[mesa-users] A common stellar-structure myth

[Brian Jackson]

Since we're reviewing basic stellar evolution, can I ask why L ~ M^3?
That just comes from the equation of state?

Thanks,
Brian

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 4:17 PM, RICHARD H D TOWNSEND
<townsend at astro.wisc.edu> wrote:
> That’s as maybe, but the gravity is not stronger.
>
> In any case, what really drives the large energy generation rate in massive stars is the energy loss rate through the stellar surface, which scale as L ~ M^3 (independent of nuclear reactions). The pre-MS star continues to contract until the core energy generation rate matches this loss rate.
>
> cheers,
>
> Rich
>
>> On Aug 30, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Tomasz Plewa <tomekplewa at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It's a deeper potential well.
>>
>> Tomek
>> --
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 30, 2016, at 5:52 PM, RICHARD H D TOWNSEND <townsend at astro.wisc.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi folks —
>>>
>>> While reading the textbook I’m going to be teaching from this semester (“Pathways to Astronomy”, by Schneider & Arny), I came across this common myth about stellar structure:
>>>
>>> “The stronger gravity of a more massive star drives up the rate of nuclear fusion dramatically, while smaller stars consume their fuel at a more leisurely pace”.
>>>
>>> The attached figure, courtesy of MESA, shows the internal gravity for 1Msun and 10Msun stars at the ZAMS — and nicely busts the myth.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>>
>>> Rich
>>>
>>> <gravity.pdf>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mesa-users mailing list
>>> mesa-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa-users
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-users mailing list
> mesa-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa-users