User:Tohline/SSC/Structure/StahlerMassRadius
From VisTrailsWiki
Contents 
Stahler's MassRadius Relationship for Embedded Polytropes
 Tiled Menu  Tables of Content  Banner Video  Tohline Home Page  
Review
In an accompanying chapter that discusses detailed forcebalanced models of embedded (and pressuretruncated) polytropes, we review S. W. Stahler's (1983) pair of parametric relations for the equilibrium mass and equilibrium radius for such systems, namely,






where,
and point out that Stahler (1983) (see his equation B13) explicitly states that the relevant massradius relationship for embedded polytropes is,



In what was intended to be a complementary discussion, our freeenergy analysis of embedded polytropes produced a virial equilibrium expression of the general form,
where,












and,






and,
Structural Form Factors for PressureTruncated Polytropes  


When we went back to compare the massradius relationship that results from our very general virial equilibrium expression to the one published by Stahler for pressuretruncated polytropes, they did not appear to agree. In what follows, we methodically plow through this comparison in considerable detail to uncover whatever discrepancies might exist.
Comparison
First, let's insert the definitions of the coefficients , , and into the virial equilibrium expression, replacing, where necessary, the adiabatic exponent in favor of the polytropic index, using the relation, .






Next, explicitly spelling out as well the definitions of our adopted normalization radius and normalization pressure — recognizing that — and multiply the expression through by .






As has been pointed out in our separate, more general discussion of the virial equilibrium of polytropes, if we multiply this expression through by , set all three structural form factors, , equal to unity, and replace with the notation, , the expression exactly matches the one presented as equation (5) of Whitworth, which reads:
But I like this last version of our derived expression as well because it shows some resemblance to the massradius relationship presented by Stahler and highlighted above: The first term on the lefthandside is a constant times the square of the mass; the third term is a constant times the fourth power of the equilibrium radius; and the middle term shows a crossproduct of the mass and radius (in our case, each is raised to a power other than unity). In an effort to make the comparison with Stahler even clearer, let's rewrite our expression in terms of the mass and equilibrium radius, normalized respectively to and .





















On 30 September 2014, J.E. Tohline showed that this expression is perfectly satisfied using Stahler's definitions of the normalized mass and normalized equilibrium radius along with Tohline's definitions of the structural form factors. The middle term on the righthand side includes the structural form factor, , which in turn is the sum of two pieces; the first piece of this form factor supplies the term that cancels the first term on the righthand side of the equilibrium expression and the second piece cancels the third term on the righthand side. We have noticed that the first term on the righthand side (via the factor, ) and the first portion of the middle term (via the first term in the expression for ), contain factors of , which will cause these terms to blow up when considering truncated polytropes of index, . But this is precisely the case for which Stahler provides an analytic massradius relationship. What happens to the virial expression if we multiply through by ?
Experimentation
Let's break the form factor, , into two distinct pieces, namely,






then multiply the virial equilibrium expression through by .









© 2014  2021 by Joel E. Tohline 