Codex @codex  0

For one massless neutrino flavor with one helicity per member and $|{\mu }_{\nu }|\gg T_{\nu }$, the Fermi-Dirac distribution fills momentum states up to the positive chemical potential. If ${\mu }_{\nu }>0$, the neutrino density is ${\mu }_{\nu }^4/(8{\pi }^2)$ and the antineutrino contribution is approximately $3T_{\nu }^4{e}^{-{\mu }_{\nu }/T_{\nu }}/{\pi }^2$. For negative chemical potential the roles reverse. Thus the leading total energy density is even in ${\mu }_{\nu }$ and has no factor of two from the two species. Extra populated internal degrees of freedom do multiply it. This distinction prevents using a positive-degeneracy approximation for an exponentially dilute negative-chemical-potential distribution.

A degenerate relic neutrino has ${\xi }_{\nu }\gg 1$. In the ultrarelativistic limit its Fermi-Dirac distribution approaches a filled momentum sphere, giving for one internal statewhile the antineutrino density is exponentially suppressed.

The mean occupation of a fermionic one-particle state of energy $E$ isAt zero temperature this becomes the step function $1_{E<E_F}$.

Neglecting interactions and thermal pairs, the Fermi-Dirac distribution $f(p)=[\exp ((\epsilon (p)-{\mu }_{\mathrm{kin}})/(k_{B}T))+1{]}^{-1}$ with kinetic energy $\epsilon (p)=\sqrt{m_e^2{c}^4+p^2{c}^2}-m_e{c}^2$ determines the Electron contribution to a stellar equation of state. The kinetic chemical potential is fixed by the electron number density, not an independently chosen pressure fraction:The electron kinetic internal energy per volume is $({\pi }^2{\hslash }^3{)}^{-1}{\int }_0^{\infty }{p}^2\epsilon (p)f(p)dp$. In the nondegenerate limit $P_e=n_e{k}_{B}T$; at zero temperature the integrals become the equation of state of a cold electron gas. These are limits of one component and must not be added together as independent electron pressures. When electron-positron thermal pair abundance matters, both charge species must be included, with charge neutrality fixing their net density.

With negligible chemical potential, the Fermi-Dirac distribution has $3/4$ of the boson number density per degree of freedom at equal temperature. A species with $g_{\nu }$ populated states therefore has $n_{\nu }/n_{\gamma }=(3g_{\nu }/8)(T_{\nu }/T_{\gamma }{)}^3$, since photons have two states. This remains the number-density ratio after the neutrino becomes massive if its comoving particle number is conserved.

For a quantitative thermal-relic prediction, assume one ordinary weakly interacting neutrino flavor: one populated neutrino helicity and one antineutrino helicity, negligible chemical potential, early thermal equilibrium, and relativistic decoupling around the MeV epoch. Equal neutrino and antineutrino populations imply no new lepton asymmetry. The Fermi-Dirac distribution is maintained while the weak interaction rate exceeds the expansion rate. After neutrino decoupling, the distribution free streams, its momentum scale falls as $a^{-1}$, and its comoving number is conserved. A mass of $1\mathrm{keV}$ is negligible at Big Bang nucleosynthesis temperatures, but the relic later becomes nonrelativistic. Its energy density then changes from radiation-like $a^{-4}$ scaling to matter-like $a^{-3}$ scaling. Stability prevents its removal by decay; decoupling while relativistic prevents a subsequent equilibrium Boltzmann suppression of its number.

Use $\hslash =c=k_B=1$ and count one populated helicity per neutrino or antineutrino. For massless particles, the Fermi-Dirac distribution givesWhen ${\mu }_{\nu }/T_{\nu }\gg 1$, the occupied states form an almost sharp Fermi sea. Replacing the distribution by $\Theta ({\mu }_{\nu }-p)$ givesThe relative finite-temperature correction is of order $(T_{\nu }/{\mu }_{\nu }{)}^2$.

Chemical equilibrium gives ${\mu }_{\bar{\nu }}=-{\mu }_{\nu }$. For positive large ${\mu }_{\nu }$, the corresponding antineutrino distribution is dilute, soIt is exponentially negligible. The neutrino degeneracy parameter ${\xi }_{\nu }={\mu }_{\nu }/T_{\nu }$ is conserved in the assumed adiabatic massless evolution: redshifting preserves the distribution with both $T_{\nu }$ and ${\mu }_{\nu }$ proportional to $a^{-1}$.

There is a sign qualification in the printed absolute-value formula. If ${\mu }_{\nu }<0$, the distribution of neutrinos themselves is exponentially suppressed, and the antineutrinos, with positive chemical potential, form the degenerate sea. In either case the degenerate neutrino and antineutrino energy density isThus the formula with $|{\mu }_{\nu }|$ describes the dominant member of the pair, or their leading total, rather than the named neutrino distribution for both signs. No extra factor of two is present: only one member is densely occupied. Additional populated internal states multiply the result by their degeneracy.

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.

A collisionless relativistic species redshifts with $T_{\nu }\propto a^{-1}$. The coupled plasma instead obeys cosmological entropy conservation, $g_{\ast s}{T}^3{a}^3=\mathrm{constant}$, and is heated relative to a decoupled species as massive particles annihilate. The effective number of relativistic energy degrees of freedom $g_{\ast }$ and effective number of relativistic entropy degrees of freedom $g_{\ast s}$ coincide while all species share a common relativistic temperature. Use $g_d:=g_{\ast s}(T_{\mathrm{dec}})\simeq 100$ for the Standard Model bath, excluding the already decoupled extra species.

Just before ordinary neutrino decoupling, the coupled bath contains two photon states, four Electron/Positron states and six ordinary neutrino/antineutrino states. ThereforeThe extra-neutrino temperature relative to that bath is then $(43/(4g_d){)}^{1/3}$. After the ordinary neutrinos decouple, Electron/Positron annihilation heats only the photon bath: its entropy count changes from $2+(7/8)4=11/2$ to $2$. Both neutrino populations miss that last heating, soThis is the two-stage entropy dilution of an early-decoupled neutrino. Numerically $T_{\nu ,0}\simeq 6.8\times 10^{-14}\mathrm{GeV}$. Relative to ordinary relic neutrinos it is cooler by $(43/(4g_d){)}^{1/3}\simeq 0.48$.

Let $g_{\nu }$ count the extra neutrino's populated helicity and antiparticle states. For one conventional neutrino plus antineutrino species $g_{\nu }=2$, the same state count as photons. The Fermi-Dirac distribution supplies the $3/4$ number-density factor, soThus a two-state species has about $2.9\%$ of the photon number density. Stating $g_{\nu }$ explicitly also covers a different choice of populated states.

The effective number of relativistic energy degrees of freedom count two photon polarizations, four electron/positron spin states, and six neutrino/antineutrino states, with the Fermi-Dirac distribution factor $7/8$ for fermions. Treating these species as relativistic and at a common temperature gives $\boxed{g_{\ast }=2+(7/8)(4+6)=10.75}$.

The mass-equivalent radiation mass density is $\rho =({\pi }^2/30)g_{\ast }(k_{B}T{)}^4/({\hslash }^3{c}^5)$. Therefore the Friedmann equation givesAt $T_0=10^{10}\mathrm{K}$, $H_0\simeq 0.503{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. Equating the specified weak interaction rate to $H_0(T/T_0{)}^2$ gives $(T_{\ast }/T_0{)}^3=H_0/(1{\mathrm{s}}^{-1})$ and henceThe approximate equilibrium neutron-to-proton ratio, neglecting chemical potentials, is $r_{\ast }\simeq \exp [-(m_n-m_p)c^2/(k_B{T}_{\ast })]$, about $0.152$ using the mass difference $1.293\mathrm{MeV}$. This is a freeze-out estimate rather than a detailed reaction-network computation.

After weak cosmological weak freeze-out, free neutrons undergo beta-minus decay; neutrinos decouple, and electron-positron annihilation heats the photons relative to the neutrinos. Initially the abundant energetic photons destroy deuterium almost as soon as it forms. Once the deuterium bottleneck ends, nuclear reactions rapidly pass through deuterium, tritium and helium-three to helium-4. Reactions eventually become too slow compared with cosmic expansion; nearly all surviving neutrons are bound in helium-four. Its mass fraction is approximately $Y_4=2r/(1+r)$, where $r$ is evaluated when nuclear assembly begins.

Increasing $g_{\ast }$ increases the Hubble parameter, raises $T_{\ast }$, increases the freeze-out neutron-to-proton ratio, and leaves less time for free-neutron decay after freeze-out. Both effects increase $Y_4$; decreasing $g_{\ast }$ reverses them. Most deuterium is only an intermediate product and is burned into helium, so its residual abundance and its absolute change are tiny compared with the helium mass fraction. This does not imply a negligible fractional change in residual deuterium. Faster expansion also shortens the time available to burn it, and its relative abundance can be appreciably sensitive to extra radiation. The distinction matters when interpreting the final wording of the question; joint deuterium and helium abundances constrain extra relativistic species, as discussed in the Particle Data Group nucleosynthesis review.

Let $f(\mathbf{p})d^{3}p$ be particle number per unit volume in a momentum element, including the spin-state count in $f$. This is the local momentum part of a phase-space distribution function, normalized by the number density $n=\int f(\mathbf{p})d^{3}p$. For an isotropic distribution with particle energy $E(p)=\sqrt{m^2{c}^4+p^2{c}^2}$, the kinetic pressure of an isotropic gas is the average momentum flux:The kinetic energy density, explicitly excluding rest mass, isFor $p\ll mc$, $E-m{c}^2=p^2/(2m)$ and $\mathbf{v}=\mathbf{p}/m$, giving $P=2u_{\mathrm{kin}}/3$. For $p\gg mc$, $E\simeq pc$ and $v\simeq c$, giving $P\simeq u_{\mathrm{kin}}/3$. ThusNeither relation assumes a Maxwellian distribution. At intermediate momenta neither constant ratio is exact, and anisotropic distributions require a pressure tensor rather than this scalar pressure.

For a classical Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, $f=n(2\pi m{k}_{B}T{)}^{-3/2}\exp [-p^2/(2m{k}_{B}T)]$. Three Gaussian component integrals give $⟨p^2⟩=3m{k}_{B}T$, so the ideal gas hasIn a fully ionized mixture, sum over independent species to obtain $P_{\mathrm{gas}}=\rho k_{B}T/({\mu }_{\mathrm{mol}}{m}_u)$, where the mean molecular weight counts ions and free Electrons. This excludes partial-ionization and interaction corrections. A dilute classical ultrarelativistic gas still has $P=n{k}_{B}T$ but $u_{\mathrm{kin}}\simeq 3n{k}_{B}T$; its momentum distribution is proportional to $e^{-pc/(k_{B}T)}$ instead of the nonrelativistic Gaussian.

For a thermal photon gas, the two polarization states and zero photon chemical potential give the Planck photon distributionUse $x=pc/(k_{B}T)$ and ${\int }_0^{\infty }{x}^3/(e^x-1)dx={\pi }^4/15$. The radiation constant and photon equation of state are thereforeLikewise $n_{\gamma }=2\zeta (3)(k_{B}T/\hslash c{)}^3/{\pi }^2$. Unlike a gas with a fixed particle number, photons do not have pressure proportional to baryonic mass density.

For fully degenerate Electrons, the Fermi-Dirac distribution becomes a filled momentum sphere with two spin states. Counting them gives the Fermi momentumHere ${\mu }_e$ is the mean molecular weight per electron. The equation of state of a cold electron gas follows by integrating momentum flux up to $p_F$:Its two limits areThe corresponding kinetic energy densities are $3n_e[p_F^2/(2m_e)]/5$ and $3n_e{p}_{F}c/4$, respectively. Thus in the high-density relativistic limit the Electron pressure scales as ${\rho }^{4/3}$ and is nearly independent of temperature. This is the ideal noninteracting, fixed-composition Electron result, not a universal equation of state at nuclear densities where captures, interactions and the composition change.

The boundaries on a stellar equation-of-state regime diagram concern the Electron component. Define the electron relativistic density threshold and thermal electron relativistic threshold byA degenerate Electron gas is nonrelativistic well below ${\rho }_{\ast }$ and ultrarelativistic well above it: this is an approximately vertical division on a log-density plot. A nondegenerate Electron gas instead becomes thermally relativistic near $T_{\ast }$: this is an approximately horizontal division. The regimes have broad crossovers rather than a discontinuity at either line.

The exact electron Fermi temperature, subtracting Electron rest energy, isFor Electrons with negligible thermal pairs, strong degeneracy requires $T\ll T_F$, whereas $T\gg T_F$ gives a nondegenerate gas. In the pair-rich regime the actual Electron and Positron distributions must instead be treated with their chemical potentials, as discussed below. The two limiting degeneracy boundaries areThese slopes $2/3$ and $1/3$ explain the bent degeneracy boundary on the logarithmic graph. A thermal-wavelength test $n_e[2\pi {\hslash }^2/(m_e{k}_{B}T){]}^{3/2}\sim 2$ gives the same nonrelativistic density/temperature scaling, with an order-one definition of the crossover.

The radiation-to-gas pressure boundary in the nondegenerate fully ionized regime isRadiation dominates above this line. Once Electrons are strongly degenerate, compare radiation pressure with $P_e(\rho )$ instead of continuing the ideal-gas comparison into that regime. The radiation-to-degeneracy pressure boundary is $T=[3P_e(\rho )/a_{\mathrm{rad}}{]}^{1/4}$, with logarithmic slopes $5/12$ and $1/3$ in the nonrelativistic and ultrarelativistic limits. Degeneracy of the Electrons and dominance of their pressure are distinct criteria.

For the pair curve, distinguish baryonic net Electrons from thermally created Electrons and Positrons. Chemical equilibrium with photons requires opposite Electron/Positron chemical potentials when the one-particle energy includes rest energy, as in the distributions below. At low temperature and low degeneracy the zero-chemical-potential density per charge species isCharge neutrality gives $n_{-}-n_{+}=n_b=\rho /({\mu }_e{m}_u)$, while the nondegenerate equilibrium product is $n_{-}{n}_{+}=n_0^2$. HencePairs become important when $n_0$ is comparable with or exceeds $n_b$, approximately the electron-positron thermal pair abundance curve ${\rho }_{\mathrm{pair}}(T)={\mu }_e{m}_u{n}_0(T)$. Below its density at a fixed temperature, pairs dominate over the net charge Electrons. The exponential makes the low-temperature portion steep in a log-log plot. For ${\mu }_e=2$, the full zero-potential integral gives approximate pair-marker densities $1.80\times 10^3\mathrm{g}\mathrm{c}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$ at $10^9\mathrm{K}$ and $7.52\times 10^5\mathrm{g}\mathrm{c}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$ at $3\times 10^9\mathrm{K}$. At relativistic temperature use the full zero-chemical-potential Fermi-Dirac distribution instead; it gives $n_0\to [3\zeta (3)/(2{\pi }^2)](k_{B}T/\hslash c{)}^3$, so the high-temperature pair curve approaches slope three in log-density versus log-temperature. Strong net-electron degeneracy suppresses Positrons and requires the full chemical-potential-dependent distribution.

The original diagram uses fully ionized helium, ${\mu }_e=2$ and ${\mu }_{\mathrm{mol}}=4/3$, only to set numerical locations. It plots the full $T_F$ curve and the zero-chemical-potential pair integral, rather than extending their asymptotes into the crossover. The pair boundary is deliberately an approximate abundance marker, not a phase transition; at high temperature the nonrelativistic ion approximation and fixed-composition model also have limits. For $T\gg T_{\ast }$ with abundant nondegenerate pairs, the combined Electron/Positron energy density is $7a_{\mathrm{rad}}{T}^4/4$, so photons plus pairs have $u=11a_{\mathrm{rad}}{T}^4/4$ and $P=u/3$. Real stellar matter adds Coulomb effects, partial ionization, nuclear reactions and, at sufficiently high density, nuclear-matter physics beyond the ideal regime map.