure-Truncated Polytropes |
|---|
As has been detailed in an accompanying chapter, we have successfully analyzed the relative stability of pressure-truncated polytopes. The curves shown here on the right in Figure 1 graphically present the mass-radius relationship for pressure-truncated model sequences having a variety of polytropic indexes, as labeled, over the range . (Another version of this figure includes the isothermal sequence.) On each sequence for which , the green filled circle identifies the model with the largest mass. We have shown analytically that the oscillation frequency of the fundamental-mode of radial oscillation is precisely zero for each one of these maximum-mass models. As a consequence, we know that each green circular marker identifies the point along its associated sequence that separates dynamically stable (larger radii) from dynamically unstable (smaller radii) models.
Key Realization: Along sequences of pressure-truncated polytropes, the maximum-mass models identify precisely where the onset of dynamical instability occurs.
The principal question is: Along bipolytropic sequences, are maximum-mass models (identified by the solid green circular markers in Fig. 2) associated with the onset of dynamical instabilities? For more details, look here.
|
Figure 2: Equilibrium Sequences of Bipolytropes with and Various |
Analytically Determined Parameters† |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 | |||
|
0.33 |
24.00496 | 0.038378833 | 0.52024552 | |
|
0.316943 |
10.744571 | 0.068652714 | 0.382383875 | |
|
0.31 |
9.014959766 | 0.0755022550 | 0.3372170064 | |
|
0.3090 |
8.8301772 | 0.076265588 | 0.331475715 | |
|
|
4.9379256 | 0.084824137 | 0.139370157 | |
|
†Additional model parameters can be found here. |
||||
|
In terms of mass , length , and time , the units of various physical constants and variables are:
As a result, for example (see details below), if we hold the central-density — as well as and — constant along an equilibrium sequence, mass will scale as …
If instead (see details below) we hold — as well as and — constant along an equilibrium sequence, mass will scale as …
|
Original Model Construction
Fixed Central Density
From Examples, we find,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where, rewriting the relevant expressions in terms of the parameters,
and
we find,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Interface Pressure
Equilibrium Sequence Expressions
From the relevant interface conditions, we find,
|
|
|
|
Inverting this last expression gives,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hence, keeping and constant, we have,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This last expression shows that if and are both held fixed, then the interface pressure, , will be constant along the sequence of equilibrium models.
Note also:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sequence Plots
A plot of versus at fixed interface pressure will be generated via the relations,
| Ordinate: | Abscissa: | |
|
|
vs |
|
Alternatively, a plot of versus at fixed interface pressure will be generated via the relations,
| Ordinate: | Abscissa: | |
|
|
vs |
|
|
The expression for is …
The extremum in occurs when the LHS of this expression is zero, that is, when …
For the solution to this expression is . |
|
Equilibrium Sequences of BiPolytropes Having |
|
|---|---|
| Mass vs. Radius (Fixed Interface Pressure) |
Mass vs. Central Density (Fixed Interface Pressure) |
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Fixed Total Mass
Equilibrium Sequence Expressions
Again, drawing from previous Examples in which — as well as and — is held fixed, equilibrium models obey the relations,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's invert the first expression in order to construct equilibrium sequences in which the total mass — rather than — is held fixed. We find that,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note as well that,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sequence Plots
A plot of versus at fixed interface pressure will be generated via the relations,
| Ordinate | Abscissa | |
|
|
vs |
|


Hidden Text
Following the Lead of Yabushita75
Here in the context of bipolytropes, we want to construct an interface-pressure versus volume plot; and mass-versus-central density plots like the ones displayed for truncated isothermal spheres in Figure 1 of an accompanying discussion, and as displayed for a bipolytrope in Figure 1 (p. 445) of 📚 S. Yabushita (1975, MNRAS, Vol. 172, pp. 441 - 453).
In our accompanying chapter that presents example models of bipolytropes, we have adopted the following normalizations:
|
|
|
|
; |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
; |
|
|
|
Also, from the relevant interface conditions, we find,
|
|
|
|
Inverting this last expression gives,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hence, we can rewrite the "normalized" expressions as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Interface Pressure
Start with the model relation,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, given that,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Total Mass
Also, from the relevant interface conditions, we find,
|
|
|
|
Inverting this last expression gives,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hence, for a given specification of the interface location, — test values shown (in parentheses) assuming and — the desired expression for the central density is,
|
|
|
|
and, drawing the expression for the normalized total mass from our accompanying table of parameter values, namely,
|
|
|
|
we find,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where — again, from our accompanying table of parameter values —
|
|
|
|
(0.96077) | |
|
|
|
|
(0.79941) | |
|
|
|
|
(0.96225) | |
|
|
|
|
(1.10940) | |
|
|
|
|
(3.13637) | |
|
|
|
|
(2.77623) | |
|
|
|
|
(1.22153) |
Building on Earlier Eigenfunction Details
In the heading of Figure 6 from our accompanying presentation of the properties of marginally unstable oscillation modes in bipolytropes, we point to the (Excel spreadsheet) "Data File" that contains most of the relevant model details. See specifically,
|
in Marginally Unstable Models having Various |
|---|
Relevant Instabilities
Truncated n = 5 Polytrope
In Figure 3 of an accompanying discussion, we show where various turning points lie along the equilibrium sequence of truncated polytropes.
|
Figure 3: Equilibrium Sequences of Pressure-Truncated, n = 5 Polytropic Spheres |
|||||
| ● | †External Pressure vs. Volume (Fixed Mass) |
Mass vs. Radius (Fixed External Pressure) |
‡Mass vs. Central Density (Fixed External Pressure) |
Mass vs. Central Density (Fixed Radius) |
|
| ● | √3 | (a) |
(b) |
(c) |
(d) |
| ● | 3 | ||||
| ● | √15 | ||||
| ● | 9.01 | ||||
vs.
|
vs. |
vs. |
vs. |
||
-
KEY RESULT:
- The maximum "Bonnor-Ebert type" mass and external pressure occurs along the sequence precisely at .
- It is precisely at this turning point that the equilibrium model is marginally (dynamically) unstable; the eigenfunction is parabolic.
- For all , the location along the relevant sequence presents an analogous turning point whose location and whose eigenfunction is known analytically.
Bipolytropes with (nc, ne) = (5, 1)
Sequence Plots
In Figure 1 of an accompanying discussion, we show — via a plot in the diagram — how the bipolytrope sequence behaves for various values of the molecular-weight ratio over the range, .

Figure 1: Analytically determined plot of fractional core mass () versus fractional core radius () for bipolytrope model sequences having six different values of : 1 (blue diamonds), ½ (red squares), 0.345 (dark purple crosses), ⅓ (pink triangles), 0.309 (light green dashes), and ¼ (purple asterisks). Along each of the model sequences, points marked by solid-colored circles correspond to models whose interface parameter, , has one of three values: 0.5 (green circles), 1 (dark blue circles), or 3 (orange circles); the images linked to Table 2 provide plots of the density, pressure and mass profiles for nine of these identified models.
According to our accompanying discussion, in terms of the parameters,
and
the parameter, , varies with as,
- KEY RESULT: Over the range, , there is a value of above which no equilibrium configurations exist. We have determined the location of this "turning point" by setting, ; our derived result is,
Maximum Fractional Core Mass, (solid green circular markers)
for Equilibrium Sequences having Various Values ofLHS
RHS

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.0 0.33
24.00496 0.0719668 0.0710624 0.2128753 0.0726547 1.8516032 -223.8157 -223.8159 0.038378833 0.52024552 0.316943
10.744571 0.1591479 0.1493938 0.4903393 0.1663869 2.1760793 -31.55254 -31.55254 0.068652714 0.382383875 0.3090
8.8301772 0.1924833 0.1750954 0.6130669 0.2053811 2.2958639 -18.47809 -18.47808 0.076265588 0.331475715 4.9379256 0.3309933 0.2342522 1.4179907 0.4064595 2.761622 -2.601255 -2.601257 0.084824137 0.139370157 Recall that,
and
📚 Eggleton, Faulkner, & Cannon (1998) also analytically determined the structure of models along various sequences; their Figure 1 displays the behavior of versus log10 of the interface-to-core density ratio for a range of .What Indicates Dynamical Instability?
KEY RESULT (to be done): From our original derivation, we have generated a plot intended to replicate Figure 1 from EFC98; then we have marked on each sequence the location of the mass-extremum as determined by our above analytically derived result.
Related Discussions
- Instability Onset Overview
- Analytic
Appendices: | VisTrailsEquations | VisTrailsVariables | References | Ramblings | VisTrailsImages | myphys.lsu | ADS |




