Density distrubution and solar lifetime of the sun

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on how the density distribution within the sun affects its potential energy and solar lifetime. If the sun were a hollow shell, the potential energy would be less than in a uniform density case, leading to a shorter solar lifetime due to increased energy depletion. Conversely, if most of the mass were concentrated in the center with a fluffy outer layer, the potential energy would be higher, potentially extending the sun's lifetime. The key factor is that a hollow structure would significantly impact the sun's energy dynamics. Understanding these density variations is crucial for accurate calculations of the sun's longevity.
zeion
Messages
455
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Kelvin could only see the photosphere (the glowing outer surface) of the sun, so didn't know how the mass was distributed inside
it. How would the potential energy of the sun change if it was a hollow shell? (No numbers needed; just indicate whether it
would be more or less than in the uniform density case). Similarly, what if the outer part is just fluff, so that most of the mass is
in the center? Which of these two cases makes a bigger difference to our calculation for the lifetime of the sun?


Homework Equations



Potential energy = GM^2 / r

There is a factor in this equation that depends on the density distribution within the
object (e.g. 0.6 for a uniform sphere) - but for rough calculations we can ignore that.

The Attempt at a Solution



I don't understand how this factor of density distribution fits into the equation.
But I'm assuming that if the sun was hollow it would significantly lower it's solar lifetime since the photosphere would have to radiate inside the shell as well thus depleting its potential energy quicker.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No one? :(
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top