Why Does a(tau) Not Equal af in This Orbital Migration Equation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tony873004
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the orbital migration equation presented in a journal paper, specifically the formula a(t) = af - delta a exp(-t/tau). The user initially assumes that a(0) equals ai and a(tau) equals af, but realizes that a(tau) does not equal af due to the nature of the exponential function. The confusion arises from misunderstanding the significance of tau, which represents the timescale of migration. The author clarifies that af is the semi-major axis value as time approaches infinity, while a(tau) reflects the value at one e-folding time. This distinction resolves the user's question about the relationship between a(tau) and af.
tony873004
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
1,753
Reaction score
143
**** Edit, appearently, Latex is not working right now. Here's my best effort to duplicate this post without Latex: ***

In the following journal paper:
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1995AJ...110..420M&data_type=PDF_HIGH&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf

the top of page 424 contains this formula
a(t)=af-delta a exp(-t/tau)

which if I'm not mistaken is the same as
a(t)=af-delta a e(-t/tau)

It gives an object's semi-major axis at time t for an object that is migrating from the orbit where it formed, to where it is in the current epoch.

tau is the timescale of the migration
and ai can be computed by
af-delta a

It would make sense to me that a(0) should equal ai, and a(tau) should equal af.

My first assumption is correct. a(0) does equal ai since e0=1.

But my second assumption can only work if e-1 = 0, which it does not.

Does anyone care to guess what I'm doing wrong?

*** The Latex version for when TEX starts working again ***
In the following journal paper:
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1995AJ...110..420M&data_type=PDF_HIGH&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf

the top of page 424 contains this formula
a(t)=a_{f}-\delta a exp(-t/\tau)

which if I'm not mistaken is the same as
a(t)=a_{f}-\delta a e^{(-t/\tau)}

It gives an object's semi-major axis at time t for an object that is migrating from the orbit where it formed, to where it is in the current epoch.

\tau is the timescale of the migration
and ai can be computed by
a_{f}-\delta a

It would make sense to me that a(0) should equal ai, and a(\tau) should equal af.

My first assumption is correct. a(0) does equal ai since e0=1.

But my second assumption can only work if e-1 = 0, which it does not.

Does anyone care to guess what I'm doing wrong?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I figured it out. As long as I posted the question here, I might as well post the answer too incase anybody was curious. I e-mailed the author of the paper and she responded:
af is the value of a(t) at t-->infinity (i.e., very long time... many times
tau). a(tau) is just the value of 'a' at one e-folding time.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...

Similar threads

Back
Top