Appendix/Ramblings/AdditionalAnalyticallySpecifiedEigenvectors00Bipolytropes

From jetwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Searching for Additional Eigenvectors of Zero-Zero Bipolytropes

This chapter is an extension of two accompanying discussions: The original discovery and detailed derivation; and the more readable, summary.

In our accompanying summary, we have demonstrated how analytically specified eigenvectors can be constructed for the mode labeled, (,j)=(2,1). This was done by specifying γe, then solving a quartic equation for q. Shortly after completing this summary chapter, we noticed that an alternate approach may be to specify q, then solve for γe; and this path may be simpler because it may only involve solution of a quadratic equation. (Actually, we later have realized that the relevant equation is cubic, rather than quadratic. This is nevertheless simpler than the quartic equation.) If this proves to be the case, then it may also be possible to analytically construct eigenvectors of additional modes. Let's see.


CAUTION!   All of the "core" eigenfunction expressions are suspect because (I think!) they have been developed herein under the assumption that g2=(1+2q3)2, whereas the relation should read,

1g2

=

(1+2q3)21+8q3=(1+2X)21+8X.


Seek Alternate Solution to Mode21 (,j)=(2,1)

Setup21

According to STEP 4 in our accompanying summary discussion, we need to solve the following "derivative matching" expression:

γcγe[14(1+2X)27(1+2X)25(1+8X)]

=

c0+3A2X+6A2B2X21+A2X+A2B2X23(γcγe1)

γcγe[14(1+2X)27(1+2X)25(1+8X)]+3(γcγe1)

=

c0+(c0+3)A2X+(c0+6)A2B2X21+A2X+A2B2X2

where, recognizing that, αe=c0(c0+2),

A2

[c0(c0+5)(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe]

 

=

[c02+5c0(c02+17c0+66)(c02+8c0+15)(c02+2c0)]

 

=

(4c0+222c0+5),

B2

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

 

=

[(c02+11c0+24)(c02+17c0+66)(c02+14c0+48)(c02+2c0)]

 

=

(c0+72c0+8).

Here, we assume that Xq3 is specified and seek the corresponding value of c0. Given that the LHS of this matching relation is known once X has been specified, in order to simplify notation we will also define,

Q

γcγe[14(1+2X)27(1+2X)25(1+8X)]+3(γcγe1).

Then the matching relation becomes,

Q

=

c0+(c0+3)A21X+(c0+6)A21B21X21+A21X+A21B21X2

0

=

[c0+(c0+3)A21X+(c0+6)A21B21X2]Q[1+A21X+A21B21X2]

 

=

[c0(c0+3)(4c0+222c0+5)X+(c0+6)(4c0+222c0+5)(c0+72c0+8)X2]Q[1(4c0+222c0+5)X+(4c0+222c0+5)(c0+72c0+8)X2]

 

=

[c0(2c0+5)(2c0+8)(c0+3)(2c0+8)(4c0+22)X+(c0+6)(4c0+22)(c0+7)X2]

 

 

Q[(2c0+5)(2c0+8)(2c0+8)(4c0+22)X+(4c0+22)(c0+7)X2]

 

=

{c0(4c02+26c0+40)+(4c0+22)X[(c02+13c0+42)X(2c02+14c0+24)]}

 

 

Q{(4c02+26c0+40)+(4c0+22)X[c0(X2)+(7X8)]}

 

=

4c03+[264Q]c02+[4026Q]c040Q

 

 

+(4c0+22)X{[X2]c02+[13X14Q(X2)]c0+[42XQ(7X8)24]}

 

=

4c03+[264Q]c02+[4026Q]c040Q

 

 

+4X[X2]c03+4X[13X14Q(X2)]c02+4X[42XQ(7X8)24]c0

 

 

+22X[X2]c02+22X[13X14Q(X2)]c0+22X[42XQ(7X8)24].

Solve Cubic Equation

Here we draw from a separate discussion of solutions to a cubic equation.

Using y in place of c0, this "derivative matching" relation can be written in the form of a standard cubic equation. Specifically,

ay3+by2+cy+d

=

0,

where,

a

4+4X(X2),

b

(264Q21)+4X[13X14Q21(X2)]+22X(X2),

c

[4026Q21]+4X[42XQ21(7X8)24]+22X[13X14Q21(X2)],

d

40Q21+22X[42XQ21(7X8)24].

As is well known and documented — see, for example Wolfram MathWorld or Wikipedia's discussion of the topic — the roots of any cubic equation can be determined analytically. In order to evaluate the root(s) of our particular cubic equation, we have drawn from the utilitarian online summary provided by Eric Schechter at Vanderbilt University. For a cubic equation of the general form,

ay3+by2+cy+d=0,

a real root is given by the expression,

y=p+{z+[z2+(rp2)3]1/2}1/3+{z[z2+(rp2)3]1/2}1/3,

where,

pb3a,      z[p3+bc3ad6a2],      and      r=c3a.

(There is also a pair of imaginary roots, but they are irrelevant in the context of our overarching astrophysical discussion.)


Upon evaluation, we have found that the expression inside of the square root is negative over the region of parameter space that is of most physical interest. Hence, we need to call upon a separate discussion in which the cube root of complex numbers was discussed.


We'll shift to Wolfram's notation; specifically,

a0

=

da,

a1

=

ca,

a2

=

ba,

R

32a2a133a02a23233

 

=

bc3ad6a2(b3a)3=z,

Q

3a1a2232

 

=

c3a(b3a)2=rp2.

Then, after defining,

DQ3+R2=z2+(rp2)3;         S3R+D;         and         T3RD;

Wolfram states that the three roots of the cubic equation are (the first one being identical to the "real" root identified above),

y1

=

p+(S+T),

y2

=

p12(S+T)+12i3(ST),

y2

=

p12(S+T)12i3(ST).

Now, whenever D is intrinsically negative, we need to treat both S3 and T3 as complex numbers. If we define,

𝔯(R2+|D|)1/2,

      and      

θtan1[|D|R],

then we can write,

S3=𝔯e+iθ,

      and      

T3=𝔯eiθ.

As is explained in this online resource, both S and T must formally submit to three separate roots tagged by the integer index, (j=0,1,2). Working only with the j=0 root for both, we find that the above expressions for the three roots of our cubic equation become,

y1

=

p+2𝔯1/3cos(θ3),

y2

=

p𝔯1/3[cos(θ3)+3sin(θ3)],

y3

=

p𝔯1/3[cos(θ3)3sin(θ3)].

We have deduced empirically that y3 is the root that is physically relevant in our case. That is to say, for a given 0<q<1,

c0=p𝔯1/3[cos(θ3)3sin(θ3)].

In turn, for a given value of q, the corresponding value of αe is obtained via the relation, αe=c0(c0+2).

The right-hand panel of Figure 1 presents a plot of this c0(q) function; actually what has been plotted is the inverted relation, q(αe). The open, red circular markers trace the portion of the function that provides physically viable solutions, in the sense that the corresponding value of αc lies between the values, negative one and three; the filled, light=blue circular markers identify roots of the cubic equation that are not physically viable.

In the left-hand panel of Figure 1, we re-display a plot that has been discussed in an accompanying chapter. It contains a plot (blue markers) of the same same q(αe) function but, this time, as determined from the root of a quartic equation. In order to illustrate more clearly that the two curves are the same, we have plotted the quartic solution (small, purple circular markers) on top of the cubic solution in the right-hand panel.

Figure 1:  Comparing Roots to Quartic and Cubic Equations

quartic solution cubic solution


Illustration21

Analytically Definable Eigenvectors in (nc,ne)=(0,0) Bipolytropes

Quantum Numbers:  (,j)=(2,1)

Analyzable Model Sequence One Example Eigenfunction

Montage of Stability Results for (ell,j) = (2,1) quantum numbers


Top-Left Panel:  Plotted points show how the location of the core/envelope interface, qri/R, varies with αe(34/γe) — where γe is the adiabatic exponent of the envelope — in equilibrium models that are amenable to analytic modal analysis for quantum numbers, (,j)=(2,1). Red (alternatively, blue) markers identify models for which the corresponding value of the adiabatic exponent of the core [see bottom-left panel] falls inside (alternatively, outside) the physically viable range, namely, 1γc. The yellow circular marker identifies the model whose analytically determined eigenfunction is displayed on the right, as an example.

Bottom-Left Panel:   Plotted points show how αc(34/γc) varies with αe over the physically viable parameter range, 1α3. Both axes have been flipped so that incompressible models (γ=) lie on the left/bottom while isothermal models (γ=1) lie on the right/top. The core is more compressible than the envelope in models that lie above and to the left of the black-dashed, diagonal line. The yellow circular marker identifies the same example model as it does in the top-left panel.

Top-Right Panel:  Displays — as a function of the fractional radius, r0/R=qξ — the analytically determined eigenfunction for the (,j)=(2,1) mode in the model identified by the yellow circular marker in both left-hand panels, for which,

αe=0.35             c0(plus)=0.1937742

and, correspondingly (via our separate solution of the governing quartic equation), (q,αc)=(0.6840119,+0.8326585). (This same plot appears in Figure 1 of our accompanying summary.) Specifically, over the radial interval, 0ξ1, the green markers trace the core's contribution to the combined eigenfunction, namely,

xj=1|core

=

5(1+8q3)7(1+2q3)2ξ25(1+8q3)7(1+2q3)2;

and, over the radial interval, 1ξ1/q, the purple markers trace the envelope's contribution to the combined eigenfunction, namely,

x=2|env

=

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

where the coefficients, A21,B21, are as defined above in terms of the parameter, c0. The corresponding eigenfrequency is, from the perspective of the core,

3ω22πGρc

=

20γc8=8(7+αc)3αc28.9115809;

and, from the perspective of the envelope,

3ω22πGρc

=

3γe[αe+5c0+22]ρeρc28.9115807,

where the relevant density ratio is, ρe/ρc=2q3/(1+2q3)0.3902664.

Bottom-Right Panel:  The green and purple markers present the same eigenfunction-amplitude information, x(r/R), as in the Top-Right panel, but on a logarithmic scale. Specifically, in this plot, the vertical displacement of the green and purple markers is given by the expression,

y

=

18log10[x2+ϵ2]+yshift,

where, for plotting purposes, we have used, ϵ=105, and have set yshift to a value that ensures that y1 at the outer edge. In this type of log-amplitude plot, the eigenfunction's various nodes — that is, radial locations where x passes through zero — are highlighted; here, specifically, there is one node inside the core and one node resides in the envelope. Using the vertical coordinate to represent, instead, the configuration's mass-density normalized to its central value, ρ/ρc, the solid black line segments trace the unperturbed density distribution throughout this specific (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytrope. Throughout the core, ρ/ρc=1; then, at the location of the interface (ri/R=q0.684), the density abruptly drops to its envelope value (ρ/ρc=ρe/ρc0.39).

NOTE: As may be ascertained from our general discussion of the structural properties of (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytropes, equilibrium "zero-zero" bipolytropes can be constructed with the envelope/core interface parameter set to any value across the range, 0q1; and for any chosen value of q, the envelope/core density ratio can, in principle, be set to any value, 0ρe/ρc1. We have not, however, been able to analytically solve the relevant pair of linear-adiabatic wave equations (LAWEs) for this entire set of equilibrium models. Instead, our ability to derive analytically prescribed eigenvectors is limited by the constraint,

ρeρc

=

2q31+2q3=2(ri/R)31+2(ri/R)3.

The black-dotted curve in the Bottom-Right Panel displays the behavior of this constraint; accordingly, the step function depicted by the solid black line segments must necessarily drop from unity to a point on this black-dotted curve for any equilibrium model — such as the example illustrated here — that has an analytically prescribable radial-oscillation eigenvector.

Try Mode22 (,j)=(2,2)

Setup22

In this case we need to replace the core eigenfunction segment that was specified in STEP 3 in our separate discussion of mode (,j)=(2,1) with the following:

xj=2|core

=

35(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2ξ2+99(1+2q3)4ξ435(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2+99(1+2q3)4


So, following the procedure outlined in STEP 4 of our separate discussion, the requirement that the first derivatives match at the interface becomes,

252(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2+396(1+2q3)435(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2+99(1+2q3)4

=

c0+(c0+3)A22q3+(c0+6)A22B22q61+A22q3+A22B22q6,

where,

A22

=

A21=(4c0+222c0+5),

B22

=

B21=(c0+72c0+8).

So, as described above, in order to determine c0 for any specified value of q — or, equivalently, Xq3 — we simply need to replace Q21 with Q22 in the definition of the coefficient of each term in the cubic expression, where,

Q22

252(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2+396(1+2q3)435(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2+99(1+2q3)4.


Finally, as explained in our summary discussion, in order for the two (dimensional) eigenfrequencies to match, the adiabatic exponent for the core must be,

γc

=

1[6+2j(2j+5)]{8+γe[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)]ρeρc}.


Illustration22

Analytically Definable Eigenvectors in (nc,ne)=(0,0) Bipolytropes

Quantum Numbers:  (,j)=(2,2)

Analyzable Model Sequence One Example Eigenfunction

Montage of Stability Results for (ell,j) = (2,1) quantum numbers


Top-Left Panel:  Plotted points show how the location of the core/envelope interface, qri/R, varies with αe(34/γe) — where γe is the adiabatic exponent of the envelope — in equilibrium models that are amenable to analytic modal analysis for quantum numbers, (,j)=(2,2). Red (alternatively, blue) markers identify models for which the corresponding value of the adiabatic exponent of the core [see bottom-left panel] falls inside (alternatively, outside) the physically viable range, namely, 1γc. The red marker that is farthest to the left identifies the model whose analytically determined eigenfunction is displayed, as an example, in the right-hand panels.

Bottom-Left Panel:   Plotted points (only 2, here!) show how αc(34/γc) varies with αe over the physically viable parameter range, 1α3. Both axes have been flipped so that incompressible models (γ=) lie on the left/bottom while isothermal models (γ=1) lie on the right/top. The core is more compressible than the envelope in models that lie above and to the left of the black-dashed, diagonal line.

Top-Right Panel:  Displays — as a function of the fractional radius, r0/R=qξ — the analytically determined eigenfunction for the (,j)=(2,2) mode in the model identified by the red circular marker that is farthest to the left in both left-hand panels, for which,

q=[0.005+179(0.985200)]=0.886575

and, correspondingly, (c0,αe,αc)=(2.332785,+0.7763158,0.9146699). Specifically, over the radial interval, 0ξ1, the green markers trace the core's contribution to the combined eigenfunction, namely,

xj=2|core

=

35(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2ξ2+99(1+2q3)4ξ435(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2+99(1+2q3)4;

and, over the radial interval, 1ξ1/q, the purple markers trace the envelope's contribution to the combined eigenfunction, namely,

x=2|env

=

ξc0[1+q3A22ξ3+q6A22B22ξ61+q3A22+q6A22B22],

where the coefficients, A22,B22, are as defined above in terms of the parameter, c0. The corresponding eigenfrequency is, from the perspective of the core,

3ω22πGρc

=

42γc8=8(18+αc)3αc34.915496;

and, from the perspective of the envelope,

3ω22πGρc

=

3γe[αe+5c0+22]ρeρc34.915496,

where the relevant density ratio is, ρe/ρc=2q3/(1+2q3)0.5822407.

Bottom-Right Panel:  The green and purple markers present the same eigenfunction-amplitude information, x(r/R), as in the Top-Right panel, but on a logarithmic scale. Specifically, in this plot, the vertical displacement of the green and purple markers is given by the expression,

y

=

18log10[x2+ϵ2]+yshift,

where, for plotting purposes, we have used, ϵ=105, and have set yshift to a value that ensures that y1 at the center of the configuration. In this type of log-amplitude plot, the eigenfunction's various nodes — that is, radial locations where x passes through zero — are highlighted; here, specifically, there are two nodes inside the core and none in the envelope, although one of the nodes in the core lies just inside the core/envelope interface. Using the vertical coordinate to represent, instead, the configuration's mass-density normalized to its central value, ρ/ρc, the solid black line segments trace the unperturbed density distribution throughout this specific (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytrope. Throughout the core, ρ/ρc=1; then, at the location of the interface (ri/R=q0.89), the density abruptly drops to its envelope value (ρ/ρc=ρe/ρc0.58).

NOTE: As may be ascertained from our general discussion of the structural properties of (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytropes, equilibrium "zero-zero" bipolytropes can be constructed with the envelope/core interface parameter set to any value across the range, 0q1; and for any chosen value of q, the envelope/core density ratio can, in principle, be set to any value, 0ρe/ρc1. We have not, however, been able to analytically solve the relevant pair of linear-adiabatic wave equations (LAWEs) for this entire set of equilibrium models. Instead, our ability to derive analytically prescribed eigenvectors is limited by the constraint,

ρeρc

=

2q31+2q3=2(ri/R)31+2(ri/R)3.

The black-dotted curve in the Bottom-Right Panel displays the behavior of this constraint; accordingly, the step function depicted by the solid black line segments must necessarily drop from unity to a point on this black-dotted curve for any equilibrium model — such as the example illustrated here — that has an analytically prescribable radial-oscillation eigenvector.

Try Mode31 (,j)=(3,1)

Setup31

In this case we need to replace the envelope eigenfunction segment that was specified in STEP 2 in our separate discussion of mode (,j)=(2,1) with the following: For the case of =2, this means that, throughout the envelope, the eigenfunction is,

x=3|env

=

ξc0[1+q3A31ξ3+q6A31B31ξ6+q9A31B31C31ξ91+q3A31+q6A31B31+q9A31B31C31],

where, the values of the newly introduced coefficients,

A31

[c0(c0+5)(c0+9)(c0+14)(c0+3)(c0+5)αe]

 

=

[c02+5c0(c02+23c0+126)(c02+8c0+15)(c02+2c0)]

 

=

6(c0+7)2c0+5,

B31

[(c0+3)(c0+8)(c0+9)(c0+14)(c0+6)(c0+8)αe]

 

=

[(c02+11c0+24)(c02+23c0+126)(c02+14c0+48)(c02+2c0)]

 

=

(6c0+51)6(c0+4),

C31

[(c0+6)(c0+11)(c0+9)(c0+14)(c0+9)(c0+11)αe]

 

=

[(c02+17c0+66)(c02+23c0+126)(c02+20c0+99)(c02+2c0)]

 

=

2(c0+10)3(2c0+11).

Then, after defining,

Q31

14(1+2X)27(1+2X)25(1+8X),

the matching relation becomes,

Q31

=

c0+(c0+3)A31X+(c0+6)A31B31X2+(c0+9)A31B31C31X31+A31X+A31B31X2+A31B31C31X3

0

=

[c0+(c0+3)A31X+(c0+6)A31B31X2+(c0+9)A31B31C31X3]Q31[1+A31X+A31B31X2+A31B31C31X3]

 

=

[c0(c0+3)6(c0+7)2c0+5X+(c0+6)6(c0+7)2c0+5(6c0+51)6(c0+4)X2(c0+9)6(c0+7)2c0+5(6c0+51)6(c0+4)2(c0+10)3(2c0+11)X3]

 

 

Q31[16(c0+7)2c0+5X+6(c0+7)2c0+5(6c0+51)6(c0+4)X26(c0+7)2c0+5(6c0+51)6(c0+4)2(c0+10)3(2c0+11)X3]

 

=

[3c0(2c0+5)(c0+4)(2c0+11)(c0+3)(c0+4)3(2c0+11)6(c0+7)X+(c0+6)3(2c0+11)(c0+7)(6c0+51)X2(c0+9)(c0+7)(6c0+51)2(c0+10)X3]

 

 

Q31[3(2c0+5)(c0+4)(2c0+11)18(c0+7)(c0+4)(2c0+11)X+3(2c0+11)(c0+7)(6c0+51)X22(c0+7)(6c0+51)(c0+10)X3]

 

=

[(6c02+15c0)(2c02+19c0+44)18(c02+10c0+21)(2c02+19c0+44)X+3(2c02+23c0+66)(6c02+93c0+357)X22(c02+19c0+90)(6c02+93c0+357)X3]

 

 

Q31[3(2c0+5)(2c02+19c0+44)18(c0+7)(2c02+19c0+44)X+3(2c0+11)(6c02+93c0+357)X22(6c02+93c0+357)(c0+10)X3]

0

=

[(12c04+144c03+549c02+660c0)18(2c04+39c03+276c02+839c0+924)X+3(12c04+324c03+3249c02+14349c0+23562)X22(6c04+207c03+2664c02+15153c0+32130)X3]

 

 

Q31[3(4c03+48c02+183c0+220)18(2c03+33c02+177c0+308)X+3(12c03+252c02+1737c0+3927)X22(6c03+153c02+1287c0+3570)X3]

Root of Quartic Equation

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

=

ac04+bc03+cc02+dc0+e,

where, in our particular case,

e

18924X+323562X2232130X3Q31[322018308X+33927X223570X3],

d

66018839X+314349X2215153X3Q31[318318177X+31737X221287X3],

c

54918276X+33249X222664X3Q31[3481833X+3252X22153X3],

b

1441839X+3324X22207X312Q31[13X+3X2X3],

a

12(13X+3X2X3).

Now, define,

Δ0

c23bd+12ae,

Δ1

2c39bcd+27b2e+27ad272ace,

p

8ac3b28a2,

κ

b34abc+8a2d8a3,

K

121/3[Δ1+Δ124Δ03]1/3,

(see below)   (K+Δ0K)

2Δ01/2cos[13cos1(Δ124Δ03)1/2],

S

12[2p3+13a(K+Δ0K)]1/2.

Then the four roots of the quartic equation are,

(c0)1

=

b4aS+12[4S22p+κS]1/2,

(c0)2

=

b4aS12[4S22p+κS]1/2,

(c0)3

=

b4a+S+12[4S22pκS]1/2.

(c0)4

=

b4a+S12[4S22pκS]1/2.

It is this fourth root that interests us, here.


We have determined empirically that, in our specific case, the quantity,

Δ124Δ03

is negative over the range of physically interesting values of X. Hence, the quantity, K3, is necessarily complex. Let's work carefully through a determination of K and, by consequence, S, in this situation.

2K3

=

Δ1+Δ124Δ03

 

=

Δ1+i4Δ03Δ12

 

=

Δ1+2Δ03/2i[1Γ2]1/2

[KΔ01/2]3

=

Γ+i1Γ2,

where,

Γ[Δ124Δ03]1/2.

We therefore can state that, in the complex plane, the three roots (j=0,1,3) of this expression are,

KΔ01/2

=

eiθK/3ei(2πj/3),

where,

θKcos1Γ.

Focusing on the simplest (j=0) root, we have,

K

=

Δ01/2eiθK/3

(K+Δ0K)

=

Δ01/2eiθK/3+Δ01/2eiθK/3

 

=

2Δ01/2cos[cos1Γ3].

Because this expression does not contain an imaginary component, we understand that S is real.


Finally, as explained in our summary discussion, in order for the two (dimensional) eigenfrequencies to match, the adiabatic exponent for the core must be,

γc

=

16+2j(2j+5)]{8+γe[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)]ρeρc}

 

=

120{8+γe[2αe+(c0+9)(c0+14)]ρeρc},

where, the last expression follows from plugging in the desired mode's quantum numbers, (,j)=(3,1), and, again, using the relation,

X=q3

=

ρe/ρc2(1ρe/ρc)

ρeρc

=

2X1+2X.

Illustration31

Analytically Definable Eigenvectors in (nc,ne)=(0,0) Bipolytropes

Quantum Numbers:  (,j)=(3,1)

Analyzable Model Sequence One Example Eigenfunction

Montage of Stability Results for (ell,j) = (3,1) quantum numbers


Top-Left Panel:  Plotted points show how the location of the core/envelope interface, qri/R, varies with αe(34/γe) — where γe is the adiabatic exponent of the envelope — in equilibrium models that are amenable to analytic modal analysis for quantum numbers, (,j)=(3,1). Red (alternatively, blue) markers identify models for which the corresponding value of the adiabatic exponent of the core [see bottom-left panel] falls inside (alternatively, outside) the physically viable range, namely, 1γc. The yellow circular marker identifies the model whose analytically determined eigenfunction is displayed on the right, as an example.

Bottom-Left Panel:   Plotted points show how αc(34/γc) varies with αe over the physically viable parameter range, 1α3. Both axes have been flipped so that incompressible models (γ=) lie on the left/bottom while isothermal models (γ=1) lie on the right/top. The core is more compressible than the envelope in models that lie above and to the left of the black-dashed, diagonal line. The yellow circular marker identifies the same example model as it does in the top-left panel.

Top-Right Panel:  Displays — as a function of the fractional radius, r0/R=qξ — the analytically determined eigenfunction for the (,j)=(3,1) mode in the model identified by the yellow circular marker in both left-hand panels, for which,

q=[0.01+40(0.9899)]0.4059596

and, correspondingly, (c0,αe,αc)=(1.7819827,0.3885031,0.9647648). Specifically, over the radial interval, 0ξ1, the green markers trace the core's contribution to the combined eigenfunction, namely,

xj=1|core

=

5(1+8q3)7(1+2q3)2ξ25(1+8q3)7(1+2q3)2;

and, over the radial interval, 1ξ1/q, the purple markers trace the envelope's contribution to the combined eigenfunction, namely,

x=3|env

=

ξc0[1+q3A31ξ3+q6A31B31ξ6+q9A31B31C31ξ91+q3A31+q6A31B31+q9A31B31C31],

where the coefficients, A31,B31,C31, are as defined above in terms of the parameter, c0. The corresponding eigenfrequency is, from the perspective of the core,

3ω22πGρc

=

20γc8=8(7+αc)3αc12.17774;

and, from the perspective of the envelope,

3ω22πGρc

=

γe[2αe+(c0+9)(c0+14)]ρeρc12.17774,

where the relevant density ratio is, ρe/ρc=2q3/(1+2q3)0.118016.

Bottom-Right Panel:  The green and purple markers present the same eigenfunction-amplitude information, x(r/R), as in the Top-Right panel, but on a logarithmic scale. Specifically, in this plot, the vertical displacement of the green and purple markers is given by the expression,

y

=

18log10[x2+ϵ2]+yshift,

where, for plotting purposes, we have used, ϵ=105, and have set yshift to a value that ensures that y1 at the outer edge. In this type of log-amplitude plot, the eigenfunction's various nodes — that is, radial locations where x passes through zero — are highlighted; here, specifically, there is one node inside the core and two nodes reside in the envelope. Using the vertical coordinate to represent, instead, the configuration's mass-density normalized to its central value, ρ/ρc, the solid black line segments trace the unperturbed density distribution throughout this specific (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytrope. Throughout the core, ρ/ρc=1; then, at the location of the interface (ri/R=q0.41), the density abruptly drops to its envelope value (ρ/ρc=ρe/ρc0.12).

NOTE: As may be ascertained from our general discussion of the structural properties of (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytropes, equilibrium "zero-zero" bipolytropes can be constructed with the envelope/core interface parameter set to any value across the range, 0q1; and for any chosen value of q, the envelope/core density ratio can, in principle, be set to any value, 0ρe/ρc1. We have not, however, been able to analytically solve the relevant pair of linear-adiabatic wave equations (LAWEs) for this entire set of equilibrium models. Instead, our ability to derive analytically prescribed eigenvectors is limited by the constraint,

ρeρc

=

2q31+2q3=2(ri/R)31+2(ri/R)3.

The black-dotted curve in the Bottom-Right Panel displays the behavior of this constraint; accordingly, the step function depicted by the solid black line segments must necessarily drop from unity to a point on this black-dotted curve for any equilibrium model — such as the example illustrated here — that has an analytically prescribable radial-oscillation eigenvector.

Check Surface Boundary Condition

Let's determine analytically the logarithmic derivative of the envelope segment of the eigenfunction, at the surface (ξ=1/q) of the configuration. Given that,

x=3|env

=

ξc0[1+q3A3ξ3+q6A3B3ξ6+q9A3B3C3ξ91+q3A3+q6A3B3+q9A3B3C3],

where,

A3

=

6(c0+7)(2c0+5),

B3

=

(6c0+51)6(c0+4),

C3

=

2(c0+10)3(2c0+11),

we have,

dlnx=3dlnξ

=

1x{c0ξc0[1+q3A3ξ3+q6A3B3ξ6+q9A3B3C3ξ91+q3A3+q6A3B3+q9A3B3C3]+ξc0[3q3A3ξ3+6q6A3B3ξ6+9q9A3B3C3ξ91+q3A3+q6A3B3+q9A3B3C3]}

 

=

c0+[3q3A3ξ3+6q6A3B3ξ6+9q9A3B3C3ξ91+q3A3ξ3+q6A3B3ξ6+q9A3B3C3ξ9].

This means that,

dlnx=3dlnξ|ξ=1/q

=

c0+[3A3+6A3B3+9A3B3C31+A3+A3B3+A3B3C3]

 

=

c0+{3[108(c0+7)(c0+4)(2c0+11)]+6[18(c0+7)(6c0+51)(2c0+11)]9[12(c0+7)(6c0+51)(c0+10)]18(2c0+5)(c0+4)(2c0+11)108(c0+7)(c0+4)(2c0+11)+18(c0+7)(6c0+51)(2c0+11)12(c0+7)(6c0+51)(c0+10)}

 

=

c0+108{3(2c03+33c02+177c0+308)+(12c03+252c02+1737c0+3927)(6c03+153c02+1287c0+3570)18(4c03+48c02+183c0+220)108(2c03+33c02+177c0+308)+18(12c03+252c02+1737c0+3927)12(6c03+153c02+1287c0+3570)}

 

=

c0+108{0c03+0c0281c05670c03+0c02+0c01458}

 

=

c0+6(c0+7)

 

=

7(c0+6),

which precisely matches the desired surface boundary condition for =3 that has been detailed in an accompanying summary discussion.



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   |


Try Mode32 (,j)=(3,2)

Setup32

Here, we set the quantum numbers to (,j)=(3,2). In this case, as when addessing Mode22, above, the core eigenfunction segment should be,

xj=2|core

=

35(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2ξ2+99(1+2q3)4ξ435(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2+99(1+2q3)4;

and, as when addressing Mode31, above, throughout the envelope, the eigenfunction should be,

x=3|env

=

ξc0[1+q3A32ξ3+q6A32B32ξ6+q9A32B32C32ξ91+q3A32+q6A32B32+q9A32B32C32],

where,

A32

=

6(c0+7)2c0+5,

B32

=

(6c0+51)6(c0+4),

C32

=

2(c0+10)3(2c0+11).

In establishing the interface matching conditions, we should be able to follow the same steps as in our search for "31" modes, but replace Q31 with,

Q32

252(1+8q3)(1+2X)2+396(1+2X)435(1+8q3)2126(1+8q3)(1+2q3)2+99(1+2q3)4.

And, in order for the two (dimensional) eigenfrequencies to match, the adiabatic exponent for the core must be,

γc

=

16+2j(2j+5)]{8+γe[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)]ρeρc}

 

=

142{8+γe[2αe+(c0+9)(c0+14)]ρeρc}.


Illustration32

Analytically Definable Eigenvectors in (nc,ne)=(0,0) Bipolytropes

Quantum Numbers:  (,j)=(3,2)

Analyzable Model Sequence One Example Eigenfunction

Montage of Stability Results for (ell,j) = (3,2) quantum numbers


Top-Left Panel:  Plotted points show how the location of the core/envelope interface, qri/R, varies with αe(34/γe) — where γe is the adiabatic exponent of the envelope — in equilibrium models that are amenable to analytic modal analysis for quantum numbers, (,j)=(3,2). Red (alternatively, blue) markers identify models for which the corresponding value of the adiabatic exponent of the core [see bottom-left panel] falls inside (alternatively, outside) the physically viable range, namely, 1γc. The yellow circular marker identifies the model whose analytically determined eigenfunction is displayed on the right, as an example.

Bottom-Left Panel:   Plotted points show how αc(34/γc) varies with αe over the physically viable parameter range, 1α3. Both axes have been flipped so that incompressible models (γ=) lie on the left/bottom while isothermal models (γ=1) lie on the right/top. The core is more compressible than the envelope in models that lie above and to the left of the black-dashed, diagonal line. The yellow circular marker identifies the same example model as it does in the top-left panel.

Top-Right Panel:  Displays — as a function of the fractional radius, r0/R=qξ — the analytically determined eigenfunction for the (,j)=(3,2) mode in the model identified by the yellow circular marker in both left-hand panels, for which,

q=[0.01+185(0.983×99)]0.6204377

and, correspondingly, (c0,αe,αc)=(2.3774068,+0.8972496,+0.0231304). Specifically, over the radial interval, 0ξ1, the green markers trace the core's contribution to the combined eigenfunction as defined by the expression for xj=2|core, given above; and, over the radial interval, 1ξ1/q, the purple markers trace the envelope's contribution to the combined eigenfunction as defined by the expression for x=3|env, given above.

The corresponding eigenfrequency is, from the perspective of the core,

3ω22πGρc

=

42γc8=8(18+αc)3αc48.4351;

and, from the perspective of the envelope,

3ω22πGρc

=

γe[2αe+(c0+9)(c0+14)]ρeρc48.4351,

where the relevant density ratio is, ρe/ρc=2q3/(1+2q3)0.323257.

Bottom-Right Panel:  The green and purple markers present the same eigenfunction-amplitude information, x(r/R), as in the Top-Right panel, but on a logarithmic scale. Specifically, in this plot, the vertical displacement of the green and purple markers is given by the expression,

y

=

18log10[x2+ϵ2]+yshift,

where, for plotting purposes, we have used, ϵ=105, and have set yshift to a value that ensures that y1 at the enter of the configuration. In this type of log-amplitude plot, the eigenfunction's various nodes — that is, radial locations where x passes through zero — are highlighted; here, specifically, there is one node inside the core and one node resides in the envelope. Using the vertical coordinate to represent, instead, the configuration's mass-density normalized to its central value, ρ/ρc, the solid black line segments trace the unperturbed density distribution throughout this specific (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytrope. Throughout the core, ρ/ρc=1; then, at the location of the interface (ri/R=q0.62), the density abruptly drops to its envelope value (ρ/ρc=ρe/ρc0.32).

NOTE: As may be ascertained from our general discussion of the structural properties of (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytropes, equilibrium "zero-zero" bipolytropes can be constructed with the envelope/core interface parameter set to any value across the range, 0q1; and for any chosen value of q, the envelope/core density ratio can, in principle, be set to any value, 0ρe/ρc1. We have not, however, been able to analytically solve the relevant pair of linear-adiabatic wave equations (LAWEs) for this entire set of equilibrium models. Instead, our ability to derive analytically prescribed eigenvectors is limited by the constraint,

ρeρc

=

2q31+2q3=2(ri/R)31+2(ri/R)3.

The black-dotted curve in the Bottom-Right Panel displays the behavior of this constraint; accordingly, the step function depicted by the solid black line segments must necessarily drop from unity to a point on this black-dotted curve for any equilibrium model — such as the example illustrated here — that has an analytically prescribable radial-oscillation eigenvector.

Try Mode33 (,j)=(3,3)

Setup33

Here, we set the quantum numbers to (,j)=(3,3). In this case, drawing from our summary of Sterne's presentation, the core eigenfunction segment should be,

xj=3|core

=

3573337(1+2q3)2ξ2+4293(1+2q3)4ξ41435(1+2q3)6ξ63573337(1+2q3)2+4293(1+2q3)41435(1+2q3)6,

and, as when addressing Mode31, above, throughout the envelope, the eigenfunction should be,

x=3|env

=

ξc0[1+q3A33ξ3+q6A33B33ξ6+q9A33B33C33ξ91+q3A33+q6A33B33+q9A33B33C33],

where,

A33

=

6(c0+7)2c0+5,

B33

=

(6c0+51)6(c0+4),

C33

=

2(c0+10)7(c0+6).

In establishing the interface matching conditions, we should be able to follow the same steps as in our search for "31" modes, but replace Q31 with,

Q33

23337(1+2q3)2+44293(1+2q3)461435(1+2q3)63573337(1+2q3)2+4293(1+2q3)41435(1+2q3)6.


And, in order for the two (dimensional) eigenfrequencies to match, the adiabatic exponent for the core must be,

γc

=

16+2j(2j+5)]{8+γe[2αe+(c0+3)(c0+3+5)]ρeρc}

 

=

172{8+γe[2αe+(c0+9)(c0+14)]ρeρc}.


Figure 4: Results for mode (,j)=(3,3)

[[|850px|Results for (ell,j) = (3,3)]]

q
c0
γe
αe 0.
ne
ν
ρe/ρc
γc
αc

Illustration33

Analytically Definable Eigenvectors in (nc,ne)=(0,0) Bipolytropes

Quantum Numbers:  (,j)=(3,3)

Analyzable Model Sequence One Example Eigenfunction

Montage of Stability Results for (ell,j) = (3,3) quantum numbers


Top-Left Panel:  Plotted points show how the location of the core/envelope interface, qri/R, varies with αe(34/γe) — where γe is the adiabatic exponent of the envelope — in equilibrium models that are amenable to analytic modal analysis for quantum numbers, (,j)=(3,3). Red (alternatively, blue) markers identify models for which the corresponding value of the adiabatic exponent of the core [see bottom-left panel] falls inside (alternatively, outside) the physically viable range, namely, 1γc. The yellow circular marker identifies the model whose analytically determined eigenfunction is displayed on the right, as an example.

Bottom-Left Panel:   Plotted points show how αc(34/γc) varies with αe over the physically viable parameter range, 1α3. Both axes have been flipped so that incompressible models (γ=) lie on the left/bottom while isothermal models (γ=1) lie on the right/top. The core is more compressible than the envelope in models that lie above and to the left of the black-dashed, diagonal line. The yellow circular marker identifies the same example model as it does in the top-left panel.

Top-Right Panel:  Displays — as a function of the fractional radius, r0/R=qξ — the analytically determined eigenfunction for the (,j)=(3,2) mode in the model identified by the yellow circular marker in both left-hand panels, for which,

q=0.01+642(0.98990)0.6455152,

and, correspondingly, (c0,αe,αc)=(+0.3511525,+0.8256130,0.0183637). Specifically, over the radial interval, 0ξ1, the green markers trace the core's contribution to the combined eigenfunction as defined by the expression for xj=3|core, given above; and, over the radial interval, 1ξ1/q, the purple markers trace the envelope's contribution to the combined eigenfunction as defined by the expression for x=3|env, given above.

The corresponding eigenfrequency is, from the perspective of the core,

3ω22πGρc

=

72γc8=8(33+αc)3αc87.41594;

and, from the perspective of the envelope,

3ω22πGρc

=

γe[2αe+(c0+9)(c0+14)]ρeρc87.41594,

where the relevant density ratio is, ρe/ρc=2q3/(1+2q3)0.3497877.

Bottom-Right Panel:  The green and purple markers present the same eigenfunction-amplitude information, x(r/R), as in the Top-Right panel, but on a logarithmic scale. Specifically, in this plot, the vertical displacement of the green and purple markers is given by the expression,

y

=

110log10[x2+ϵ2]+yshift,

where, for plotting purposes, we have used, ϵ=105, and have set yshift to a value that ensures that y1 at the outer edge. In this type of log-amplitude plot, the eigenfunction's various nodes — that is, radial locations where x passes through zero — are highlighted; here, specifically, there are three nodes inside the core and one node resides in the envelope. Using the vertical coordinate to represent, instead, the configuration's mass-density normalized to its central value, ρ/ρc, the solid black line segments trace the unperturbed density distribution throughout this specific (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytrope. Throughout the core, ρ/ρc=1; then, at the location of the interface (ri/R=q0.65), the density abruptly drops to its envelope value (ρ/ρc=ρe/ρc0.35).

NOTE: As may be ascertained from our general discussion of the structural properties of (nc,ne)=(0,0) bipolytropes, equilibrium "zero-zero" bipolytropes can be constructed with the envelope/core interface parameter set to any value across the range, 0q1; and for any chosen value of q, the envelope/core density ratio can, in principle, be set to any value, 0ρe/ρc1. We have not, however, been able to analytically solve the relevant pair of linear-adiabatic wave equations (LAWEs) for this entire set of equilibrium models. Instead, our ability to derive analytically prescribed eigenvectors is limited by the constraint,

ρeρc

=

2q31+2q3=2(ri/R)31+2(ri/R)3.

The black-dotted curve in the Bottom-Right Panel displays the behavior of this constraint; accordingly, the step function depicted by the solid black line segments must necessarily drop from unity to a point on this black-dotted curve for any equilibrium model — such as the example illustrated here — that has an analytically prescribable radial-oscillation eigenvector.

Summary Plots

(,j)=(2,1) (,j)=(2,2)  
Log(amplitude) plot for (ell,j) = (2,1) Log(amplitude) plot for (ell,j) = (2,2)  
3ω22πGρc=37.08874 3ω22πGρc=35.95210  
 
(,j)=(3,1) (,j)=(3,2) (,j)=(3,3)
Log(amplitude) plot for (ell,j) = (3,1) Log(amplitude) plot for (ell,j) = (3,2) Log(amplitude) plot for (ell,j) = (3,3)
3ω22πGρc=12.452545 3ω22πGρc=35.05461 3ω22πGρc=87.41594

Related Discussions

Tiled Menu

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