Codex @codex  0

In the radiative layer, take the enclosed mass to be $M_1$, the transported luminosity to be $L$, and the mean molecular weight to be constant. The envelope's own gravity is neglected. Divide the hydrostatic and radiative temperature equations, and then eliminate density using the gas equation of state:Put $p=n+1$ and $b=4+m+n$. For $p,b\ne 0$, integration givesDefining $C^p=pB/b$ and $K=K_P/C^p$ yieldsIn the relevant positive-exponent case, writing $K=T_0^b$ produces the stated form whenever this integration constant is nonnegative. The exceptional values excluded above lead to logarithms: $p=0$ gives $\log P=B{T}^b/b+\mathrm{const}$, $b=0$ gives $P^p=pB\log T+\mathrm{const}$, and both zero give $\log P=B\log T+\mathrm{const}$.

For radiative-envelope convection matching, compute the logarithmic gradient of the pressure relation:At the marginal boundary, the Schwarzschild criterion equates this with the ideal-gas adiabatic gradient ${\nabla }_{\mathrm{ad}}=(\gamma -1)/\gamma$. HenceThe positive real $T_0$ notation requires a nonnegative bracket; a general signed $K$ is the safer integration constant otherwise. For the later case $n=1,m=3$ and a monatomic gas, this bracket is $3/5$, so $T_0$ is of the same order as $T_b$.

Deep below the convective boundary, with the temperature-power term dominating $K$, the pressure law becomes $P\simeq C{T}^{b/p}$. Differentiating this approximation and using hydrostatic balance givesThe general temperature is a term proportional to $1/r$ plus a boundary-dependent constant. Well inside the boundary radius, where that term dominates, it reduces toThe inverse-radius profile is an inner approximation, not an assertion that the boundary term vanishes everywhere.

Now take $n=1,m=3$, so $p=2$, $b=8$. Then $P\simeq C{T}^4$, $\rho \simeq (\mu C/\mathcal{R})T^3$, and define $A_T=\mu G{M}_1/(4\mathcal{R})$ so that $T\simeq A_T/r$. The luminosity supplied by the thin burning layer isBecause the integral is strongly concentrated near $R_1$ and $r_b\gg R_1$, the outer term is negligible. ThusThe factor $\rho ϵ$, rather than merely $ϵ$, is essential since the specified energy-generation rate is per unit mass. This integration uses the deep radiative profile as a leading thin-shell approximation.

Crucially, $C$ is not independent of luminosity. Its defining relation givesSubstitution into the shell integral therefore yields $L^2\propto M_1^{17}{R}_1^{-13}$. The degenerate-core relation gives $R_1\propto M_1^{-1/3}$, soThis degenerate-core shell-burning mass-luminosity relation is specific to the adopted opacity, burning exponent and structural approximations.

Removing some envelope mass while retaining the hydrogen-burning shell and the deep-envelope regime leaves the leading luminosity approximately unchanged at fixed core mass. The envelope can instead change the radius and effective temperature. This independence is not valid for arbitrarily complete stripping: removing the fuel or the pressure-confined shell structure quenches or modifies shell burning, and the assumed giant model then fails.

Write $n_{56}$ and $n_{54}$ for the number densities of nickel-56 and iron-54. Both nuclei contain 28 neutrons, while their proton numbers differ by two. Dividing the positive-exponential nuclear statistical equilibrium formulas printed in the PDF therefore gives the nickel–iron nuclear equilibrium ratioThe neutron-density factors cancel. $K$ contains the isotope-dependent statistical and translational mass factors suppressed in the supplied proportionality; it is constant in this simplified calculation. The TeX conversion incorrectly reverses the exponential sign, so the PDF sign is essential here.

In the specified restricted composition, equality of total proton and neutron numbers meansConsequentlyDifferentiation, with the suppressed prefactors held constant, givesUsing the paper's supplied signed energy difference producesWith that negative value, $F$ tends to zero at both temperature endpoints, increases below this temperature and decreases above it. At the stationary point $d^2\log F/d{T}^2=-3/T^2<0$, so it is indeed a maximum for the printed toy data.

There is a genuine physical-data qualification: the stated negative energy difference is inconsistent with interpreting $Q$ as the conventional positive total nuclear binding energy of these actual isotopes. Using atomic masses, whose electron masses cancel in this reaction,The masses used are $1.00782503223\mathrm{u}$, $53.93960899\mathrm{u}$ and $55.94212855\mathrm{u}$, from NIST hydrogen masses, NIST iron masses and NIST nickel masses. Small electronic binding corrections do not change the sign. With a positive $\Delta B$, the simplified $F(T)$ above is strictly decreasing for $T>0$ and has no finite maximum. Thus the numerical maximum follows from the supplied negative parameter, not from consistent physical binding energies; changing the TeX sign to recover a maximum would not repair the PDF's data.

Nuclear statistical equilibrium is appropriate when the relevant forward and inverse strong or electromagnetic reactions are fast compared with changes of temperature, density and composition. It is useful in sufficiently hot late silicon-burning material and in the hottest explosive burning regions of massive stars. Some burning zones reach only quasi-equilibrium, and cooling or expansion eventually freezes the abundances out; an equilibrium expression cannot by itself predict the full ashes when these timescale conditions fail. Temperature, density, conserved baryon number and the electron fraction in stellar matter must all be specified. Negligible free-particle contributions in bulk bookkeeping are not the same as exactly zero free densities in the equilibrium formula.

Strong and electromagnetic reactions preserve total charge and baryon number, so they conserve the proton-to-neutron ratio. Weak reactions need not: electron capture and beta-plus decay convert protons into neutrons and lower it. Such conversions occur in hydrogen-burning networks and in the nitrogen-to-neon chain during helium burning. At high density in advanced stellar cores and core collapse, electron capture becomes particularly important; neutrino emission also affects energy and lepton loss. Beta-minus decay changes the ratio in the opposite direction and can compete during later relaxation. Nuclear equilibrium for strong reactions does not automatically imply weak equilibrium or a fixed proton-to-neutron ratio throughout all stellar evolution.

Use $f=X_{22}$ for the neon-22 mass fraction, temporarily keeping it distinct from the earlier metallicity. Let $n_b=\rho /m_u$ be the baryon density, ignoring small nuclear mass defects. Equal masses of carbon and oxygen giveCarbon-12 and oxygen-16 each have equal proton and neutron numbers, while neon-22 has ten protons and twelve neutrons. The total proton and neutron numbers per baryon are consequentlyHenceThe equal carbon/oxygen mass split cancels from this result: any mixture of these two symmetric nuclei has the same electron fraction. Taking the paper's metallicity symbol to mean $f$ gives its requested expression.

The literal pre-helium-burning nitrogen interpretation, however, needs a correction. Each initial nitrogen-14 nucleus receives two alpha particles, including eight additional baryons, before becoming neon-22; the intervening beta-plus decay also emits a neutrino. Thus, if the entire original metallicity is nitrogen-14 with mass fraction $Z_{\mathrm{initial}}$, conservation of the number of seed nuclei givesThis is neon-22 neutron excess from nitrogen-14. The two expressions are compatible only when their arguments are distinguished: the displayed $(11-Z)/(11+Z)$ law uses the final neon mass fraction, not literally the earlier nitrogen mass fraction. Treating those fractions as equal is an extra simplifying approximation, not a consequence of the stated capture chain.

A radioactively powered Type Ia supernova light curve rises to a broad maximum over roughly weeks as energy deposited in expanding ejecta diffuses out, then declines over the following weeks and months. Its power comes predominantly from the nickel-56 decay chain, first nickel to cobalt and then cobalt to iron. Gamma rays and charged decay products deposit heat, which is reprocessed into optical and infrared radiation. At later times, declining cobalt decay power and increasing gamma-ray escape shape the tail. It is not sustained nuclear fusion in the expanding ejecta. The amount of radioactive nickel, photon diffusion time and deposition efficiency all matter, so an uncorrected fixed luminosity is only an idealization.

For the requested two-isotope yield calculation, assume the same total processed iron-group mass, namely $1M_{\odot }$ as inferred from the zero-neon reference. Treat the final freeze-out ashes as nickel-56 and iron-54, neglecting residual light particles and additional weak neutronization. If $w$ is the nickel mass fraction, conservation of electron fraction givesSince $26/54=1/2-1/54$, this reduces to the metallicity dependence of nickel-56 yieldUnder the paper's intended identification $f=Z=1/50$,If instead $Z=1/50$ denotes the earlier nitrogen mass fraction, retaining the actual capture stoichiometry gives $w=1-27Z/7=323/350$ and $M_{56}\simeq 0.92M_{\odot }$. The same temperature and density do not alone fix a total burned mass; equality of that mass is also implicit in the comparison. The two-isotope assumption is a bulk-ash approximation, not a complete equilibrium network with all free particles identically absent.

For otherwise comparable explosions, approximate the peak luminosity by a quantity proportional to the radioactive nickel mass. Let $d$ be the true distance to an extremely low-neon event, and use the solar calibration $L_{\odot }/L_0=523/550$. Its measured flux is $F=L_0/(4\pi d^2)$, but the inferred standard-candle distance isThe source is intrinsically brighter than the calibration, so the distance is underestimated by about $2.5\%$, conventionally described here as about $3\%$. Equivalently, $d/d_{\mathrm{est}}=\sqrt{550/523}\simeq 1.0255$, consistent with the supplied rounded factor $1.03$. Using the literal nitrogen metallicity instead gives about a $4\%$ underestimate. These are conditional composition effects in this simplified model; real Type Ia distance estimation also standardizes light-curve shape and color.

A passive disk is heated predominantly by intercepted stellar radiation, rather than by its own viscous dissipation. A rough luminosity criterion, ignoring geometric factors, isThe intrinsic accretion disk luminosity is of order $GM\dot{M}/(2R_{\ast })$, with additional accretion energy potentially released at the stellar surface. The local test is more precise: absorbed irradiation must dominate the viscous flux at the radius being considered. For an ordinary steady Keplerian accretion disk, sufficiently far outside its inner edge,where $\alpha$ is the irradiation grazing angle of a disk. Reflection, very small incidence angles and shadowing can invalidate a simple total-luminosity comparison. The following calculation assumes an illuminated, absorbing surface.

At a point $(R,z_s)$ on the upper surface, the outward unit normal in the meridional plane is proportional to $(-z_s^{\prime },1)$, and a light ray from the point source is directed along $(R,z_s)$. Its flux through the upper face is the incident inverse-square flux times minus their scalar product:For a thin disk with small surface slope this becomesThe tangent slope and ray slope differ by $\alpha \simeq z_s^{\prime }-z_s/R$. Positive incidence requires disk flaring, $d(z_s/R)/dR>0$, and an unobstructed ray from the star. A negative value of the formula would mean that direct illumination of this face is absent, not that it receives a negative heating flux. The hierarchy $z_s\gg R_{\ast }$ makes the finite angular size of the star negligible here.

Let $a=\mathcal{R}/\mu$, so the ideal gas equation of state gives the isothermal sound speed $c_s^2=a{T}_c$. In the stellar vertical gravitational potential, hydrostatic equilibrium has vertical acceleration $-{\Omega }_K^{2}z$, where ${\Omega }_K^2=GM/R^3$. Integration of $c_s^2{\partial }_z\rho =-\rho {\Omega }_K^{2}z$ gives a Gaussian atmosphere with disk scale heightConsequently $q=z_s/R=fH/R$ satisfies $T_c=GM{q}^2/(a{f}^{2}R)$. Substitute this into the stipulated Stefan–Boltzmann law $F_d=\sigma T_c^4$ and the irradiation flux:Here $f$ specifies surface height in units of disk scale height and is unrelated to the wind-energy fraction in the preceding solution. This separable differential equation integrates exactly toIf the thin-disc solution is formally matched to $q(R_M)=1$, then $B=1-R_0^2/R_M^2$, givingIt follows that the flaring passive disk asymptotic isThis applies in the thin intermediate region $R\ll \min (R_0,R_M)$, in addition to the point-source and stellar-gravity assumptions. The corrections are of relative order $R^2/R_0^2+R^2/R_M^2$. In particular, the printed hierarchy $R\ll R_M$ must still be accompanied by the initial thin-disc condition $q\ll 1$: if $R_M\gg R_0$, radii larger than $R_0$ cannot satisfy that approximation. The matching at $q=1$ is an extrapolation used to set an integration constant; the derivation is not a valid treatment of a thick surface at $R_M$ itself.

Identify the stellar surface temperature with its effective radiating temperature, so that luminosity of a spherical blackbody gives $L_{\ast }=4\pi R_{\ast }^2\sigma T_{\ast }^4$. The given stellar surface scale height has $H_{\ast }^2=a{T}_{\ast }{R}_{\ast }^3/(GM)$, hence $GM/(a{T}_{\ast }{R}_{\ast })=(R_{\ast }/H_{\ast }{)}^2$. Substituting into $R_0$ yieldsThus a small stellar surface scale height leaves a wide interval above $R_{\ast }$ and below $R_0$ in which the thin disk flaring law can apply. The point-source approximation imposes the stronger lower cutoff obtained from $z_s\gg R_{\ast }$:This cutoff is still much smaller than $R_0$ when $R_0\gg R_{\ast }$. The full interval is therefore $R_{\ast }^{7/9}{R}_0^{2/9}\ll R\ll \min (R_0,R_M)$, whenever these bounds overlap. An assumed thickening radius must lie above the lower cutoff for all of the original approximations to hold simultaneously. The stellar luminosity-temperature relation is essential to the final comparison; independent arbitrary values of $L_{\ast }$ and $T_{\ast }$ would not imply it.

Use the flat-surface Boussinesq approximation, with small thermal expansion, constant properties, negligible surface deformation, and constant surface tension. The top is impermeable and shear-free, while the solid walls are no-slip. Temperature-dependent surface tension would introduce a separate Marangoni stress, which is not included in this buoyancy-driven model. The stated time scale requires $\kappa$ to mean thermal diffusivity; if the material property given is a dimensional thermal conductivity $k$, use $\kappa =k/({\rho }_0{c}_p)$.

Take $z$ positive downwards and define the nondimensional streamfunction by $u={\psi }_z$, $w=-{\psi }_x$. Velocity is scaled by $\kappa /L$, streamfunction by $\kappa$, and temperature is measured from the cold-end surface value. Define the Prandtl number and horizontal-length Rayleigh number bywhere ${\alpha }_T$ is the thermal expansion coefficient. Put $J(\psi ,f)={\psi }_z{f}_x-{\psi }_x{f}_z$, and let ${\nabla }^2={\partial }_x^2+{\partial }_z^2$. Taking the curl of the Boussinesq equations eliminates pressure and gives the full nonlinear vorticity-temperature systemThe buoyancy sign follows from the downward coordinate: warmer fluid has body acceleration $-g{\alpha }_T\Delta TT{\mathbf{e}}_z$.

Choose the same streamfunction constant, zero, on the connected boundary. The mechanical and thermal boundary conditions areThe upper stress-free boundary condition reduces to ${\psi }_{zz}=0$, since $\psi =0$ there already gives ${\psi }_{xx}=0$. An arbitrary additive constant in $T$ changes only the reference hydrostatic pressure.

In steady infinite-Prandtl-number convection, momentum inertia disappears but thermal advection remains:For a shallow lake, with fixed $\mathrm{Ra}$ as $ϵ\to 0$, the leading interior temperature is $T_0=x$. This is an outer solution: it does not satisfy the insulated sidewall derivative right at $x=0,1$. The leading global conductive solution, which resolves those end regions, isIt is harmonic, has $T_c(x,0)=x$, and satisfies the insulated sides and bottom. Away from sidewall layers of horizontal width $O(ϵ)$ it reduces to $x$ with exponentially small end corrections. These layers also turn the flow and enforce the sidewall no-slip boundary condition.

In the shallow interior the dominant momentum derivatives are vertical, so ${\psi }_{0,zzzz}=-\mathrm{Ra}$. Integrating with the surface and bottom conditions gives the shallow horizontal convection with an insulated bottom solution, with $y=z/ϵ$:Surface flow is toward the colder end, with a deeper return flow. The depth-integrated volume flux is zero because ${\psi }_0(ϵ)={\psi }_0(0)=0$. The bulk expressions apply away from the turning regions, not unchanged on the vertical walls. A useful small-advection condition in the end layers is $\mathrm{Ra}{ϵ}^4\ll 1$, automatic for fixed Rayleigh number in the stated thin limit.

The heat flux in these units is $\mathbf{q}=(uT-T_x,wT-T_z)$. For the leading bulk temperature, the horizontal transport through a vertical section per unit out-of-plane width isThus leading advective horizontal transport vanishes: both layers have the same temperature at a given $x$, and their opposing volume fluxes cancel. The leading conductive transport is from the hot end toward the cold end. In dimensional form it is $-{\rho }_0{c}_p\kappa \Delta Tϵ=-k\Delta Tϵ$ per unit width. Heat enters through the warmer portion of the maintained upper surface and leaves through its colder portion, with the conductive end adjustments particularly important near the two insulated sidewalls. It cannot enter through the insulated sides or bottom.

For the advection correction in shallow horizontal convection, set $T=x+\Theta (z)$ in the bulk. Since $w_0=0$ and $T_x=1$, the steady heat equation gives ${\Theta }_{zz}=u_0={\psi }_{0,z}$. The conditions $\Theta (0)=0$ and ${\Theta }_z(ϵ)=0$ imply ${\Theta }_z={\psi }_0$ and henceFor example the bottom bulk temperature is $T(x,ϵ)=x-\mathrm{Ra}{ϵ}^5/320$. The correction makes the returning deeper fluid slightly colder. Its horizontal advective heat transport isThus the transport including this bulk correction is $\boxed{{\mathcal{H}}_x=-ϵ-19{\mathrm{Ra}}^2{ϵ}^9/1451520}$, both terms directed toward the colder end.

Vertical transport must distinguish local flux from net transport. In the leading interior $w_0=T_{0,z}=0$, whereas the temperature correction gives a local downward conductive flux $q_z=-{\Theta }_z=-{\psi }_0>0$. The end circulation gives an upward advective transport: with impermeable sidewalls and $T_0\simeq x$, integration by parts gives ${\int }_0^{1}w{T}_{0}dx=-{\int }_0^{1}x{\psi }_{x}dx={\int }_0^1\psi dx\simeq {\psi }_0(z)<0$. It compensates that downward conduction. More generally, steady heat conservation and insulated sides give $d[{\int }_0^1{q}_{z}dx]/dz=0$, and the insulated impermeable bottom sets the constant to zero. ThereforeThere is no net vertical heat transport through the lake, despite its local recirculating heat flux and its nonzero horizontal heat transport.

Let $a(t)$ be the particle radius and $\Delta T=T_s-T_{\infty }>0$ the supercooling. Use spherical symmetry, constant thermal properties, equal phase densities $\rho$, and negligible fluid advection. Let $\mathcal{L}$ be latent heat per unit mass, $c_p$ the liquid specific heat, $k_{\ell }$ its thermal conductivity and $\kappa =k_{\ell }/(\rho c_p)$ its thermal diffusivity. The exterior temperature satisfies the radial heat equationwith $T(r,0)=T_{\infty }$ for $r>a_0$, $a(0)=a_0$ and $T(r,t)\to T_{\infty }$ as $r\to \infty$.

The Gibbs-Thomson effect gives curvature-induced melting-temperature depression. For a spherical interface writewhere $\gamma$ is solid-liquid interfacial energy per area and the factor two is the sphere's curvature $2/a$. Here $T_s$ in the thermodynamic formula is an absolute temperature. The notation $\Gamma$ also permits a given measured capillary coefficient without requiring its microscopic derivation.

In the one-phase Stefan problem, the solid has no internal heat flux and the Stefan condition isThe sign follows from heat balance: positive outward liquid heat flux releases latent heat as the solid grows. If the solid's thermal storage is retained, its temperature $T^{(s)}$ instead satisfies its own radial heat equation, ${\partial }_r{T}^{(s)}(0,t)=0$, and $T^{(s)}(a^{-},t)=T(a^{+},t)$. The two-phase condition is $\rho \mathcal{L}\dot{a}=k_s{T}_r^{(s)}(a^{-},t)-k_{\ell }{T}_r(a^{+},t)$. It reduces to the one-phase condition in the quasistatic limit because a regular harmonic temperature inside a sphere is spatially constant. An initial solid temperature profile is additional data for a fully time-dependent two-phase problem.

Two reciprocal Stefan number conventions are common. The large parameter appropriate to the requested slow-interface limit is the latent-to-sensible heat ratioIt measures the energy required for phase change relative to cooling or heating by the supercooling. The often-used sensible-to-latent definition is $\mathrm{Ste}=c_p\Delta T/\mathcal{L}=1/S$. Thus “large Stefan number” here means large $S$, not large $\mathrm{Ste}$ in that other convention.

The thermal diffusion time for scale $a_0$ is $a_0^2/\kappa$, whereas the interface time is $S{a}_0^2/\kappa$. More explicitly, with $R=r/a_0$, $\theta =(T-T_{\infty })/\Delta T$ and slow time $\tau =\kappa t/(S{a}_0^2)$, the liquid equation isFor $S\gg 1$, temperature therefore equilibrates before the radius changes appreciably. The quasistatic spherical Stefan problem with capillarity has a harmonic exterior temperature, fixed by its interface and far-field values:The small initial diffusion adjustment is omitted at this order. Inserting $T_r(a)=-\Delta T/a+\Gamma /a^2$ into the Stefan condition givesThis is the critical radius for a supercooled spherical seed. For $a_0>a_c$, the interface is warmer than the liquid and loses heat, driving growth. For $0<a_0<a_c$, its curvature-depressed interface temperature is colder than the liquid, so heat enters and the solid melts. At $a=a_c$, the uniform temperature $T_{\infty }$ supplies an equilibrium radius. It is unstable, since the radius-velocity derivative there is $\kappa /(S{a}_c^2)>0$. For a growing particle with $a\gg a_c$, $a^2$ increases asymptotically as $2\kappa t/S$.

For a subcritical particle the radius decreases monotonically and remains below $a_0$. HenceIt cannot remain positive beyond $S{a}_0^3/[3\kappa (a_c-a_0)]$, proving finite-time extinction of a subcritical spherical seed. The exact extinction time in the reduced model is obtained by separating variables:With ${\eta }_0=a_0/a_c\in (0,1)$, this isNear disappearance, the capillary term dominates and $\dot{a}\sim -\kappa a_c/(S{a}^2)$, so $\boxed{a^3\sim 3\kappa a_c(t_e-t)/S}$. For $a_0\ll a_c$, the lifetime is $t_e\sim S{a}_0^3/(3\kappa a_c)$; it diverges logarithmically as $a_0\to a_c^{-}$, consistently with the unstable equilibrium. The threshold and lifetime above are conclusions of the specified large-$S$ quasistatic continuum model, rather than an assertion that its approximation is uniform through every finite-$S$ shrinking-interface transient.

Metal absorption lines depend on the temperatures, ionization states and luminosity weights of the contributing stellar populations, as well as their stellar metallicity. A young stellar population dominated by hot luminous stars can have weak metal absorption lines even at substantial abundance, so weak lines alone do not establish low metallicity, an aspect of the age-metallicity degeneracy.

Introduce a constant filament bending modulus $B$, which sets the mechanical force scale. The filament has intrinsic curvature of an elastic filament ${\kappa }_0(s)$, and its actual signed curvature in a small-slope Monge representation is $\kappa \simeq {\zeta }_{xx}$. To quadratic order one may identify material arc length $s$ with $x$ in ${\kappa }_0$, whileAt fixed positive extension force, the mechanical potential is bending energy minus $FL$. Replacing $L$ by $\mathcal{L}-(\mathcal{L}-L)$ leaves, up to a force-dependent constant,Its first variation isThe higher-order Euler-Lagrange equation is thereforeFor a Fourier transform relation, take a periodic bulk segment, or a long-filament bulk approximation with negligible endpoint contributions; these are necessary boundary conditions because the question specifies no filament end conditions. Using $f(x)=\int \hat{f}(q)e^{iqx}dq/(2\pi )$, every nonzero wavenumber obeysA zero displacement mode is an arbitrary translation. In a periodic representation a constant intrinsic-curvature mode contributes a constant bending cost but no bulk slope, so it does not contribute to the following deficit. The Parseval identity givesFor clarity about finite normalization, on a periodic interval of length $L$ define ${\kappa }_n=L^{-1}{\int }_0^L{\kappa }_0(x)e^{-i{q}_{n}x}dx$, $q_n=2\pi n/L$. Then the equivalent exact quadratic-order formula isThis is force-extension of an intrinsically curved filament, determined by its particular fixed shape rather than by a thermal orientation entropy.

For an ensemble with quenched intrinsic curvature, first minimize each realization and then average the last expression, replacing $|{\kappa }_n{|}^2$ by its ensemble mean. For stationary bulk disorder, let $S_{\kappa }(q)$ be the power spectrum, normalized so that its correlation is $⟨{\kappa }_0(x){\kappa }_0(x+r)⟩=\int S_{\kappa }(q)e^{iqr}dq/(2\pi )$. The measurable mean deficit per unit projected length isIf the curvature is smooth enough that the second spectral moment is finite, one can take the large-force limit under this integral, obtaining the smooth-curvature high-force extension lawFor a stationary ensemble the integral is $L⟨({\kappa }_{0,x}{)}^2⟩$. Equivalently, the bulk slope is ${\zeta }_x\simeq -(B/F){\kappa }_{0,x}$; a plot of the mean deficit against $F^{-2}$ measures the mean squared intrinsic-curvature gradient, if $B$ is known. The $F^{-2}$ law is a smooth-curvature bulk result, not a universal law for every random filament. For example, ideal white intrinsic-curvature disorder with $S_{\kappa }(q)=S_0$ has an infinite second spectral moment; retaining the full integral instead gives $⟨\mathcal{L}-L⟩/L=S_0\sqrt{B}/(8\sqrt{F})$ in that ideal continuum model.

Endpoint conditions also matter. If each end is moment-free and has no transverse applied force, the natural conditions from the variation areat each end. These can produce a free-end curvature boundary layer of width $\ell =\sqrt{B/F}$. For a constant intrinsic filament curvature $\kappa$, integration of the higher-order Euler-Lagrange equation with zero transverse force gives $B({\zeta }_x{)}_{xx}-F{\zeta }_x=0$ and henceThe last formula follows by integrating ${\sinh }^2[(x-L/2)/\ell ]$, and tends to ${\kappa }^2{\ell }^3/2\propto F^{-3/2}$, despite the vanishing bulk curvature gradient. Thus a finite free-ended measurement must include or suppress endpoint bending before interpreting a bulk $F^{-2}$ fit.

For the freely jointed chain, rigid links have independent orientations, so the restoring force is entropic. Let $T$ now denote absolute temperature, and $\beta =1/(k_{B}T)$ with Boltzmann constant $k_B$. In the usual three-dimensional chain, a segment at polar angle $\theta$ has force energy $-Fb\cos \theta$. Its angular canonical partition function and the full chain partition function areDifferentiating $\log Z_N$ with respect to $\beta F$ yields the exact mean projected displacementHere $\mathcal{L}$ is the Langevin function; this is force-extension of a three-dimensional freely jointed chain, in the fixed-force canonical ensemble. At high extension, $\coth \xi =1+2e^{-2\xi }+\cdots$, soThus the smooth quenched-curvature bulk deficit falls as $F^{-2}$, whereas the three-dimensional freely jointed chain deficit falls as $F^{-1}$ and depends explicitly on temperature. The distinction is mechanical straightening of a fixed intrinsic shape versus orientational entropy; thermal bending fluctuations of a stiff filament have not been included in the first calculation.

If the comparison chain is also restricted to two dimensions, it is a planar freely jointed chain rather than the three-dimensional model. In this case,The last identity follows directly by differentiating the integral defining $I_0$; $I_0$ and $I_1$ are Modified Bessel functions of the first kind. At large $\xi$ the angular weight is proportional to $e^{-\xi {\theta }^2/2}$, giving $⟨\cos \theta ⟩\simeq 1-⟨{\theta }^2⟩/2=1-1/(2\xi )$. Consequently $Nb-⟨L⟩\sim N{k}_{B}T/(2F)$: the same inverse-force exponent, with half the three-dimensional coefficient. Both versions assume inextensible links and forces below the regime where the links themselves stretch.