White Dwarf Radii: Minimizing Total Energy

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter quasar987
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Radius
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the principles underlying the minimization of total energy in white dwarfs, specifically focusing on the expression for total energy and its implications for the star's radius. Participants explore theoretical aspects, including gravitational and degeneracy pressures, and the conditions for stability in white dwarfs.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an expression for the total energy of a white dwarf and questions the principles behind the reasoning that the radius minimizing this energy corresponds to the star's actual radius.
  • Another participant suggests that the minimum radius is the point at which the star would collapse into a neutron star, indicating a critical transition.
  • A participant speculates that one term in the energy expression represents gravitational energy and the other represents degeneracy pressure, though they are unsure which is which.
  • It is noted that systems tend to reach a state of minimized energy, with a participant drawing parallels to quantum mechanics and atomic electrons seeking ground states.
  • There is a discussion about whether the tendency to minimize energy is an axiom of physics or a property derived from more fundamental principles, with one participant expressing uncertainty about its presentation in existing texts.
  • Another participant identifies the second term in the energy expression as gravitational potential energy and provides a specific formulation for the constants involved, linking energy minimization to the balance of gravitational and degeneracy forces.
  • A later reply seeks a more rigorous justification for the relationship between energy minimization and equilibrium, suggesting that the generalized force should vanish for the system to be in equilibrium.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the principles of energy minimization, with some agreeing on the general concept while others question its foundational status in physics. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact justification for the relationship between energy minimization and equilibrium.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the definitions and derivations of terms in the energy expression, and there are unresolved questions about the applicability of these principles across different areas of physics.

quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
32
In the simplistic treatement of white dwarfs we covered in my thermo class, we obtained an expression for the total energy of the star, namely

[tex]E=\frac{A}{R^2}-\frac{B}{R}[/tex]

where A and B are constants. Then, we said that the actual radius of the dwarf is the radius that minimizes the energy.

On what principles is this reasoning based ?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I can't address your question directly. All that I can say is that the minumum radius is that at which it must collapse into a neutron star.
 
I would guess that one of these terms represents the energy from gravity trying to compress the star and the other represents the energy from the degeneracy pressure of the electrons. Which is which and where they come from, I do not know.
 
All systems try to reach a state where the energy is minimised. Look at electrons in an atom, they always head to the ground state. Of course if the white dwarf is stable then it is bound to be in its minimal energy state anyway otherwise it would have to collapse further.

EDIT: Just to add the place where I see this the most is in quantum mechanics. I'm not sure how common it is in thermodynamics.

Obviously you know how to minimise it. Differentiate wrt R and set to zero then rearrange for R.

[tex]0=\frac{-2A}{R^3} +\frac{B}{R^2}[/tex]

[tex]R=\frac{2A}{B}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Kurdt said:
All systems try to reach a state where the energy is minimised.

So is this an axiom of physics or what? I have a feeling that this holds in classical mechanics too and that it's not an axiom but rather a property that can be proved from more fundamental assumptions.
 
quasar987 said:
So is this an axiom of physics or what? I have a feeling that this holds in classical mechanics too and that it's not an axiom but rather a property that can be proved from more fundamental assumptions.

Interesting point. I've never really seen this set out specifically in texts I've come across. I've attempted answering this several times but what I come up with is more confusing than anything else so I'll leave it to somebody more skilled than me or else give me a while to word myself clearly.
 
quasar987 said:
[tex]E=\frac{A}{R^2}-\frac{B}{R}[/tex]

The second term is the gravitational potential energy. In a uniform density star,

[tex]B=\frac{3GM^2}{5}[/tex]

The first term is the thermal energy. In a degenerate gas, this will be proportional to the Fermi energy:

[tex]E_F=\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}(3\pi^2n)^{2/3}[/tex]

In a uniform density star,

[tex]E_T \propto n^{2/3} \propto \frac{M^{2/3}}{R^2}[/tex]

Minimizing the total energy is effectively equivalent to balancing the forces of gravity and degeneracy. To get a feel for this, consider the one-dimensional Newtonian expression:

[tex]F=\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}[/tex]

When the net force is zero, the energy is either minimized or maximized. In the latter case, however, the equilibrium is unstable, so we usually consider only energy minimization.
 
Last edited:
SpaceTiger said:
[...]
Minimizing the total energy is effectively equivalent to balancing the forces of gravity and degeneracy. To get a feel for this, consider the one-dimensional Newtonian expression:
[...]

Hey ST, thanks for the reply. What I'm looking for however, is for more than "a feel". I'm interested in the exact justification for this. Don't be afraid to use technical terms, I'll sort out what it all means myself.

I was thinking it was something like "R is a generalized coordinate and the system is in equilibrium when the generalized force dE/dR vanishes."

Anything close?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K