Computing a value of radius for a typical white dwarf

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around calculating the radius of a typical white dwarf using bolometric flux and surface temperature values. Participants explore the mathematical approach and the assumptions involved in the calculations, focusing on the expected order of magnitude for the radius.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates the radius of a white dwarf using a formula involving bolometric flux, surface temperature, and distance, initially obtaining a result that seems too high.
  • Another participant suggests that the equation may require a factor of 4π next to σ and mentions that the values used may relate to Vega's magnitude rather than a standard white dwarf.
  • There is a discussion about the conversion between erg and SI units, with some participants questioning whether the correct conversions were applied in the calculations.
  • One participant updates their calculations with a different value for bolometric flux, resulting in a radius that aligns more closely with expected values.
  • Concerns are raised about the complexity of the calculations and the potential for errors in unit conversions and assumptions made in the formulas.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the calculations and the assumptions made, particularly regarding unit conversions and the application of the formula. No consensus is reached on the correct approach or final value for the radius of a white dwarf.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential limitations in the calculations, including the dependence on specific values for bolometric flux and the need for clarity in unit conversions. The discussion highlights the complexity of integrating monochromatic spectral flux into total flux calculations.

fab13
Messages
300
Reaction score
7
I try to get a correct result for the radius of a standard white dwark (roughly 10000 km).

I just want the order of magnitude , i.e with the common values of a solar mass into Earth radius sphere.

From http://www.astro.umontreal.ca/~bergeron/CoolingModels/Synthetic_Calibration.pdf page 1223, I took the following (typical ?) values to compute this radius :

##\Phi_{\text{bolometric}}=10^{-9}\,\text{erg}.\text{cm}^{-2}.\text{s}^{-1}##

##T_{\text{surface}}=10000 K##, ##\text{D}=140## parsec,

and by using the following formula :

##R=\sqrt{\dfrac{ \Phi_{\text{bolometric}} D^{2}}{\sigma T^{4}}}##

Then I calculate the radius with all these values in (SI) units ##(1\,erg.cm^{-2} = 10^{-7} 10^{4}\,J.m^{-2}=10^{-3}\,J.m^{-2}##

$$Radius = \sqrt{\dfrac{(10^{-9}*10^{-7}*10^4*(140*3.26*3600*24*365*3*10^8)^2)}{(5.67*10^{-8}*(10000^4)}}$$

and I get ##Radius = 1.8134\,10^8 \,\text{meters} = 1.8134\,10^{5} \,\text{kilometers}##

That's too high as result, I expect rather a scale ##10^{3}## km < Radius < ##10^{4}## km.

If someone could tell me where is my error to get a standard value of radius for a white dwarf ?

UPDATE :

I get expected results with a flux equal to : ##\Phi_{\text{bolometric}}=10^{-12}## erg.s^-1.cm^-2

such that :

##Radius = \sqrt{\dfrac{(10^{-12}*10^{-7}*10^4*(140*3.26*3600*24*365*3*10^8)^2)}{(5.67*10^{-8}*(10000^4)}}##
= 5.7343 10^3 km

Anyone could confirm me the typical value of a bolometric flux (apparent brightness) equal to ##10^{-12}##erg.s^-1.cm^-2 for a white dwarf distant from 140 pc ?

I have difficulties to do the link between the monochromatic spectral flux (exprimed in erg.cm^-2.s^-1.Angstrom^-1) and the total flux ( in erg.cm^-2.s^-1, i.e the monochromatic spectral flux integrated on all wavelength), like for example in this figure :

W1UmO.png


But from this figure, I can only get the total flux between 1300 and 1600 Angstrom, not the total flux over all wavelengths (##\Phi_{\text{bolometric}}(1300<\lambda<1600)\,\approx\,8*10^{-12}*300\,\approx\,2.4*10^{-9}\, erg.cm^-2.s^-1##)

Any help or suggestion is welcome, regards
 

Attachments

  • W1UmO.png
    W1UmO.png
    27.2 KB · Views: 562
Astronomy news on Phys.org
That is a lot to plug into a calculator.

Parsec ≈ 31 petameters. 3.1 x 1016

square parsec is 931 square petameters, or 9.6 x 1032m

10-12 x 1402 x 9.6 x 1032 = 1.88 x 1025

1.88 x 1025/(5.67 x 108)= 3.3 x 1016

√(3.3 x 1012) = 181659021 ≈ 1.8 x 108

That looks O.K.

Should your equation have a 4π next to σ?

The table on page 1223 of your link has values for Vega magnitude. You should be calculating Vega's radius.
 
stefan r said:
That is a lot to plug into a calculator.

Parsec ≈ 31 petameters. 3.1 x 1016

square parsec is 931 square petameters, or 9.6 x 1032m

10-12 x 1402 x 9.6 x 1032 = 1.88 x 1025

1.88 x 1025/(5.67 x 108)= 3.3 x 1016

√(3.3 x 1012) = 181659021 ≈ 1.8 x 108

That looks O.K.

Should your equation have a 4π next to σ?

The table on page 1223 of your link has values for Vega magnitude. You should be calculating Vega's radius.

@stefan r

It seems that you have not used the conversion between erg and SI units since ##\sigma = 5.67 10^{-8} \,W.m^{-2}##, haven't you ?

Regards
 
fab13 said:
@stefan r

It seems that you have not used the conversion between erg and SI units since ##\sigma = 5.67 10^{-8} \,W.m^{-2}##, haven't you ?

Regards
I used the same numbers you had. 5.67 x 10-8 x (104)4 = 5.67 x 108

σ has units W m-2s-1T-4 but that works fine in the equation in your first post.
 
@stefan r

Sorry, I must precise that in the calculation :

##Radius = \sqrt{\dfrac{(10^{-12}*10^{-7}*10^4*(140*3.26*3600*24*365*3*10^8)^2)}{(5.67*10^{-8}*(10000^4)}}##

I apply the factor "##10^{-7}*10^{4}##" since the bolometric flux is expressed as : ##\Phi_{\text{bolometric}}=10^{-12}\,\text{erg.cm^-2.s^-1} = 10^{-12}\,10^{-7}\,\text{J.cm^-2.s^-1} = 10^{-12}\,10^{-7}\,10^{4}\,\text{W.m^-2}=10^{-15}\,\text{W.m^-2}##

I hope you understand
 
In real life, I stop giving out partial credit when the numbers go in. This thread is an example why.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K