White dwarf mass-radius relationship

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the mass-radius relationship of white dwarf stars, exploring the mathematical formulation and implications of this relationship. Participants examine the role of physical constants, variations in equations, and the conditions under which the relationship holds, with a focus on theoretical and conceptual aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a formula for the mass-radius relationship of white dwarfs and questions the origin of the factor 0.010 in the relationship R/R(solar)=0.010(M(solar)/M)^0.333.
  • Another participant suggests that the equation should align with existing literature, noting differences in the inclusion of proton mass.
  • Some participants discuss the role of physical constants in the equations and the expectation that they would yield a solar-radius white dwarf for a solar mass, highlighting the differences in physics between white dwarfs and main sequence stars.
  • A later reply emphasizes that the 0.01 factor arises from the net heat loss of white dwarfs compared to the Sun, suggesting that the physics involved is fundamentally different.
  • One participant reiterates the mass-radius relationship and suggests that understanding the relationship is simpler than analyzing the constants involved.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of white dwarfs as polytropes with a specific index, discussing the implications for mass and radius independence.
  • There is a counterpoint regarding the relativistic nature of white dwarfs, with some arguing that they are not particularly relativistic except near the Chandrasekhar limit, where significant changes occur.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the mass-radius relationship and the role of relativistic effects, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of the mass-radius relationship, particularly as it approaches the Chandrasekhar mass, where the relationship may not hold as expected. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of the physical conditions affecting white dwarfs.

MattWakes
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
The mass-radius relationship for a white dwarf star is defined by :

R= (9pi)^0.66 /8 * h^2/m1 * 1/(Gm2^1.66*M^.333),

where m1= electron mass, m2=proton mass, G=grav. constant, h=planck's constant
I want to take a proportion with the solar mass and solar radius, which would involve a division where I think everything should cancel out. But then for one solar mass, a white dwarf would have a radius equal to that of the Sun. I've found that the following is the correct relationship:

R/R(solar)=0.010(M(solar)/M)^.333

But where in the world does the factor of 0.010 come from?

If anything needs to be explained more clearly, please let me know.
Thank you very much!
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Yeah I guess there are variations to the equation out there. Would the constants not also divide out in the equation that you have mentioned, though?
 
MattWakes said:
But where in the world does the factor of 0.010 come from?

White dwarfs are smaller than main sequence stars. The 0.01 tells you how much smaller. (And it's made up of h's and c's and pi's and the like)
 
Your formula includes various physical constants and numerical factors, you are supposed to plug those in and see what you get. That's where the 0.01 comes from, there's no reason to expect those physical constants would yield a solar-radius white dwarf if it has a solar mass, because the physics of the Sun is very different from the physics of a white dwarf. In particular, a white dwarf has lost a whole lot of net heat, relative to the Sun, and that's why it is so much smaller. So the answer to your question is, the 0.01 comes from all that net heat that the white dwarf had to lose to get to a white dwarf.
 
MattWakes said:
The mass-radius relationship for a white dwarf star is defined by :

R= (9pi)^0.66 /8 * h^2/m1 * 1/(Gm2^1.66*M^.333),

where m1= electron mass, m2=proton mass, G=grav. constant, h=planck's constant
I want to take a proportion with the solar mass and solar radius, which would involve a division where I think everything should cancel out. But then for one solar mass, a white dwarf would have a radius equal to that of the Sun. I've found that the following is the correct relationship:

R/R(solar)=0.010(M(solar)/M)^.333

But where in the world does the factor of 0.010 come from?

If anything needs to be explained more clearly, please let me know.
Thank you very much!

All you need to know to figure out a relation like R/R(solar)=X*(M(solar)/M)^(1/3) is to know that ##R\sim M^{1/3}## and how large a solar mass white dwarf is. I think this is perhaps easier than trying to figure out how all the constants work out. Once you know how big a solar-mass white dwarf is, you can plug in 1 solar mass to the right hand side of the equation and get that R/R(solar)=X. That's where the .01 comes from. A solar mass white dwarf will have a radius that is 1/100th the radius of the Sun (or about 6900km). Of course, this relationship fails quite dramatically as M reaches 1.4 solar masses, and so it's not like the range of validity of this relationship is all that broad in the first place.
 
Hi guys,
A white dwarf is a polytrope with index n=3 since it is relativistic and degenerate.
For all the polytropes, the mass radius relation is: M~R(n-3)/(n-1). So for a white dwarf the mass is independent of the radius.
 
White dwarfs are generally not particularly relativistic. You are talking about what happens as the mass approaches the "Chandrasekhar mass." That mass is independent of the radius because it is just one mass, generally about 1.4 solar masses, where the white dwarf goes highly relativistic, and that is also where it collapses into a neutron star. In the opposite limit of a lower-mass white dwarf, it is nonrelativistic so has a polytrope index of n=3/2, and a mass-radius relationship that radius scales like mass to the -1/3 power, as above.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K