In-Class Assignment 15#

In-Class Only, Not Submitted for Credit

Gravity Darkening in Low Mass Stars#

Gravity darkening, also referred to as gravity brightening, is an astronomical phenomenon where the poles of a star are brighter than the equator, due to rapid rotation and oblate shape. When a star is oblate, it has a larger radius at its equator than it does at its poles.

As a result, the poles have a higher surface gravity, and thus higher temperature and pressure is needed to maintain hydrostatic equilibrium. Thus, the poles are “gravity brightened”, and the equator “gravity darkened”. - Wikipedia.

../_images/grav_dark_schematic.jpg

Credit: ESO. Achernar has an unusually rapid rotational velocity, causing it to become oblate in shape.

Learning Objectives#

  • explore the impact of gravity darkening on HR diagrams

  • where does ES operate in rotating stars?

  • determine the impact of rotation on the surface carbon abundance

Download the following model files locally.

a. - How does Gravity Darkening Affect HR Evolution?#

Using the history data for the rotating and non-rotating models,

  1. plot an HR diagram for non-rotating model (our usual history columns) and the rotating model for the (polar, equatorial, and intrinsic - our total usual values).

State how gravity darking moves the model on the HR, i.e. - hotter/cooler, redder/bluer compared to a non-rotating model.

## a results here

b. - Eddington-Sweet Circulation in Low Mass Rotating Stars#

Using the profile data,

  1. plot the diffusion coefficient profiles for convection (log_D_conv), overshoot (log_D_ovr), ES (am_log_D_ES) circulation.

Where does the ES circulation operate if anywhere? What can you say about the rotation in these regions?

## b results here

c. - Impact of Rotation in Surface Carbon Abundance#

Using the non-rotating and rotating history data,

  1. plot to the log of the initial versus final surface c12 for both models.

For this mass, does rotationally-induced mixing suggest an increase or decrease to the surface value? Compare with Figure 5 of Heger et al 2000.

## c results here