Version 2 (modified by 9 years ago) ( diff ) | ,
---|
Having a kinetic energy (per unit mass) at r that is higher than would have been acquired from freefall alone (which would just be GM/r), i.e. solving the equations:
again where the specific kinetic energy at the surface of the star ® after having fallen from a distance r away from the center of the star is given by,
ke(r) | Error (%) | Distance (pc) |
10*freefall | 30 | 6.8x10-7 |
10*freefall | .01 | .00002 |
100*freefall | 30 | 7.4x10-6 |
100*freefall | .01 | .0002 |
1000*freefall | 30 | 7.5x10-5 |
1000*freefall | .01 | .002 |
Now, what if a gas parcel started from rest, a distance r away from the star surface? Now we are solving,
ke(r) | Error (%) | Distance (pc) |
0 | .01 | 2.2x10-6 |
0 | 30 | 7.5x10-8 |
Lastly, what if the parcel was moving, however, it was moving slower than freefall? Now ke(r) will be a fraction of the freefall energy in the table below. In particular, what if ke(r) was ½, 1/5, 1/10 the freefall kinetic energy… at what distance, r, would I see a 0.01% error? What about a 30% error?
Attachments (7)
- accretionluminosity1.png (37.8 KB ) - added by 9 years ago.
- accretionluminosity2.png (25.7 KB ) - added by 9 years ago.
- accretionluminosity.nb (45.8 KB ) - added by 9 years ago.
- 4cellkernel1.png (4.0 KB ) - added by 9 years ago.
- 40cellkernel1.png (4.6 KB ) - added by 9 years ago.
- dx1kernel.png (4.6 KB ) - added by 9 years ago.
- dxpt1kernel.png (3.9 KB ) - added by 9 years ago.
Download all attachments as: .zip