Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Hydrostatic equilibrium — where it appears

The balance in which a body's internal pressure gradient exactly supports the weight of the material above each level. It is what makes a star's central temperature follow from its mass and radius alone, with no reference to what is burning or whether anything is.

Named by 15 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Luminosity against mass, against a slope of 3.5. Main-sequence luminosity against mass, both in solar units, on logarithmic axes, over the range 0.079 to 63 solar masses. The measured curve comes from the eclipsing binaries and is the same in every drawing of it; what changes here is what it is compared against. The dashed line is a pure power law of exponent 3.5, and the curve crosses it rather than following it — the local slope runs from about 2.3 at the bottom of the range, where the interiors are convective, through nearly 4 near a solar mass where bound-free opacity dominates, to about 3 among the massive stars where electron scattering does. Quoting one exponent across the whole sequence is a convenience and the places it fails are the places the interior physics changes. Because the slope is between three and four across most of the range, a small spread in mass becomes an enormous spread in output: the 63-solar-mass end is 3.0e+9 times brighter than the 0.079-solar-mass end.

Mass decides everything, by a power of three and a half

Two stars of the same mass are almost the same star. Double the mass and the output multiplies by eleven — which is why a modest range of masses produces a colossal range of stars.

stars · The mass–luminosity relation Inside a star that is holding itself up (polytrope n = 3). Temperature, density and pressure through a star, as fractions of their central values, against fractional radius. All three come from one numerical integration of the Lane–Emden equation at index 3, which is the hydrostatic balance written for a gas whose pressure is a power of its density. The inner half of the radius holds 90% of the mass, and the outer half is nearly weightless — which is why the load, and so the temperature, is concentrated where the burning is.

A star is held up by its own weight

A star has a central temperature because it has a central pressure, and it has a central pressure because everything above is pressing down. The nuclear reactions do not set that temperature — they obey it.

stars · Hydrostatic equilibrium The main sequence against its own ceiling. Luminosity against mass, in solar units, with the Eddington limit drawn on the same axes. The limit is exactly linear in mass. The main sequence is not — until it is: above about 55 solar masses the relation flattens to a straight proportionality as well, and the two lines then run parallel at a fixed ratio of 83 per cent. They never cross on this range, which is the more interesting outcome: the most massive stars do not approach their limit gradually, they are built at a fixed fraction of it. The Sun, by contrast, radiates 0.0026 per cent of its own ceiling.

A brightness that would blow the star apart

Light pushes. For a star of a given mass there is a luminosity at which the outward push on its own outer layers equals the inward pull of gravity, and it depends on nothing but the mass and the opacity — not on the star's structure, its composition or its age.

stars · Eddington limit From 1.667 to 1.343, and the limit is in the second number. The local slope Γ = d ln P / d ln ρ of the exact degenerate electron equation of state, against density, differentiated numerically from the drawn pressure rather than quoted. It is 1.6666 at 10⁴ kg/m³ — the 5/3 of a non-relativistic Fermi gas — and 1.3430 at 10¹² — the 4/3 of a relativistic one — falling monotonically between, and passing 1.5 at 3.63·10⁹ kg/m³. Nothing gives way at either end; the electrons simply run out of room to go faster, because they are already near c. The mass limit is in the exponent and not in the strength. Hydrostatic balance for a polytrope of index Γ gives M ∝ ρ_c^(3Γ−4)/2, so at Γ = 4/3 the exponent is zero: the mass no longer depends on the central density at all, and there is exactly one mass a fully relativistic degenerate star can have — 1.459 M☉ at μ_e = 2. Above it, squeezing harder buys pressure that rises more slowly than gravity does, and there is nothing left to stop at.

The mass a cold star cannot exceed

A degenerate star's radius falls as its mass rises, and nothing in that relation suggests a limit. Making the electrons relativistic softens the pressure law until pressure and gravity scale the same way with radius — and the radius drops out of the balance, leaving one mass and no room to argue.

stars · Degeneracy The mirror: an envelope 62 times larger around a core 1.48 times smaller. Envelope radius and core radius against helium-core mass for a 1 solar-mass star, both in solar radii on one logarithmic axis. Two curves with opposite slopes at every point: the envelope grows from 2.0 to 122 solar radii — 0.57 astronomical units — while the degenerate core contracts from 13,848 to 9,368 kilometres, and the two are separated by a factor of 364 in the middle of the range. The figure is drawn from two stated relations rather than from a stellar model: a core-mass–luminosity law of the sixth power, calibrated to 2,500 solar luminosities at 0.48 solar masses of core, and a Hayashi temperature falling from 5000 to 3700 kelvin across the range. Everything else follows exactly — the radius by the Stefan–Boltzmann law, the core radius by the cold degenerate relation R ∝ M⁻¹ᐟ³. Note what the tip radius is and is not: it is the red-giant branch, and the later asymptotic-giant tip is a different and larger number.

The star that swells because its centre shrank

A helium core contracts, and the envelope around it expands by a factor of sixty. The central density rises at the same time as the radius, which is the opposite of what a self-gravitating body is expected to do, and a burning shell between the two is the whole reason it happens.

stars · Stellar evolution 14 radial orders of the Sun, at 135.1 μHz apart. The p-mode spectrum of the Sun — 1 solar mass in 1 solar radius — from the asymptotic relation with its second-order term, drawn as 14 radial orders of ℓ = 0, 1 and 2 under a Gaussian envelope centred on ν_max = 3,090 μHz. Two numbers are marked and they do very different work. The large separation, 135.1 μHz, is the spacing between consecutive ℓ = 0 modes and fixes the mean density. The small separation, 9.00 μHz, is 2.7 pixels on this axis — it fixes the age, and it is why the échelle diagram exists rather than being a convenience. The vertical axis is the measurement: each mode moves the surface by about 20.0 cm s⁻¹ at the peak, and brightens it by a few parts per million, which is why this was impossible before a decade-long velocity series. Each mode is one line: its true width is set by its lifetime and is far below a pixel here.

The interior read from a comb of frequencies

A star's surface moves by about twenty centimetres a second, in thousands of overlapping sound modes at once. Two numbers off that spectrum give a mass and a radius with almost no stellar model in the chain, and a third gives an age.

stars · Asteroseismology A cluster weighed three ways, and its stars weighed once. A cluster of galaxies with a velocity dispersion of 1000 km/s, gas at 8 keV and a strong-lensing Einstein radius of 25 arcseconds, each turned into a mass inside 1.5 Mpc by its own relation and nothing else: 7.0, 8.9 and 15.2 × 10¹⁴ M☉. The three assume, respectively, that the galaxies are in equilibrium, that the gas is, and nothing whatever — so their agreement to within a factor of 2.2 is not three restatements of one assumption. The lensing bar is the loosest of the three and is drawn that way deliberately: it measures the mass inside a cylinder of radius 109 kpc, 1.11×10¹⁴ M☉, and carrying that out to 1.5 Mpc as though it were a sphere overstates it. The stars are 2.9 per cent of it.

A cluster weighed three ways

The speeds of a cluster's galaxies, the temperature of its gas and the bending of light behind it are three measurements with almost nothing in common. They agree within a factor of two, and all three exceed the mass of the stars by about a hundred.

galaxies · Clusters Lane–Emden solutions for n = 0, 1, 1.5, 3, 4.5, 5, and the one that has no surface. The dimensionless density θ against the dimensionless radius ξ, for polytropic indices 0, 1, 1.5, 3, 4.5, 5. Each curve is the whole structure of a star whose pressure is K times its density to the power 1 + 1/n: the equation of state and hydrostatic equilibrium leave one second-order differential equation, and this is its solution. Every curve starts at θ = 1 with zero slope, because the density is greatest at the centre and has no cusp there. What separates them is where they end. At n = 0 the density is uniform and the surface is at ξ₁ = 2.4495; by n = 3 it has moved out to 6.8968 and the central density is 54.2 times the mean. At n = 5 the curve reaches zero only at infinity — a configuration of infinite radius and, remarkably, finite mass — and every index above it has neither. The three curves that have closed forms, n = 0, 1 and 5, are drawn from the same numerical integration as the rest and agree with those forms to better than two parts in a million, which is what licenses reading the others off the picture. What the figure cannot show is the scale: ξ is radius divided by a length that depends on the central density and on K, so two stars of the same index and wildly different sizes have the same curve here.

An equation of state is already a star

Write down how a gas's pressure depends on its density, insist that the pressure hold the weight up, and everything else follows — the run of density, the fraction of the mass inside each radius, and, at one particular index, a mass that does not care what the radius is.

stars · Polytropes Measured moment-of-inertia factors, from the Sun's 0.07 to the Moon's 0.3931. Eleven bodies whose interiors have never been sampled, arranged by the one interior quantity that has been measured for all of them. C/MR² is 2/5 for a uniform sphere and falls as mass is concentrated toward the centre, and the values here span from 0.07 to 0.3931. That spread is the content. The Moon at 0.3931 is barely differentiated — whatever iron core it has is a few per cent of its radius, which is why the Moon is the one large body in the inner solar system without a magnetic field of its own. Mercury at 0.346 is nearly as low as the Earth despite being an eighth of its mass, and for a body that small the only way to get there is an iron core filling most of the radius. The Sun at 0.07 is off the scale of anything a two-layer model describes; a star is not a planet with a bigger core but a body whose density falls by five orders of magnitude between centre and surface. The faint curves behind are the two-layer relation at a few density contrasts, drawn to show what kind of interior each value is consistent with — and the horizontal placement of each body on them is an illustration rather than a result, since one factor never fixes one core. Every number here was obtained by watching the body turn: a precession rate, a libration amplitude, a gravity field sampled on a flyby, or in the Sun's case the frequencies of its own oscillations.

Whether the heavy material sank

A moment of inertia is 0.4 of MR² for a uniform sphere and less for everything that has differentiated, and it is measured by watching a body wobble. Mercury's 0.346 says most of the planet is iron core; the Moon's 0.393 says almost none of it is.

gravitation · Moment of inertia Central pressure bracketed without a model: 6 bodies, 23 decades apart. What can be said about the middle of a body from its mass and its radius alone. The lower end of each bar is GM²/8πR⁴, which follows from hydrostatic equilibrium and nothing else — no equation of state, no composition, no temperature, no assumption whatever about how the density is arranged inside. The upper end costs one more assumption, that the density does not increase outward, and it needs a central density, which is a model output rather than an observation and is why that edge is drawn as the softer one. The dot is what a full structural model gives. For the first five bodies every dot lies inside its bar, and what is worth noticing is how wide the bar is: Sun's rigorous floor is 4.48e+13 pascals against a modelled 2.34e+16, a factor of 522. The bound is true and nearly useless there, because most of a centrally condensed body's pressure comes from the concentration and the derivation deliberately knows nothing about it. The relativistic entry is the exception, and the reason to draw the figure at all. neutron star's modelled central pressure is 8.5 times the Newtonian ceiling — a body no Newtonian arrangement of matter with density falling outward can produce. The floor still holds, and holds for a statable reason: relativity makes the pressure gradient steeper than Newtonian gravity does, so the true central pressure can only exceed what the Newtonian derivation demands. The bracket therefore does more than constrain an interior. Applied at a small enough radius it breaks, and where it breaks is where Newtonian hydrostatics has stopped being the right equation.

A floor under the centre that assumes nothing

There is a lower bound on the pressure at the centre of any body in hydrostatic equilibrium, and it needs no equation of state, no composition and no temperature — only a mass and a radius. For the Sun it is nearly useless. For a neutron star it says which theory of gravity the interior needs.

stars · Hydrostatic equilibrium A star 1.24 times wider than it is tall, and 19 per cent brighter pole-on. Left, the meridional section of a star rotating at ω = 0.9257 of its critical angular velocity, computed from the Roche potential rather than sketched: the equator sits at 1.245 polar radii, and at the critical rate that ratio is exactly 1.5 whatever the star is made of. The same rotation expressed as a fraction of the critical equatorial speed is 0.768, and the two conventions differ by the distortion itself — a figure that prints one under the other's name is wrong by an amount that looks like rounding. Effective gravity at the equator is 0.329 of its polar value, so von Zeipel's flux law makes the pole hotter than the equator by a factor 1.320 at the theoretical exponent 0.25 and 1.232 at the 0.188 that interferometric imaging actually fits. Right, the apparent bolometric brightness against viewing inclination, integrated over the visible gravity-darkened surface: pole-on the star is 1.19 times brighter than edge-on, and the apparent temperature falls with it. The consequence is that a rapid rotator's place on the Hertzsprung–Russell diagram is partly a statement about the observer's position, which no spectrum taken alone can undo.

A temperature that depends on where the observer stands

A star turning near its break-up rate is half again as wide as it is tall, and its equator is thousands of degrees cooler than its poles. Neither of those is a small correction to a spectrum — the effective temperature and the luminosity such a star appears to have are partly statements about which way its axis happens to point.

starlight · Gravity darkening A spot is dark because it is squeezed. Pressure against depth below the quiet photosphere's optical surface, drawn as a ratio to the pressure there. The rising curve is the surrounding gas, which grows exponentially with a 140-kilometre scale height because that is what hydrostatic equilibrium in an ideal gas produces. The flat pair of bands is the spot's own budget: a magnetic pressure of 3.58·10⁵ dyn/cm² from a 3000-gauss field, which is 25 per cent of the total, plus the gas pressure left over. Horizontal balance requires the two columns to reach the same total at the same geometric level, and the level at which they do is 348 kilometres below the quiet surface — so the spot's own optical surface sits in a hollow. Measured Wilson depressions, obtained from the foreshortening of a spot near the limb, are four to six hundred kilometres. Nothing about the darkness was assumed: a field strength read off a Zeeman splitting fixes the magnetic share, the share fixes the depression, and the depression fixes the temperature the deeper layer must have to carry the reduced flux.

The darkness a field pays for

A sunspot is not cool because something is missing. It is cool because a three-thousand-gauss field supplies part of the pressure that holds the column up, the gas therefore supplies less, and the level at which that gas becomes opaque sits some hundreds of kilometres deeper than the surface around it.

stars · Plasma beta A layer several times thicker than its heat can explain. The vertical density profile of the neutral gas layer, drawn twice. The narrow curve is what thermal pressure alone supports: an 8-kilometre-a-second sound speed against the vertical gravity of the stellar disc gives a scale height of 47 parsecs. The broad curve adds the three pressures that are not heat — turbulent motion, the magnetic field and the cosmic rays — which together roughly triple the total and, because the scale height goes as the square of the effective dispersion, thicken the layer by a factor of 3.1 to 145 parsecs. The observed half-thickness of the H I layer is about 150. The narrow curve is a real prediction and it is wrong, and what is missing from it is precisely the two terms that emit nothing: a field measured by Zeeman splitting and Faraday rotation, and a particle population measured by what it does to a detector on a mountain. A galaxy's gas disc is inflated by things that cannot be photographed, and the thickness is how the inflation is measured.

A disc held open by what cannot be photographed

Solve hydrostatic equilibrium for the galaxy's gas layer using its temperature and the disc's gravity, and the answer is a layer several times thinner than the one that is there. What is missing from the calculation is turbulence, a magnetic field and a population of cosmic rays — three pressures of comparable size, two of which emit nothing.

galaxies · Interstellar medium A moment of inertia that is a shape plus an assumption. The Darwin–Radau relation: the polar moment of inertia a body would have, given the ratio of its rotation parameter to its flattening, if it were a hydrostatic fluid. The curve passes through exactly 0.4 at q/f = 0.8, which is the uniform sphere and the one point that needs no interior model, and falls as the body becomes more centrally condensed. Four of the five worlds drawn sit on it within a few per cent of their independently measured moments, which is what makes the relation usable at all. The world that does not appear on the plot is the Moon, whose q/f is 0.025 — far outside the window in which the relation has a real solution, because its shape is a fossil frozen in when it was much closer to its primary and has nothing to do with its present rotation. That failure is the useful one. A relation that returns a wrong answer quietly is dangerous; this one returns no answer at all.

The part of a shape the spin cannot explain

A rotating planet bulges by a predictable amount. Subtract that amount from the shape actually observed and something is usually left over — a few parts in a hundred thousand for the Earth, and ninety-seven per cent of the whole bulge for the Moon. The residue is not an error. It is the only remote measurement of what a planet's interior is doing that does not average over the whole body.

gravitation · Moment of inertia 742 kelvin between a dwarf and a supergiant, at the same ionisation. The fraction of calcium still neutral against temperature, for three surface gravities: a dwarf, a giant and a supergiant. The three curves are the same curve slid sideways. The Saha equation carries the electron pressure in its denominator, and the photospheric pressure follows the surface gravity as its square root — hydrostatic equilibrium gives a gas pressure of order g over the opacity, and the opacity in a cool star is set by the electrons themselves. So the pressure runs from 19 newtons a square metre in the dwarf down to 0.48 in the supergiant, a factor of 40, and the half-ionisation point moves from 4427 kelvin to 3685 — 742 kelvin apart. At fixed temperature the ionisation ratio goes as g^-0.50, exactly the square root the algebra requires. A star's luminosity class is a measurement of the density of its photosphere, read off which stage of an element the lines belong to.

A luminosity class is a density measurement

The Saha equation has an electron pressure in its denominator, and a supergiant's photosphere is forty times less dense than a dwarf's at the same temperature. So the same element sits in different ionisation stages in the two, the spectrum says which, and the second axis of stellar classification is a barometer.

starlight · Ionisation

Named alongside it

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

Eddington limitDegeneracy pressureEffective temperatureEquation of statePolytropeStellar densityStellar evolutionStellar radiusWhite dwarfCentral condensationChandrasekhar limitConvection

All concepts