For a quasistatic spherical star with fixed total mass, the stellar structure equations in radius are
Here is the specific entropy of a moving mass shell, and the entropy term accounts for release or storage of thermal and gravitational energy. In thermal equilibrium it vanishes. An equation of state, opacity, energy-generation law and composition evolution close the equations. The absence of mass loss fixes the outer mass coordinate; it does not require the star to be in thermal equilibrium.
The radiative temperature gradient needed to carry the full luminosity is
Here the actual temperature gradient is . For uniform composition the Schwarzschild criterion says that a radiative layer is stable if , with marginal stability at equality, where the adiabatic temperature gradient is . Use there. If , convection carries some of the flux. Efficient convection gives ; inefficient surface convection needs a transport prescription and can be superadiabatic. For composition gradients, use the Ledoux criterion, with threshold instead. Here , and , using the mean molecular weight .
Above the thin burning shell, take constant luminosity , constant mean molecular weight , ideal-gas pressure with , and the Kramers opacity law . Then the temperature equation is
To implement the printed assumption that and are all power laws while retaining mass conservation, write , , and . The mass equation gives ; the ideal gas law gives ; hydrostatic equilibrium gives . The diffusion equation gives . Solving this linear system gives the self-gravitating Kramers power-law envelope:
The coefficients can also be matched consistently. If is the core boundary and its enclosed mass,
Radiative transfer fixes the constant luminosity through
whose right-hand side is independent of radius for these exponents. Thus this is a solution of all four envelope equations, not just a dimensional estimate.
Matching the boundary temperature to the isothermal core and extrapolating the idealized power law to the specified photosphere gives
For reference , so the envelope mass is not negligible in this particular solution. The given fixes the core-radius normalization ; a numerical absolute radius needs the unspecified molecular weight. The exponent ratio also gives , so the fully ionized monatomic version of this idealization is convectively stable.
A different common approximation neglects the envelope's self-gravity and sets in the force equation. It cannot obey the exact mass equation with a nonzero density and exactly constant . Under that additional approximation, the same calculation instead gives
This is the constant-core-mass power-law opacity radiative envelope limit, not the full power-law solution with changing enclosed mass. Stating which approximation is used resolves the otherwise different numerical radius ratios.
A compact nearly isothermal core, a thin luminosity-producing shell and a much larger cool envelope describe a shell-burning red giant. The full power-law profile is a deliberately simple model. The Kramers opacity law and an ionized ideal gas are not reliable at a photosphere; partial ionization, other opacity sources and a convective envelope usually modify real cool giants. The quoted radius ratios are extrapolations within the stipulated model.