SSC/Structure/BiPolytropes/Analytic1.53/Pt2

From JETohlineWiki
Revision as of 18:30, 15 January 2024 by Joel2 (talk | contribs) (See Also)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

BiPolytrope with (nc, ne) = (3/2, 3)


Part I:  Milne's (1930) EOS

 


Part II:  Point-Source Model

 


Part III:  Our Derivation

 


The Point-Source Model

According to Chapter IX.3 (p. 332) of [C67], in the so-called "point-source" model, "… it is assumed that the entire source of energy is liberated at the center of the star; analytically, the assumption is that Lr=constant=L."

Handling Radiation Transport

Here we begin with the familiar expression for the radiation flux,

Frad

=

c3ρκR(aradT4)

=

χradT,

[Shu92], Vol. I, §2, p. 17, Eq. (2.17)

and    [T78], §3.4, p. 57, Eq. (67)

where [T78] refers to

χrad

4caradT33κρ,

[T78], §3.4, p. 57, Eq. (68)

as the coefficient of radiative conductivity. When modeling spherically symmetric configurations, the radiation flux has only a radial component, that is, Frad=e^r(Fr). And, as pointed out in the context of Eq. (170) on p. 214 of [C67] … the quantity Lr4πr2Fr, which is the net amount of energy crossing a spherical surface of radius r, is generally introduced instead of Fr. We therefore have,

Lr4πr2 = c3ρκRddr(aradT4)

dTdr

= 34caradρκRT3Lr4πr2

[C67], Chapter V, Eq. (171)
[Clayton68], §6, Eq. (6-4a)
[KW94], §9.1, Eq. (9.6)
[HK94], §7.1, Eq. (7.8)
[BLRY07], §5.2, Eq. (5.15)

Dimensional Analysis:

κRLcarad rT4ρm14(K)4.

NOTE: This is consistent with the opacity, κR(2m1).

Harrison's Approach

Following 📚 M. Hall Harrison (1946, ApJ, Vol. 103, pp. 193 - 206), we seek to solve this last expression in concert with solutions to a pair of additional key governing relations for spherically symmetric equilibrium configurations, namely,

dPdr=GMrρr2

;      

dMrdr=4πr2ρ

📚 Hall Harrison (1946), p. 196, Eq. (20)

while adopting (see related discussion)

Form A
of the Ideal Gas Equation of State,

Pgas=μ¯ρT

and adopting Kramers' opacity law, that is,

κRκKramers = κ0ρT7/2.

Dimensional Analysis:

[κ0Lcarad] rT15/2ρ2m27(K)15/2
μ t22(K)1

We note as well that the leading coefficient in Kramers' opacity is,

κ0 5×1022cm5g2(K)7/2.

[Clayton68], §3.3, Eq. (3-170)
[KW94], §17.2, Eq. (17.5)
[HK94], §4.4.2, Eq. (4.35)

Does a Polytropic Relation Work?

Let's examine whether a point-source model can be represented by a polytropic relation.

Adopting Temperature (instead of enthalpy)

P = Kρ1+1/nρ=(PK)n/(n+1);
(μ)ρT = Kρ1+1/nT=(K/μ)ρ1/n;
Tn = (K/μ)nρTn=(K/μ)n(PK)n/(n+1)T(n+1)=(K/μ)(n+1)(PK).

Hydrostatic balance is governed by the single 2nd order ODE,

1r2ddr[r2ρdPdr] = 4πGρ.

Normally in order to arrive at the Lane-Emden equation, P is converted to ρ; here, let's convert both P and ρ to T. First, on the RHS we have,

ρ = (/μK)nTn;

and second, on the LHS we have,

1ρdPdr =

(K/μ)nTnddr[Kn(/μ)(n+1)T(n+1)]

  =

(μ)Tnddr[T(n+1)]

  =

(n+1)(μ)dTdr

  =

(n+1)(μ){34caradρκRT3L4πr2}

  =

(n+1)(μ)[3L16πcarad][ρr2T3]κ0ρT7/2

r2ρdPdr =

(n+1)(μ)[3κ0L16πcarad]ρ2T13/2

  =

(n+1)K2n(μ)2n+1[3κ0L16πcarad]T(4n13)/2.

So, the hydrostatic-balance condition becomes,

(n+1)K2n(μ)2n+1[3κ0L16πcarad]1r2dT(4n13)/2dr

= 4πG(/μK)nTn

(n+1)4πGK2n(/μK)n(μ)2n+1[3κ0L16πcarad]1r2dT(4n13)/2dr

= Tn

𝒜r2dT(4n13)/2dr

= Tn
𝒜1r2dr =

TndT(4n13)/2,

where,

𝒜

(n+1)4πGKn(μ)n+1[3κ0L16πcarad].


Dimensional Analysis:

[κ0Lcarad] m27(K)15/2
μ t22(K)1
polytropic K t22+3/nm1/n

Hence,

𝒜 G1Kn(μ)n+1[m27(K)15/2]
  [3mt2][t22+3/nm1/n]n[t22(K)1]n+1[m27(K)15/2]
  [3][2+3/n]n[2]n+1[7](K)13/2n3(K)13/2n.

Now, the characteristic length scale for polytropic configurations is given by the expression,

an2[(n+1)K4πGρc(1n)/n].

If we divide 𝒜 by an3, the resulting expression should give us the characteristic temperature of the envelope. Specifically, we find that,

𝒜an3 =

(n+1)4πGKn(μ)n+1[3κ0L16πcarad]×[(n+1)Kn4πGρc(1n)/n]3/2

  =

(n+1)1/2ρc3(n1)/2n(μ)n+1[3κ0L16πcarad](4πG)1/2Kn3/2

 

[m3]3(n1)/2n[t22(K)1]n+1[m27(K)15/2][3m1t2]1/2[t22+3/nm1/n]n3/2

 

t2n21+2n+3m3(n1)/2n21/2+1+3/2n9(n1)/2n+2n+2+7+3/2[(2n+3)/n](2n+3)/2(K)13/2n

 

(9+4n2+12n)/2n(2n+3)2/2n(K)13/2n

 

(K)(132n)/2.


Quite generally we can write,

1αdTαdr =

Tα1dTdr.

Rewriting the hydrostatic-balance condition, we find that,

𝒜1r2 =

Tnddr[T(4n13)/2]=Tn(4n132)T(4n15)/2dTdr=(4n132)T(2n15)/2dTdr.

Associating the exponents,

α1 =

2n152α=2n132,

we can write,

𝒜1r2 =

(4n132)(22n13)ddr[T(2n13)/2]

3d(r3) =

𝒜(4n132n13)d[T(2n13)/2]

0 =

d[𝒜(134n132n)T(2n13)/23r3]

constant =

𝒜an3(134n132n)T(2n13)/23(ran)3.

Adopting Enthalpy (instead of Temperature)

For polytropic configurations the enthalpy, H, can easily be adopted in place of temperature via the relation,

(μ)T = H(n+1).

Hence,

P = Kρ1+1/n;         H = Kρ1/n;         Hn+1 = KnP.

And the radiation-transport equation can be rewritten in the form,

Lr4πr2 = carad3ρκR(n+1)4(μ)4dH4dr
  = carad3κ0(n+1)4(μ)4[ρ2T7/2]dH4dr
  = carad3κ0(n+1)4(μ)4{(KH)2n[(μ)1H(n+1)]7/2}4H3dHdr
  = 4caradK2n3κ0(n+1)15/2(μ)15/2H(134n)/2dHdr
r2dHdr = [3κ0L(n+1)15/216πcaradK2n(μ)15/2]H(4n13)/2 .

In terms of the enthalpy, the hydrostatic-balance expression becomes,

4πG[HnKn] = 1r2ddr{r2[KnHn]ddr[KnHn+1]}
4πGHn = Knr2ddr{[r2Hn]ddr[Hn+1]}
  = (n+1)Knr2ddr{r2dHdr}.

Combining these two equations gives,

r2Hn = ddr{H(4n13)/2}
  = (4n13)2H(4n15)/2dHdr
[2(4n13)]r2 = H(2n15)/2dHdr

where,

[3κ0L(n+1)17/264π2GcaradKn(μ)15/2].

As above, quite generally we can write,

1αdHαdr =

Hα1dHdr.

So, associating the exponents, we appreciate that,

α1 =

2n152α=2n132.

Hence, we have,

[2(4n13)]r2 = 2(2n13)ddr[H(2n13)/2]
r2 = (4n13)(2n13)ddr[H(2n13)/2]
d[r3an3] = 3(4n13)(2n13)an3d[H(2n13)/2]
d[ξ3] = [3(4n13)(2n13)][an3Hnorm(2n13)/2]d[HHnorm](2n13)/2;

so, if we adopt the definition,

Hnorm

[(2n13)3(4n13)an3]2/(2n13),

the relation becomes,

d[ξ3] = d[HHnorm](2n13)/2.

Power-Law Density Distribution

In an accompanying discussion, we have demonstrated that power-law density distributions can provide analytic solutions of the Lane-Emden equation, although the associated boundary conditions do not naturally conform to the boundary conditions that are suitable to astrophysical configurations. We have just shown that the point-source envelope configuration appears to admit a power-law temperature (alternatively, enthalpy) solution. Via the polytropic relation, H=Kρ1/n, we can convert to the density-radius relation,

d[ξ3] = [Kρc1/nHnorm](2n13)/2d[ρρc](2n13)/2n

which, upon integration gives,

constant = [ρρc](2n13)/2nξ3,

if we adopt the definition,

ρc (HnormK)n.

Setting the integration constant to zero, our result gives,

ρρc ξ6n/(2n13).

In astrophysically relevant configurations, the exponent on ξ must be negative, which means that we are confined to models for which n<72.

Now, from our associated discussion of power-law density distributions in polytropes, we discovered that hydrostatic balance can be established at all radial positions within a spherically symmetric configuration for power-law density distributions of the form,

ρρcξ2n/(n1)

This matches our just-derived point-source model if,

6n/(2n13) = 2n/(n1)
6(n1) = 2(132n)
n = 165,

which is less than 72, so it is an astrophysically viable result.

See Also


Tiled Menu

Appendices: | VisTrailsEquations | VisTrailsVariables | References | Ramblings | VisTrailsImages | myphys.lsu | ADS |