Chandrasekhar Mass - White Dwarf

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Leonardo Machado
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass White dwarf
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the maximum mass of a white dwarf, specifically the Chandrasekhar mass, using hydrostatic equilibrium equations and a custom equation of state (EoS). The user successfully computes the Chandrasekhar mass for carbon but finds discrepancies when applying the EoS to iron, yielding a value of 1.23 solar masses instead of the expected 1.46 solar masses. The conversation confirms that the difference arises from the ratio of nucleons to electrons, which affects gravitational collapse and degeneracy pressure, validating the user's findings.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of hydrostatic equilibrium equations
  • Familiarity with the concept of the Chandrasekhar mass
  • Knowledge of equation of state (EoS) in astrophysics
  • Basic principles of Fermi pressure and degeneracy pressure
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the derivation of the Chandrasekhar mass for different elements
  • Explore advanced topics in hydrostatic equilibrium in stellar structures
  • Study the implications of degeneracy pressure in stellar evolution
  • Investigate the properties of various isotopes and their effects on stellar collapse
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysicists, and students studying stellar evolution and white dwarf characteristics will benefit from this discussion.

Leonardo Machado
Messages
56
Reaction score
2
Hello guys.

I'm working to compute de max. mass for a white dwarf through solving the hidrostatic equilibrium equations. ( The classical ones, not TOV), and using an EoS made by my own, that considers the Fermi Pressure and stuff.

When i use the EoS for a carbon white dwarf ( i do get the Chandrasekhar mass correctly, but if i use for Iron i get i bit less then it should be. ( 1,23 instead 1,46 solar masses)

So. This difference really exist or I'm getting it wrong ??
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
The most common isotope of iron has 30 neutrons to go with 26 protons, so that's 56 nucleons to 26 free electrons, whereas carbon 12 has 12 nucleons per 6 electrons. The Chandra mass is inversely proportional to the square of that ration, so is 1.16 times smaller for iron than for carbon. That seems to be what you are getting too, so I think you are correct. Physically, the more nucleons you have per electron, the stronger the gravity relative to the degeneracy pressure, so it is easier to collapse the star.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Leonardo Machado
Ken G said:
The most common isotope of iron has 30 neutrons to go with 26 protons, so that's 56 nucleons to 26 free electrons, whereas carbon 12 has 12 nucleons per 6 electrons. The Chandra mass is inversely proportional to the square of that ration, so is 1.16 times smaller for iron than for carbon. That seems to be what you are getting too, so I think you are correct. Physically, the more nucleons you have per electron, the stronger the gravity relative to the degeneracy pressure, so it is easier to collapse the star.
Thanks friend, my orientator has confirmed it to me also.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
7K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
8K