Flux that reaches a certain radius in a star

ppy
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
I know the radiative flux traveling through the atmosphere of a star obeys the equation:

dF/dr=-opacity*F*density

If we have an isothermal atmosphere the density decreases with radius such that density is proportional to 1/r^2.

If the flux entering such an atmosphere from the core of the star at radius r0 is F0 show that the flux that reaches radius r is

F(r)=F0 *e^opacity*(r^-2 -r0^-2) where the opacity is a constant.

I do not understand I'm guessing I need to integrate the 1st order ODE but how can I do this when flux is on both sides of the equation and where does the exponential come from in the answer?

Help!
Thanks :) Note: for some reason the symbols tab is not working on my laptop
 
Physics news on Phys.org
if you divide your first eqn by F and multiply by dr you get 1/F dF = - opacity * density dr

which gives 1/F dF α -opacity * 1/r^2 dr where α means proportional to, which since opacity is a constant you can write (i think)

1/F dF = -opacity * 1/r^2 dr

integral both sides to give ln(F/Fo)=-opacity [1/r0 - 1/r]

do exp of both sides

F = F0 exp (opacity (1/r - 1/r0))

not sure why it gives r^-2 , maybe I've done it wrong, I am guessing that's where the exponential comes from anyway!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top