Poisson and continuity equation for collapsing polytropes

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the application of the Poisson equation in the context of collapsing polytropes as presented in Kippenhahn & Weigert's "Stellar Structure and Evolution." Initially, the user expresses confusion over the use of the velocity potential \(\psi\) instead of the gravitational potential \(\Phi\) in the equation. After conducting a dimensional analysis, the user concludes that the equation was indeed incorrect. Ultimately, the user discovers the correct formula later in the text, emphasizing the importance of thoroughly reading the material. This highlights the need for careful review when studying complex topics in astrophysics.
AmenoParallax
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hello everybody!
I am using in my studies this beautiful book by Kippenhahn & Weigert, "Stellar Structure and Evolution", but I have some problems about collapsing polytropes (chapter 19.11)...
After defining dimensionless lenght-scale z by:
r=a(t)z
and a velocity potential \psi:
\frac{\partial r}{\partial t}=v_r=\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial r}
the authors rewrite the Poisson equation:
\frac{1}{z^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}(z^2\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial z})=4\pi G\rho a^2
but I think there should be the gravitational potential \phi instead of \psi, in fact performing a simple dimensional analysis shows that the left hand side is a square length over time, while the right hand side is a square length over square time, so I think the equation is wrong... Am I right? Did I miss something? :confused:
Help please!
Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Ok, i got through it, and there is a mistake, indeed. The function in the differential equation is \Phi, the gravitational potential, and not the velocity potential \psi... I found the correct formula... in the following page :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Life lesson: always read until end of chapter! (or paragraph at least...)
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
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...
How does light maintain enough energy in the visible part of the spectrum for the naked eye to see in the night sky. Also, how did it start of in the visible frequency part of the spectrum. Was it, for example, photons being ejected at that frequency after high energy particle interaction. Or does the light become visible (spectrum) after hitting our atmosphere or space dust or something? EDIT: Actually I just thought. Maybe the EM starts off as very high energy (outside the visible...
Back
Top