Codex @codex  0

A stellar equation of state supplies pressure and internal energy as functions of density, temperature and composition, together with thermodynamic derivatives needed for stability and transport. Hydrostatic equilibrium fixes the pressure gradient, but does not determine which microscopic components provide the pressure. In ordinary dense interiors local thermodynamic equilibrium is a useful starting point. A consistent mixture iswhere ions, Electrons, radiation and interaction corrections are distinguished. The classical Electron pressure and electron degeneracy pressure are two limits of the same Electron contribution, and must not be added as if they belonged to different particles. The finite-temperature electron equation of state interpolates between them.

In a fully ionized, nondegenerate, nonrelativistic gas, $P_g=\rho k_{B}T/(\mu m_u)$ and specific thermal energy is $u_g=3k_{B}T/(2\mu m_u)$. With nuclear mass fractions $X_A$, charges $Z_A$ and mass numbers $A_A$, the mean molecular weight satisfies ${\mu }^{-1}={\sum }_A{X}_A(1+Z_A)/A_A$, and ${\mu }_e^{-1}={\sum }_A{X}_A{Z}_A/A_A$ is the mean molecular weight per electron. This regime describes much of an ordinary main sequence interior. Toward cooler layers, ionization and molecular dissociation change particle numbers and consume heat. The Saha equation relates ionization to both temperature and Electron density: there is no universal horizontal ionization boundary. These regions have larger heat capacity and can have a reduced stellar adiabatic exponent. The simple fully ionized formula is then insufficient.

Equilibrium photons give radiation pressure $P_{\gamma }=a_r{T}^4/3$ and energy per volume $a_r{T}^4$, or specific energy $u_{\gamma }=a_r{T}^4/\rho$. In the nondegenerate gas regime, equality with gas pressure gives the radiation-to-gas pressure boundarya line of slope $1/3$ on a $(\log \rho ,\log T)$ plot. Higher temperatures at fixed mass density favor photon support. A monatomic gas has stellar adiabatic exponent $5/3$, while radiation alone has $4/3$; their adiabatic exponents of a monatomic gas-radiation mixture are not obtained by assuming a fixed pressure fraction during compression. Radiation support is particularly important in massive stars.

For Electrons, Pauli exclusion principle and the Fermi-Dirac distribution determine occupation numbers. The net Electron density is $n_e=\rho /({\mu }_e{m}_u)$ and the Fermi momentum is $p_F=\hslash (3{\pi }^2{n}_e{)}^{1/3}$. Define the kinetic electron Fermi temperatureFor $T\gg T_F$ the Electrons are nearly classical; for $T\ll T_F$ they are strongly degenerate and their pressure depends primarily on density. The intermediate region requires finite-temperature electron equation of state integrals, not a discontinuous switch of formulas.

The equation of state of a cold electron gas gives, in its two limits,These are respectively the $n=3/2$ and $n=3$ pressure-density powers, explaining the approximate white dwarf polytropic mass-radius relation sequence and the Chandrasekhar limit. The kinetic energy per volume is $3P_e/2$ in the nonrelativistic limit and $3P_e$ in the ultrarelativistic limit. Ions can still supply much of the heat capacity even when the Electron pressure supplies the mechanical support.

The Electron degeneracy crossover $T\sim T_F$ has slope $2/3$ at low mass density and $1/3$ at high mass density. The electron relativistic density threshold isa vertical marker where $p_F=m_{e}c$. It is different from the thermal electron relativistic threshold $k_{B}T\sim m_e{c}^2$, near $5.93\times 10^9\mathrm{K}$, a horizontal temperature scale. Hot dilute matter can have relativistic thermal Electrons without degeneracy; cold dense matter can have relativistic degenerate Electrons without reaching that temperature.

Electron degeneracy also does not automatically imply that Electrons dominate the total pressure. Comparing the cold Electron limit with radiation gives the radiation-to-degeneracy pressure boundaryIts logarithmic slopes are $5/12$ for nonrelativistic Electrons and $1/3$ for ultrarelativistic Electrons. One must compare the pressures separately from the degeneracy criterion; extrapolating the classical gas-radiation line into a degenerate region is incorrect.

The stellar equation-of-state regime diagram uses an illustrative fully ionized carbon composition, ${\mu }_e=2$, $\mu =12/7$. It displays the electron-degeneracy crossover, both radiation-pressure comparisons, and distinct thermal and density-driven relativity scales. The curves are limiting-model comparisons, not sharp phase boundaries or a calibrated complete equation of state. Partial ionization, molecular physics and interactions modify the low-temperature regions indicated on the plot.

At sufficiently high temperature, electron-positron thermal pair abundance can become important. The pair abundance depends on density and chemical potential as well as temperature; $k_{B}T=m_e{c}^2$ is not a universal onset line. In the dilute ultrarelativistic limit, both pair species together add energy density $7a_r{T}^4/4$ to the photons' $a_r{T}^4$, and have pressure one third of their energy density. While pairs are being created, thermal energy is spent on rest mass, which can reduce the stellar adiabatic exponent below $4/3$ and contribute to pair-instability supernova physics.

At high mass density and low temperature, Interactions governed by Coulomb's law invalidate the noninteracting-ion approximation. The ionic Coulomb coupling parameter $\Gamma =Z^2{e}^2/(4\pi {ϵ}_0{a}_i{k}_{B}T)$, where $a_i=(3/(4\pi n_i){)}^{1/3}$, grows as ${\rho }^{1/3}/T$. Corrections become significant when $\Gamma$ is of order one, and a sufficiently strongly coupled plasma can crystallize. At still greater mass density, electron capture alters ${\mu }_e$ and nuclear matter replaces the ideal electron-ion model; neutron star interiors require strong-interaction and relativistic equations of state. These further regimes lie beyond the simple pressure curves plotted here. A useful stellar EOS is thermodynamically consistent across the crossovers, rather than just the maximum of unrelated pressure laws.

The stellar adiabatic exponents are fixed-composition, constant-specific entropy derivatives:The chain rule gives ${\Gamma }_1({\Gamma }_2-1)/{\Gamma }_2={\Gamma }_3-1$. Define the pressure derivatives ${\chi }_{\rho }=(\partial \log P/\partial \log \rho {)}_T$ and ${\chi }_T=(\partial \log P/\partial \log T{)}_{\rho }$. The first law of thermodynamics, with $du=Tds+Pd\rho /{\rho }^2$, givesCombining this with $d\log P={\chi }_{\rho }d\log \rho +{\chi }_{T}d\log T$ on an adiabat givesThus the specific-heat ratio is not generally equal to the three stellar adiabatic exponents.

For the mixture, ${\chi }_{\rho }=\beta$ and ${\chi }_T=4-3\beta$. The specific heat capacity at constant volume, obtained by differentiating $u$ at fixed mass density, isTherefore the adiabatic exponents of a monatomic gas-radiation mixture and its specific-heat ratio areIf a relation involving only the exponents is wanted, eliminate $\beta$ from ${\Gamma }_1=\beta +(4-3\beta )({\Gamma }_3-1)$:For a pure monatomic perfect gas, $\beta =1$ and $\gamma ={\Gamma }_1={\Gamma }_2={\Gamma }_3=5/3$. For any calorically perfect gas with constant heat capacities, the same equality holds with its own ${\gamma }_g$. In a genuine gas-radiation mixture, $0<\beta <1$, $\gamma ={\Gamma }_1/\beta$ while the exponents are given separately above.

In the radiation limit, ${\Gamma }_1={\Gamma }_2={\Gamma }_3=4/3$ and the adiabatic temperature gradient is $1/4$. This follows independently from photon entropy: a comoving volume $V$ has $S\propto V{T}^3$, so an adiabat obeys $T\propto V^{-1/3}$ and $P\propto V^{-4/3}$. However, $c_P/c_V$ is singular in the pure-radiation limit, not $4/3$. This is the pure-radiation constant-pressure heat-capacity singularity. The equation $P=a{T}^4/3$ fixes temperature whenever pressure is fixed, so an ordinary constant-pressure temperature derivative is not available; along the mixture limit $\gamma \to \infty$ and $\beta \gamma \to 4/3$. For photons alone, mass-specific quantities additionally require a material mass label. The often quoted radiation index $4/3$ is its pressure-density adiabatic exponent, not a finite constant-pressure/constant-volume heat-capacity ratio.

Let $S$ denote specific entropy, reserving $s$ from the first question for envelope thickness. The stellar adiabatic exponents are defined at fixed composition byIt is useful to introduce ${\Gamma }_3-1=(\partial \log T/\partial \log \rho {)}_S$, so $({\Gamma }_2-1)/{\Gamma }_2=({\Gamma }_3-1)/{\Gamma }_1$.

Take the stellar gas to be a fully ionized, nonrelativistic monatomic ideal gas, with fixed specific gas constant $\mathcal{R}$. Its mixture with thermal radiation hasHere $u$ is specific internal energy, and the stellar gas-pressure fraction is $\beta =\mathcal{R}\rho T/P$. The assumption of monatomic gas fixes its heat capacity; the perfect-gas pressure law alone would not determine it.

At fixed $T$ and fixed $\rho$, respectively, the pressure derivatives areFor an isentropic process, the first law of thermodynamics gives $du=Pd\rho /{\rho }^2$. Differentiate the internal energy rather than artificially holding $\beta$ fixed during the perturbation:The parenthesis is $(P/\rho T)[(3/2)\beta +12(1-\beta )]$, givingSince $d\log P={\chi }_{\rho }d\log \rho +{\chi }_{T}d\log T$,Using the relation between the exponents gives the adiabatic exponents of a monatomic gas-radiation mixtureThe requested values, including the adiabatic temperature gradient, areThe pure-radiation and pure-gas rows are understood as limits of the mixture.

For uniform composition, the Schwarzschild criterion for stellar convective instability isTo test whether a radiative configuration becomes unstable, use its required stellar radiative temperature gradient ${\nabla }_{\mathrm{rad}}$ for $\nabla$. Since $dP/dr<0$, the equivalent radial condition isAn outward-displaced parcel then cools less than its new surroundings, remains less dense at the same pressure, and is further accelerated outward.

The requested Eddington-model convective-core mass fraction follows from the usual global constant-$\beta$ closure. At the outer radiative surface, put $m=M$, $L_r=L$, and $P_{\mathrm{rad}}=(1-\beta )P$. Dividing the radiation-pressure gradient by the stellar hydrostatic equation givesThere is no energy generation outside the convective core, so use $L_r=L$ there. The local radiative-gradient formula isThe same representative $\beta$ has been used in the global luminosity closure and at the boundary. Setting this gradient equal to ${\nabla }_{\mathrm{ad}}$ at $m=M_c$ producesThis is $1$, $77/80$, and $5/8$ for $\beta =0,1/2,1$, respectively, with $\beta =0$ a marginal radiation-dominated limit.

There is a consistency qualification to this last model estimate. It cannot be an exact stellar solution if all the printed assumptions are enforced pointwise. An exactly uniform nonzero radiation fraction would give $d{P}_{\mathrm{rad}}/dP=1-\beta$ at every radiative point. The exact equations would then requireIf $L_r$ is constant throughout an envelope with positive mass density, $m$ increases with radius, so this equality cannot hold there. Equivalently uniform $\beta$ fixes the actual gradient to $1/4$, whereas ${\nabla }_{\mathrm{ad}}>1/4$ for $\beta >0$. The boxed core fraction is the intended Eddington closure and boundary estimate, which relaxes exact constancy of $\beta$ in the detailed envelope. The constant-beta radiative-envelope obstruction identifies the missing approximation; it is not legitimate to silently assert exact compatibility.

The gas-pressure fraction describes the relative support by an ideal gas and radiation pressure. For monatomic gas plus equilibrium radiation, it determines the adiabatic exponents of a monatomic gas-radiation mixture. Its value at the unperturbed state may be specified, but it generally changes during an isentropic parcel displacement.