Why Does the Equation for a Star's Central Pressure Become Singular at r=0?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter arunma
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pressure Star
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the hydrostatic equation for a star's central pressure and the implications of its singularity at r=0. Participants explore the mathematical and physical interpretations of the equation, its integration, and its relationship to general relativity and Newtonian physics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why the central pressure equation becomes singular at r=0 and expresses uncertainty about integrating the equation.
  • Another participant highlights that the mass M is a function of radius, M = M(r), and emphasizes the need to consider the domain where pressure and density increase toward the star's center.
  • A later reply acknowledges the importance of recognizing that M = M(r) as a resolution to the initial confusion.
  • Discussion includes the equation of state for hydrostatic equilibrium, noting the negative sign due to gravitational force and providing an integral for core pressure.
  • One participant raises a question about the applicability of the formula under general relativity (GR) in the weak field limit, suggesting that pressure under GR increases gravitational pull, unlike in Newtonian physics.
  • Another participant inquires whether the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) equation reduces to the classical Newtonian equation in the weak field limit, providing both equations for comparison and discussing the conditions under which GR applies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints regarding the implications of the hydrostatic equation and its singularity, with some exploring connections to general relativity and others focusing on classical interpretations. No consensus is reached on the implications of the singularity or the relationship between the equations in different gravitational contexts.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of boundary conditions for density and mass functions in the context of the hydrostatic equilibrium equations. There are also references to the limitations of Newtonian physics in describing gravitational systems under certain conditions.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in stellar structure, gravitational physics, and the interplay between classical and relativistic theories may find this discussion relevant.

arunma
Messages
924
Reaction score
4
I have a question about the hydrostatic equation for a star's central pressure. I know that the central pressure for a star is,

[tex]\dfrac{dP}{dr} = \rho \dfrac{G M}{r^2}[/tex]

My question is: why does this blow up at [tex]r = 0[/tex]? Because of the singularity, I'm not sure how I can integrate the equation in order to obtain the total gravitational pressure on a star. Can anyone help? Thanks.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Well, firstly since M = M(r).

Think about the equation and what it is decribing, and the domain in which it is valid, i.e. pressure and density must increase as one descends toward the center of the star.


These might help.

http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/152.mf1i.spring02/GravField.htm

http://www.yale.edu/phys180/lecture_notes/180_Lect_31/sld007.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks, I think this takes care of my difficulty. I stared at that equation for quite awhile and completely forgot that M = M(r).
 

The gravitational force, due to spherical symmetry, points toward the center and therefore has a
negative sign.

The equation of state for hydrostatic equilibrium:
[tex]\boxed{\frac{dP}{dr} = - \rho(r) \frac{G m(r)}{r^2}}[/tex]

Integrating for core pressure:
[tex]\boxed{P_c = - G \int_0^R \frac{\rho(r) m(r)}{r^2} dr}[/tex]

Note that the density and mass functions must obey boundary conditions:
[tex]\rho(0) = \rho_c \; \; \; \rho(R) = 0[/tex]
[tex]m(0) = M_t \; \; \; m(R) = 0[/tex]
[/Color]
Reference:
http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~smao/starHtml/stellarEquation.pdf"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does the above formula match the stituation under GR in the weak field limit?

An interesting document in this context might be: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0705/0705.0825v3.pdf

Pressure under GR increases gravitational pull while in Newtonian physics this is not the case.
 


Does the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) equation for gravitational hydrostatic equilibrium in General Relativity reduce to the classical Newtonian gravitational hydrostatic equilibrium equation under the General Relativity weak field limit?

Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) equation for gravitational hydrostatic equilibrium:
[tex]\frac{dP(r)}{dr}=-\frac{G(\rho(r)+P(r)/c^2)(m(r)+4\pi P(r) r^3/c^2)}{r^2(1-2Gm(r)/rc^2)}[/tex]

Classical Newtonian equation for gravitational hydrostatic equilibrium:
[tex]\frac{dP(r)}{dr} = - \rho(r) \frac{G m(r)}{r^2}[/tex]

The Schwarzschild solution analogue in classical Newtonian theory of gravitation corresponds to the gravitational field around a point particle. (ref. 1)

Static models for stellar structure must be based upon the Schwarzschild metric, which is the genesis solution of the TOV equation, in order to obey General Relativity. In models where the dimensionless quantities of each analogue are both much less than one, the model becomes non-relativistic, and deviations from General Relativity are small and reduces to Newton's law of gravitation: (ref. 2)

[tex]\frac{\Phi}{c^2}=\frac{GM_\mathrm{sun}}{r_\mathrm{orbit}c^2} \sim 10^{-8} \; \; \; \quad \left(\frac{v_\mathrm{Earth}}{c}\right)^2=\left(\frac{2\pi r_\mathrm{orbit}}{(1\ \mathrm{yr})c}\right)^2 \sim 10^{-8}[/tex]

In situations where either dimensionless parameter is large, then the model becomes relativistic and General Relativity must be used to describe the system. General relativity reduces to Newtonian gravitation in the limit of small potential and low velocities, therefore Newton's law of gravitation is the low-gravitation non-relativistic weak field limit of General Relativity.
[/Color]
Reference:
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0264-9381/14/1A/010/"
Problems with Newton's theory - Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff_equation"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzschild_metric"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K