Help Deriving Hydrostatic Equilibrium

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of hydrostatic equilibrium in the context of star formation and the life cycle of stars. Participants are exploring the mathematical and physical reasoning behind the equations presented in a specific textbook, particularly focusing on the forces acting on a cylindrical volume element within a star.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the term P(r+dr) = P(r) + (dP/dr)dr, suggesting it resembles a linear approximation for small changes.
  • Another participant clarifies that the (dP/dr)dr term accounts for the change in pressure with radial distance, implying that pressure does not remain constant across the volume element.
  • There is a question about why one would not simply state P(r) = P(r+dr), which would suggest no pressure variation, contradicting the assumption of a non-zero mass enclosed within the volume.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need for a linear approximation to describe pressure changes, but there is ongoing uncertainty regarding the implications of these terms and the derivation steps involved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the assumptions made regarding pressure variation and the implications for the mass enclosed within the volume element, which remain unresolved.

jumi
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Hey all,

I posted this in the Astrophysics sub-forum, but traffic here seems higher (if a mod sees this, can you close the other thread please?)

Long story short, for my Modern Physics course, we have to do a research paper on a physics topic we didn't cover in class. Since I've always been interested in astronomy and the cosmos, I figured I'd do star formation / life cycle of stars. The paper has to have mathematical and physical reasoning for everything we present.

Anyway, I found some cool books that have helped me out thus far, but I'm having trouble following an explanation for hydrostatic equilibrium.

The book in question "Evolution of Stars and Stellar Populations" by Maurizio Salaris and Santi Cassisi.

They start the derivation by "finding the equation of motion of a generic infinitesimal cylindrical volume element with axis along the radial direction, located between radii r and r+dr", with a base (perpendicular to the radial direction) of area dA and density ρ.

They then obtain the mass, dm, contained in the element: dm = ρdrdA.

"[They] neglect rotation and consider self-gravity and internal pressure as the only forces in action. The mass enclosed within the radius r acts as a gravitational mass located at the center of the star; this generates an inward gravitational acceleration: g(r) = Gm_{r} / r^{2}."

"Due to spherical symmetry, the pressure forces acting on both sides perpendicular to the radial direction are balanced, and only the pressure acting along the radial direction has to be determined. The force acting on the top of the cylinder is P(r+dr)dA, whereas the force acting on the base of the element is P(r)dA. By writing: P(r+dr) = P(r) + \frac{dP}{dr}dr and remembering that drdA = dm/ρ, the equation of motion for the volume element can be written as: \frac{d^{2}r}{dt^{2}}dm = -g(r)dm - \frac{dP}{dr}\frac{dm}{ρ}."

---

They go further to get the final equation, but I get lost at this last paragraph. I don't understand where the last term of this equation comes from: P(r+dr) = P(r) + \frac{dP}{dr}dr. Why wouldn't it just be P(r+dr) = P(r)?

And then once they get that equation, how do they get to this equation: \frac{d^{2}r}{dt^{2}}dm = -g(r)dm - \frac{dP}{dr}\frac{dm}{ρ}? I know they skipped a bunch of steps... Maybe I'm just not thinking right.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jumi said:
I get lost at this last paragraph. I don't understand where the last term of this equation comes from: P(r+dr) = P(r) + \frac{dP}{dr}dr.
That looks like the standard linear approximation to a complex curve. For small excursions about x, we can linearize the complex curve using the gradient at x, viz., f(x+∆x) ≈ f(x) + (df(x)/dx) * ∆x
 
By where does the (dP/dr)*dr term come from?

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/884/physforums.png

Why wouldn't it just be P(r) = P(r+dr)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jumi said:
By where does the (dP/dr)*dr term come from?
That relates the change of pressure with radial distance.
Why wouldn't it just be P(r) = P(r+dr)?
That would be saying there is no change of pressure with distance, and the mass enclosed within the volume dA·dr must be zero.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
960
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K