Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2001 iii Paper 35 2 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The energy-conserving self-similar blast wave requires a stage in which the original stellar radius, ejecta mass, ambient pressure and cooling have ceased to supply important scales. In particular, the swept-up mass must greatly exceed the ejecta mass; alone need not ensure this in a very dilute interstellar medium. For fixed explosion energy , uniform ambient mass density and elapsed time , dimensional analysis gives . Matching mass, length and time gives , , . Equivalently, a self-similar strong shock wave has , whose constant-energy solution has the same exponents:The dimensionless coefficient depends on and the post-shock profiles; dimensional reasoning cannot fix it.
For completeness, obtain the Strong-shock Rankine-Hugoniot conditions in the shock frame. Let denote downstream speed relative to the outward-moving front. With negligible upstream pressure and enthalpy, conservation of mass, momentum and energy givesPut . Substituting into the last two equations and selecting the compressive, nontrivial branch yields . HenceHere the symbol , written as in what follows, is the laboratory-frame radial velocity; it is not the relative speed .
Use the thin-shell approximation for a spherical blast wave. Set and . Equating the swept-up mass to gives . The growing shell's momentum is . Since newly swept gas has zero laboratory momentum, the net force is the cavity pressure acting on the inner shell, to thin-shell accuracy:The pressure at the shock is already accounted for by the jump conditions and mass loading; subtracting as an additional external pressure would count the shock reaction twice. With , the last equation becomesTherefore, for constant ,
The shell volume is . Its internal energy and kinetic energy areTreat the cavity volume as at the same thin-shell level, so its internal energy is . Their sum is proportional to for constant and . Constant total energy thus requires , giving . ConsequentlyUsing , this becomesFor , and the approximate energy fractions are , , .
This is an approximate normalization, not an exact treatment of finite shell thickness. If instead one subtracts the shell volume and uses for the cavity, while retaining the other shell assumptions, the energy coefficient becomes and . The difference is an order- geometric correction of this crude shell model; a consistent exact coefficient requires the full self-similar profiles.
In the idealized mass budget all swept gas is assigned to the shell, so the cavity inertia is neglected. The hot cavity's residual mass density is not specified, so its kinetic energy cannot be assigned a unique numerical fraction from the stated data. If its low mass is and its velocity is of order , then andFor an illustrative uniform-density cavity with homologous velocity , direct radial integration gives , so the preceding fraction has an extra factor . The cavity can carry substantial internal energy despite negligible kinetic energy because it is hot. Neglect of its inertia is justified in the swept-mass-dominated stage, not merely by its small initial radius.
The calculation describes the adiabatic expansion stage of a supernova remnant, giving an estimate of its age or explosion energy from its radius, expansion speed and ambient mass density. For example , and . Such blasts inject energy and momentum into the interstellar medium and redistribute stellar ejecta. The early ejecta-dominated stage, radiatively cooled late shell, nonuniform ambient medium, finite ambient sound speed, magnetic fields, nonspherical geometry and energy transfer to cosmic rays violate different assumptions. Even in the adiabatic spherical stage, the real profiles are not a uniform thin shell and a uniform-pressure cavity, so here is an estimate.