SSC/Stability/BiPolytrope00Details: Difference between revisions

From jetwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "__FORCETOC__ <!-- __NOTOC__ will force TOC off --> =Radial Oscillations of a Zero-Zero Bipolytrope= <font color="red" size="+1"><b>IMPORTANT NOTE!</b></font>  While the..."
 
No edit summary
Line 4,302: Line 4,302:
</div>
</div>


{{ LSU_WorkInProgress }}
{{ SGFworkInProgress }}


====Example21====
====Example21====

Revision as of 12:29, 24 July 2021

Radial Oscillations of a Zero-Zero Bipolytrope

IMPORTANT NOTE!  While the overall development in this chapter is correct and, in particular, the chronology of discovery is properly reflected, the final quantitative results — for example, the recorded root(s) of the governing quartic equation — are incorrect because, beginning in the Example21 subsection, below, we started using an incorrect expression for the function g2. In an accompanying summary presentation, we have corrected this mistake.

Groundwork

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

Adiabatic Wave (or Radial Pulsation) Equation

User:Tohline/Math/EQ RadialPulsation01

whose solution gives eigenfunctions that describe various radial modes of oscillation in spherically symmetric, self-gravitating fluid configurations. According to our accompanying derivation, if the initial, unperturbed equilibrium configuration is an (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytrope, then we know that the relevant functional profiles are as follows for the core and envelope, separately. Note that, throughout, we will preferentially adopt as the dimensionless radial coordinate, the parameter,

ξ

rri,

in which case,

χ

=

χiξ=q(Gρc2R2Pc)1/2ξ.

The corresponding radial coordinate range is,

0ξ1      for the core, and

1ξ1q      for the envelope.

Core

r0

=

(PcGρc2)1/2χ=(qR)ξ,

ρ0

=

ρc,

P0Pc

=

12π3χ2=12π3[Gρc2R2Pc]q2ξ2=1ξ2g2,

Mr

=

4π3(Pc3G3ρc4)1/2χ3=4π3(Pc3G3ρc4)1/2(Gρc2R2Pc)3/2(qξ)3

 

=

4π3(ρcR3)(qξ)3=4π3(qξ)3ρc[(PcGρc2)1/2(32π)1/21qg]3

 

=

4π3(qξ)3[(Pc3G3ρc4)1/2(32π)3/21q3g3]=4π3[(π6)1/2νg3Mtot(32π)3/21g3]ξ3

 

=

Mtotνξ3,

where,

g2(ν,q)

{1+(ρeρc)[2(1ρeρc)(1q)+ρeρc(1q21)]},

ρeρc

=

q3ν(1ν1q3).

Hence,

g0

=

G(Mtotνξ3)(qRξ)2=(GMtotR2)νξq2

 

=

G[(Pc3G3ρc4)1/2(6π)1/21νg3][(Gρc2Pc)1/2(2π3)1/2qg]2νξq2

 

=

(PcG)1/2(23π3)1/2ξg

ρ0P0

=

ρcPc[1ξ2g2]1=ρcPc(g2g2ξ2);

and the wave equation for the core becomes,

0

=

1(qR)2d2xdξ2+[4qRr0(qRg0ρ0P0)]1(qR)2dxdξ+(ρ0P0)[ω2γg+(43γgγg)g0r0]x

 

=

1(qR)2{d2xdξ2+[4ξq(PcGρc2)1/2(32π)1/21qg(PcG)1/2(23π3)1/2ξgρcPc(g2g2ξ2)]dxdξ}

 

 

+ρcPc(g2g2ξ2)[ω2γg+(43γgγg)(PcG)1/2(23π3)1/2ξg1qRξ]x

 

=

1(qR)2{d2xdξ2+[4ξ(2ξg2ξ2)]dxdξ}

 

 

+ρcPc(g2g2ξ2)[ω2γg+(43γgγg)(PcG)1/2(23π3)1/21qg(Gρc2Pc)1/2(2π3)1/2qg]x

 

=

1(qR)2(g2ξ2){(g2ξ2)d2xdξ2+(4g26ξ2)1ξdxdξ+q2g2R2ρcPc[ω2γg+(43γgγg)4πGρc3]x}

 

=

1(qR)2(g2ξ2){(g2ξ2)d2xdξ2+(4g26ξ2)1ξdxdξ+2[3ω2γg4πGρc+(43γgγg)]x}.

Envelope

r0

=

(qR)ξ,

ρ0

=

ρe,

P0Pc

=

12π3χi2+2π3(ρeρc)χi2[2(1ρeρc)(1ξ1)ρeρc(ξ21)]

 

=

11g2{1(ρeρc)[2(1ρeρc)(1ξ1)ρeρc(ξ21)]}

g2P0Pc

=

g21+(ρeρc)[2(1ρeρc)(1ξ1)ρeρc(ξ21)],

Mr

  = 

4π3[Pc3G3ρc4]1/2χi3[1+ρeρc(ξ31)]

 

  = 

Mtot4π3[(π6)1/2νg3][(32π)1g2]3/2[1+ρeρc(ξ31)]

 

  = 

νMtot[1+ρeρc(ξ31)].

Hence,

g0

=

GMtotνR2q2ξ2[1+ρeρc(ξ31)],

and, after multiplying through by (q2R2g2P0/Pc), the wave equation for the envelope becomes,

0

=

q2g2R2P0Pc{d2xdr02+[4r0(g0ρ0P0)]dxdr0}+q2g2R2ρ0Pc[ω2γg+(43γgγg)g0r0]x

 

=

g2P0Pc{d2xdξ2+[4(qRg0ρeP0)ξ]1ξdxdξ}+q2g2R2ρePc[ω2γg+(43γgγg)g0r0]x

 

=

g2P0Pc[d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ](qg2Rg0ρePc)dxdξ

 

 

+2(ρeρc)34πGρc{ω2γg+(43γgγg)(4πGρc3)[1ξ3+ρeρc(11ξ3)]}x

 

=

g2P0Pc[d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]2(ρeρc)[1+ρeρc(ξ31)]1ξ2dxdξ

 

 

+2(ρeρc){3ω24πGρcγg+(43γgγg)[1ξ3+ρeρc(11ξ3)]}x

Check1

If ρe/ρc=1, this envelope wave equation should match seamlessly into the core wave equation. Let's see if it does. First,

g2(ν,q)|ρe=ρc

=

1+(1q21)=1q2,

g2P0Pc|ρe=ρc

=

g2ξ2=1q2ξ2.

Hence, for the envelope,

0

=

g2P0Pc[d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]2[1+(ξ31)]1ξ2dxdξ

 

 

+2{3ω24πGρcγg+(43γgγg)[1ξ3+(11ξ3)]}x

 

=

(1q2ξ2)[d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]2ξdxdξ+2{3ω24πGρcγg+(43γgγg)}x

 

=

(1q2ξ2)d2xdξ2+{4(1q2ξ2)2ξ2}1ξdxdξ+2[3ω24πGρcγg+(43γgγg)]x

 

=

(1q2ξ2)d2xdξ2+(4q26ξ2)1ξdxdξ+2[3ω24πGρcγg+(43γgγg)]x.

Whereas, for the core,

0

=

(1q2ξ2)d2xdξ2+(4q26ξ2)1ξdxdξ+2[3ω2γg4πGρc+(43γgγg)]x,

which matches exactly.

Boundary Condition

In order to ensure finite pressure fluctuations at the surface of this bipolytropic configuration, we need the logarithmic derivative of x to obey the following relation:

dlnxdlnr0|surface

=

1γg(43γg+ω2R3GMtot).

Now, according to our accompanying discussion of the equilibrium mass and radius of a zero-zero polytrope, we know that,

R3Mtot

=

(PcGρc2)3/2(32π)3/21(qg)3(G3ρc4Pc3)1/2(π23)1/2νg3

 

=

(34πρc)νq3.

Hence, a reasonable surface boundary condition is,

dlnxdlnr0|surface

=

3ω24πGρcγg(νq3)(34γg).


Attempt to Find Eigenfunction for the Envelope

Adopting some of the notation used by T. E. Sterne (1937) and enunciated in our accompanying discussion of the uniform-density sphere, we'll define,

α

34/γg,

𝔉

3ω22πγgGρc2α,

in which case the wave equation for the core becomes,

0

=

1(qR)2(g2ξ2){(g2ξ2)d2xdξ2+(4g26ξ2)1ξdxdξ+𝔉x},

and the wave equation for the envelope becomes,

0

=

g2P0Pc[d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]2(ρeρc)[1+ρeρc(ξ31)]1ξ2dxdξ

 

 

+(ρeρc){𝔉+2α[11ξ3ρeρc(11ξ3)]}x.

A Specific Choice of the Density Ratio

Now, let's focus on the specific model for which ρe/ρc=1/2. In this case,

g2(ν,q)|ρe/ρc=1/2

=

1+12[1q+12(1q21)]

 

=

14q2{4q2+[2q22q3+1q2]}

 

=

[1+5q22q34q2];

g2P0Pc|ρe/ρc=1/2

=

g21+12[(1ξ1)12(ξ21)]

 

=

g2114[ξ2+12ξ]

 

=

g2ξ24[1+5ξ22ξ3].

Note that this last expression goes to zero at the surface of the bipolytrope, that is, at ξ=1/q. For this specific case, the wave equation for the envelope becomes,

0

=

g2P0Pc[d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ][1+12(ξ31)]1ξ2dxdξ+12{𝔉+2α[11ξ3+12(1+1ξ3)]}x

 

=

{g2ξ24[1+5ξ22ξ3]}[d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]12[1+ξ3]1ξ2dxdξ+12{𝔉+α[11ξ3]}x

 

=

14ξ3{[4g2ξ3ξ5(1+5ξ22ξ3)][d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]2ξ(1+ξ3)dxdξ+2ξ3[𝔉+α(11ξ3)]x}

 

=

14ξ3{[4g2ξ3ξ55ξ3+2ξ2][d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]2ξ(1+ξ3)dxdξ+[2ξ3(𝔉+α)2α]x}

 

=

14ξ3{[2+(4g25)ξξ3][ξ2d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]2(1+ξ3)[ξdxdξ][2α2ξ3(𝔉+α)]x}

 

=

14ξ3{[2+(4g25)ξξ3][ξ2d2xdξ2]+[3+(8g210)ξ3ξ3][2ξdxdξ][2α2ξ3(𝔉+α)]x}

 

=

x4ξ3{[2+(4g25)ξξ3][ξ2xd2xdξ2]+[6+4(4g25)ξ6ξ3][ξxdxdξ][2α2ξ3(𝔉+α)]}.

Idea Involving Logarithmic Derivatives

Notice that the term involving the first derivative of x can be written as a logarithmic derivative; specifically,

ξxdxdξ

=

dlnxdlnξ.

Let's look at the second derivative of this quantity.

ddξ[dlnxdlnξ]

=

ξxd2xdξ2+dxdξ[1xξx2dxdξ]

 

=

ξxd2xdξ2+1x[1dlnxdlnξ]dxdξ

ξ2xd2xdξ2

=

ddlnξ[dlnxdlnξ][1dlnxdlnξ]dlnxdlnξ.

Now, if we assume that the envelope's eigenfunction is a power-law of ξ, that is, assume that,

x=a0ξc0,

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

dlnxdlnξ=c0,

and the two key derivative terms will be,

ξxdxdξ=c0,

      and      

ξ2xd2xdξ2=c0(c01).

Hence, in order for the wave equation for the envelope for the specific density ratio being considered here to be satisfied, we need,

0

=

[2+(4g25)ξξ3][c0(c01)]+[6+4(4g25)ξ6ξ3][c0][2α2ξ3(𝔉+α)]

 

=

[2+(4g25)ξξ3]c0(c01)+c0[6+4(4g25)ξ6ξ3][2α2ξ3(𝔉+α)]

 

=

[2c0(c01)+6c02α]+[(4g25)(c02c0+4c0)]ξ+[c0(c01)6c0+2(𝔉+α)]ξ3

 

=

2[c02+2c0α]+[(4g25)(c02+3c0)]ξ+[2(𝔉+α)c0(c0+5)]ξ3.

This means that three algebraic relations must simultaneously be satisfied, namely:

ξ0:

c02+2c0α=0

c0=1±(1+α)1/2;

ξ1:

g2=54

q=(12)1/3     and, hence, ν=23;

ξ3:

2(𝔉+α)=c0(c0+5)

23σ2=(α1)±α+1.

More General Solution

Leaving the density ratio unspecified, let's try to write the wave equation for the envelope in the same form, and see if the logarithmic derivatives can be manipulated in a similar fashion.

0

=

g2P0Pc[d2xdξ2+4ξdxdξ]2(ρeρc)[1+ρeρc(ξ31)]1ξ2dxdξ

 

 

+(ρeρc){𝔉+2α[11ξ3ρeρc(11ξ3)]}x

ξ3x0

=

g2ξP0Pc[ξ2xd2xdξ2]+{4g2ξP0Pc2(ρeρc)[(1ρeρc)+(ρeρc)ξ3]}ξxdxdξ

 

 

+ξ3(ρeρc){[𝔉+2α2αρeρc]+2α(ρeρc1)1ξ3}

where,

g2ξP0Pc

=

ξ{g21+(ρeρc)[2(1ρeρc)(1ξ1)ρeρc(ξ21)]}

 

=

ξ{[2(ρeρc)(1ρeρc)]1ξ+[g212(ρeρc)(1ρeρc)+(ρeρc)2](ρeρc)2ξ2}

 

=

[2(ρeρc)(1ρeρc)]+[g212(ρeρc)(1ρeρc)+(ρeρc)2]ξ(ρeρc)2ξ3

 

=

[2(ρeρc)(1ρeρc)]+[g212(ρeρc)+3(ρeρc)2]ξ(ρeρc)2ξ3.

Hence, the wave equation becomes,

0

=

[𝒜+(g2)ξ(ρeρc)2ξ3][ξ2xd2xdξ2]+{4[𝒜+(g2)ξ(ρeρc)2ξ3]𝒜2(ρeρc)2ξ3}ξxdxdξ

 

 

+[(ρeρc)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)ξ3+2α(ρeρc)(ρeρc1)]

 

=

[𝒜+(g2)ξ(ρeρc)2ξ3][ξ2xd2xdξ2]+{3𝒜+4(g2)ξ6(ρeρc)2ξ3}ξxdxdξ

 

 

+[(ρeρc)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)ξ3α𝒜],

where,

𝒜

2(ρeρc)(1ρeρc);

1+2(ρeρc)3(ρeρc)2.

As before, if we assume a power-law solution, the wave equation for the envelope becomes,

0

=

[𝒜+(g2)ξ(ρeρc)2ξ3][c0(c01)]+{3𝒜+4(g2)ξ6(ρeρc)2ξ3}c0

 

 

+[(ρeρc)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)ξ3α𝒜]

 

=

ξ0[𝒜c0(c01)+3𝒜c0α𝒜]+ξ1[(g2)c0(c01)+4(g2)c0]+ξ3[(ρeρc)2c0(1c0)6(ρeρc)2c0+(ρeρc)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)]

 

=

ξ0[c0(c01)+3c0α]𝒜+ξ1[(g2)(c02+3c0)]+ξ3[(𝔉+2α)(ρeρc)(5c0+c02+2α)](ρeρc).

This means that three algebraic relations must simultaneously be satisfied, namely:

ξ0:

c02+2c0α=0

c0=1±(1+α)1/2;

ξ3:

(𝔉+2α)=(ρeρc)(5c0+c02+2α)

σ23ω22πGρcγg=3(ρeρc)[(α1)±α+1];

ξ1:

g2=1+2(ρeρc)3(ρeρc)2

q3=(ρe/ρc)2[1(ρe/ρc)]

 

 

and, hence,

ν=13[1(ρe/ρc)].

Surface Boundary Condition

Given that, with this solution, the ratio,

νq3

=

13[1(ρe/ρc)]{2[1(ρe/ρc)](ρe/ρc)}=23(ρe/ρc),

we see that the desired surface boundary condition is,

dlnxdlnr0|surface

=

3ω24πGρcγg23(ρe/ρc)(34γg)

 

=

σ23(ρe/ρc)α

 

=

c0.

But, for our identified solution, this is the logarithmic derivative of x throughout the envelope as well as at the surface. So the boundary condition is automatically satisfied.

Match to a Core Eigenfunction (First Blundering)

If we define,

ηξg,

the above wave equation for the core becomes,

0

=

(1η2)d2xdη2+(46η2)1ηdxdη+𝔉x.

Not surprisingly, this is identical in form to the eigenvalue problem first presented by Sterne (1937) in connection with an examination of radial oscillations in uniform-density spheres. For the core of our zero-zero bipolytrope, we can therefore adopt any one of the polynomial eigenfunctions and corresponding eigenfrequencies derived by Sterne. We will insist that the eigenfrequency of the envelope match the eigenfrequency of the core; and, following J. O. Murphy & R. Fiedler (1985b) (see the top paragraph of the right-hand column on p. 223 of their article), we seek solutions for which there is continuity in both the eigenfunction and its first derivative at the interface (ξ=1).

Try Quadratic Core Eigenfunction

Let's begin with Sterne's quadratic function and see if we can match it to the envelope's power-law eigenfunction. Keeping in mind that the overall normalization is arbitrary, from Sterne's presentation, we have,

xcore

=

a[175η2]

 

=

a[175(ξg)2],

and the associated eigenfrequency is obtained by setting,

𝔉=σ22α=14.

In this case, then, the eigenfrequency for the envelope will match the eigenfrequency of the core if,

14+2α

=

3(ρeρc)[(α1)±α+1]

(ρeρc)

=

237+α(α1)±α+1

Now, the eigenfunction for the envelope is,

xenv=ξc0,

where,

c0

=

1±(1+α)1/2.

The value of this function will match the value of its core counterpart at the interface (ξ=1) if,

a[175(1g)2]

=

1

a

=

[175(1g)2]1.

Finally, the slope (first derivative) of the core eigenfunction will match the slope of the envelope eigenfunction at the interface if,

c0ξc01|ξ=1

=

14a5g2ξ|ξ=1

145c0

=

g2a

 

=

g275

 

=

25+2(ρeρc)3(ρeρc)2

3(ρeρc)22(ρeρc)+25(17c0)

=

0.

The solution to this quadratic equation gives,

(ρeρc)

=

16[2±4245(17c0)]

 

=

13[1±165(17c0)]

In order for this condition to hold while also meeting the demands of the eigenfrequency, we need α to satisfy the relation,

237+α(α1)±α+1

=

13[1±165(17c0)]

14+2αα+c0

=

1±[5c05c065(c07c0)]1/2

[14+αc0α+c0]2

=

42c05c0

5c0(14+αc0)2

=

(42c0)(α+c0)2,

where, keep in mind,

c0

=

1±(1+α)1/2.

RESULT:  After examining a range of physically reasonable values of α, we do not find any values for which the left-hand-side of this condition matches the right-hand-side.


Try Quartic Core Eigenfunction

Let's begin with Sterne's quartic function and see if we can match it to the envelope's power-law eigenfunction. From Sterne's presentation, we have,

xcore

=

a[1185(ξg)2+9935(ξg)4]

and the associated eigenfrequency is obtained by setting,

𝔉=σ22α=36.

In this case, then, the eigenfrequency for the envelope will match the eigenfrequency of the core if,

36+2α

=

3(ρeρc)[(α1)±α+1]

(ρeρc)

=

36+2α3[(α1)±α+1]

The eigenfunction for the envelope is, as before. The value of this envelope function will match the value of its core counterpart at the interface (ξ=1) if,

a[1185(1g)2+9935(1g)4]

=

1

a

=

[1185(1g)2+9935(1g)4]1.

Finally, the slope (first derivative) of the core eigenfunction will match the slope of the envelope eigenfunction at the interface if,

(c0a)ξc01|ξ=1

=

[365g2ξ+49935g4ξ3]ξ=1

c0[1185(1g)2+9935(1g)4]

=

365g2+49935g4

c0[35g4718g2+99]

=

736g2+499.

Eureka Regarding Prasad's 1948 Paper

Envelope Solution Outline

Comment by J. E. Tohline on 5 December 2016: Yesterday, I stumbled on this key paper by Prasad (1948) while I was looking back through the published literature to catalog who has solved the polytropic wave equation numerically.
Comment by J. E. Tohline on 5 December 2016: Yesterday, I stumbled on this key paper by Prasad (1948) while I was looking back through the published literature to catalog who has solved the polytropic wave equation numerically.

C. Prasad (1948, MNRAS, 108, 414-416) has examined a closely related problem and, as it turns out, the mathematical approach that he used to solve that problem analytically is gratifyingly useful to me here. If, as above, we restrict our investigation to configurations for which,

g2=,

and if we multiply through by x/(𝒜ξ2), our governing wave equation becomes,

0

=

[11𝒜(ρeρc)2ξ3]d2xdξ2+[36𝒜(ρeρc)2ξ3]1ξdxdξ+[1𝒜(ρeρc)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)ξ3α]xξ2

 

=

[1𝒟ξ3]d2xdξ2+[36𝒟ξ3]1ξdxdξ+[𝒟(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)ξ3α]xξ2,

where,

𝒟1𝒜(ρeρc)2=(ρeρc)2[2(ρeρc)(1ρeρc)]1=[2(ρcρe1)]1.

This wave equation is very similar to equation (2) of Prasad (1948). If, following Prasad's guidance, we then assume a series solution of the form,

x

=

ξc00akξk,

the indicial equation gives,

c0=1±1+α.

This is precisely the value of the exponent, c0, that we derived — in a more stumbling fashion — above and, as is shown by the following framed image, it is identical to the exponent derived by Prasad (1948).

Equation and accompanying text extracted from C. Prasad (1948)

"Radial Oscillations of a Particular Stellar Model"

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 108, pp. 414-416 © Royal Astronomical Society

Prasad (1948)
Prasad (1948)
Displayed here exactly as presented in the original publication.

Using equation (7) from Prasad (1948) as a guide, we hypothesize that the eigenfrequency of the jth mode in the envelope is given by the relation,

σj2|env

=

(c0+3j)(c0+3j+5)+2αe

 

=

3[αe+c0(2j+1)+j(3j+5)],

where, the last expression results from recognizing that αe=c02+2c0, and we have adopted the notation,

σj2|env(𝔉+2α)ρcρe=3ω22πγgGρe.

And guided by equation (6) from Prasad (1948), we hypothesize that successive coefficients in the (truncated) series that defines the radial structure of each mode is governed by the recurrence relation,

1𝒟ak+3ak

=

(c0+k)(c0+k+5)(σj22α)(c0+k+3)(c0+k+5)α.

Example Envelope Eigenvectors

Mode j = 0

Here we assume that the series defining the eigenfunction has only one term. This should match our earlier restricted solution. Specifically,

xj=0

=

a0ξc0

1ξdxj=0dξ

=

a0c0ξc02;

d2xj=0dξ2

=

a0c0(c01)ξc02.

In this case, the wave equation becomes,

0

=

a0ξc02{[1𝒟ξ3]c0(c01)+[36𝒟ξ3]c0+[𝒟(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)ξ3α]}.

The coefficients of the ξ0 terms will sum to zero if the above-defined indicial exponent condition is satisfied; that is, by setting,

c0

=

1±(1+α)1/2.

In order for the coefficients of the ξ3 terms to sum to zero, we need,

(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α)2α

=

c0(c01)+6c0

σj=02|env

=

c0(c0+5)+2α.

Mode j = 1

Here we assume that the series defining the eigenfunction has two terms: k=0 and k=3. Specifically,

xj=1

=

a0ξc0+a3ξc0+3

1ξdxj=1dξ

=

a0c0ξc02+a3(c0+3)ξc0+1;

d2xj=1dξ2

=

a0c0(c01)ξc02+a3(c0+3)(c0+2)ξc0+1.

In this case, after factoring out a0ξc02, the wave equation becomes,

0

=

[1𝒟ξ3][c0(c01)+a3a0(c0+3)(c0+2)ξ3]+[36𝒟ξ3][c0+a3a0(c0+3)ξ3]

 

 

+[𝒟(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)ξ3α][1+a3a0ξ3].

Again, the coefficients of the ξ0 terms will sum to zero if the above-defined indicial exponent condition is satisfied; that is, by setting,

c0

=

1±(1+α)1/2.

In order for the coefficients of the ξ3 terms to sum to zero, we need,

0

=

𝒟c0(c01)+a3a0(c0+3)(c0+2)6𝒟c0+3a3a0(c0+3)+𝒟(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)αa3a0

a3a0[(c0+3)(c0+2)+3(c0+3)α]

=

𝒟[c0(c01)+6c0(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α)+2α]

1𝒟a3a0[(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

=

[c0(c0+5)(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α)+2α]

1𝒟a3a0

=

c0(c0+5)(σj=122α)(c0+3)(c0+5)α.

In addition, we must also examine what condition is required for the ξ6 terms to sum to zero. We have,

0

=

𝒟a3a0[(c0+3)(c0+2)6(c0+3)+(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)]

σj=12|env

=

(c0+3)(c0+8)+2α.


Mode j = 2

Here we assume that the series defining the eigenfunction has three terms: k=0, k=3, and k=6. Specifically,

xj=2

=

a0ξc0+a3ξc0+3+a6ξc0+6

1ξdxj=2dξ

=

1ξ[a0c0ξc01+a3(c0+3)ξc0+2+a6(c0+6)ξc0+5];

d2xj=2dξ2

=

a0c0(c01)ξc02+a3(c0+3)(c0+2)ξc0+1+a6(c0+6)(c0+5)ξc0+4.

In this case, after factoring out a0ξc02, the wave equation becomes,

0

=

[1𝒟ξ3][c0(c01)+a3a0(c0+3)(c0+2)ξ3+a6a0(c0+6)(c0+5)ξ6]

 

 

+[36𝒟ξ3][c0+a3a0(c0+3)ξ3+a6a0(c0+6)ξ6]+[𝒟(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)ξ3α][1+a3a0ξ3+a6a0ξ6].

Again, the coefficients of the ξ0 terms will sum to zero if,

c0

=

1±(1+α)1/2.

In order for the coefficients of the ξ3 terms to sum to zero, we need,

0

=

𝒟c0(c01)+a3a0(c0+3)(c0+2)6𝒟c0+3a3a0(c0+3)+𝒟(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)αa3a0

1𝒟a3a0[(c0+3)(c0+2)+3(c0+3)α]

=

c0(c01)+6c0+2α(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α)

1𝒟a3a0

=

c0(c0+5)+2ασj=22(c0+3)(c0+5)α

In order for the coefficients of the ξ6 terms to sum to zero, we need,

0

=

a6a0(c0+6)(c0+5)𝒟a3a0(c0+3)(c0+2)+3a6a0(c0+6)6𝒟a3a0(c0+3)αa6a0+𝒟(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)a3a0

a6a0[(c0+6)(c0+5)+3(c0+6)α]

=

𝒟a3a0[(c0+3)(c0+2)+6(c0+3)+2ασj=22]

1𝒟a6a3

=

(c0+3)(c0+8)(σj=222α)(c0+6)(c0+8)α.

And the frequency determined from setting to zero the sum of coefficients of the ξ9 terms is,

0

=

𝒟a6a0(c0+6)(c0+5)6𝒟a6a0(c0+6)+𝒟(ρcρe)(𝔉+2α2αρeρc)a6a0

 

=

𝒟a6a0[(c0+6)(c0+5)+6(c0+6)(σj=222α)]

(σj=222α)

=

(c0+6)(c0+11).

Match Prasad-like Envelope Eigenvector to the Core Eigenvector

If we define,

ηξg,

the above wave equation for the core becomes,

0

=

(1η2)d2xdη2+(46η2)1ηdxdη+𝔉x.

Not surprisingly, this is identical in form to the eigenvalue problem first presented by Sterne (1937) in connection with an examination of radial oscillations in uniform-density spheres. For the core of our zero-zero bipolytrope, we can therefore adopt any one of the polynomial eigenfunctions and corresponding eigenfrequencies derived by Sterne. We will insist that the eigenfrequency of the envelope match the eigenfrequency of the core; and, following J. O. Murphy & R. Fiedler (1985b) (see the top paragraph of the right-hand column on p. 223 of their article), we seek solutions for which there is continuity in both the eigenfunction and its first derivative at the interface (ξ=1).

Eigenfrequencies

We must note that, heretofore, we have used the following dimensionless frequency notations:

σ2|core3ωcore22πγgGρc,

      and      

σ2|env3ωenv22πγgGρe.

This means that, demanding that the two dimensional frequencies (ω) be the same requires that the ratio of the dimensionless frequencies (σ) be,

σ2|coreσ2|env

=

ρeρc.

Now, according to Sterne's derivation, the dimensionless eigenfrequency associated with the jth mode in the core is,

σj2|core

=

2α+𝔉j=2α+2j(2j+5).

And, as we have just discussed, the dimensionless eigenfrequency associated with the th Prasad-like mode in the envelope is,

σ2|env

=

2α+𝔉=2α+(c0+3)(c0+3+5),

where,

c0

=

1±(1+α)1/2.

Hence, in order for any specific pair of modes to have the same dimensional eigenfrequencies, we must have an envelope-to-core density ratio given by the expression,

ρeρc

=

2α+2j(2j+5)2α+(c0+3)(c0+3+5).

Put another way, the ratio of the dimensional eigenfrequencies is,

ωenv2ωcore2

=

σenv2σcore2(ρeρc)=2α+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)2α+2j(2j+5)(ρeρc).

We also should keep in mind that, in our particular case, the envelope density must not be greater than the core density. So, demanding that the (dimensional) eigenfrequencies be equal and, simultaneously, that ρe/ρc1, implies the following constraint on the integer index, j for each choice of the index, :

2α+2j(2j+5)

2α+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)

2j

c0+3

j

jmax

INT[12(c0+3)].

The following table lists values of jmax for various values of the companion index, , and an assumed value of the parameter,

α34/γg=3nn+1.

Limiting Index, jmax, assuming
c0=1+α1
(n,γg,α,c0)
(0,,3,1) (3,43,0,0) (,1,1,1)
0 0 0 ---
1 2 1 1
2 3 3 2
3 5 4 4
4 6 6 5
5 8 7 7
6 9 9 8
7 11 10 10
8 12 12 11
9 14 13 13
10 15 15 14

C0 Plus

Limiting Index, jmax, assuming
c0=1+α1
(n,γg,α,c0)
(,1,1,1) (3,43,0,2) (0,,3,3)
0 --- --- ---
1 1 0 0
2 2 2 1
3 4 3 3
4 5 5 4
5 7 6 6
6 8 8 7
7 10 9 9
8 11 11 10
9 13 12 12
10 14 14 13

C0 Minus

Implications

Keeping in mind that,

g2

1+(ρeρc)[2(1ρeρc)(1q)+ρeρc(1q21)],

and that, in order for the Prasad-like modes to be relevant in the envelope, we must have,

g2=

1+2(ρeρc)3(ρeρc)2

 

=

(1ρeρc)[3(ρeρc)+1].

we recognize that once the eigenfrequency match is used to define the relevant value of the density ratio, ρe/ρc, the relevant values of both q and ν are set as well. Specifically, as derived above, in the context of our "more general" envelope solution,

q3=(ρe/ρc)2[1(ρe/ρc)]

      and      

ν=13[1(ρe/ρc)].

This also means that the parameter,

𝒟

=

[2(ρcρe1)]1=q3.

Eigenfunctions

The eigenfunction associated with the jth Sterne-like mode of the core is,

xj|core

=

i=0ja2i(ξ2g2)i,

where, for the specified, jth mode, the value of the leading coefficient, a0, is arbitrary, but for all other coefficients,

ak+2ak

=

k2+5k𝔉j(k+2)(k+5).

 

=

k2+5k2j(2j+5)(k+2)(k+5).

The eigenfunction associated with the th Prasad-like mode of the envelope is,

x|env

=

ξc0i=0b3iξ3i,

where, for the specified, th mode, the value of the leading coefficient, a0, is arbitrary, but for all other coefficients,

1q3bk+3bk

=

(c0+k)(c0+k+5)𝔉(c0+k+3)(c0+k+5)α

 

=

(c0+k)(c0+k+5)(c0+3)(c0+3+5)(c0+k+3)(c0+k+5)α.

Example11

Let's try (,j)=(1,1).

x1|core

=

a0[1+a2a0(ξg)2]

 

=

a0{1+[k2+5k2j(2j+5)(k+2)(k+5)]k=0(ξg)2}

 

=

a0[175(ξg)2]

dx1dξ|core

=

a0145(ξg2)

x1|env

=

b0ξc0[1+b3b0ξ3]

 

=

b0ξc0{1+[(c0+k)(c0+k+5)(c0+3)(c0+3+5)(c0+k+3)(c0+k+5)α]k=0ξ3}

 

=

b0ξc0{1+[c0(c0+5)(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]ξ3}

dx1dξ|env

=

b0ξc01{c0+c0[c0(c0+5)(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]ξ3+[3c0(c0+5)3(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]ξ3}

 

=

b0ξc01{c0+[c02(c0+5)c0(c0+3)(c0+8)+3c0(c0+5)3(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]ξ3}

 

=

b0ξc01{c0+(c0+3)[c0(c0+5)(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]ξ3}

 

=

b0ξc01{c0[6(c0+3)(c0+4)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]ξ3}

Let's define both a0 and b0 such that the values of both eigenfunctions is unity at the interface (ξ=1). This means that,

a0

=

[175g2]1=[5g25g27];

b0

=

{1+[c0(c0+5)(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]}1

 

=

[(c0+3)(c0+8)αc0(c0+5)α].

Hence, in order for the first derivative of both eigenfunctions to be equal at the interface, we need,

a0145(1g2)

=

b0{c0[6(c0+3)(c0+4)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]}

[5g25g27]145g2

=

{c0[(c0+3)(c0+8)α]6(c0+3)(c0+4)(c0+3)(c0+8)α}[(c0+3)(c0+8)αc0(c0+5)α]

1475g2

=

c0[(c0+3)(c0+8)α]6(c0+3)(c0+4)c0(c0+5)α

75g214

=

c0(c0+5)αc0[(c0+3)(c0+8)α]6(c0+3)(c0+4)

g2

=

75+145[αc0(c0+5)c0[(c0+3)(c0+8)α]6(c0+3)(c0+4)].


Example12

Let's try (,j)=(1,2).

x1|core

=

a0+a2(ξg)2+a4(ξg)4

 

=

a0[1+a2a0(ξg)2+a4a2a2a0(ξg)4]

 

=

a0{1+[k2+5k2j(2j+5)(k+2)(k+5)]k=0(ξg)2+[k2+5k2j(2j+5)(k+2)(k+5)]k=2[k2+5k2j(2j+5)(k+2)(k+5)]k=0(ξg)4}

 

=

a0[1185(ξg)2+9935(ξg)4];

dx1dξ|core

=

a0[365(ξg2)+49935(ξ3g4)]

 

=

a035g4[736g2ξ+499ξ3].

In order for the core's x2 eigenfunction to have the value of unity at ξ=1, we need,

1

=

a0[1185(1g)2+9935(1g)4]

 

=

a035g4[35g4718g2+99]

a0

=

35g4[35g4718g2+99]1

Hence, in order for the first derivative of both eigenfunctions to be equal at the interface, we need,

a035g4[736g2+499]

=

b0{c0[6(c0+3)(c0+4)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]}

35g4[35g4718g2+99]1135g4[736g2+499]

=

[(c0+3)(c0+8)αc0(c0+5)α]{c0[6(c0+3)(c0+4)(c0+3)(c0+8)α]}

36[35g4718g2+99]1[117g2]

=

[c0[(c0+3)(c0+8)α]6(c0+3)(c0+4)c0(c0+5)α]

[117g2]

=

1[35g4718g2+99]

0

=

35g4718g2+99(117g2)

 

=

35g47(18)g2+11(9),

where,

36[c0(c0+5)αc0[(c0+3)(c0+8)α]6(c0+3)(c0+4)].

The solution to this quadratic equation gives,

g2

=

170{7(18)±72(18)24435(9)}

 

=

7(18)70{1±14435(9)72(18)2}.


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   |


Example21

Let's try (,j)=(2,1).

x1|core

=

a0[1+a2a0(ξg)2]

 

=

a0{1+[k2+5k2j(2j+5)(k+2)(k+5)]k=0(ξg)2}

 

=

a0[175(ξg)2]

dx1dξ|core

=

a0145(ξg2)

x2|env

=

b0ξc0[1+b3b0ξ3+b3b0b6b3ξ6]

 

=

b0ξc0{1+𝒟[(c0+k)(c0+k+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+k+3)(c0+k+5)α]k=0ξ3

 

 

+𝒟2[(c0+k)(c0+k+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+k+3)(c0+k+5)α]k=0[(c0+k)(c0+k+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+k+3)(c0+k+5)α]k=3ξ6}

 

=

b0ξc0{1+𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]ξ3

 

 

+𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]ξ6}

dx2dξ|env

=

b0ξc01{c0+(c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]ξ3

 

 

+(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]ξ6}

Let's define both a0 and b0 such that the values of both eigenfunctions is unity at the interface (ξ=1). This means that,

a0

=

[175g2]1=[5g25g27];

b0

=

{1+𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]+𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}1

Hence, in order for the first derivative of both eigenfunctions to be equal at the interface, we need,

1b0145(1g2)

=

1a0{c0+(c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

+(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}

0

=

[175g2]{c0+(c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

+(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}

 

 

+145(1g2){1+𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

+𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}.

But, we can show that,

1g=(1+2𝒟).

WRONG!   This relation should read,

g2

=

1+8q3(1+2q3)2=1+8𝒟(1+2𝒟)2


Hence,

0

=

[175(1+𝒟)2]{c0+(c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

+(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}

 

 

+75(1+𝒟)2{2+2𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

+2𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}

 

=

{c0+(c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

+(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}

 

 

+75(1+𝒟)2{(2c0)+2𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α](c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

+2𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]

 

 

(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}

 

=

{c0+(c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

+(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}

 

 

+75(1+𝒟)2{(2c0)(c0+1)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α]

 

 

(c0+4)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)α][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)α]}

Allow Different Adiabatic Exponents

Let's allow the core to have a different adiabatic exponent, γc, from the envelope, γe; this also means that α will be correspondingly different in the two regions. First, note that the ratio of the eigenfrequencies is,

3ωe22πGγeρe[2πGγcρc3ωc2]

=

2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)2αc+2j(2j+5),

where,

c0

=

±1+αe1.

So, if we want the dimensional eigenfrequencies to be identical, this means we need,

γcρcγeρe

=

2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)2αc+2j(2j+5)

γc[6+2j(2j+5)]

=

8+γe[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)]ρeρc.

No Physical Solution11

Let's try (,j)=(1,1). Skimming through the earlier Example11 discussion, above, it looks like the only thing we need to do in order to allow the core and envelope to have different adiabatic exponents is to explicitly add the "envelope" subscript to α on the right-hand side of the last expression for g2. That is, in order to match both the value and the first derivative of the two eigenfunctions at the core/envelope interface, we need,

g2

=

75+145[αec0(c0+5)c0[(c0+3)(c0+8)αe]6(c0+3)(c0+4)]

g21

=

25{1+7[αec0(c0+5)c0[(c0+3)(c0+8)αe]6(c0+3)(c0+4)]}.

But, as before, the requirement that g2= means that,

0

=

3(ρeρc)22(ρeρc)+(g21)

(ρeρc)

=

13[1±13(g21)].

Notice that the right-hand side of this expression only depends on the choice of the adiabatic exponent in the envelope. When combined with the condition imposed by setting the dimensional frequency ratio to unity, we have,

γcγe

=

[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)2αc+2j(2j+5)](ρeρc)

 

=

2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)3[2αc+2j(2j+5)][1±13(g21)]

γc3[2αc+2j(2j+5)]

=

γe[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)][1±13(g21)].

In this last expression, the left-hand side only depends on the adiabatic exponent in the core, while the right-hand side only depends on the adiabatic exponent in the envelope.

Evaluation (Tohline's Excel spreadsheet AdExp inside workbook AnalyticEigenvector.xlsx):   Over the range, 1α3, we plotted LHS(αe) and RHS(αc) for the example case of (,j)=(1,1). There was a fairly wide range of pairings, (αc,αe) for which the LHS = RHS; for example, at (1,+1.05), both sides give 36, and at (1.95,1.95), both sides give 200. But in all cases, the inferred density ratio was greater than unity. Hence, this example index pairing does not seem to result in physically relevant core-envelope eigenvectors.

Solution21

Setup

Let's try (,j)=(2,1). Examining the above, Example21 discussion, we deduce that, in order for the first derivative of both eigenfunctions to be equal at the interface, we need,

a0145(1g2)

=

b0{c0+(c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe]

 

 

+(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)αe]}

[145g27]

=

{1+𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe]+𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)αe]}1

 

 

×{c0+(c0+3)𝒟[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe]

 

 

+(c0+6)𝒟2[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe][(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)αe]}

Notice that the core's adiabatic exponent does not explicitly enter into this condition. Given that,

𝒟=q3,

      and      

g2=(1+2𝒟)2=(1+2q3)2,

WRONG!   This relation should read,

g2

=

1+8q3(1+2q3)2=1+8𝒟(1+2𝒟)2


we can view this expression as a conditional relationship between q and γe. Once a (q,γe) pair has been found that satisfies this condition, we can use the matching-frequency condition to give the corresponding, required value of γc; specifically, for (,j)=(2,1),

γc[2αc+2j(2j+5)]

=

γe[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)](ρeρc)

 

=

γe[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)][2q31+2q3]

γc[2(34/γc)+14]

=

γe[2(34/γe)+(c0+6)(c0+11)][2q31+2q3]

20γc8

=

γe[6+(c0+6)(c0+11)][2q31+2q3]8[2q31+2q3]

γc

=

120{γe[6+(c0+6)(c0+11)][2q31+2q3]+8[11+2q3]}.

First Few Numerically Determined Model Parameters

Example Solutions (,j)=(2,1)
Envelope Interface Core
ne γe αe c0 (plus) σ=22|env q3 ρeρc ν nc γc αc σj=12|core
20 1.05 0.80956 0.56356 55.118 0.4564055 0.4772092 0.6376037 1.2805786 1.780897 +0.7539409 15.508
10 1.1 0.6363636 0.3969773 58.136 0.47763915 0.4885639 0.6517594 1.0393067 1.9621799 +0.9614509 15.923
5 1.2 1/3 0.1835034 62.247 0.50243157 0.50121284 0.6682877 0.7861924 2.2719532 +1.2394004 16.479
3 4/3 0 0 66 0.52185923 0.51069581 0.68123949 0.6071418 2.6470616 +1.4888905 16.978

Note that, in all cases, we find,

σ2|envσcore2(ρeρc)γeγc

=

1,

thereby demonstrating that the ratio of the dimensional frequencies is unity.

Special Case of 4/3 Envelope

It is worth examining in more detail the specific case of γe=4/3 because, in this case, αe and c0 (plus) are both zero, so the constraint equations become simpler. For this specific case, in order for the two eigenfunctions and their first derivatives to match at the interface, we have,

[14(1+2q3)257(1+2q3)2]

=

{1+q3[61135]+q6[61135][3861168]}1

 

 

×{3q3[61135]+6q6[61135][3861168]}

 

=

q3{66+q3[6774]}×{522q3+q6[774]}1

 

=

66q3[4+7q32088q3+77q6]

[14(1+2q3)2][2088q3+77q6]

=

66q3[4+7q3][57(1+2q3)2].

165q3(47q3)

=

14(1+2q3)2(10+22q377q6).

In the physically relevant range of the parameter, 0<q<1, the parameter value that satisfies this constraint is,

q3=0.52185923.

From the frequency-ratio constraint, therefore, we have,

γc

=

25[1+24q31+2q3]=2.6470616.

Roots of Quartic Equation

Let,

  for γe=43

A21

[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe]

      …      

225

B21

[(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+6)(c0+8)αe]

      …      

78

Then the interface constraint equation takes the form,

14(1+2𝒟)27(1+2𝒟)25

=

c0+(c0+3)𝒟A21+(c0+6)𝒟2A21B211+𝒟A21+𝒟2A21B21

7(1+4𝒟+4𝒟2)[2+2A21𝒟+2A21B21𝒟2]

=

[c0+(c0+3)A21𝒟+(c0+6)A21B21𝒟2][7(1+4𝒟+4𝒟2)5]

5[c0+(c0+3)A21𝒟+(c0+6)A21B21𝒟2]

=

7(1+4𝒟+4𝒟2){[2+2A21𝒟+2A21B21𝒟2][c0+(c0+3)A21𝒟+(c0+6)A21B21𝒟2]}

 

=

7(1+4𝒟+4𝒟2)[(2c0)(1+c0)A21𝒟(4+c0)A21B21𝒟2]

0

=

5[c0+(c0+3)A21𝒟+(c0+6)A21B21𝒟2]+7(1+4𝒟+4𝒟2)[(2c0)(1+c0)A21𝒟(4+c0)A21B21𝒟2]

 

=

[5c0+5(c0+3)A21𝒟+5(c0+6)A21B21𝒟2]+[7(2c0)7(1+c0)A21𝒟7(4+c0)A21B21𝒟2]

 

 

+[28(2c0)𝒟28(1+c0)A21𝒟228(4+c0)A21B21𝒟3]

 

 

+[28(2c0)𝒟228(1+c0)A21𝒟328(4+c0)A21B21𝒟4]

=

𝒟0[5c0+7(2c0)]+𝒟1[5(c0+3)A217(1+c0)A21+28(2c0)]

 

 

+𝒟2[5(c0+6)A21B217(4+c0)A21B2128(1+c0)A21+28(2c0)]+𝒟3[28(4+c0)A21B2128(1+c0)A21]+𝒟4[28(4+c0)A21B21]

=

𝒟0[142c0]+𝒟1[28(2c0)+(82c0)A21]+𝒟2[28(2c0)28(1+c0)A21+2(1c0)A21B21]

 

 

+𝒟3[(1+c0)+(4+c0)B21](28A21)+𝒟4[28(4+c0)A21B21].

To solve this equation analytically, we follow the Summary of Ferrari's method that is presented in Wikipedia's discussion of the Quartic Function to identify the roots of an arbitrary quartic equation.

First, we adopt the shorthand notation:

0

=

aX4+bX3+cX2+dX+e,

where, in our particular case,

  for γe=43

e

142c0,

      …      

14

d

28(2c0)+(82c0)A21,

      …      

1045

c

28(2c0)28(1+c0)A21+2(1c0)A21B21,

      …      

186910

b

28A21[(1+c0)+(4+c0)B21],

      …      

308

a

28(4+c0)A21B21.

      …      

21565

Now, define,

  for γe=43

Δ0

c23bd+12ae,

      …      

1.829079×104

Δ1

2c39bcd+27b2e+27ad272ace,

      …      

1.358913×108

p

8ac3b28a2,

      …      

0.6247681

q

b34abc+8a2d8a3,

      …      

0.1521170

Q

121/3[Δ1+Δ124Δ03]1/3,

      …      

5.141760×102

S

12[2p3+13a(Q+Δ0Q)]1/2.

      …      

0.1078593

Then the four roots of the quartic equation are,

  for γe=43

X1

=

b4aS+12[4S22p+qS]1/2,

      …      

0.5218592

X2

=

b4aS12[4S22p+qS]1/2,

      …      

1.094721

X3,4

=

b4a+S±12[4S22pqS]1/2.

      …      

imaginary

The X1 root is the physically relevant one, and it matches the interface value of 𝒟=q3 associated with γe=4/3 in our above table of example solutions. Excellent!


In summary then, for any choice of the envelope's adiabatic exponent, γe, the physically relevant root of the quartic equation gives us the interface location of the model for which our analytically specified eigenvector applies; specifically,

q=X11/3.

From this value, we also know that,

g=1(1+2q3);       ρeρc=2q3(1+2q3);       and       νMcoreMtot=[3(1ρeρc)]1.      

WRONG!   The first of these three expressions should read,

g2

=

1+8q3(1+2q3)2=1+8𝒟(1+2𝒟)2

Combined Eigenfunction

From above, we know that the eigenfunction for the core (0ξ1) is,

xj=1|core

=

a0[175(ξg)2]=57(1+2q3)2ξ257(1+2q3)2.

And the matching eigenfunction for the envelope (1ξq1) is,

x=2|env

=

ξc0[1+q3A21ξ3+q6A21B21ξ61+q3A21+q6A21B21].

Related Discussions


Tiled Menu

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