Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Generator

The mass-luminosity generator

Luminosity against mass, against a slope of 3.5
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.

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.

9 essays call mass-luminosity. The drawing above is what it returns with no arguments at all; every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.

Where it is called

Every figure listed here is the same construction drawn at different numbers, so a correction to one is a correction to all of them.

Blackbody curves at 3000, 5800, 10000 K. Thermal emission against wavelength, each curve scaled to its own peak so the shift can be seen on one plot. The peak moves to shorter wavelengths as the temperature rises, which is why colour is a thermometer. Starlight

Colour is a thermometer, and it reads across the galaxy

A star's colour gives its surface temperature, from two brightness measurements and no other information. It is the cheapest useful measurement in astronomy.

 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. Stars

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.

 How long a star lasts, against its mass. Main-sequence lifetime against mass, on logarithmic axes. Fuel grows in proportion to mass and consumption grows as its three-and-a-half power, so the lifetime falls steeply — a star of thirty solar masses lives for a few million years. Stars

Why the biggest stars die first, and take the galaxy with them

A star thirty times the Sun's mass has thirty times the fuel and burns it forty thousand times faster. It lasts a few million years, and everything heavier than iron exists because of it.

 Two radial-velocity curves, and one mass ratio. The line-of-sight velocity of each star through one orbit of AI Phoenicis. Both curves are computed from the two masses and the period; what a spectrograph delivers is the reverse. The ratio of the amplitudes is the inverse ratio of the masses — 48.2 to 50.3 kilometres a second, so the heavier star moves more slowly — and the sum of the amplitudes with the period gives the mass sum, 2.437 solar masses, once the inclination is known from the eclipses. Stars

The only stars whose masses are known

A star's mass cannot be measured by looking at it. It can be measured by watching two stars pull on each other, and if the pair also eclipses, the same observations give both radii as well — with no stellar model anywhere in the chain. A few hundred such systems calibrate everything else.

 One population, three integrals, two ends. The same mass function weighted three ways, each normalised so that the area under it is one, against mass on a logarithmic axis — so a share of the page is a share of the total. The light is a zero-age population's, every star still on the main sequence, which is the only age at which the top of the range is present at all. The steep curve on the left is the number of stars, which peaks at 0.08 M☉ and falls away because the function is steeper than m⁻¹; the middle one is the mass they carry; the one on the right is the light they emit, computed from this file's own main-sequence relation and peaking at 55.0 M☉ — 682 times further up the axis. The population that is counted and the population that is seen are two different populations. Above 8 M☉ there are 0.63% of the stars, 21% of the mass and 99% of the light. The slopes are α = 1.3 above 0.08 M☉, α = 2.3 above 0.5 M☉, and the low-mass end is where the honesty runs out: it has never been measured in another galaxy, and every mass inferred from a luminosity assumes it. Stars

Most stars are small, and most of the light is not

The mass function is steep and the mass–luminosity relation is steeper, so counting stars and measuring their output are integrals of the same function dominated by opposite ends of it. Every mass inferred from a brightness passes through that mismatch.

 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. Stars

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.

 An exponent between 2.3 and 4, not a number. The local logarithmic slope of the mass–luminosity relation against mass — the exponent that "L ∝ M^3.5" stands in for — read off the same fit to eclipsing binaries that the relation itself is drawn from. It is a step function with two corners, and the steps are 2.3 below 0.43 M☉, 4 0.43 to 2 M☉, 3.5 2 to 55 M☉. The horizontal lines are what homology predicts: a star in radiative equilibrium has L ∝ μ⁴M³/κ̄, which gives an exponent of 3 when the opacity is electron scattering and a constant, 5.5 when it is Kramers and depends on density and temperature, and 1 where radiation pressure holds the star up and the luminosity is pinned to the Eddington value. The measured steps sit between those predictions rather than on them, which is what a real star does — no star is homologous, the low-mass ones are convective throughout and the heavy ones have convective cores, and the fitted exponents are what is left after all of that. The useful statement is not that the exponent is 3.5 but that it is between 2 and 5 everywhere and 4 in the middle, and that the reason it moves is a change of which opacity is carrying the energy out. Stars

An exponent that is a slope, not a law

The phrase “L goes as M to the three and a half” stands in for a curve with three straight pieces and two corners. The exponent is 2.3 below half a solar mass, 4 in the middle and falls towards 1 at the top — and each change of exponent is a change in which opacity is carrying the energy out.

 Brighter by mass, fainter by temperature. Main sequences from 0.5 to 1.3 solar masses in luminosity against effective temperature, hotter to the left, for solar composition, [Fe/H] = −1.5, from homology applied to the solar-composition relation. The dots join stars of the same mass: lowering the metals moves each one up and to the left, so a 0.8 solar-mass star goes from 0.41 to 0.66 solar luminosities and from 5049 to 5879 K. The main sequence is steep, so a move of that size to the left carries a star past solar stars much brighter than itself: at a fixed temperature of 5800 K the metal-poor sequences lie 0.59 magnitudes below the solar one. A metal-poor star is brighter than a solar one of the same mass and fainter than a solar one of the same temperature — which is why such stars were called subdwarfs. Stars

Brighter for its mass and fainter for its colour

Two stars of the same mass are almost the same star only if they are made of the same material. Take most of the metals out and the opacity falls, the radiation leaks out faster and the star settles brighter and much hotter — so far hotter that, at a given colour, it sits below the ordinary main sequence. The relation between mass and light has composition inside it, and every mass, age and distance read off it inherits that.

 The carbon a star makes, and the carbon it needs. For a 30 solar-mass star born with no carbon, two quantities against its central temperature, on logarithmic scales: the carbon fraction its core needs for the CNO cycle to carry its luminosity (falling steeply, because a hotter core needs less catalyst), and the carbon the triple-alpha process makes in the hundred thousand years the core takes to contract (rising even more steeply). They meet at 108 million kelvin and a carbon fraction of 1.7 × 10⁻¹⁰: 1.7 parts in ten billion by mass, made by the star itself, are enough to switch on the cycle that runs every massive star of the present day. The contraction stops there. Stars

A star that has to make its own catalyst

Every massive star now forming burns hydrogen through a cycle of reactions that carbon, nitrogen and oxygen catalyse, and the first stars had none of those elements. A massive star made of hydrogen and helium alone contracts and heats until its core reaches a hundred million kelvin, where helium begins to fuse into carbon; a few atoms of carbon in ten billion are enough to start the cycle, and the star settles there — three times hotter at its centre than any star of the same mass today, and smaller, and bluer.

The whole library · All essays