Concept

Equivalent width — where it appears

The width of a perfectly black rectangle that removes as much light as an absorption line does, which no spectrograph's resolution can alter. It is the quantity a curve of growth relates to an abundance, and it is preferred to a line depth precisely because it survives being observed at any resolution.

Named by 5 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The curve of growth. The equivalent width of an absorption line against the number of absorbers along the sight line, both logarithmic, computed by integrating a Voigt profile with damping parameter 0.005. Three regimes: the width grows in proportion to the abundance while the line is weak, then almost not at all for two decades once the core saturates, then as the square root once the damping wings dominate. A line measured in the middle stretch carries almost no information about the abundance, and most strong lines in a stellar spectrum are there.

How much of a line is not in its depth

An absorption line stops getting deeper long before it stops getting stronger. What keeps growing is its area, and the way the area depends on the number of absorbers has three distinct regimes over five decades — one of which carries almost no information at all.

starlight · Line formation
Three profiles of equal equivalent width, 28.6 mÅ. Three absorption profiles with the same equivalent width — 28.6 milliångström, 1.72 km/s at 500 nm, matched to better than 0.1% by root-finding over the quadrature — differing in nothing but shape. Left: the cores, on a common velocity axis. Right: the same three normalised to their own half widths, on a logarithmic depth scale. The thermal profile is a Gaussian set by Fe's mass at 6000 K, 1.34 km/s; the collisional one a Lorentzian of γ = 2.28e-3 nm; the rotational one the classical kernel of a disc turning at v sin i = 1.73 km/s, which is exactly zero beyond 1.28 half widths and is the only one of the three with an edge. Matching the areas does not match the widths: the half widths are 1.11 km/s (thermal), 1.35 km/s (rotational), 0.68 km/s (collisional), a factor of 1.98 between the widest and the narrowest. At three half widths the collisional wing is 49 times the thermal one and at five it is 1.27·10⁶ times — six decades, which is why a line's shape stays diagnostic long after its width has stopped being so. 11% of the Lorentzian's own equivalent width lies beyond the right-hand panel's edge and is not drawn anywhere.

The same width for three different reasons

Thermal motion, rotation and collisions each widen an absorption line, and they can be tuned to areas that agree to a part in a thousand. What separates them is the shape, and the shape carries a rotation speed from one profile and a surface gravity from another.

starlight · Line formation
A strong line at three gravities, 6000 K. Left, one strong absorption line of Fe computed at three surface gravities and drawn on the same wavelength scale — no normalisation to each profile's own width, which is exactly what the comparison is about. The thermal core is identical in all three, because the Doppler width is 0.00223 nm at 6000 K whatever the star's size. The wings are not: collisional damping is proportional to the density of perturbers, that density is proportional to the gas pressure, and in a grey atmosphere the pressure at the photosphere is proportional to g — so log g = 4.4 carries a damping parameter 794 times that of log g = 1.5. Right, the width at a tenth of the core depth against gravity, measured off those curves: a slope of 0.499, against the half a Lorentzian wing forces. That is the second dimension of a spectral classification. The first is the temperature, read from which lines are present; this one is the pressure, read from how wide they are, and it is the whole reason a spectrum can be turned into an absolute magnitude and then into a distance.

The second thing a spectrum says

Two stars of the same colour can differ in luminosity by ten magnitudes, and the difference shows in the widths of their lines rather than in which lines are present. That width is a pressure, the pressure is a gravity, and the gravity is a distance.

starlight · Spectra
A better measurement that made the model worse: 0.9 per cent in the sound speed. The fractional difference between the Sun's sound speed as its own oscillations measure it and as a structural model predicts it, against fractional radius. Zero would be agreement. The lower curve is the model built on the solar abundances used until the mid-2000s, and it hugs the axis: a part in a thousand across most of the interior, which was for a long time the best-tested piece of stellar physics anybody had. The upper curve is the same model with the abundances re-measured using three-dimensional atmospheres and without assuming local thermodynamic equilibrium — better measurements by every methodological standard, which lowered carbon, nitrogen and oxygen by around thirty per cent. The disagreement grows to 0.9 per cent, and it is not spread through the star: it peaks at 0.683 of the radius, just beneath the base of the convection zone at 0.713. The same substitution moves the model's own convection-zone base from 0.715 to 0.729, against a seismic value known to about a thousandth. What is being tested here is not really the abundances but what converts a composition into a structure, which is the opacity: the metals whose abundances fell are exactly the ones whose bound–free absorption dominates at those temperatures, and an opacity larger by some fifteen per cent near that boundary would restore the agreement. Laboratory measurements of iron at those conditions have since come in high by about that much, which is a satisfying result to have arrived at by way of a discrepancy in the sound speed of the Sun. The curves are published inversions and model differences rather than anything computed here; what the figure adds is where they peak and by how much.

A better measurement that made the model worse

The Sun's composition was re-measured with better atmospheres and better physics, and the carbon, nitrogen and oxygen abundances fell by about thirty per cent. The improved model then disagreed with the Sun's own oscillations by ten times as much as the model it replaced, and it still does.

starlight · Opacity
A continuum drawn 4.3 per cent below the real one. A short stretch of spectrum with one strong line in it and 150 weak ones scattered across the same interval. The upper dashed line is the true continuum — the flux the star would emit with no lines at all — and it is not observable. The lower one is what a fit through the highest points of the spectrum returns, which is 4.3 per cent lower, because the weak lines have depressed the gaps between the strong ones. Measuring the strong line's equivalent width against the apparent continuum instead of the real one makes it 11.2 per cent too small. The error has a sign, it is worse in spectra with more lines, and it therefore correlates with metallicity — which is exactly the quantity being measured.

A continuum that was never observed

An equivalent width is an area measured relative to the continuum, and the continuum is not in the data. It is drawn — a curve through the highest points of the spectrum — and in any spectrum with many weak lines those highest points are already below the true continuum, because the weak lines have eaten the gaps.

starlight · Line formation

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Damping wingsVoigt profileAbundanceCurve of growthDoppler broadeningMetallicityPressure broadeningSurface gravitySystematic errorAbsolute magnitudeAbundance analysisBound-free absorption

All concepts