SSC/Structure/BiPolytropes/AnalyzeStepFunction

From jetwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

More Careful Examination of Step Function Behavior

The ideas that are captured in this chapter have arisen as an extension of our accompanying "renormalization" of the Analytic51 bipolytrope.

Discontinuous Density Distribution

Expectations

From among the set of governing relations that apply to spherically symmetric configurations, we focus, first, on the combined,

Euler + Poisson Equations

dvrdt=1ρdPdrGMrr2

At the interface between the core and envelope of an equilibrium bipolytrope, both the core and the envelope must satisfy the relation,

1ρdPdr

=

GMrr2.

Now, the quantity on the right-hand side of this expression must be the same at the interface, when viewed either from the perspective of the core or from the perspective of the envelope. Therefore, at the interface, the equilibrium configuration must obey the relation,

[1ρdPdr]env,i

=

[1ρdPdr]core,i.


Now, if we set ρe=(μe/μc)ρc at the interface, then,

[dPdr]env,i

=

μeμc[dPdr]core,i.

Check Behavior

In step 4 of our accompanying analysis, we find that from the perspective of the core,

P*

=

(1+13ξ2)3,

      and,      

r*

=

(32π)1/2ξ.

Hence, at the interface,

dP*dr*|core={dξdr*dP*dξ}core

=

2(2π3)1/2[(1+13ξ2)4ξ]i

 

=

(4π3)θi8ri*.

While, in step 8 of that analysis, we find from the perspective of the envelope,

P*

=

θi6ϕ2,

      and,      

r*

=

(μeμc)1θi2(2π)1/2η.

Hence, at the interface,

dP*dr*|env={dηdr*dP*dη}env

=

{(μeμc)θi2(2π)1/2}2θi6[ϕdϕdη]i

 

=

2(2π)1/2θi8{(μeμc)}[31/2θi3(dθdξ)i]

 

=

23(6π)1/2θi8(μeμc)ξi

 

=

2(2π3)1/2θi8(μeμc)[(2π3)1/2ri*]

 

=

(4π3)θi8(μeμc)ri*.

Gratifyingly, we find as expected that,

[dP*dr*]env,i

=

μeμc[dP*dr*]core,i.

Discrete LAWE for Bipolytrope

Summary Set of Nonlinear Governing Relations

In summary, the following three one-dimensional ODEs define the physical relationship between the three dependent variables ρ, P, and r, each of which should be expressible as a function of the two independent (Lagrangian) variables, t and Mr:

Equation of Continuity
dρdt=4πρ2r2ddMr(drdt)2ρr(drdt)
,

Euler + Poisson Equations
d2rdt2=4πr2dPdMrGMrr2


Adiabatic Form of the
First Law of Thermodynamics

ρdPdtγgPdρdt=0.

March from the Center, Outward

Establish Fidelity of Finite-Difference Model

We know the analytic structure of the equilibrium configuration. Let's choose a Lagrangian grid that is labeled by (r0)j and the corresponding enclosed mass, mj(r0), where the center of the spherical bipolytrope is labeled by j=0 while each subsequent grid "line" is labeled j. We will identify the mean density of each mass shell by the expression,

ρ¯j1/2

=

[ΔmVolume]j1/2=[mjmj1][4π3(rj3rj13)]1.

The pressure can be determined from knowledge of the density via knowledge of the (fixed) specific entropy, namely,

Pj1/2

=

(ρ¯j1/2)γexp[μ(γ1)s].

These two expressions, effectively, originate from the continuity equation and the adiabatic form of the first law of thermodynamics, respectively. They are relations that allow the determination of the mass density and the pressure, given fixed mass shells but varying mass-shell radial locations.

STEP 1:   From the analytically known equilibrium structure of the (nc,ne)=(5,1) bipolytrope, create a table that documents how the radial location of each mass shell, rj, varies with the enclosed mass, mj.

STEP 2:   Determine how ρ¯j1/2 varies with radial shell location, using the above continuity-equation relation. (Plot ρ¯ versus m obtained in this discrete manner — see the red-dotted curve in the following figure — then also plot how ρ varies with m according to the analytic equilibrium structure — see the dark-blue-dotted curve; the plotted curves should be nearly, but not exactly, the same.)

STEP 3A:   Given ρ¯j1/2, determine how Pj1/2 varies with radial shell location, using the above 1st Law relation. (Plot the pressure, as determined in this discrete manner, versus m — see the light-green-dotted curve in the following figure — then also plot how P varies with m according to the analytic equilibrium structure — see the purple-dotted curve; the plotted curves should be nearly, but not exactly, the same.)

STEP 3B:   Determine (and plot) how (dP/dm)j varies with m.

Now, what can we learn from the "Euler + Poisson Equation"? Well, for the equilibrium state, we should find that,

dPdm

=

Gm4πr4.

STEP 4:   Show how dP/dm varies with m, according to this analytic prescription, and compare it against the pressure gradient behavior obtained in STEP 3. Do they match?

Finite-Difference Representation of n = 5 Core

On a semi-log plot …

  • As prescribed in STEP 2: The red-dotted curve shows how the discrete density, ρ¯j1/2, varies with enclosed mass, and the dark-blue-dotted curve shows how the analytically determined density varies with enclosed mass.
  • As prescribed in STEP 3A: The light-green-dotted curve shows how the discrete pressure, Pj1/2, varies with enclosed mass, and the purple-dotted curve shows how the analytically determined pressure varies with enclosed mass.
  • As prescribed in STEP 3B: The light-blue-dotted curve shows how the discrete pressure gradient, (dP/dm)j, varies with enclosed mass, and the orange-dotted curve shows how the analytically determined quantity, Gm/(4πr4), varies with enclosed mass. Note that, in each case, we have added "1" to the logarithm of the specified quantity in order to shift both curves up in the plot and thereby unclutter the diagram.

Guessing Eigenvector

Step 5

STEP 5:   Guess the eigenvector, δri, remembering that a reasonably good trial eigenfunction for the core is one that has a "parabolic dependence on the radius," namely,

xαscale

=

1ξ215,

      where,      

ξ

=

(2π3)1/2r0.

This means,

x(r0)

=

αscale[1(2π45)r02],

dxdr0

=

αscale(4π45)r0.


Finite-Difference Representation of δr

Once a "guess" for the fractional displacement vector, (δr)j=[xr0]j, has been specified, we recognize that the perturbed location of each radial shell is given by the expression,

rj

=

(r0)j+(δr)j.




Parabolic Displacement Function w/ αscale=0.001
Shell m r0 xαscale rj Analytic FD P* dP*dm 4π(r*)2dP*dm=g0
ρ0 danalytic [ρj1/2]0 dj1/2 ρj1/2
0 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000 1.000000 + 0.003000 --- --- --- 1.000000 0.000000
½ --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.995868 0.003004 0.998860 1.000000 0.000000
1 0.001039 0.062922 0.999447 0.062859 0.993123 0.002997 --- --- --- 0.991754 5.275715 0.262476
--- --- --- --- --- --- 0.981896 0.002999 0.984840 1.000000 0.000000
2 0.008211 0.125843 0.997789 0.125718 0.972886 0.002989 --- --- --- 0.967552 2.605474 0.518508
--- --- --- --- --- --- 0.955465 0.002988 0.958319 1.000000 0.000000
3 0.027155 0.188765 0.995025 0.188577 0.940420 0.002975 --- --- --- 0.928937 1.701968 0.762083
--- --- --- --- --- --- 0.917695 0.002971 0.920421 1.000000 0.000000
4 0.062586 0.251686 0.991155 0.251437 0.897462 0.002956 --- --- --- 0.878252 1.241164 0.988001
95 6.769823 5.977546 - 3.988996 6.001390 0.0002917 - 0.021945 --- --- --- 0.000057 0.000422 0.189466
95½ --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.0002844 - 0.021852 0.0002782 1.000000 0.000000
96 6.777942 6.040467 - 4.094580 6.065200 0.0002773 - 0.022473 --- --- --- 0.000054 0.000405 0.185762
96½ --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.002705 - 0.022366 0.0002644 1.000000 0.000000
97 6.785828 6.103389 - 4.201270 6.129031 0.0002638 - 0.023006 --- --- --- 0.000051 0.000389 0.182163
97½ --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.0002574 - 0.022884 0.0002515 1.000000 0.000000
98 6.793488 6.166310 - 4.309066 6.192881 0.0002511 - 0.023545 --- --- --- 0.000048 0.000374 0.178666
98½ --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.0002450 - 0.023408 0.0002393 1.000000 0.000000
99 6.800930 6.229232 - 4.417967 6.256752 0.0002391 - 0.024090 --- --- --- 0.000045 0.000359 0.175267



Density perturbation
Density perturbation

Hence, from the linearized continuity equation,

d

=

r0dxdr03x

 

=

αscale{(4π45)r023[1(2π45)r02]}

 

=

αscale{2(2π45)r023+3(2π45)r02}

 

=

αscale{(2π9)r023}.

The solid black curve in the figure shown here, on the right, displays this analytically specified density perturbation, d(m), for the case αscale=0.001.

Finite-Difference Representation of d

Our finite-difference representation of the mass-density at each radial shell in the equilibrium configuration (subscript "0") is,

[ρ¯j1/2]0

=

[mjmj1]0[4π3(rj3rj13)]01.

After perturbing the radial location of each shell — that is, after setting rj=(r0)j+[xr0]j — the resulting finite-difference representation of the perturbed mass density of each shell is given by the expression,

ρ¯j1/2

=

[mjmj1]0[4π3(rj3rj13)]1.

(Note that we retain a subscript "0" on the mass, mj, because it serves as our Lagrangian identifier for each shell.) The fractional density perturbation at each discrete shell is, then,

dj1/2[δρρ0]j1/2={ρ¯j1/2[ρ¯j1/2]01}

=

(rj3rj13)0(rj3rj13)1.

The red dots in the above "density perturbation" figure display how dj varies with mass shell when x is specified by the parabolic dependence on radius. The dots lie virtually on top of the solid black curve in this figure, indicating that our finite-difference representation of the perturbed mass density matches well the analytically specified perturbed mass density.

And, from linearized entropy conservation,

p

=

αscale{(2π9)r023}γc

 

=

αscale{(2π9)r023}65

dpdr0

=

αscale(8π15)r0.

Now, from below we find that,

P0ρ0=P*ρ* =

(1+ξ23)3(1+ξ23)5/2

  =

(1+ξ23)1/2,

g0=m(r*)2 =

(23π)1/2[ξ3(1+13ξ2)3/2][(32π)1/2ξ]2

  =

(8π3)1/2[ξ(1+13ξ2)3/2].

Hence, the linearized Euler + Poisson Equations expression gives,

ω2r0x

=

P0ρ0dpdr0(4x+p)g0

 

=

αscale(1+ξ23)1/2(8π15)r0{4αscale[1(2π45)r02]+αscale[(2π9)r023]65}(8π3)1/2[ξ(1+13ξ2)3/2]

(ω2αscale)(1+13ξ2)3/2r0x

=

(1+ξ23)(8π15)r0{4(8π45)r02+(12π45)r02185}(8π3)1/2ξ

 

=

(1+ξ23)(8π15)r0[25+(4π45)r02](8π3)1/2ξ

 

=

(1+ξ23)(8π15)(32π)1/2ξ[25+(4π45)(32π)ξ2](8π3)1/2ξ

 

=

(25π352)1/2ξ25(8π3)1/2ξ+(25π3352)1/2ξ3(25π3352)1/2ξ3

 

=

0        Exactly!

Step 6

STEP 6:   Given that when a proper solution has been obtained,

d2rdt2

ω2δri,

at each radial shell we can determine what the value of ω2 would be as a result of our δri guess by rewriting the

Euler + Poisson Equations
d2rdt2=4πr2dPdMrGMrr2

to read,

+[ωi2Gρc]

1δriri2[4π(ri*)4dP*dm*+m*].

Euler + Poisson Equations

[Kc1/2G1/2ρc2/5]d2r*dt2

=

4π(r*)2[Kc1/2G1/2ρc2/5]2dP*dm[Kcρc6/5][G3/2ρc1/5Kc3/2]Gm(r*)2[Kc3/2G3/2ρc1/5][G1/2ρc2/5Kc1/2]2

[Kc1/2G1/2ρc2/5]d2r*dt2

=

4π(r*)2[Kc1/2G1/2ρc3/5]dP*dmm(r*)2[Kc1/2G1/2ρc3/5]

[1Gρc]d2r*dt2

=

4π(r*)2dP*dm+m*(r*)2


d2rdt2

ddt[(iω)r0xeiωt]=ω2r0xeiωt

r2dPdm

r02[1+xeiωt]2{dP0dm[1+peiωt]+P0eiωtdpdm}r02dP0dm[1+(2x+p)eiωt]+P0r02eiωtdpdm

Gmr2

Gmr02[1+xeiωt]2Gmr02[12xeiωt].

After introducing a perturbation, we find that …

RHS

=

4π[r*]2dP*dm+m*[r*]2

 

=

4πr02[1+δrr0]2d(P0+δP)dm+m*r02[1+δrr0]2

 

4πr02[1+2x]d(P0+δP)dm+g0[12x]

 

4πr02[d(P0+δP)dm]+g0+4πr02[2x]d(P0+δPsmall)dm2xg0

 

4πr02[d(P0+δP)dm]+g0+2x[4πr02dP0dmg0]

 

{4πr02[d(P0+δP)dm]+g0}4xg0.

This "RHS" expression must be paired with …

LHS

=

[ωi2Gρc]δri=[ωi2Gρc]xr0.

The term inside the curly braces on the RHS is easy to evaluate inside our finite-difference scheme. For our example parabolic displacement function, we expect this term to give,

{4πr02[d(P0+δP)dm]+g0}

P0ρ0dpdr0pg0=4xg0.

 

=

αscale(1+ξ23)1/2(8π15)r0{αscale[(2π9)r023]65}(8π3)1/2[ξ(1+13ξ2)3/2]

 

=

αscale[ξ(1+13ξ2)3/2]r02(27π33352)1/2

 

=

αscale(2533π52)1/2ξ(1+13ξ2)3/2+αscale(23π35)(1+ξ23)1/2r0αscaler02(27π33352)1/2ξ(1+13ξ2)3/2

 

=

αscale(1+13ξ2)3/2{(2533π52)1/2ξ+(25π352)1/2(1+ξ23)ξ(25π352)1/2ξ3}

 

=

αscale(1+13ξ2)3/2{[(2533π52)1/2+(25π352)1/2]ξ+[(25π3352)1/2(2532π3352)1/2]ξ3}

 

=

αscale(1+13ξ2)3/2{(27π3)1/2ξ2(25π3352)1/2ξ3}.

For comparison, note that this expression is identical to the expression for 4xg0, namely,

4xg0 =

4αscale[1ξ215](8π3)1/2[ξ(1+13ξ2)3/2]

  =

αscale(1+13ξ2)3/2{(27π3)1/2ξ(27π3352)1/2ξ3}.

Step 7

STEP 7:   Alternatively, from our summary set of linearized equations, we expect …

ω2r0x

P0ρ0dpdr0(4x+p)g0

 

=

P0ρ0d(δP/P0)dr0(4δrr0+δPP0)Gmr02

 

=

P0ρ0[1P0d(δP)dr0δPP02dP0dr0]+[(14δrr0)(1+δPP0)]Gmr02

 

=

1ρ0[d(δP)dr0δPP0dP0dr0]+(14δrr0)Gmr02+(1+δPP0)1ρ0dP0dr0

 

=

1ρ0[d(P0+δP)dr0]+[1+δrr0]4Gmr02

 

=

1ρ0[dPdr0]+r04r4Gmr02

 

=

r02r4[4πr4dPdm+Gm]

ω2

1δrr2[4πr4dPdm+Gm]r02r2

Step 8

STEP 8:   Finally, we should guess a new eigenvector (then guess again, and again, and again …) until ω2 settles down to have the same value at all radial locations.

Try Again, With Detailed Example

Model Amodel2

Under the "AModel2FD" tab of an Excel spreadsheet titled, "qAndNuMaxAug21", we have constructed a discrete model of the core of a bipolytrope that has the following properties:

Model A
μe/μc 0.31
νMcoreMtot 0.337217
qrcoreRtot 0.0755023
Core Properties (at interface)
ξi 9.0149598
θi 0.1886798
dθdξ|i -0.0201845
Mcore=(23π)1/2[ξ3(1+13ξ2)3/2]i 6.8009303
rcore=(32π)1/2ξi 6.2292317

We have divided this model into 100 equally spaced radial zones (center and surface included), that is, each with the following radial-shell thickness:   δξξi/99=0.0910602, and δr=rcore/99=0.0629215. Analytic expressions providing the physical properties of our (nc,ne)=(5,1) bipolytropes at each radial shell have been drawn from an accompanying chapter — for example …

r* =

(32π)1/2ξ,

ρ* =

(1+ξ23)5/2,

P* =

(1+ξ23)3,

m =

(23π)1/2[ξ3(1+13ξ2)3/2].

We note as well that, in equilibrium,

g0m(r*)2 =

4π(r*)2dP*dm=1ρ*dP*dr*.

Hence, in equilibrium we have,

dP*dm =

14π(r*)2ρ*(ξr*)dP*dξ

  =

ξ4π(r*)3ρ*[3(1+ξ23)42ξ3]

  =

14π[(32π)1/2ξ]3[(1+ξ23)5/2]1[2ξ2(1+ξ23)4]

  =

12π[(32π)3/2ξ3][(1+ξ23)5/2][ξ2(1+ξ23)4]

  =

(23π333122π2)1/2(1+ξ23)3/2ξ1

  =

(2π33)1/2(1+ξ23)3/2ξ1;

and,

4π(r*)2dP*dm =

22π[(32π)1/2ξ]2(2π33)1/2(1+ξ23)3/2ξ1

  =

2(2π3)1/2(1+ξ23)3/2ξ;

and,

4π(r*)4dP*dm =

[(32π)1/2ξ]22(2π3)1/2(1+ξ23)3/2ξ

  =

(23π)1/2(1+ξ23)3/2ξ3.

The following table provides a sample of variable values in the central region (shells 0 - 4) and near the interface (shells 95 - 99) of the equilibrium configuration.

Analytically Determined Physical Properties at Various Radial Shells
Shell ξ m=4π(r*)4dP*dm r* ρ* P* dP*dm 4π(r*)2dP*dm=g0
0 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 1.000000 1.000000 0.000000
1 0.091060 0.001039 0.062922 0.993123 0.991754 5.275715 0.262476
2 0.182120 0.008211 0.125843 0.972886 0.967552 2.605474 0.518508
3 0.273181 0.027155 0.188765 0.940420 0.928937 1.701968 0.762083
4 0.364241 0.062586 0.251686 0.897462 0.878252 1.241164 0.988001
95 8.650719 6.769823 5.977546 0.000292 0.000057 0.000422 0.189466
96 8.741779 6.777942 6.040467 0.000277 0.000054 0.000405 0.185762
97 8.832839 6.785828 6.103389 0.000264 0.000051 0.000389 0.182163
98 8.923900 6.793488 6.166310 0.000251 0.000048 0.000374 0.178666
99 9.014960 6.800930 6.229232 0.000239 0.000045 0.000359 0.175267

This last expression is precisely the same (in magnitude, but opposite in sign) as the expression that we have presented for m. If we therefore return to STEP 6, we appreciate that the right-hand side of the "eigenvector" expression,

+[ω2Gρc](δr*r*)(r*)

[4π(r*)2dP*dm+m(r*)2],

goes to zero at every radial shell if the configuration is in equilibrium.

ASIDE:  Next, we will focus on building a discrete, finite-difference representation of each equilibrium model, as well as of this "eigenvector" expression. In doing so, we will immediately find that the two terms on the right-hand-side do not exactly sum to zero, even for an equilibrium configuration. We should nevertheless try to construct a finite-difference representation for which the two terms cancel to a relatively high degree of precision. We have considered rewriting this "eigenvector" expression in the form,

+[ω2Gρc](δr*r*)(r*)3

[4π(r*)4dP*dm+m],

because this form isolates the Lagrangian mass, m, which is time-invariant. But as the numbers in the third column of the above table illustrate, the terms on the right-hand-side vary by several orders of magnitude as we move from shell 1 to shell 100. If it is written instead in the form that we have initially suggested, namely,

+[ω2Gρc](δr*r*)(r*)

[4π(r*)2dP*dm+m(r*)2],

then, as is illustrated by the numbers in the last column of the table and by the following figure, the terms on the right-hand-side vary by no more than one order of magnitude as we move from the center to the surface of the configuration.

Variation of g0 from center to interface
This choice should facilitate cancellation to a higher degree of precision in our finite-difference-based model.

Even Simpler Core

STEP 0:   We construct a finite-difference representation of the initial (unperturbed) equilibrium configuration by dividing the model into 99 radial zones that are equally spaced in 0ξξi. The initial radial coordinate of each zone and the corresponding initial enclosed mass are given, respectively, by the expressions …

[rj]0

=

(32π)1/2ξj,

      and,      

mj

=

(23π)1/2[ξ3(1+13ξ2)3/2].

The mass, mj, will serve as our Lagrangian coordinate; that is, we will perturb the model by modifying the radial location of each shell while fixing the enclosed mass.

STEP 1:   Guess the eigenvector, δri, remembering that a reasonably good trial eigenfunction for the core is one that has a "parabolic dependence on the radius," namely,

xαscale

=

1ξ215,

      where,      

ξ

=

(2π3)1/2r0.

This means,

x(r0)

=

αscale[1(2π45)r02],

dxdr0

=

αscale(4π45)r0.

Once a "guess" for the fractional displacement vector, (δr)j=[xr0]j, has been specified, we recognize that the perturbed location of each radial shell is given by the expression,

rj

=

(r0)j[1+xj].

STEP 2:   Our finite-difference representation of the mass-density at each radial shell in the equilibrium configuration (subscript "0") is,

[ρ¯j1/2]0

=

[mjmj1]0[4π3(rj3rj13)]01.

After perturbing the radial location of each shell — that is, after setting rj=(r0)j+[xr0]j — the resulting finite-difference representation of the perturbed mass density of each shell is given by the expression,

ρ¯j1/2

=

[mjmj1]0[4π3(rj3rj13)]1.

(Note that we retain a subscript "0" on the mass, mj, because it serves as our Lagrangian identifier for each shell.)

STEP 3:   The pressure can be determined in the equilibrium configuration (subscript "0") and after the perturbation from knowledge of the density and the chosen adiabatic index, γc=6/5, via knowledge of the (fixed) specific entropy, namely,

[Pj1/2]0

=

[ρ¯j1/2]0γcexp[μ(γ1)s],

      and,      

Pj1/2

=

[ρ¯j1/2]γcexp[μ(γ1)s].

The pressure perturbation can therefore be obtained from the simple difference,

[δP]j1/2

=

Pj1/2[Pj1/2]0.

Displacement Function
Displacement Function

STEP 4:   If, in the context of our above discussion of the perturbed "Euler + Poisson Equations", we set LHS = RHS, we obtain,

[ωi2Gρc]xr0

{4πr02[d(P0+δP)dm]+g0}4xg0

 

=

{4πr02[d(δP)dm]}4xg0

x

{4πr02[d(δP)dm]}{[ωi2Gρc]r0+4g0}1.

So for a specified value of the square of the oscillation frequency, [ω2/(Gρc)] — same value for all shells — the strategy should be to (a) guess xj; (b) evaluate the right-hand-side of this last expression; (c) if the RHS does not equal the "guessed" eigenvector, xj, then you need to guess a new eigenvector; (d) repeat!

In the figure shown here on the right, the black curve displays the variation with mass, m, of the (parabolic-shaped) displacement function, x/αscale, that served as our initial "guess;" while the red dots show how the right-hand side of this last expression varies with m for the case, ωi2=0. They lie almost exactly on top of one another, as hoped/expected.

Transition

In transitioning from the core to the envelope, all of the above (green) STEPS will remain the same except for the 1st Law's treatment of the pressure. Following along the lines of our Ramblings idea exchange with Patrick Motl, the mass-density is generically related to the pressure via the expression,

s/μ¯

=

1(γg1)ln[P(γg1)ργg]

sμ¯(γg1)

=

ln[P(γg1)ργg]

P

=

(γg1)ργgexp[sμ¯(γg1)].

Given that, in polytropic configurations for which we make the association, γg=(n+1)/n, the pressure is related to the density via the expression, P=Kργg, we appreciate that,

K

=

(γg1)exp[sμ¯(γg1)].

Core

For the core, we set γg=6/5. Hence,

P

=

Kcρ6/5.

Normalizing the pressure and the density as we have in a closely related discussion of the structure of bipolytropes, we have throughout the core,

P*=PKcρ06/5

=

(ρ*)6/5.

Now, in this normalized expression we see that the polytropic constant for the core is, Kc*=1. This means that the specific entropy of all the fluid in the core is given by the expression,

1

=

15exp[sc*μ¯c5]

sc*μ¯c

=

5ln(5).

Envelope

For the envelope, we set γg=2. Hence,

P

=

Keρ2.

Adopting the same pressure and density normalizations as used in the core, we have throughout the envelope,

P*=PKcρ06/5

=

(KeKc)ρ04/5(ρ*)2.

Now, at the interface of the equilibrium model, we know that,

KeKc

=

ρ04/5(μeμc)2θi4=ρ04/5(μeμc)2[1+ξi23]2.

Hence, throughout the envelope,

P*

=

(μeμc)2[1+ξi23]2(ρ*)2,

in which case we find,

Ke*

=

(μeμc)2[1+ξi23]2

se*μ¯e

=

ln{(μeμc)2[1+ξi23]2}.

STEP 3 Clarification

It is critically important to appreciate that the manner in which the pressure is determined at discrete locations in our finite-difference model must be different in the envelope and the core.

Core:       Pj1/2

=

15[ρ¯j1/2]6/5exp[μcsc*5]=[ρ¯j1/2]6/5.

Core:       Pj1/2

=

15[ρ¯j1/2]6/5exp[μcsc*5]=[ρ¯j1/2]6/5.

See Also

Tiled Menu

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