SSC/Stability/n1PolytropeLAWE

From jetwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Radial Oscillations of n = 1 Polytropic Spheres

As far as we have been able to ascertain, the first technical examination of radial oscillation modes in n=1 polytropes was performed — using numerical techniques — in 1951 by L. D. Chatterji; at the time, he was in the Mathematics Department of Allahabad University. His two papers on this topic were published in, what is now referred to as, the Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy (PINSA). The citations that immediately follow this opening paragraph provide inks to both of these papers by Chatterji, but the links may be insecure. (Citations/links to articles that provide analyses of models having other polytropic indexes are provided at the bottom of this chapter.) Apparently Springer is archiving recent PINSA volumes, but their holdings do not date back as early as 1951.

Groundwork

In an accompanying discussion, we derived the so-called,

Adiabatic Wave (or Radial Pulsation) Equation

d2xdr02+[4r0−(g0ρ0P0)]dxdr0+(ρ0γgP0)[ω2+(4−3γg)g0r0]x=0

whose solution gives eigenfunctions that describe various radial modes of oscillation in spherically symmetric, self-gravitating fluid configurations. Because this widely used form of the radial pulsation equation is not dimensionless but, rather, has units of inverse length-squared, we have found it useful to also recast it in the following dimensionless form:

d2xdχ02+[4χ0−(ρ0ρc)(P0Pc)−1(g0gSSC)]dxdχ0+(ρ0ρc)(P0Pc)−1(1γg)[τSSC2ω2+(4−3γg)(g0gSSC)1χ0]x=0,

where,

gSSC≡PcRρc,       and       τSSC≡[R2ρcPc]1/2.

In a separate discussion, we showed that specifically for isolated, polytropic configurations, this linear adiabatic wave equation (LAWE) can be rewritten as,

0

=

d2xdξ2+[4−(n+1)V(ξ)ξ]dxdξ+[ω2γgθ(n+14πGρc)−(3−4γg)⋅(n+1)V(x)ξ2]x

 

=

d2xdξ2+[4ξ−(n+1)θ(−dθdξ)]dxdξ+(n+1)θ[σc26γg−αξ(−dθdξ)]x,

where we have adopted the dimensionless frequency notation,

σc2

≡

3ω22πGρc.

Here we focus on an analysis of the specific case of isolated, n=1 polytropic configurations, whose unperturbed equilibrium structure can be prescribed in terms of analytic functions. Our hope — as yet unfulfilled — is that we can discover an analytically prescribed eigenvector solution to the governing LAWE.

Search for Analytic Solutions to the LAWE

Setup

From our derived structure of an n = 1 polytrope, in terms of the configuration's radius R and mass M, the central pressure and density are, respectively,

Pc=πG8(M2R4) ,

and

ρc=πM4R3 .

Hence the characteristic time and acceleration are, respectively,

τSSC=[R2ρcPc]1/2=[2R3GM]1/2=[π2Gρc]1/2,

and,

gSSC=PcRρc=(GM2R2).

The required functions are,

  • Density:

ρ0(χ0)ρc=sin⁡(πχ0)πχ0 ;

  • Pressure:

P0(χ0)Pc=[sin⁡(πχ0)πχ0]2 ;

  • Gravitational acceleration:

g0(r0)gSSC=2χ02[Mr(χ0)M]=2πχ02[sin⁡(πχ0)−πχ0cos⁡(πχ0)].

So our desired Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors will be solutions to the following ODE:

d2xdχ02+2χ0[1+πχ0cot⁡(πχ0)]dxdχ0+1γg{πχ0sin⁡(πχ0)[πω22Gρc]+2χ02(4−3γg)[1−πχ0cot⁡(πχ0)]}x=0,


or, replacing χ0 with ξ≡πχ0 and dividing the entire expression by π2, we have,

d2xdξ2+2ξ[1+ξcot⁡ξ]dxdξ+1γg{ξsin⁡ξ[ω22πGρc]+2ξ2(4−3γg)[1−ξcot⁡ξ]}x=0.


This is identical to the formulation of the wave equation that is relevant to the (n = 1) core of the composite polytrope studied by J. O. Murphy & R. Fiedler (1985b); for comparison, their expression is displayed, here, in the following boxed-in image.

n = 1 Polytropic Formulation of Wave Equation as Presented by Murphy & Fiedler (1985b)

Murphy & Fiedler (1985b)
Murphy & Fiedler (1985b)

Material that appears after this point in our presentation is under development and therefore
may contain incorrect mathematical equations and/or physical misinterpretations.
|   Go Home   |


 

From an accompanying discussion, we find the,

Polytropic LAWE (linear adiabatic wave equation)

0=d2xdξ2+[4−(n+1)Q]1ξ⋅dxdξ+(n+1)[(σc26γg)ξ2θ−αQ]xξ2

where:    Q(ξ)≡−dln⁡θdln⁡ξ,    σc2≡3ω22πGρc,     and,     α≡(3−4γg)

For an isolated n = 1 (γg=2,α=1) polytrope, we know that,

θ

=

sin⁡ξξ

    ⇒Q(ξ)≡−dln⁡θdln⁡ξ

=

[1−ξcot⁡ξ].

Hence, the relevant LAWE is,

0

=

d2xdξ2+[4−2(1−ξcot⁡ξ)]1ξ⋅dxdξ+2[(σc212)ξ3sin⁡ξ−(1−ξcot⁡ξ)]xξ2

LAWE for n = 1 Polytrope

0

=

d2xdξ2+2ξ[1+ξcot⁡ξ]dxdξ+12[(σc23)ξsin⁡ξ−4ξ2(1−ξcot⁡ξ)]x

This matches precisely the expression derived immediately above.

Surface boundary condition:

−dln⁡xdln⁡ξ|surf

=

(3−nn+1)+nσc26(n+1)[ξθ′]surf

⇒−dln⁡xdln⁡ξ|surf

=

1+σc212[ξ3(ξcos⁡ξ−sin⁡ξ)]ξ=π=1−π2σc212

Attempt at Deriving an Analytic Eigenvector Solution

Multiplying the last expression through by ξ2sin⁡ξ gives,

(ξ2sin⁡ξ)d2xdξ2+2[ξsin⁡ξ+ξ2cos⁡ξ]dxdξ+[σ2ξ3−2α(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ)]x=0,


where,

σ2

≡

ω22πGρcγg,

α

≡

3−4γg.

The first two terms can be folded together to give,

1ξ2sin2ξ⋅ddξ[ξ2sin2ξdxdξ]

=

1ξ2sin⁡ξ[2α(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ)−σ2ξ3]x

 

=

−[2αξ2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)+σ2(ξsin⁡ξ)]x

 

=

−[2αξ2ξ2sin⁡ξ⋅ddξ(sin⁡ξξ)+σ2(ξsin⁡ξ)]x

 

=

−[2αξddξ(sin⁡ξξ)+σ2](ξsin⁡ξ)x,

where, in order to make this next-to-last step, we have recognized that,

ddξ(sin⁡ξξ)

=

sin⁡ξξ2[ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1].

It would seem that the eigenfunction, x(ξ), should be expressible in terms of trigonometric functions and powers of ξ; indeed, it appears as though the expression governing this eigenfunction would simplify considerably if x∝sin⁡ξ/ξ. With this in mind, we have made some attempts to guess the exact form of the eigenfunction. Here is one such attempt.

First Guess (n1)

Let's try,

x=sin⁡ξξ,

which means,

x'≡dxdξ

=

sin⁡ξξ2[ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1].

Does this satisfy the governing expression? Let's see. The right-and-side (RHS) gives:

RHS

=

−[2αξddξ(sin⁡ξξ)+σ2](ξsin⁡ξ)x=−[2αx'ξ+σ2].

At the same time, the left-hand-side (LHS) may, quite generically, be written as:

LHS

=

x'ξ{ξ(ξ2sin2ξ)x'⋅d[(ξ2sin2ξ)x']dξ}

 

=

x'ξ[dln⁡[(ξ2sin⁡2ξ)x']dln⁡ξ].

Putting the two sides together therefore gives,

x'ξ[dln⁡[(ξ2sin⁡2ξ)x']dln⁡ξ+2α]

=

−σ2

⇒[dln⁡[(ξ2sin⁡2ξ)x']1/(2α)dln⁡ξ+1]

=

−σ22α(ξx')

⇒dln⁡[(ξ2sin⁡2ξ)x']−1/(2α)dln⁡ξ

=

1+σ22α(ξx').

[Comment from J. E. Tohline on 6 April 2015: I'm not sure what else to make of this.]

Second Guess (n1)

Adopting the generic rewriting of the LHS, and leaving the RHS fully generic as well, we have,

x'ξ[dln⁡[(ξ2sin⁡2ξ)x']dln⁡ξ]

=

−[2αξddξ(sin⁡ξξ)+σ2](ξsin⁡ξ)x

⇒x'x[dln⁡[(ξ2sin⁡2ξ)x']dln⁡ξ]

=

−2α(ξsin⁡ξ)ddξ(sin⁡ξξ)−σ2(ξ2sin⁡ξ)

⇒dln⁡(x)dln⁡ξ[dln⁡[(ξ2sin⁡2ξ)x']dln⁡ξ]

=

−2α[dln⁡(sin⁡ξ/ξ)dln⁡ξ]−σ2(ξ3sin⁡ξ).

⇒−σ2

=

(sin⁡ξξ3){dln⁡(x)dln⁡ξ[dln⁡[(ξ2sin⁡2ξ)x']dln⁡ξ]+2α[dln⁡(sin⁡ξ/ξ)dln⁡ξ]}.

[Comment from J. E. Tohline on 6 April 2015: I'm not sure what else to make of this.]


Third Guess (n1)

Let's rewrite the polytropic (n = 1) wave equation as follows:

sin⁡ξ[ξ2x'′+2ξx'−2αx]+cos⁡ξ[2ξ2x'+2αξx]+σ2ξ3x=0.

It is difficult to determine what term in the adiabatic wave equation will cancel the term involving σ2 because its leading coefficient is ξ3 and no other term contains a power of ξ that is higher than two. After thinking through various trial eigenvector expressions, x(ξ), I have determined that a function of the following form has a chance of working because the second derivative of the function generates a leading factor of ξ3 while the function itself does not introduce any additional factors of ξ into the term that contains σ2:

x

=

[asin2(ξ5/2)+bsin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+ccos⁡2(ξ5/2)][Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]

⇒x'

=

[asin2(ξ5/2)+bsin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+ccos⁡2(ξ5/2)]⋅d[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]dξ

 

 

+d[asin2(ξ5/2)+bsin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+ccos⁡2(ξ5/2)]dξ⋅[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]

 

=

[asin2(ξ5/2)+bsin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+ccos⁡2(ξ5/2)]⋅d[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]dξ

 

 

+[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]{5aξ3/2sin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+b[52ξ3/2cos⁡2(ξ5/2)−52ξ3/2sin⁡2(ξ5/2)]−5cξ3/2sin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)}

 

=

[asin2(ξ5/2)+bsin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+ccos⁡2(ξ5/2)]⋅d[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]dξ

 

 

+[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]{5(a−c)ξ3/2sin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+5b2ξ3/2[1−2sin⁡2(ξ5/2)]}

⇒x'′

=

[asin2(ξ5/2)+bsin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+ccos⁡2(ξ5/2)]⋅d2[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]d2ξ

 

 

+{5(a−c)ξ3/2sin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+5b2ξ3/2[1−2sin⁡2(ξ5/2)]}⋅d[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]dξ

 

 

+[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]{152(a−c)ξ1/2sin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+252(a−c)ξ3cos⁡2(ξ5/2)−252(a−c)ξ3sin⁡2(ξ5/2)

 

 

+15b4ξ1/2[1−2sin2(ξ5/2)]−25bξ3sin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)}

 

=

[asin2(ξ5/2)+bsin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+ccos⁡2(ξ5/2)]⋅d2[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]d2ξ

 

 

+{5(a−c)ξ3/2sin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+5b2ξ3/2[1−2sin⁡2(ξ5/2)]}⋅d[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]dξ

 

 

+[Asin⁡ξ+Bcos⁡ξ]{154ξ1/2[2(a−c)sin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+b(1−2sin⁡2(ξ5/2))]

 

 

+252ξ3[−2bsin⁡(ξ5/2)cos⁡(ξ5/2)+(a−c)(1−2sin⁡2(ξ5/2))]}

[Comment from J. E. Tohline on 9 April 2015: I'm not sure what else to make of this.]

[Additional comment from J. E. Tohline on 15 April 2015: It is perhaps worth mentioning that there is a similarity between the argument of the trigonometric function being used in this "third guess" and the Lane-Emden function derived by Srivastava for n=5 polytropes; and also a similarity between Srivastava's function and the functional form of the LHS that we constructed, above, in connection with our "second guess."]

Fourth Guess (n1)

Again, working with the polytropic (n = 1) wave equation written in the following form,

sin⁡ξ[ξ2x'′+2ξx'−2αx]+cos⁡ξ[2ξ2x'+2αξx]+σ2ξ3x=0.

Now, let's try:

x=a0+b1ξsin⁡ξ+c2ξ2cos⁡ξ,

which means,

x'

=

b1sin⁡ξ+b1ξcos⁡ξ+2c2ξcos⁡ξ−c2ξ2sin⁡ξ

 

=

(b1−c2ξ2)sin⁡ξ+(b1+2c2)ξcos⁡ξ,

x'′

=

(−2c2ξ)sin⁡ξ+(b1−c2ξ2)cos⁡ξ+(b1+2c2)cos⁡ξ−(b1+2c2)ξsin⁡ξ

 

=

−(2c2+b1+2c2)ξsin⁡ξ+(2b1+2c2−c2ξ2)cos⁡ξ.

The LHS of the wave equation then becomes,

LHS

=

sin⁡ξ{ξ2[−(2c2+b1+2c2)ξsin⁡ξ+(2b1+2c2−c2ξ2)cos⁡ξ]+2ξ[(b1−c2ξ2)sin⁡ξ+(b1+2c2)ξcos⁡ξ]−2α[a0+(b1ξ)sin⁡ξ+(c2ξ2)cos⁡ξ]}

 

 

+cos⁡ξ{2ξ2[(b1−c2ξ2)sin⁡ξ+(b1+2c2)ξcos⁡ξ]+2αξ[a0+(b1ξ)sin⁡ξ+(c2ξ2)cos⁡ξ]}+σ2ξ3[a0+b1ξsin⁡ξ+c2ξ2cos⁡ξ]

 

=

sin⁡ξ{[−(2c2+b1+2c2)ξ3sin⁡ξ+(2b1+2c2−c2ξ2)ξ2cos⁡ξ]+[2(b1−c2ξ2)ξsin⁡ξ+2(b1+2c2)ξ2cos⁡ξ]−2α[a0+(b1ξ)sin⁡ξ+(c2ξ2)cos⁡ξ]}

 

 

+cos⁡ξ{[2(b1−c2ξ2)ξ2sin⁡ξ+2(b1+2c2)ξ3cos⁡ξ]+[2a0αξ+2b1αξ2sin⁡ξ+2c2αξ3cos⁡ξ]}+σ2[a0ξ3+b1ξ4sin⁡ξ+c2ξ5cos⁡ξ]

 

=

sin⁡ξ{−2αa0+[−(2c2+b1+2c2)ξ3+2(b1−c2ξ2)ξ−2α(b1ξ)]sin⁡ξ+[(2b1+2c2−c2ξ2)ξ2+2(b1+2c2)ξ2−2α(c2ξ2)]cos⁡ξ}

 

 

+cos⁡ξ{+2a0αξ+[2(b1−c2ξ2)ξ2+2b1αξ2]sin⁡ξ+[2(b1+2c2)ξ3+2c2αξ3]cos⁡ξ}+σ2[a0ξ3+b1ξ4sin⁡ξ+c2ξ5cos⁡ξ]

 

=

σ2a0ξ3+[−(2c2+b1+2c2)ξ3+2(b1−c2ξ2)ξ−2α(b1ξ)]sin2ξ+[2(b1+2c2)ξ3+2c2αξ3](1−sin2ξ)

 

 

+[(2b1+2c2−c2ξ2)ξ2+2(b1+2c2)ξ2−2α(c2ξ2)]sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ+[2(b1−c2ξ2)ξ2+2b1αξ2]sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ

 

 

+σ2[b1ξ4sin⁡ξ+c2ξ5cos⁡ξ]+2a0αξcos⁡ξ−2αa0sin⁡ξ

 

=

[σ2a0+2(b1+2c2)+2c2α]ξ3+{+2(b1)ξ−2α(b1ξ)+[−2c2−2(b1+2c2)−2c2α−(2c2+b1+2c2)]ξ3}sin2ξ

 

 

+{[(2b1+2c2)+2(b1+2c2)−2α(c2)+2(b1)+2b1α]ξ2−3c2ξ4}sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ

 

 

+sin⁡ξ[σ2b1ξ4−2αa0]+ξcos⁡ξ[σ2c2ξ4+2a0α]

 

=

[σ2a0+2(b1+2c2)+2c2α]ξ3+{2b1(1−α)−[2c2(5+α)+3b1]ξ2}ξsin2ξ

 

 

+{2(3−α)(b1+c2)−3c2ξ2}ξ2sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ+sin⁡ξ[σ2b1ξ4−2αa0]+ξcos⁡ξ[σ2c2ξ4+2a0α].

Fifth Guess (n1)

Along a similar line of reasoning, let's try a function of the form,

x

=

xssin⁡ξ+xccos⁡ξ+x1sin⁡2ξ+x2cos⁡2ξ+x3sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ,

where xs,xc,x1,x2, and x3 are five separate, as yet, unspecified (polynomial?) functions of ξ. This also means that,

x'

=

(xs'−xc)sin⁡ξ+(xc'+xs)cos⁡ξ+(x1'−x3)sin⁡2ξ+(x2'+x3)cos⁡2ξ+(x3'+2x1−2x2)sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ;

and,

x'′

=

(xs'′−2xc'−xs)sin⁡ξ+(xc'′+2xs'−xc)cos⁡ξ+(x1'′−2x3'−2x1+2x2)sin⁡2ξ+(x2'′+2x3'+2x1−2x2)cos⁡2ξ+(x3'′+4x1'−4x2'−4x3)sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ.

Hence the LHS of the polytropic (n = 1) wave equation becomes,

LHS

=

sin⁡ξ{ξ2[(xs'′−2xc'−xs)sin⁡ξ+(xc'′+2xs'−xc)cos⁡ξ+(x1'′−2x3'−2x1+2x2)sin⁡2ξ+(x2'′+2x3'+2x1−2x2)cos⁡2ξ+(x3'′+4x1'−4x2'−4x3)sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ]

 

 

+2ξ[(xs'−xc)sin⁡ξ+(xc'+xs)cos⁡ξ+(x1'−x3)sin⁡2ξ+(x2'+x3)cos⁡2ξ+(x3'+2x1−2x2)sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ]

 

 

−2α[xssin⁡ξ+xccos⁡ξ+x1sin⁡2ξ+x2cos⁡2ξ+x3sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ]}

 

 

+cos⁡ξ{2ξ2[(xs'−xc)sin⁡ξ+(xc'+xs)cos⁡ξ+(x1'−x3)sin⁡2ξ+(x2'+x3)cos⁡2ξ+(x3'+2x1−2x2)sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ]

 

 

+2αξ[xssin⁡ξ+xccos⁡ξ+x1sin⁡2ξ+x2cos⁡2ξ+x3sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ]}

 

 

+σ2ξ3{xssin⁡ξ+xccos⁡ξ+x1sin⁡2ξ+x2cos⁡2ξ+x3sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ}

 

=

[(xs'′−2xc'−xs)ξ2+2ξ(xs'−xc)−2αxs+σ2ξ3x1]sin2ξ+[(xc'′+2xs'−xc)ξ2+2ξ(xc'+xs)−2αxc+2ξ2(xs'−xc)+2αξxs+σ2ξ3x3]sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ

 

 

+[(x1'′−2x3'−2x1+2x2)ξ2+2ξ(x1'−x3)−2αx1]sin3ξ+[(x2'′+2x3'+2x1−2x2)ξ2+2ξ(x2'+x3)−2αx2+2ξ2(x3'+2x1−2x2)+2αξx3]sin⁡ξcos⁡2ξ

 

 

+[(x3'′+4x1'−4x2'−4x3)ξ2+2ξ(x3'+2x1−2x2)−2αx3+2ξ2(x1'−x3)+2αξx1]sin2ξcos⁡ξ

 

 

+[2ξ2(xc'+xs)+2αξxc+σ2ξ3x2]cos2ξ+[2ξ2(x2'+x3)+2αξx2]cos3ξ+σ2ξ3xssin⁡ξ+σ2ξ3xccos⁡ξ

 

=

[(xs'′−2xc'−xs)ξ2+2ξ(xs'−xc)−2αxs+σ2ξ3x1]sin2ξ+[(xc'′+2xs'−xc)ξ2+2ξ(xc'+xs)−2αxc+2ξ2(xs'−xc)+2αξxs+σ2ξ3x3]sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ

 

 

+[(x1'′−2x3'−2x1+2x2)ξ2+2ξ(x1'−x3)−2αx1+σ2ξ3xs]sin⁡ξ

 

 

+[(x2'′+2x3'+2x1−2x2)ξ2+2ξ(x2'+x3)−2αx2+2ξ2(x3'+2x1−2x2)+2αξx3−(x1'′−2x3'−2x1+2x2)ξ2−2ξ(x1'−x3)+2αx1]sin⁡ξcos⁡2ξ

 

 

+[(x3'′+4x1'−4x2'−4x3)ξ2+2ξ(x3'+2x1−2x2)−2αx3+2ξ2(x1'−x3)+2αξx1−2ξ2(x2'+x3)−2αξx2]sin2ξcos⁡ξ

 

 

+[2ξ2(xc'+xs)+2αξxc+σ2ξ3x2]cos2ξ+[2ξ2(x2'+x3)+2αξx2+σ2ξ3xc]cos⁡ξ

So, the five chosen (polynomial?) functions of ξ must simultabeously satisfy the following, seven 2nd-order ODEs:

sin⁡ξ

      :      

(x1'′−2x3'−2x1+2x2)ξ2+2ξ(x1'−x3)−2αx1+σ2ξ3xs=0

sin2ξ

      :      

(xs'′−2xc'−xs)ξ2+2ξ(xs'−xc)−2αxs+σ2ξ3x1=0

sin2ξcos⁡ξ

      :      

(x3'′+4x1'−4x2'−4x3)ξ2+2ξ(x3'+2x1−2x2)−2αx3+2ξ2(x1'−x3)+2αξx1−2ξ2(x2'+x3)−2αξx2=0

sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ

      :      

(xc'′+2xs'−xc)ξ2+2ξ(xc'+xs)−2αxc+2ξ2(xs'−xc)+2αξxs+σ2ξ3x3=0

sin⁡ξcos⁡2ξ

      :      

(x2'′+2x3'+2x1−2x2)ξ2+2ξ(x2'+x3)−2αx2+2ξ2(x3'+2x1−2x2)+2αξx3−(x1'′−2x3'−2x1+2x2)ξ2−2ξ(x1'−x3)+2αx1=0

cos2ξ

      :      

2ξ2(xc'+xs)+2αξxc+σ2ξ3x2=0

cos⁡ξ

      :      

2ξ2(x2'+x3)+2αξx2+σ2ξ3xc=0

Example 1

Let's work on the coefficient of the cos⁡ξ term:

xc

=

ξβ(Ac)

x2

=

ξβ(C2ξ2)

x3

=

ξβ(B3ξ)

⇒       Coefficient of "cos⁡ξ" term

=

ξβ[2ξ2(2C2ξ+(B3ξ))+2αξ(C2ξ2)+σ2ξ3(Ac)]

 

=

ξβ+3[2(2C2+B3)+2αC2+σ2(Ac)]

⇒σ2

=

−2Ac[B3+(2+α)C2]

Sixth Guess (n1)

Rationale

From our review of the properties of n=1 polytropic spheres, we know that the equilibrium density distribution is given by the sinc function, namely,

ρρc

=

sin⁡ξξ,

where,

ξ≡π(r0R0).

The total mass is,

Mtot=4π⋅ρcR03,

and the fractional mass enclosed within a given radius, r, is,

Mr(ξ)Mtot

=

1π[sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ].

Let's guess that, during the fundamental mode of radial oscillation, the sinc-function profile is preserved as the system's total radius varies. In particular, we will assume that the system's time-varying radius is,

R=R0(1+δRR0)=R0(1+ϵR),

and seek to determine how the displacement vector, ϵ≡δr/r0, varies with r0 in order to preserve the overall sinc-function profile. As is usual, we will only examine small perturbations away from equilibrium, that is, we will assume that everywhere throughout the configuration, |ϵ|≪1.


Let's begin by defining a new dimensionless coordinate,

η≡π(rR)=π[r0(1+ϵ)R0(1+ϵR)]≈ξ(1+ϵ),

and recognize that, in the new perturbed state, the fractional mass enclosed within a given radius, r, is,

Mr(η)Mtot

=

1π[sin⁡η−ηcos⁡η].

In order to associate each mass shell in the perturbed configuration with its corresponding mass shell in the unperturbed, equilibrium state, we need to set the two Mr functions equal to one another, that is, demand that,

sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ

=

sin⁡η−ηcos⁡η

 

≈

sin⁡[ξ(1+ϵ)]−ξ(1+ϵ)cos⁡[ξ(1+ϵ)]

 

=

[sin⁡ξcos⁡(ξϵ)+cos⁡ξsin⁡(ξϵ)]−ξ(1+ϵ)[cos⁡ξcos⁡(ξϵ)−sin⁡ξsin⁡(ξϵ)]

 

≈

sin⁡ξ[1−12(ξϵ)2]+(ξϵ)cos⁡ξ−ξ(1+ϵ)cos⁡ξ[1−12(ξϵ)2]+ξ2ϵ(1+ϵ)sin⁡ξ

 

≈

sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ−12(ξϵ)2sin⁡ξ+(ξϵ)cos⁡ξ−(ξϵ)cos⁡ξ+12ξ3ϵ2cos⁡ξ+ξ2ϵsin⁡ξ+(ξϵ)2sin⁡ξ

⇒−ξ2ϵsin⁡ξ

≈

(ξϵ)22[ξcos⁡ξ+sin⁡ξ]

⇒1ϵ

≈

−12[ξ⋅cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+1]

⇒ϵ

≈

−2[1+ξ⋅cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]−1=−2sin⁡ξ[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−1.

Resulting Polytropic Wave Equation

So, let's try,

x

=

2sin⁡ξ[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−1

 

=

[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−32sin⁡ξ[sin⁡2ξ+2ξsin⁡ξcos⁡ξ+ξ2cos⁡2ξ],

in which case,

x'

=

2cos⁡ξ[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−1−2sin⁡ξ[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−2[2cos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡ξ]

 

=

[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−2{2cos⁡ξ[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−2sin⁡ξ[2cos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡ξ]}

 

=

[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−2[2cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+2ξcos⁡2ξ−4sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ+2ξsin⁡2ξ]

 

=

2[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−2[ξ−sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ]

 

=

[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−32[ξsin⁡ξ+ξ2cos⁡ξ−sin⁡2ξcos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡ξcos⁡2ξ],

and,

x'′

=

2[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−2[1−cos⁡2ξ+sin⁡2ξ]−4[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−3[ξ−sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ][2cos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡ξ]

 

=

4[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−3{sin⁡2ξ[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−[ξ−sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ][2cos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡ξ]}

 

=

4[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−3[sin⁡3ξ+ξsin⁡ξcos⁡ξ+ξ2sin⁡ξ−2ξcos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡2ξcos⁡ξ+2sin⁡ξcos⁡2ξ]

Graphical Reassessment

Before plowing ahead and plugging these expressions into the polytropic wave equation, I plotted the trial eigenfunction,

ϵ(ξ/π)

(see the blue curve in the accompanying "Trial Eigenfunction" figure), and noticed that it passes through

±∞

midway through the configuration. This is a very unphysical behavior. On the other hand, the inverse of this function (see the red curve) exhibits a relatively desirable behavior because it increases monotonically from negative one at the center. As plotted, however, the function has one node. In searching for the eigenfunction of the fundamental mode of oscillation, it might be better to add "1" to the inverse of the function and thereby get rid of all nodes. (Keep in mind, however, that the red curve might be displaying the eigenfunction associated with the first overtone.)

Let's therefore try,

x=1+1ϵ=1−12[ξ⋅cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+1]=12[1−ξ⋅cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ].

In this case we have,

x'

=

12[ξ−cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+ξ⋅cos2ξsin2ξ]

 

=

12sin2ξ[ξsin2ξ−sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ+ξcos⁡2ξ],

 

=

12sin2ξ[ξ−sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ],

and,

x'′

=

−cos⁡ξsin3ξ[ξ−sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ]+12sin2ξ[1−cos⁡2ξ+sin⁡2ξ]

 

=

1−cos⁡ξsin3ξ[ξ−sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ].

Now let's plug these expressions into the polytropic (n = 1) wave equation, namely,

−σ2ξ3x

=

sin⁡ξ[ξ2x'′+2ξx'−2αx]+cos⁡ξ[2ξ2x'+2αξx].

The first term inside the square brackets on the right-hand-side gives,

ξ2x'′+2ξx'−2αx

=

ξ2−cos⁡ξsin3ξ(ξ3−ξ2sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ)+1sin2ξ(ξ2−ξsin⁡ξcos⁡ξ)−α(1−ξ⋅cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)

 

=

1sin3ξ[ξ2sin3ξ−cos⁡ξ(ξ3−ξ2sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ)+sin⁡ξ(ξ2−ξsin⁡ξcos⁡ξ)−α(sin⁡3ξ−ξcos⁡ξsin⁡2ξ)]

 

=

1sin3ξ[ξ2sin⁡ξ(1−cos⁡2ξ)+ξ2sin⁡ξcos⁡2ξ−ξ3cos⁡ξ+ξ2sin⁡ξ−ξsin⁡2ξcos⁡ξ−αsin⁡3ξ+αξcos⁡ξsin⁡2ξ]

 

=

−α+1sin3ξ[2ξ2sin⁡ξ−ξ3cos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡2ξcos⁡ξ+αξcos⁡ξsin⁡2ξ];

and the second term inside the square brackets on the right-hand-side gives,

2ξ2x'+2αξx

=

1sin2ξ(ξ3−ξ2sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ)+αsin⁡ξ(ξsin⁡ξ−ξ2cos⁡ξ).

Put together, then, we have,

RHS

=

1sin2ξ[2ξ2sin⁡ξ−ξ3cos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡2ξcos⁡ξ+αξcos⁡ξsin⁡2ξ]+cos⁡ξsin2ξ(ξ3−ξ2sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ)−αsin⁡ξ+α⋅cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ(ξsin⁡ξ−ξ2cos⁡ξ)

 

=

1sin2ξ[2ξ2sin⁡ξ−ξ3cos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡2ξcos⁡ξ+αξcos⁡ξsin⁡2ξ+ξ3cos⁡ξ−ξ2sin⁡ξcos⁡2ξ]+αsin⁡ξ[−sin⁡2ξ+ξsin⁡ξcos⁡ξ−ξ2cos⁡2ξ]

 

=

ξsin⁡ξ[2ξ−sin⁡ξcos⁡ξ−ξcos⁡2ξ]−αsin⁡ξ[sin⁡2ξ+ξ2cos⁡2ξ]

 

=

ξ2sin⁡ξ[1+sin2ξ−(sin⁡ξξ)cos⁡ξ−α(sin2ξξ2+cos⁡2ξ)],

and,

LHS

=

−ξσ22(ξ2sin⁡ξ)[sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ].

If our trial eigenfunction is a proper solution to the polytropic wave equation, then the difference of these two expressions should be zero. Let's see:

sin⁡ξξ2(RHS−LHS)

=

1+sin2ξ−(sin⁡ξξ)cos⁡ξ−α(sin2ξξ2+cos⁡2ξ)+ξσ22[sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ].

This expression clearly is not zero, so our trial eigenfunction is not a good one. However, the terms in the wave equation did combine somewhat to give a fairly compact — albeit nonzero — expression. So we may be on the right track!

New Idea Involving Logarithmic Derivatives

Simplistic Layout

Let's begin, again, with the relevant LAWE, as provided above. After dividing through by x, we have,

(sin⁡ξ)ξ2x⋅d2xdξ2+2[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]ξx⋅dxdξ+[σ2ξ3−2α(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ)]=0,


where,

σ2

≡

ω22πGρcγg,

α

≡

3−4γg.

Now, in addition to recognizing that,

ξx⋅dxdξ

=

dln⁡xdln⁡ξ,

in a separate context, we showed that, quite generally,

ξ2x⋅d2xdξ2

=

ddln⁡ξ[dln⁡xdln⁡ξ]−[1−dln⁡xdln⁡ξ]⋅dln⁡xdln⁡ξ.

Hence, if we assume that the eigenfunction is a power-law of ξ, that is, assume that,

x=a0ξc0,

then the logarithmic derivative of x is a constant, namely,

dln⁡xdln⁡ξ=c0,

and the two key derivative terms will be,

ξx⋅dxdξ=c0,

      and      

ξ2x⋅d2xdξ2=c0(c0−1).

In this case, the LAWE is no longer a differential equation but, instead, takes the form,

−σ2ξ3

=

c0(c0−1)sin⁡ξ+2c0[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]−2α(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξ)

 

=

sin⁡ξ[c0(c0−1)+2c0−2α]+ξcos⁡ξ[2(c0+α)]

 

=

sin⁡ξ[c02+c0−2α]+ξcos⁡ξ[2(c0+α)].

Now, the cosine term will go to zero if c0=−α; and the sine term will go to zero if,

α

=

3

⇒γg

=

∞.

If these two — rather strange — conditions are met, then we have a marginally unstable configuration because, σ2=0. This, in and of itself, is not very physically interesting. However, it may give us a clue regarding how to more generally search for a physically reasonable radial eigenfunction.

More general Assumption

Try,

x

=

ξc0[a0+b0sin⁡ξ+d0ξcos⁡ξ]

⇒dxdξ

=

ξc0ddξ[a0+b0sin⁡ξ+d0ξcos⁡ξ]+c0ξc0−1[a0+b0sin⁡ξ+d0ξcos⁡ξ]

 

=

ξc0[b0cos⁡ξ−d0ξsin⁡ξ+d0cos⁡ξ]+c0ξc0−1[a0+b0sin⁡ξ+d0ξcos⁡ξ]

⇒dln⁡xdln⁡ξ

=

ξ[b0cos⁡ξ−d0ξsin⁡ξ+d0cos⁡ξ][a0+b0sin⁡ξ+d0ξcos⁡ξ]−1+c0

 

=

[(b0+d0)ξcos⁡ξ−d0ξ2sin⁡ξ][a0+b0sin⁡ξ+d0ξcos⁡ξ]−1+c0


Another Viewpoint

Development

Multiplying through the above LAWE by (xξ−3) gives,

0

=

sin⁡ξξ⋅d2xdξ2+2[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξξ2]dxdξ+[σ2−2α(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]x

Notice that,

ddξ[sin⁡ξξ]

=

−sin⁡ξξ2+cos⁡ξξ

 

=

[ξcos⁡ξ−sin⁡ξξ2].

And, hence,

d2dξ2[sin⁡ξξ]

=

ddξ[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]

 

=

−cos⁡ξξ2−sin⁡ξξ+2sin⁡ξξ3−cos⁡ξξ2

 

=

−sin⁡ξξ+2[sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3].

So, we can write,

d2dξ2{(sin⁡ξξ)x}

=

ddξ{(sin⁡ξξ)dxdξ+xddξ[(sin⁡ξξ)]}

 

=

sin⁡ξξ⋅d2xdξ2+2dxdξ⋅[ddξ(sin⁡ξξ)]+x⋅d2dξ2(sin⁡ξξ)

 

=

sin⁡ξξ⋅d2xdξ2+2dxdξ⋅[ξcos⁡ξ−sin⁡ξξ2]+x⋅{−sin⁡ξξ+2[sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3]}.

This means that we can rewrite the LAWE as,

0

=

d2dξ2{(sin⁡ξξ)x}−2dxdξ⋅[ξcos⁡ξ−sin⁡ξξ2]−x⋅{−sin⁡ξξ+2[sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3]}+2[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξξ2]dxdξ+[σ2−2α(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]x

 

=

d2dξ2{(sin⁡ξξ)x}+4[sin⁡ξξ2]dxdξ+{sin⁡ξξ+σ2−2(1+α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)}⋅x.

We recognize, also, that,

1ξ⋅ddξ[(sin⁡ξξ)x]

=

[ξcos⁡ξ−sin⁡ξξ3]x+(sin⁡ξξ2)dxdξ.

⇒4(sin⁡ξξ2)dxdξ

=

4ξ⋅ddξ[(sin⁡ξξ)x]+4[sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3]x.

So the LAWE becomes,

0

=

d2dξ2{(sin⁡ξξ)x}+4ξ⋅ddξ[(sin⁡ξξ)x]+4[sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3]x+{sin⁡ξξ+σ2−2(1+α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)}⋅x

 

=

d2dξ2{(sin⁡ξξ)x}+4ξ⋅ddξ[(sin⁡ξξ)x]+{sin⁡ξξ+σ2+[4−2(1+α)](sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)}⋅x

 

=

d2Υdξ2+4ξ⋅dΥdξ+Υ+[σ2+2(1−α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]⋅x,

where we have introduced the new, modified eigenfunction,

Υ≡(sin⁡ξξ)x.

Alternatively, the LAWE may be written as,

0

=

d2Υdξ2+4ξ⋅dΥdξ+[σ2+2(1−α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)+sin⁡ξξ]⋅x;

or,

0

=

ξ2Υ⋅d2Υdξ2+4ξΥ⋅dΥdξ+[σ2+2(1−α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)+sin⁡ξξ]⋅ξ3sin⁡ξ

 

=

ξ2Υ⋅d2Υdξ2+4ξΥ⋅dΥdξ+[σ2(ξ3sin⁡ξ)+2(1−α)(1−ξcot⁡ξ)+ξ2]


Now, if we adopt the homentropic convention that arises from setting, γ=(n+1)/n, then for our n=1 polytropic configuration, we should set, γ=2 and, hence, α=1. This will mean that the lat term in this LAWE naturally goes to zero. Hence, we have,

−σ2x

=

d2Υdξ2+4ξ⋅dΥdξ+Υ;

or,

0

=

d2Υdξ2+4ξ⋅dΥdξ+[1+σ2(ξsin⁡ξ)]Υ;

or,

0

=

ξ2Υ⋅d2Υdξ2+4ξΥ⋅dΥdξ+[ξ2+σ2(ξ3sin⁡ξ)].

Does this help?

Check for Mistakes

Given the definition of Υ, its first derivative is,

dΥdξ

=

(sin⁡ξξ)dxdξ+x[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2],

and its second derivative is,

d2Υdξ2

=

ddξ{(sin⁡ξξ)dxdξ+x[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]}

 

=

(sin⁡ξξ)d2xdξ2+2[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]⋅dxdξ+x⋅ddξ[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]

 

=

(sin⁡ξξ)d2xdξ2+2[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]⋅dxdξ+x[−sin⁡ξξ−2cos⁡ξξ2+2sin⁡ξξ3]

Hence, the "upsilon" LAWE becomes,

−σ2x

=

d2Υdξ2+4ξ⋅dΥdξ+Υ+[2(1−α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]⋅x

 

=

(sin⁡ξξ)d2xdξ2+2[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]⋅dxdξ+x[−sin⁡ξξ−2cos⁡ξξ2+2sin⁡ξξ3]+4ξ⋅{(sin⁡ξξ)dxdξ+x[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]}+[sin⁡ξξ+2(1−α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]⋅x

 

=

(sin⁡ξξ)d2xdξ2+{(4sin⁡ξξ2)+2[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]}⋅dxdξ+[−sin⁡ξξ−2cos⁡ξξ2+2sin⁡ξξ3+4cos⁡ξξ2−4sin⁡ξξ3+sin⁡ξξ+2(1−α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]⋅x

 

=

(sin⁡ξξ)d2xdξ2+[2cos⁡ξξ+2sin⁡ξξ2]⋅dxdξ+[−2(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)+(2−2α)(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]⋅x

 

=

(sin⁡ξξ)d2xdξ2+2[sin⁡ξξ2+cos⁡ξξ]⋅dxdξ+[−2α(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]⋅x.

This should be compared with the first expression, above, namely,

0

=

sin⁡ξξ⋅d2xdξ2+2[sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξξ2]dxdξ+[σ2−2α(sin⁡ξ−ξcos⁡ξξ3)]x,

and it matches! Q.E.D.

Motivated by Yabushita's Discovery

Initial Exploration

This subsection is being developed following our realization — see the accompanying overview — that the eigenfunction is known analytically for marginally unstable, pressure-truncated configurations having 3≤n≤∞. Specifically, from the work of Yabushita (1975) we have the following,

Exact Solution to the Isothermal LAWE

σc2=0

 and  

x=1−(1ξe−ψ)dψdξ.

And from our own recent work, we have discovered the following,

Precise Solution to the Polytropic LAWE

σc2=0

      and      

xP≡3(n−1)2n[1+(n−3n−1)(1ξθn)dθdξ]

if the adiabatic exponent is assigned the value, γg=(n+1)/n, in which case the parameter, α=(3−n)/(n+1). Using this polytropic displacement function as a guide, let's try for the case of n=1, an expression of the form,

x

=

A−B[(1ξθ)dθdξ]

 

=

A−B[(1sin⁡ξ)ddξ(sin⁡ξξ)]

 

=

A−B(1sin⁡ξ)[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]

 

=

A+Bξ2(1−ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ),

in which case,

dxdξ

=

−B{(−cos⁡ξsin2ξ)[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]+(1sin⁡ξ)[−sin⁡ξξ−cos⁡ξξ2−cos⁡ξξ2+2sin⁡ξξ3]}

 

=

−Bξ3{(cos⁡ξsin2ξ)[−ξ2cos⁡ξ+ξsin⁡ξ]+[2−ξ2−2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]}

 

=

−Bξ3{2−ξ2−ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ},


What if, instead, we try the more generalized form,

x

=

A+B(λξ)2[1−λξcos⁡(λξ)sin⁡(λξ)].

Then we have,

1λB⋅dxdξ

=

−1(λξ)3{2−(λξ)2−λξcos⁡(λξ)sin⁡(λξ)−(λξ)2cos2(λξ)sin2(λξ)},

Probably this also means,

1λ2B⋅dxdξ

=

1(λξ)4{6−2(λξ)2−2λξcos⁡(λξ)sin⁡(λξ)−2(λξ)2cos2(λξ)sin2(λξ)−2(λξ)3cos⁡(λξ)sin⁡(λξ)−2(λξ)3cos3(λξ)sin3(λξ)}.



Let's check against the more general derivation, which gives after recognizing that, B↔(3−n)/(n−1),

dxdξ

=

(3−nn−1){1ξ+n(θ')2ξθn+1+3θ'ξ2θn}

 

=

Bξ3{ξ2+ξ2(ξsin⁡ξ)2[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]2+3ξ2sin⁡ξ[cos⁡ξξ−sin⁡ξξ2]}

 

=

Bξ3{ξ2+3[ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1]+[ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1]2}

 

=

Bξ3{ξ2+3[ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1]+[(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)2−2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)+1]}

 

=

Bξ3{ξ2+[ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2]+(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)2}.

This matches the preceding, direct derivation.

Also,

d2xdξ2

=

3Bξ4{(cos⁡ξsin2ξ)[−ξ2cos⁡ξ+ξsin⁡ξ]+[2−ξ2−2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]}

 

 

−Bξ3{[−1sin⁡ξ−2cos2ξsin3ξ][−ξ2cos⁡ξ+ξsin⁡ξ]+(cos⁡ξsin2ξ)[−2ξcos⁡ξ+sin⁡ξ+ξ2sin⁡ξ+ξcos⁡ξ]

 

 

+[−2ξ−2cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+2ξsin⁡ξsin⁡ξ+2ξcos2ξsin2ξ]}

 

=

Bξ4{(3cos⁡ξsin2ξ)[−ξ2cos⁡ξ+ξsin⁡ξ]+[6−3ξ2−6ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]+[1sin⁡ξ+2cos2ξsin3ξ][−ξ3cos⁡ξ+ξ2sin⁡ξ]

 

 

+(cos⁡ξsin2ξ)[2ξ2cos⁡ξ−ξsin⁡ξ−ξ3sin⁡ξ−ξ2cos⁡ξ]+[2ξ2+2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2ξ2sin⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ]}

 

=

Bξ4{[−3ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ+3ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]+[6−3ξ2−6ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]+[−ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+ξ2]+[−2ξ3cos3ξsin3ξ+2ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ]

 

 

+[2ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ−ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ]+[2ξ2+2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2ξ2sin⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ]}

 

=

Bξ4{6−2ξ2−2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ−2ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2ξ3cos3ξsin3ξ}.

Let's also check this against the more general derivation, which gives after again recognizing that, B↔(3−n)/(n−1),

d2xdξ2

=

(n−3n−1){4ξ2+2n(θ')ξθ+12θ'ξ3θn+8n(θ')2ξ2θn+1+(n+1)n(θ')3ξθn+2}

 

=

−B{4ξ2+2ξθ[sin⁡ξξ2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)]+12ξ3θ[sin⁡ξξ2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)]+8ξ2θ2[sin⁡ξξ2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)]2+2ξθ3[sin⁡ξξ2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)]3}

 

=

−Bξ4{4ξ2+2ξ2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)+12(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)+8(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)2+2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)3}

 

=

−2Bξ4{2ξ2+ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−ξ2+6ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−6+4ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ−8ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+4+(ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ−2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+1)(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1)}

 

=

−2Bξ4{−2+ξ2−2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+4ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ−(ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ−2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+1)+ξ3cos3ξsin3ξ−2ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ+ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ}

 

=

−2Bξ4{−3+ξ2+ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ+ξ3cos3ξsin3ξ}

 

=

Bξ4{6−2ξ2−2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2ξ2cos2ξsin2ξ−2ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−2ξ3cos3ξsin3ξ}.

A cross-check with the first attempt to derive this second derivative expression initially unveiled a couple of coefficient errors. These have now been corrected and both expressions agree.

Succinct Demonstration

Given that, for n=1, we should set γg=(n+1)/n=2⇒α=(3−4/γg)=+1, and,

Q≡−dln⁡θdln⁡ξ

=

−ξ2sin⁡ξ⋅ddξ[sin⁡ξξ]=1−ξcot⁡ξ.

If we then employ the displacement function,

x

=

A+Bξ2[1−ξcot⁡ξ],

the LAWE becomes,

LAWE

=

d2xdξ2+[4−(n+1)Q]1ξ⋅dxdξ+(n+1)[(σc26γg)ξ2θ−αQ]xξ2

 

=

d2xdξ2+[4−2Q]1ξ⋅dxdξ+[(σc26)ξ3sin⁡ξ−2Q]xξ2

 

=

d2xdξ2+[2+2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]1ξ⋅dxdξ+[−2+2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]xξ2+[(σc26)ξsin⁡ξ]x

 

=

2Bξ4{3−ξ2−ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)2−ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)3}

 

 

+2Bξ4[1+ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]{ξ2−2+ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)2}

 

 

+[−2+2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ][Aξ2+Bξ4(1−ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)]+[(σc26)ξsin⁡ξ]x

 

=

2Bξ4{3−ξ2−ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)2−ξ3cos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)3

 

 

+ξ2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)−2(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)+(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)2+(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)3+ξ2−2+ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)2}

 

 

−2Bξ4[1−2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ+(ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ)2]+2Aξ2[ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1]+[(σc26)ξsin⁡ξ]x

 

=

2Aξ2[ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ−1]+[(σc26)ξsin⁡ξ]x

Pretty amazing degree of cancelation! So the above-hypothesized displacement function does satisfy the n=1, polytropic LAWE — for any value of the coefficient, B — if we set A=0 and σc2=0. If we set B=3, the function will be normalized such that it goes to unity at the center. In summary, then, we have,

xP|n=1

=

3ξ2[1−ξcot⁡ξ].


What About Bipolytropes?

Here we will try to find an analytic expression for the radial displacement function, x, for a bipolytropic envelope whose polytropic index is, ne=1. As in the above succinct derivation, the relevant LAWE is,

LAWE

=

d2xdξ2+[4−(n+1)Q]1ξ⋅dxdξ+(n+1)[(σc26γg)ξ2θ−αQ]xξ2

 

=

d2xdξ2+[4−2Q]1ξ⋅dxdξ+[(σc26)ξ3sin⁡ξ−2Q]xξ2

 

=

d2xdξ2+[2+2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]1ξ⋅dxdξ+[−2+2ξcos⁡ξsin⁡ξ]xξ2+[(σc26)ξsin⁡ξ]x

First Attempt

Let's try,

x

=

A+B(ξ−F)2[1−(ξ−D)cot⁡(ξ−C)].

First, note that,

ddξ[cot⁡(ξ−C)]

=

ddξ[cos⁡(ξ−C)sin⁡(ξ−C)]

 

=

−[1+cot2(ξ−C)].

Hence,

dxdξ

=

−2B(ξ−F)3[1−(ξ−D)cot⁡(ξ−C)]−B(ξ−F)2{cot⁡(ξ−C)−(ξ−D)[1+cot⁡2(ξ−C)]}

 

=

−B(ξ−F)3{[2−2(ξ−D)cot⁡(ξ−C)]−(ξ−F)[cot⁡(ξ−C)−(ξ−D)[1+cot⁡2(ξ−C)]]}

 

=

−B(ξ−F)3{2−cot⁡(ξ−C)[2(ξ−D)+(ξ−F)]+(ξ−F)(ξ−D)[1+cot⁡2(ξ−C)]}

 

=

−B(ξ−F)3{2−[3ξ−(2D+F)]cot⁡(ξ−C)+[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]+[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]cot⁡2(ξ−C)}

 

=

−B(ξ−F)3{[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD+2]−[3ξ−(2D+F)]cot⁡(ξ−C)+[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]cot⁡2(ξ−C)}.

And,

d2xdξ2

=

3B(ξ−F)4{[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD+2]−[3ξ−(2D+F)]cot⁡(ξ−C)+[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]cot⁡2(ξ−C)}

 

 

−B(ξ−F)3{[2ξ−(D+F)]−3cot⁡(ξ−C)−[3ξ−(2D+F)]dcot⁡(ξ−C)dξ+[2ξ−(D+F)]cot⁡2(ξ−C)+[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]dcot2(ξ−C)dξ}

⇒[(ξ−F)4B]d2xdξ2

=

3[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD+2]−3[3ξ−(2D+F)]cot⁡(ξ−C)+3[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]cot⁡2(ξ−C)

 

 

−(ξ−F)[2ξ−(D+F)]+3(ξ−F)cot⁡(ξ−C)−(ξ−F)[2ξ−(D+F)]cot⁡2(ξ−C)

 

 

+(ξ−F)[3ξ−(2D+F)]dcot⁡(ξ−C)dξ−(ξ−F)[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]dcot2(ξ−C)dξ

 

=

3[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD+2]−(ξ−F)[2ξ−(D+F)]+{3(ξ−F)−3[3ξ−(2D+F)]}cot⁡(ξ−C)

 

 

+{3[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]−(ξ−F)[2ξ−(D+F)]}cot2(ξ−C)

 

 

−(ξ−F)[3ξ−(2D+F)][1+cot2(ξ−C)]+(ξ−F)[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]2cot⁡(ξ−C)[1+cot⁡2(ξ−C)]

 

=

3[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD+2]−(ξ−F)[2ξ−(D+F)]−(ξ−F)[3ξ−(2D+F)]+{3(ξ−F)−3[3ξ−(2D+F)]+2(ξ−F)[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]}cot⁡(ξ−C)

 

 

+{3[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]−(ξ−F)[2ξ−(D+F)]−(ξ−F)[3ξ−(2D+F)]}cot2(ξ−C)+2(ξ−F)[ξ2−(D+F)ξ+FD]cot3(ξ−C).

Let's set C=D=F and see if these expressions match the ones above.

dxdξ|C=D=F

=

−Bξ3{2+ξ2−3ξcot⁡ξ+ξ2cot⁡2ξ}.

ξ4B⋅d2xdξ2|C=D=F

=

3[ξ2+2]−(ξ)[2ξ]−ξ[3ξ]+{3(ξ)−3[3ξ]+2ξ[ξ2]}cot⁡(ξ)

 

 

+{3[ξ2]−ξ[2ξ]−ξ[3ξ]}cot2ξ+2ξ[ξ2]cot3ξ

 

=

3ξ2+6−2ξ2−3ξ2+[3ξ−9ξ+2ξ3]cot⁡(ξ)+[3ξ2−2ξ2−3ξ2]cot⁡2ξ+2ξ3cot⁡3ξ

 

=

6−2ξ2+[−6ξ+2ξ3]cot⁡(ξ)−2ξ2cot⁡2ξ+2ξ3cot⁡3ξ

Second Attempt

Up to this point we have been rather cavalier about the use of ξ (and ξi) to represent the envelope's dimensionless radius (and interface location). Let's switch to η,

r*

=

(μeμc)−1θi−2(2π)−1/2η

0

=

d2xdη2+{4−(ρ*P*)Mr*(r*)}1η⋅dxdη+12πθi4(μeμc)−2(ρ*P*){2πσc23γg−αgMr*(r*)3}x.

and, throughout the envelope we have,

ρ*P*

=

(μeμc)θi−1ϕ(η)−1;

Mr*r*

=

(μeμc)−2θi−1(2π)1/2(−η2dϕdη)[(μeμc)−1θi−2(2π)−1/2η]−1=2(μeμc)−1θiη(−dϕdη).

Hence, the LAWE relevant to the envelope is,

0

=

d2xdη2+{4−[ρ*P*][Mr*(r*)]}1η⋅dxdη+12πθi4(μeμc)−2[ρ*P*]{2πσc23γg−αe(r*)2[Mr*r*]}x

 

=

d2xdη2+{4−[(μeμc)θi−1ϕ(η)−1][2(μeμc)−1θiη(−dϕdη)]}1η⋅dxdη+12πθi4(μeμc)−2[(μeμc)θi−1ϕ(η)−1]{2πσc23γg−αe[(μeμc)−1θi−2(2π)−1/2η]−2[2(μeμc)−1θiη(−dϕdη)]}x

 

=

d2xdη2+{4−[2ηϕ(−dϕdη)]}1η⋅dxdη+12πθi5ϕ(μeμc)−1{2πσc23γg−αe[(μeμc)θi5(4π)η−1](−dϕdη)}x

 

=

d2xdη2+{4−[2ηϕ(−dϕdη)]}1η⋅dxdη+12πθi5ϕ(μeμc)−1{2πσc23γg}x−αe[2ηϕ(−dϕdη)]xη2.

If we assume that, αe=(3−4/2)=1 and σc2=0, then the relevant envelope LAWE is,

0

=

d2xdη2+{4−2Q}1η⋅dxdη−[2Q]xη2,

where,

Q≡−dln⁡ϕdln⁡η.

Now consider the,

Precise Solution to the Polytropic LAWE

xP

=

b(n−1)2n[1+(n−3n−1)(1ηϕn)dϕdη]

 

=

−b[(1ηϕ)dϕdη]

 

=

bη2[−dln⁡ϕdln⁡η]

 

=

bQη2.

From our accompanying discussion, we recall that the most general solution to the n=1 Lane-Emden equation can be written in the form,

ϕ=A[sin⁡(η−B)η],

where A and B are constants whose values can be obtained from our accompanying parameter table. The first derivative of this function is,

dϕdη=Aη2[ηcos⁡(η−B)−sin⁡(η−B)].

Hence,

Q=−dln⁡ϕdln⁡η

=

−ηϕ⋅Aη2[ηcos⁡(η−B)−sin⁡(η−B)]

 

=

[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]

⇒xP

=

bη2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)].

What is this in terms of the dimensionless radius, r*/R*? Well,

r*R*

=

(μeμc)−1θi−2(2π)−1/2η[2πθi2ηs(μeμc)]

 

=

ηηs=η(π+B)

⇒η

=

r*R*(π+B).

Also,

η−B

=

r*R*(π+B)−B=π(r*R*)−B[1−(r*R*)]

 

=

π+π[(r*R*)−1]−B[1−(r*R*)]

 

=

π−(π+B)[1−(r*R*)].


[12 January 2019]: Here's what appears to work pretty well, empirically:

xP

=

1η2{1−ηcot⁡[η−(π−0.8)]}.

η

=

r*R*(π−0.6π).


Let's work through the analytic derivatives again. Keeping in mind that,

ddη[cot⁡(η−B)]

=

−[1+cot2(η−B)],

and starting with the guess,

xP

=

bη2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)],

we have,

dxPdη

=

−2bη3[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]−bη2{cot⁡(η−B)−η[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]}

⇒(η3b)dxPdη

=

−[2−2ηcot⁡(η−B)]−{ηcot⁡(η−B)−η2[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]}

 

=

η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B).

The second derivative then gives,

d2xPdη2

=

ddη{bη3[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B)]}

 

=

−3bη4[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B)]

 

 

+bη3{2η+cot⁡(η−B)+2ηcot⁡2(η−B)+ηddη[cot⁡(η−B)]+2η2cot⁡(η−B)ddη[cot⁡(η−B)]}

⇒d2xPdη2

=

bη4[6−3η2−3ηcot⁡(η−B)−3η2cot⁡2(η−B)]

 

 

+bη4{2η2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+2η2cot⁡2(η−B)−η2[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]−2η3cot⁡(η−B)[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]}

⇒η4b⋅d2xPdη2

=

6−3η2−3ηcot⁡(η−B)−3η2cot⁡2(η−B)

 

 

+2η2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+2η2cot⁡2(η−B)−η2−η2cot⁡2(η−B)−2η3cot⁡(η−B)−2η3cot⁡3(η−B)

 

=

2[3−η2−(η+η3)cot⁡(η−B)−η2cot⁡2(η−B)−η3cot⁡3(η−B)].

Recalling that,

Q=[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)],

plugging these expressions into the relevant envelope LAWE gives,

LAWE

=

d2xdη2+{4−2Q}1η⋅dxdη−2Q⋅xη2

 

=

d2xdη2+{4−2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]}1η⋅dxdη−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]2xη2

 

=

bη4{η4b⋅d2xdη2+[1+ηcot⁡(η−B)]2η3b⋅dxdη−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]2η2xb}

 

=

2bη4{3−η2−(η+η3)cot⁡(η−B)−η2cot⁡2(η−B)−η3cot⁡3(η−B)

 

 

+[1+ηcot⁡(η−B)][η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B)]−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)][1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]}

 

=

2bη4{3−η2−(η+η3)cot⁡(η−B)−η2cot⁡2(η−B)−η3cot⁡3(η−B)+[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B)]−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]

 

 

+ηcot⁡(η−B)[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B)]+ηcot⁡(η−B)[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]}

 

=

2bη4{−(η+η3)cot⁡(η−B)−η3cot⁡3(η−B)+2ηcot⁡(η−B)

 

 

+η3cot⁡(η−B)−2ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B)+η3cot⁡3(η−B)+ηcot⁡(η−B)−η2cot⁡2(η−B)}

 

=

2bη4{[−ηcot⁡(η−B)−ηcot⁡(η−B)+2ηcot⁡(η−B)]+[η3cot⁡(η−B)−η3cot⁡(η−B)]

 

 

+[η2cot2(η−B)−η2cot2(η−B)]+[η3cot3(η−B)−η3cot3(η−B)]}

 

=

0.

Okay. Now let's determine at what value of η the logarithmic derivative of xP goes to negative one.

dln⁡xPdln⁡η=ηxP⋅dxPdη

=

η3b[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]−1⋅dxPdη

 

=

[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]−1[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B)].

Setting this to negative one, we have,

−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]

=

[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)+η2cot⁡2(η−B)]

⇒1

=

η2[1+cot2(η−B)]

 

=

η2[1sin2(η−B)]

⇒1

=

η2sin2(η−B).

And this occurs when,

(Aϕ)2=1.


Third Attempt

Prior to the Brute-Force Trial Fit

Let's work through the analytic derivatives again. Keeping in mind that,

ddη[cot⁡(η−C)]

=

−[1+cot2(η−C)],

and starting with the guess,

xP

=

bη2[1−ηcot⁡(η−C)],

we have,

(η3b)dxPdη

=

η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−C)+η2cot⁡2(η−C),

and,

η4b⋅d2xPdη2

=

2[3−η2−(η+η3)cot⁡(η−C)−η2cot⁡2(η−C)−η3cot⁡3(η−C)].


Note that the relevant logarithmic derivative is,

dln⁡xPdln⁡η

=

(bη2)[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−C)+η2cot⁡2(η−C)]xP−1

 

=

[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−C)+η2cot⁡2(η−C)][1−ηcot⁡(η−C)]−1

If we know the logarithmic slope and the value of η at the interface, then we can solve for

yi≡ηicot⁡(ηi−C),

via the quadratic relation,

(1−yi)[dln⁡xPdln⁡η]i

=

ηi2−2+yi+yi2

⇒0

=

ηi2−2+yi+yi2−(1−yi)[dln⁡xPdln⁡η]i

 

=

yi2+yi{1+[dln⁡xPdln⁡η]i}+{ηi2−2−[dln⁡xPdln⁡η]i}.

(In practice it appears as though the "plus" solution to this quadratic equation is desired if the quantity inside the last set of curly braces is positive; and the "minus" solution is desired if this quantity is negative.) Once the value of yi is known, we can solve for the key coefficient, C, via the relation,

tan⁡(ηi−C)

=

ηiyi

⇒C

=

ηi−tan−1(ηiyi).


Recalling that,

Q=[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)],

plugging these expressions into the relevant envelope LAWE gives,

LAWE

=

d2xdη2+{4−2Q}1η⋅dxdη−2Q⋅xη2

 

=

d2xdη2+{4−2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]}1η⋅dxdη−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]2xη2

 

=

bη4{η4b⋅d2xdη2+[1+ηcot⁡(η−B)]2η3b⋅dxdη−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]2η2xb}

 

=

2bη4{3−η2−(η+η3)cot⁡(η−C)−η2cot⁡2(η−C)−η3cot⁡3(η−C)

 

 

+[1+ηcot⁡(η−B)][η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−C)+η2cot⁡2(η−C)]−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)][1−ηcot⁡(η−C)]}

 

=

2bη4{3−η2−(η+η3)cot⁡(η−C)−η2cot⁡2(η−C)−η3cot⁡3(η−C)+[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−C)+η2cot⁡2(η−C)]−[1−ηcot⁡(η−C)]

 

 

+ηcot⁡(η−B)[η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−C)+η2cot⁡2(η−C)]+ηcot⁡(η−B)[1−ηcot⁡(η−C)]}

 

=

2bη4{(η−η3)cot⁡(η−C)−η3cot⁡3(η−C)+ηcot⁡(η−B)[η2−1+η2cot⁡2(η−C)]}

 

=

2bη4{(η−η3)[cot⁡(η−C)−cot⁡(η−B)]+η3cot⁡2(η−C)[cot⁡(η−B)−cot⁡(η−C)]}

 

=

2bη4[cot⁡(η−C)−cot⁡(η−B)][η−η3−η3cot⁡2(η−C)]

 

=

2bη3[cot⁡(η−C)−cot⁡(η−B)]{1−η2[1+cot⁡2(η−C)]}.

This will go to zero if C=(B−2mπ), where m is a positive integer. When m=1, for example,

cot⁡(η−C)

=

cot⁡[η−(B−2π)]=cot⁡(η−B).


Okay. Now let's determine at what value of η the logarithmic derivative of xP goes to negative one.

Brute-Force Trial Fit

Photo of white board with steps showing development of trial eigenfunction. This should be paired with an Excel spreadsheet.

Using a couple of separate Excel spreadsheets — FaulknerBipolytrope2.xlsx/mu100Mode0 and AnalyticTrialBipolytropeA.xlsx/Sheet2, both stored in a DropBox account under the folder Wiki_edits/Bipolytrope/LinearPerturbation — we used an inelegant and inefficient trial & error technique in search of an eigenfunction that had the same analytic form as the one represented above for xP, but that, when plotted, appeared to qualitatively match the numerically determined envelope eigenfunction. Then, on a whiteboard — see the photo, here on the right — we formulated a concise expression for a trial function that seemed to work pretty well. Our primary finding was that α, appearing as the argument to the tan⁡α function, needed to be shifted by something like −3π/4.

 

THIS SPACE

INTENTIONALLY

LEFT BLANK

Following Up on the Brute-Force Trial Fit

In an accompanying discussion — see especially Attempt #2 — we have determined by visual inspection that a decent fit to the envelope's eigenfunction is given by the expression,

xtrial

=

b0Λ2{1−Λ[tan⁡(ηi−Λ−3π/4)+fα1−fα⋅tan⁡(ηi−Λ−3π/4)]}−a0

 

=

b0Λ2{1−Λcot⁡(Λ−E)}−a0,

Limiting Parameter Values
  min max α=αs
ηF ηi ηs 8π(ηs−ηi)2+2ηs−ηi
α −π2 −5π8 ηi−ηs−3π4
Λ ηi−π4 ηi−π8 ηs

where, over the range, ηi≤η≤ηs,

E

≡

ηi−5π4+tan−1fα,

Λ(η)

≡

ηi+gF[ηi−2ηs+η]=Λ0+gFη,

1fα=tan⁡(αs)

≡

tan⁡[−(ηs−ηi+3π4)],

gF

≡

π8(ηs−ηi).



Here, we reference a separate discussion of the bipolytrope's underlying equilibrium structure

B=ηi−π2+tan−1f E=ηi−5π4+tan−1fα

⇒cot⁡(ηi−B)

=

tan⁡[π2−(ηi−B)]

 

=

tan⁡[π2−(π2−tan⁡−1f)]

 

=

f

⇒f

=

tan⁡(B+π2−ηi)

⇒cot⁡(ηi−E)

=

tan⁡[π2−(ηi−E)]

 

=

tan⁡[π2−(5π4−tan⁡−1fα)]

 

=

tan⁡(tan⁡−1fα−3π4)

 

=

−tan⁡(3π4−tan⁡−1fα)

 

=

−cot⁡(tan⁡−1fα)

 

=

−1fα

Hence …     cot⁡(η−B)

=

tan⁡[π2−(η−B)]

 

=

tan⁡[π2−η+ηi−π2+tan⁡−1f]

 

=

tan⁡[ηi−η+tan⁡−1f]

 

=

tan⁡(ηi−η)+f1−f⋅tan⁡(ηi−η)

Hence …     cot⁡(Λ−E)

=

tan⁡[π2−(Λ−E)]

 

=

tan⁡[ηi−Λ−3π4+tan⁡−1fα]

 

=

tan⁡(ηi−Λ−3π4)+fα1−fα⋅tan⁡(ηi−Λ−3π4)

Also …    B=ηs−π

⇒f=cot⁡(ηi−B)

=

cot⁡(ηi−ηs+π)

⇒1f

=

tan⁡(ηi−ηs+π)



Let's examine the first and second derivatives of this trial eigenfunction, recognizing that,

dxtrialdη=dΛdη⋅dxtrialdΛ=gF⋅dxtrialdΛ

      and      

d2xtrialdη2=dΛdη⋅ddΛ[gF⋅dxtrialdΛ]=gF2⋅d2xtrialdΛ2.

and drawing from the derivative expressions already derived, above. For the first derivative, we have,

dxtrialdη

=

gF(b0Λ3)[Λ2−2+Λcot⁡(Λ−E)+Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)].

And the second derivative gives,

d2xtrialdη2

=

gF2(2b0Λ4)[3−Λ2−(Λ+Λ3)cot⁡(Λ−E)−Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)−Λ3cot⁡3(Λ−E)].

Hence,

LAWE

=

d2xtrialdη2+{4−2Q}1η⋅dxtrialdη−2Q⋅xtrialη2

 

=

d2xtrialdη2+{4−2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]}1η⋅dxtrialdη−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]2xtrialη2

 

=

b0η4{η4b0⋅d2xtrialdη2+[1+ηcot⁡(η−B)]2η3b0⋅dxtrialdη−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]2η2xtrialb0}

 

=

b0η4{η4b0⋅gF2(2b0Λ4)[3−Λ2−(Λ+Λ3)cot⁡(Λ−E)−Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)−Λ3cot⁡3(Λ−E)]

 

 

+[1+ηcot⁡(η−B)]2η3b0⋅gF(b0Λ3)[Λ2−2+Λcot⁡(Λ−E)+Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)]

 

 

−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]2η2b0⋅[b0Λ2{1−Λcot⁡(Λ−E)}−a0]}

 

=

b0η4{gF2(2η4Λ4)[3−Λ2−(Λ+Λ3)cot⁡(Λ−E)−Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)−Λ3cot⁡3(Λ−E)]

 

 

+[1+ηcot⁡(η−B)]⋅gF(2η3Λ3)[Λ2−2+Λcot⁡(Λ−E)+Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)]

 

 

−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)][2η2Λ2[1−Λcot⁡(Λ−E)]−2η2a0b0]}

 

=

2b0Λ4η2{gF2η2[3−Λ2−(Λ+Λ3)cot⁡(Λ−E)−Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)−Λ3cot⁡3(Λ−E)]

 

 

+[1+ηcot⁡(η−B)]⋅gFΛη[Λ2−2+Λcot⁡(Λ−E)+Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)]

 

 

−[1−ηcot⁡(η−B)][Λ2[1−Λcot⁡(Λ−E)]−a0Λ4b0]}

⇒(Λ42b0)⋅  LAWE

=

gF2[3−Λ2−(Λ+Λ3)cot⁡(Λ−E)−Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)−Λ3cot⁡3(Λ−E)]

 

 

+gFΛη[Λ2−2+Λcot⁡(Λ−E)+Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)]−(Λη)2[1−Λcot⁡(Λ−E)−a0Λ2b0]

 

 

+[ηcot⁡(η−B)]{gFΛη[Λ2−2+Λcot⁡(Λ−E)+Λ2cot⁡2(Λ−E)]+(Λη)2[1−Λcot⁡(Λ−E)−a0Λ2b0]}


Fourth Attempt

XXXX

If we assume that, αe=(3−4/2)=1 and σc2=0, then the relevant envelope LAWE is,

0

=

d2xdη2+{4−2Q}1η⋅dxdη−[2Q]xη2,

where,

Q≡−dln⁡ϕdln⁡η

=

[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)].


Let's work through the analytic derivatives again. Keeping in mind that,

ddη[cot⁡(η−B)]

=

−[1+cot2(η−B)];

and that the,

Precise Solution to the Polytropic LAWE

xP

=

b(n−1)2n[1+(n−3n−1)(1ηϕn)dϕdη]

 

=

−b[(1ηϕ)dϕdη]

 

=

bη2[−dln⁡ϕdln⁡η]

 

=

bQη2

⇒xP

=

bη2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)].

As we have already tried once, above, let's try a more general form of this expression, namely,

xQ

=

A+C(η−F)2[1−(η−D)cot⁡(η−B)].

Hence,

dxQdη

=

[1−(η−D)cot⁡(η−B)]ddη[C(η−F)2]−C(η−F)2ddη[(η−D)cot⁡(η−B)]

 

=

[1−(η−D)cot⁡(η−B)][−2C(η−F)3]−C(η−F)2[cot⁡(η−B)]+C(η−D)(η−F)2[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]

 

=

C(η−F)3{−2+2(η−D)cot⁡(η−B)−(η−F)[cot⁡(η−B)]+(η−D)(η−F)[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]}

 

=

C(η−F)3{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)+(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}.

And,

d2xQdη2

=

{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)+(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}ddη[C(η−F)3]

 

 

+C(η−F)3⋅ddη{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)+(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}

 

=

{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)+(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}[−3C(η−F)4]

 

 

+C(η−F)3{[2η−(D+F)]+cot⁡(η−B)−(η−2D+F)[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]+[2η−(D+F)]cot⁡2(η−B)−2[η2−η(D+F)+DF]cot⁡(η−B)[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]}

 

=

C(η−F)4{−3[(η−D)(η−F)−2]−3(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)−3(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}

 

 

+C(η−F)3{[2η−(D+F)]−(η−2D+F)+cot⁡(η−B)−(η−2D+F)cot⁡2(η−B)+[2η−(D+F)]cot⁡2(η−B)−2[η2−η(D+F)+DF]cot⁡(η−B)−2[η2−η(D+F)+DF]cot⁡3(η−B)}

YYYY

And,

d2xQdη2

=

{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)+(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}ddη[C(η−F)3]

 

 

+C(η−F)3⋅ddη{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)+(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}

 

=

{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)+(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}[−3C(η−F)4]

 

 

+C(η−F)3⋅{ddη[(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)]+ddη[(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)]}

 

=

C(η−F)4{−3[(η−D)(η−F)−2]−3(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)−3(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)

 

 

+(η−F)ddη[(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)]+(η−F)ddη[(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)]}

 

=

C(η−F)4{−3[(η−D)(η−F)−2]−3(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)−3(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)

 

 

+(η−F)cot⁡(η−B)ddη[(η−2D+F)]+(η−F)(η−2D+F)ddη[cot⁡(η−B)]

 

 

+(η−F)cot2(η−B)ddη[η2−η(D+F)+DF]+(η−F)(η−D)(η−F)ddη[cot2(η−B)]}

 

=

C(η−F)4{−3[(η−D)(η−F)−2]−3(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)−3(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)

 

 

+(η−F)cot⁡(η−B)−(η−F)(η−2D+F)[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]

 

 

+(η−F)cot2(η−B)[2η−(D+F)]−2(η−F)(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡(η−B)[1+cot⁡2(η−B)]}

 

=

C(η−F)4{−3[(η−D)(η−F)−2]−(η−F)(η−2D+F)

 

 

+[(η−F)−3(η−2D+F)−2(η−F)(η−D)(η−F)]cot⁡(η−B)

 

 

+[(η−F)[2η−(D+F)]−3(η−D)(η−F)−2(η−F)(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡(η−B)−(η−F)(η−2D+F)]cot⁡2(η−B)}

So the envelope LAWE becomes,

(η−F)4C⋅LAWE

=

(η−F)4C⋅d2xQdη2+(η−F)4C[1+ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η⋅dxQdη−(η−F)4C[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2xQη2

 

=

{−3[(η−D)(η−F)−2]−(η−F)(η−2D+F)+[(η−F)−3(η−2D+F)−2(η−F)(η−D)(η−F)]cot⁡(η−B)

 

 

+[(η−F)[2η−(D+F)]−3(η−D)(η−F)−2(η−F)(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡(η−B)−(η−F)(η−2D+F)]cot⁡2(η−B)}

 

 

+(η−F)[1+ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)+(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)}

 

 

−(η−F)4C[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η2{A+C(η−F)2[1−(η−D)cot⁡(η−B)]}

 

=

−3[(η−D)(η−F)−2]−(η−F)(η−2D+F)+[(η−F)−3(η−2D+F)−2(η−F)(η−D)(η−F)]cot⁡(η−B)

 

 

+(η−F)[1+ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η{[(η−D)(η−F)−2]+(η−2D+F)cot⁡(η−B)}

 

 

+[(η−F)[2η−(D+F)]−3(η−D)(η−F)−2(η−F)(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡(η−B)−(η−F)(η−2D+F)]cot⁡2(η−B)

 

 

+(η−F)[1+ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η[(η−D)(η−F)cot⁡2(η−B)]−(η−F)2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η2[1−(η−D)cot⁡(η−B)]

 

 

−(η−F)4C[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2Aη2.

What does this reduce to if A=D=F=0.

η4C⋅LAWE

=

−3[(η)(η)−2]−(η)(η)+[(η)−3(η)−2(η)(η)(η)]cot⁡(η−B)

 

 

+(η)[1+ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η{[(η)(η)−2]+(η)cot⁡(η−B)}

 

 

+[(η)[2η]−3(η)(η)−2(η)(η)(η)cot⁡(η−B)−(η−)(η)]cot⁡2(η−B)

 

 

+(η)[1+ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η[(η)(η)cot⁡2(η−B)]−(η)2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2η2[1−(η)cot⁡(η−B)]

 

 

−(η)4C[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]2Aη2.

 

=

6−4η2−2(η+η3)cot⁡(η−B)+2[1+ηcot⁡(η−B0)][η2−2+ηcot⁡(η−B)]−2[η2+η3cot⁡(η−B)]cot⁡2(η−B)

 

 

+2[1+ηcot⁡(η−B0)][η2cot⁡2(η−B)]−2[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)][1−ηcot⁡(η−B)]−2Aη2C[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]

 

=

6−4η2−2(η+η3)cot⁡(η−B)+2η2−4+2ηcot⁡(η−B)+2η3cot⁡(η−B0)−4ηcot⁡(η−B0)+2η2cot⁡(η−B0)cot⁡(η−B)−2η2cot⁡2(η−B)−2η3cot⁡3(η−B)

 

 

+2η2cot2(η−B)+2η3cot⁡(η−B0)cot⁡2(η−B)−2+4ηcot⁡(η−B0)−2η2cot⁡2(η−B0)−2Aη2C[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]

 

=

−2η2−2η3[cot⁡(η−B)+cot⁡3(η−B)]+cot⁡(η−B0)[2η3+2η2cot⁡(η−B)+2η3cot⁡2(η−B)]−2η2cot⁡2(η−B0)−2Aη2C[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)]

 

=

−2η2+2η3[cot⁡(η−B0)−cot⁡(η−B)][1+cot⁡2(η−B)]+2η2cot⁡(η−B0)[cot⁡(η−B)−cot⁡(η−B0)]−2Aη2C[1−ηcot⁡(η−B0)].

See Also

  • In an accompanying Chapter within our "Ramblings" Appendix, we have played with the adiabatic wave equation for polytropes, examining its form when the primary perturbation variable is an enthalpy-like quantity, rather than the radial displacement of a spherical mass shell. This was done in an effort to mimic the approach that has been taken in studies of the stability of Papaloizou-Pringle tori.
  • n=32 … D. Lucas (1953, Bul. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liege, 25, 585) … Citation obtained from the Prasad & Gurm (1961) article.


Tiled Menu

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