Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
The collection

Every essay — page 11

One idea per essay, ordered so that the earlier ones set up the later ones — but nothing here depends on being read in sequence.

Mechanics

Motion, force, and the quantities that refuse to change.

The same launches with drag 2.4 times the weight. Five launches at the same speed and at 20, 32, 45, 60, 70 degrees, drawn twice: in vacuum, where the arcs are symmetric parabolas, and with quadratic drag whose force at launch is 2.4 times the projectile's weight. Nothing about the drag figure is a parabola. Each path rises at nearly the vacuum angle, loses horizontal speed that nothing restores, and comes down far more steeply than it went up — the 32° launch leaves at 32° and arrives at 50°. The best of these angles in vacuum is 45° and in air is 32°, and the best range has fallen by 60 per cent. The asymmetry is the whole of the difference: drag removes speed in proportion to speed squared, so it takes most from the fast early part of the flight, and the descent happens at a speed the drag has already limited.

The angle that drag moves

Forty-five degrees is the answer in vacuum and almost nowhere else. Add one velocity-dependent force and the two equations of motion lock together, the closed form disappears, and the best launch angle falls — to thirty-eight degrees for a golf ball's drag and to twenty-nine for a shuttlecock. What moves it is not the loss but the asymmetry.

6 figures · part 2 on Projectile The potential a shaken pivot creates. The effective potential of a pendulum whose pivot is shaken vertically, against the angle from hanging, for shaking rates of 8, 14, 20, 30 times the pendulum's own frequency at an amplitude of 0.12 of its length. The shaking averages to no force at all — it is up as often as down — and yet it adds a term to the potential, because the pendulum's position is correlated with the phase of the shake rather than independent of it. The added term is proportional to sin²θ, so it is largest sideways and zero at both the hanging and the inverted positions, and it turns the maximum at 180° into a minimum once 14× and 20× and 30× the natural frequency is reached. The criterion is (aΩ)² > 2gL: the shake speed must beat the speed a fall through the pendulum's own length would give. Upside down then becomes a stable equilibrium, with a restoring force and a period of its own.

Held up by a force that averages to nothing

Shake a pendulum's pivot up and down fast enough and the pendulum will stand upside down, balanced, and push back if it is nudged. The shaking supplies no average force at all — it is up as often as it is down — and the reason it nevertheless holds is that the pendulum's position and the phase of the shake are not independent.

5 figures · part 5 on Pendulum The action along a family of paths. On the left, seven paths between the same two events: the true trajectory of a projectile and six deformations of it, each fixed at both ends and differing by one arch of a sine. On the right, the action of each — the time integral of kinetic minus potential energy — against how much it has been deformed. The true path has the least action, 0.45833 in these units, and every neighbour has more. The curve on the right is a parabola about that minimum with curvature 4.935, so the excess action grows as the square of the deformation and its slope at the true path is zero. Nothing here was minimised: the true path was obtained by solving the equation of motion, and every action on the chart including its own is the same quadrature along a stated curve. What the figure establishes is that the two ways of specifying a trajectory — obey a differential equation at every instant, or make one integral over the whole path stationary — pick out the same curve.

Least action, except that it is not least

Mechanics can be stated twice over. Once as a rule about every instant — force equals mass times acceleration — and once as a rule about the whole path at once, which says that one number computed along it is stationary. The two pick out the same trajectory, and the second name for it is wrong — past a certain duration the real path has more action than its neighbours, not less.

5 figures · part 1 on Least action

Waves

Oscillation, and everything that turns out to be an oscillation.

Absorption and refraction, drawn as one function. The real and imaginary parts of a Lorentz oscillator's susceptibility against frequency, in units of the resonance. The imaginary part is the absorption: a symmetric line centred on the resonance, with a full width at half maximum equal to the damping — 0.05, 0.12, 0.30 here. The real part is the refraction, and it is what the same medium does to the speed of light. The two curves are not two facts about the medium: either one determines the other completely, by an integral over all frequencies, and that is a consequence of the medium responding after it is asked rather than before. Between x = 0.97 and x = 1.02 the refraction runs the wrong way — the index falls as the frequency rises, which is anomalous dispersion — and that region is exactly the width of the absorption line. Away from the line the index rises with frequency, which is ordinary dispersion and is why a prism separates colours in the order it does: every transparent material is on the low-frequency tail of an ultraviolet absorption it is not otherwise showing. A narrower line is a taller one, because the area under the absorption is fixed by how many electrons there are and by nothing else.

The answer that cannot come first

A medium absorbs at some frequencies and bends light at all of them, and those look like two separate facts to be measured separately. They are one fact. The requirement that a material respond after it is asked rather than before ties the absorption at every frequency to the refraction at every other, by an integral — and a material given the two halves independently answers before the question arrives.

5 figures · part 2 on Attenuation One sharp kick, heard 6 pulse-lengths away. The signal arriving at a fixed distance from a point source that emits a single short pulse, in one, two and three dimensions, each normalised to its own peak. In three dimensions the arriving signal is the emitted pulse, unchanged in shape: it arrives, and then there is silence. In two dimensions the same kick arrives at the same moment and then keeps arriving — a tail falling as one over the time, which is still at a tenth of its peak 12.1 pulse-lengths after the front has passed. In one dimension it never comes back down at all; the medium is left displaced. The wave equation is the same equation in all three, and the source is the same source; what differs is only how many dimensions the disturbance has to spread into. Sharp arrival is the exception rather than the rule — it happens in three dimensions, and in five, and in seven, and in no even number of them — and every argument that treats a wavefront as the whole of the signal is an argument that has quietly used the fact that we live in three.

The arrival that keeps arriving

A clap heard across a field arrives and stops. The same clap in two dimensions arrives at the same instant and then goes on arriving for ever, fading as one over the time — and the difference is not absorption, or echo, or scattering. It is the number of dimensions, and sharp arrival happens in three of them and in no even number at all.

5 figures · part 6 on Wave motion How many modes a square has below a given wavenumber. The number of vibration modes of a square with wavenumber below k, counted exactly — every eigenvalue of this region is a closed form, so the staircase is the true count and not an estimate. There are 265 of them below k = 60. The smooth curves are what Weyl's law predicts. The upper one is the leading term alone, the area times k² over 4π, and it is too high by 21.5 modes at the right-hand edge; the lower one subtracts the perimeter term, the perimeter times k over 4π, and is out by 2.4. The content of the law is that the count depends on the region through its area and its perimeter and — to this order — through nothing else at all: not through its shape, not through where its corners are, not through whether it is convex. The staircase's steps are the individual modes, and they cluster where two different pairs of indices give the same wavenumber. That the count is smooth in the large while being a staircase in the small is what makes a mode count usable in thermodynamics, where it appears as a density of states and never as a list.

How many ways there are to vibrate

A drum has infinitely many modes, and below any given frequency it has a finite number of them. That number turns out to depend on the drum's area and the length of its rim and — to the accuracy anybody uses — on nothing else about its shape. Almost every result in thermal physics that involves waves is an application of that count.

5 figures · part 4 on Standing waves

Optics

Light, and the small number of rules it obeys.

A caustic, by rays and by waves. The brightness across a fold caustic, computed two ways. Geometric optics gives the rising curve: on the illuminated side two rays arrive at every point and the intensity goes as the inverse square root of the distance from the caustic, so it becomes infinite exactly at it; on the other side no ray arrives at all and the intensity is zero. The wave answer is the squared Airy function, and it disagrees in three ways that are all observable. It is finite, peaking at 1.0188 in the scaled variable rather than at the caustic itself, so the brightest line is displaced onto the bright side. It oscillates, with maxima at -1.02, -3.25, -4.82, -6.16 — those are the supernumerary fringes, and they are not interference between two separate objects but between the two rays the caustic joins. And it leaks: on the dark side, where geometry forbids any light, the Airy function decays exponentially rather than stopping, which is the same mathematics as tunnelling and is why the edge of a shadow is soft before diffraction from any aperture is considered. The two curves agree far from the caustic, which is where the ray picture is a good approximation and where they have been matched here.

The fringes below the rainbow

Geometric optics puts the whole rainbow at one angle and predicts an infinite brightness there. What is seen instead is a peak displaced inside that angle, followed by a train of pink and green arcs — and their spacing is a measurement of the raindrops, because a caustic's structure is set by the wavelength to the two-thirds power over the drop radius to the two-thirds.

7 figures · part 5 on Diffraction A circuit on the sphere of polarisations. The Poincaré sphere, on which every polarisation state is a point: linear states around the equator, circular at the poles, and orthogonal states at opposite ends of a diameter. The triangle is a closed circuit — linear at 0°, then linear at 23°, then left circular, and back — taken along geodesics, which is what a sequence of ideal polarisers does. Bringing a state round it returns it to exactly the state it started in, and multiplied by a phase: 0.3927 radians here, against minus half the enclosed solid angle of -0.7854 steradians. The two agree exactly, and neither calculation knows about the other — the phase is the argument of a product of three overlaps between Jones vectors, and the solid angle is spherical geometry. Nothing about the elements used, their thickness, or the wavelength enters. A phase that depends only on the shape of a path is the signature of a geometric phase, and this is the oldest known example of one.

The phase that is only a shape

Take a beam of polarised light through a sequence of elements that returns it to the polarisation it started with, and it comes back with a phase it did not have before. That phase is not an optical path length — it does not depend on the thickness of anything, or on the wavelength, or on how slowly the sequence was carried out. It is minus half the area the path enclosed on the sphere of polarisation states, and nothing else.

5 figures · part 5 on Polarisation

Thermodynamics

Heat, disorder, and the one law with a direction in it.

The gas that leaves is not the gas inside. The distribution of molecular speeds inside a container at 300 K and in the beam that escapes through a small hole in it, each normalised to its own peak. They are not the same distribution. A molecule's chance of reaching the hole in a given time is proportional to how fast it is going, so the beam carries one more factor of speed than the gas does — v³ rather than v² times the Boltzmann factor — and the beam is therefore faster and hotter than what it came from. The mean speed inside is 476 m/s and in the beam 561 m/s, a ratio of 1.1781 against the exact 3π/8; and the mean kinetic energy is 1.500 kT inside against 2.000 kT in the beam, which are exactly 3/2 and 2. That difference is not a subtlety. A molecular beam made by effusion has a temperature, in the sense of a mean energy, a third higher than its source; a gas slowly leaking from a container leaves the remainder cooler than it would be if a fair sample had gone; and every calculation of a rate through an aperture that uses the bulk distribution is wrong by this factor.

The gas that leaves is not the gas inside

Put a small hole in a container of gas and what comes out is faster and hotter than what stays behind — its mean kinetic energy is 2kT against the 3/2 kT of the gas it came from. Nothing has heated it. A fast molecule simply reaches the hole more often than a slow one, so the sample that escapes is biased by exactly one factor of speed, and every consequence of effusion is that factor.

4 figures · part 7 on Kinetic theory The barrier a new phase has to climb. The free energy of a droplet against its radius, at four supersaturations. Two terms compete: the volume term is a gain and goes as r³, the surface term is a cost and goes as r². At small radius the surface wins, so a droplet that forms by chance is more expensive than the vapour it came from and evaporates again; past a critical radius the volume wins and the droplet grows without limit. The maximum between them is the barrier. At S = 1.5 the critical radius is 2.66 nm and the barrier 533.8 kT, S = 2 the critical radius is 1.56 nm and the barrier 182.6 kT, S = 3 the critical radius is 0.98 nm and the barrier 72.7 kT, S = 5 the critical radius is 0.67 nm and the barrier 33.9 kT. The critical radius contains a few hundred molecules at low supersaturation and a handful at high, which is the first sign that a theory built on a surface tension and a bulk free energy is being applied outside its comfort. Both the critical radius and the barrier are located here by searching the drawn curve and checked against the closed forms 2γ/|Δg| and 16πγ³/3Δg², which agree to a part in a thousand.

The barrier a new phase has to climb

Water vapour three times supersaturated is thermodynamically desperate to condense and will sit there indefinitely if it is clean enough. The obstacle is that a droplet has to start small, and a small droplet is nearly all surface — so the first nanometre of every phase transition costs energy rather than releasing it, and what decides whether anything happens is the height of that cost divided by kT.

4 figures · part 5 on Phase change

Relativity

Space and time, drawn on the same axes.

How far a 1-gravity ship gets, against its own clock. The distance covered by a ship accelerating steadily at 1 gravity for half the trip and braking for the other half, against the time on its own clock, on a logarithmic vertical axis. The curve is a cosine hyperbolic and therefore an exponential once the ship is relativistic, which it is after about a year: Proxima Centauri in 3.5 shipboard years, Sirius in 4.6 shipboard years, the Pleiades in 11.9 shipboard years, the galactic centre in 19.8 shipboard years, Andromeda in 28.6 shipboard years. Nothing about this violates anything. The speed never reaches c — it is the hyperbolic tangent of the rapidity and after 3.5 years it is 0.9495 at turnover — and every one of those journeys takes slightly more than the distance in years as measured from home. What is growing exponentially is not the speed but the length contraction, and the traveller's honest description of the trip is that the distance shrank. The rapidity is what accumulates steadily: it grows by one unit every 0.969 years of shipboard time, for ever, with no ceiling anywhere in the arithmetic. That is the whole reason the numbers come out survivable, and the reason the fuel does not.

The ship that never arrives at c

Accelerate at one gravity and never stop. The speed creeps toward light and never reaches it, and meanwhile the galactic centre is twenty shipboard years away and Andromeda twenty-nine. What makes the journey survivable is that rapidity has no ceiling; what makes it impossible is that the fuel goes as the exponential of the same quantity.

5 figures · part 2 on Accelerated frames The clock that gains going one way and loses going the other. The rate at which a flown clock gains on a clock left at 30° latitude, in nanoseconds per hour, against the aeroplane's ground speed, with east taken as positive. Two terms are drawn and then their sum. Height alone gives 3.5 nanoseconds an hour at 9 km and does not care which way the aircraft is pointed. Motion costs time, and because the ground is already moving eastward at 402 metres a second, flying east adds to that speed and flying west subtracts from it — so the kinematic term is much larger going east and can change sign going west. The sum crosses zero at 180 metres a second eastward, which is the ground speed at which an aeroplane's clock keeps the time of the airfield it left. Over the two flights Hafele and Keating actually made, this simple model gives -61 nanoseconds eastward and +304 westward, against their own predictions of -40 and +275 and their measurements of -59 and +273. The model here uses one average altitude, one average speed and one latitude, where the real prediction integrated the flight logs; getting the signs and the rough sizes out of three lines of arithmetic is the point, and the last twenty per cent is what the logs are for. What no amount of arithmetic supplies is the thing the experiment settled: that the effect is real, that it acts on a caesium clock in a passenger seat, and that a difference of a few hundred nanoseconds after two days is measurable.

The two clocks that flew in opposite directions

Two caesium clocks were flown round the world in 1971, one each way, and came back disagreeing with the clock left behind — one having lost 59 nanoseconds and the other gained 273. Height alone would have made both gain. The sign flip comes from the ground already moving eastward at 400 metres a second before the aircraft took off.

4 figures · part 4 on Time dilation The temperature of an acceleration. The Unruh temperature against proper acceleration, both axes logarithmic. An observer accelerating through empty space finds it is not empty: the state that an inertial observer calls the vacuum, an accelerated one finds populated, with a thermal spectrum at T = ħa/2πck — which is 4.06e-21 kelvin for every metre per second squared. The line is straight because the relation is exactly proportional, and the numbers on it are what make the effect so hard to see: one gravity gives 3.98·10⁻²⁰ K, a centrifuge at 10⁵ g gives 3.97·10⁻¹⁵ K, an electron in a strong laser gives 40.6 K, the surface of a solar-mass hole gives 6.17·10⁻⁸ K. Reaching one kelvin requires 2.5·10²⁰ m/s², which is 2.5·10¹⁹ gravities and beyond anything that can be sustained. What makes the effect worth taking seriously despite that is not its size but its structure: it says the number of particles present is not a property of the field alone but of the observer as well, and the same expression with a black hole's surface gravity in place of the acceleration is the Hawking temperature exactly, checked here to a part in 10¹².

The temperature of an acceleration

Empty space is empty for an observer who is not accelerating. For one who is, the same state of the same field is a thermal bath at a temperature proportional to the acceleration — and the constant of proportionality is 4 × 10⁻²¹ kelvin for every metre per second squared, which is why nobody has felt it. What the effect changes is not what can be measured but what a particle is.

5 figures · part 3 on Accelerated frames Where to put the far clock's zero. Two clocks three light-seconds apart, synchronised by radar: a pulse leaves the near clock at 0, bounces off the far one, and returns at 6 seconds. The far clock must be set to some time between those, and every choice is drawn. Einstein's convention puts it at 3 — halfway — and gives the same speed of light in both directions. Any other value is equally consistent with every measurement that can be made, because everything measurable involves a round trip and the round trip takes 6 seconds under every one of them: computed here across the five conventions, the round-trip times differ by 0e+0 seconds. The lines are the resulting surfaces of simultaneity, which fan out from the halfway choice. What each choice fixes is the one-way speed of light — ε = 0.25 makes it 2.00c outward and 0.67c back, ε = 0.4 makes it 1.25c outward and 0.83c back, ε = 0.5 makes it 1.00c outward and 1.00c back, ε = 0.6 makes it 0.83c outward and 1.25c back, ε = 0.75 makes it 0.67c outward and 2.00c back — and no experiment distinguishes them, because measuring a one-way speed requires two synchronised clocks and synchronising them requires the answer.

The speed that cannot be measured one way

Every measurement of the speed of light ever made has sent it out and brought it back. Measuring it one way needs two clocks that agree, and making two distant clocks agree needs a rule about when the far one should read what — which is a choice, not a discovery. The constancy of c is a fact about round trips; its isotropy is a convention, chosen because it makes the equations simple.

4 figures · part 4 on Simultaneity

Quantum

Where the continuous picture runs out, and what replaces it.

Where 4s goes below 3d. The energies of five orbitals of a nucleus of charge 19, solved in a screened Coulomb potential, against how far out the screening extends. Nothing about the ordering is assumed: each level is found by integrating the radial equation outward and bisecting on the energy until the solution has the number of nodes that state is supposed to have, and the same solver returns hydrogen's −1/2n² to 7.3e-12 hartree when the screening is switched off. With no screening the three n = 3 levels would lie on top of one another. With screening they separate, always in the same order — s lowest, then p, then d — because a low angular momentum has no centrifugal barrier keeping it out of the core, so it spends part of its time inside the other electrons where the nuclear charge is unscreened. And at a screening length of 0.41 bohr the 4s level crosses below 3d, which is the fourth row of the periodic table: potassium and calcium put their electrons in 4s before anything goes into 3d, so they are an alkali metal and an alkaline earth rather than the first two transition metals. The model is a caricature — one screening length for every electron, no self-consistency, and no exchange — and it gets the ordering right anyway, which is the argument that the ordering is about penetration and nothing subtler.

The order the shells fill

In hydrogen every state with the same principal number has the same energy, and 4s and 3d differ by nothing. In every other atom they do not, and 4s is below 3d — which is why potassium is an alkali metal rather than the first transition metal. The difference is a small piece of probability that an s orbital has inside the innermost shell and a d orbital does not.

4 figures · part 2 on Atomic structure Four product states, and the four combinations that have a total spin. The four ways two spin-halves can be arranged, on the left, and the four combinations of them that are eigenstates of the total spin, on the right. Two of the products — both up and both down — are already eigenstates. The other two are not: one spin up and the other down does not specify a total spin, because it does not say which spin is which, and the states that do are the sum and the difference. The eigenvalues printed beside them are computed by applying S² as a matrix in the product basis and reading the result off, then solving s(s + 1) for s: |↑↑⟩ gives 2ħ², so s = 1; (|↑↓⟩ + |↓↑⟩)/√2 gives 2ħ², so s = 1; |↓↓⟩ gives 2ħ², so s = 1; (|↑↓⟩ − |↓↑⟩)/√2 gives 0ħ², so s = 0. The column on the far right is the eigenvalue of the operator that swaps the two particles: the three states with s = 1 come back unchanged and the one with s = 0 comes back with a minus sign. That sign is the whole of the difference. It is why the three are called a triplet and the one a singlet, why they behave differently in a magnetic field, and — through the requirement that the total state of two electrons be antisymmetric — why the two families occupy space differently before any force between them has been mentioned.

Four states, and one of them is odd

Two spin-halves make four states, and they split three and one rather than into four of a kind. Three come back unchanged when the two particles are swapped and one comes back with a minus sign — and that single sign decides how far apart two electrons sit before any force between them has been mentioned, and why hydrogen gas is two gases that do not interconvert.

5 figures · part 2 on Spin

Fluids

Matter that will not hold a shape, and the forces that act in it anyway.

The slope a heap of grains settles at. The steepest slope a cohesionless heap can hold, against the friction between its grains. A slab of thickness h on a slope is pushed down it by the weight's along-slope component and held by friction acting on the weight's across-slope component, and both are proportional to the same ρgh — so the thickness cancels and the criterion is tan θ = μ. Checked here at thicknesses of 2 mm, 50 mm, 2000 mm, the ratio of driving to holding stress differs by 2.2e-16, which is zero. That is why the quantity is an angle: nothing about the size of the pile, the size of the grains, the density or the strength of gravity survives into it, and a heap of sand on the Moon stands at the same slope as one on Earth. The marked materials are glass beads at 24°, dry sand at 33°, crushed gravel at 40°. The band between the two curves is the hysteresis: a slope steeper than 31.0° will keep flowing once started, and one shallower than 35.0° will not start — so a pile has a range of stable angles rather than one, and which it is found at depends on how it was built.

The angle that does not know the size of the heap

Pour sand and it makes a cone with a definite slope, and pouring more makes a larger cone with the same slope. The reason the answer is an angle rather than a length is a cancellation — the force pulling a surface layer downhill and the friction holding it back are both proportional to its weight, so everything about the size of the pile divides out — and everything that puts a length back in is a story about cohesion.

5 figures · part 2 on Granular matter The least energy that fresh water can cost. The work needed to take fresh water out of a feed of 1150 mol/m³ of dissolved particles — seawater — against how much of the feed is taken, in kilowatt-hours per cubic metre of product. The lower curve is the reversible minimum, in which the pressure is raised continuously as the remaining feed gets saltier; the upper one is a single stage held throughout at the pressure the final, saltiest concentrate needs. At vanishing recovery both tend to the feed's own osmotic pressure, 28.5 bar or 0.79 kWh/m³, which is the floor for the first drop and is checked here against the limit of the formula. Taking more of the feed costs more per unit taken, because what is left behind is saltier: at 10% recovery 0.83 kWh/m³ reversibly and 0.88 in one stage, 30% recovery 0.94 kWh/m³ reversibly and 1.13 in one stage, 50% recovery 1.10 kWh/m³ reversibly and 1.58 in one stage, 60% recovery 1.21 kWh/m³ reversibly and 1.98 in one stage, 75% recovery 1.46 kWh/m³ reversibly and 3.17 in one stage. The horizontal line is what a good seawater plant actually uses, 3 kWh/m³, so the second-law efficiency of the industry is about 37 per cent. None of this is about membranes. It is the free energy of mixing salt into water, read backwards, and no technology of any kind can go below the lower curve.

What it costs to take the salt out

Salt dissolves in water because mixing is overwhelmingly the more probable arrangement, and separating the two again means paying back what the mixing gave away. The bill can be computed before any apparatus is chosen — 0.79 kilowatt-hours for the first cubic metre from seawater — and it rises with every further cubic metre taken, because what is left behind is saltier than what was started with.

5 figures · part 2 on Osmosis The height a 1 mK difference lifts helium. The head of liquid that a temperature difference of 1 millikelvin can support across a superleak — a plug fine enough that the normal fluid cannot pass and the superfluid can — against the temperature it is done at. Only the normal component carries entropy, so warming one side makes the superfluid flow toward the warm side until the pressure difference balances, and equilibrium is at ΔP = ρSΔT. The height that supports is SΔT/g, in which the density cancels exactly; computed both ways here the two agree to machine precision. The numbers are the striking part: 2.0 mm at 1.2 K, 4.6 mm at 1.4 K, 9.2 mm at 1.6 K, 19.4 mm at 1.8 K, 46.9 mm at 2 K, from a temperature step a thousand times smaller than anything a hand could feel. Aim a light at the warm side and the liquid does not merely rise but jets out of the tube, which is the fountain effect Allen and Jones found in 1938 and the most direct demonstration that helium II is two fluids rather than one. The entropies used are measured values; everything else on this chart is computed from them.

The fountain a lamp can drive

Below two degrees above absolute zero, liquid helium behaves as though it were two fluids occupying the same space — one carrying all the entropy and all the viscosity, the other carrying neither. It is not a metaphor and not a mixture. Shine a light on one side of a fine plug and the liquid jets out of the tube, because a temperature difference of a thousandth of a degree is a pressure of a hundred pascals.

4 figures · part 3 on Superfluidity

Astrophysics

Gravity read as geometry, and the laws carried where no laboratory can follow.

Cold matter, and the mass above which nothing holds it up. The radius of a cold, degenerate star against its mass, obtained by integrating the equations of hydrostatic support outward from 11 different central densities with the exact degenerate equation of state, and nothing else. Heavier means smaller — the opposite of every ordinary object, and the direct consequence of a pressure that comes from counting states rather than from heat. The curve turns over and runs into a vertical asymptote at 1.452 solar masses, against 1.456 from the limiting polytrope, whose own constant 2.0182 is integrated here as well. That is Chandrasekhar's limit. It exists because the electrons become relativistic: once they are, the pressure goes as the four-thirds power of the density, and for that exponent alone the mass of a self-gravitating ball is independent of its radius — so squeezing it harder produces no more support and there is exactly one mass such a star can have. The horizontal line is the Earth's radius, which the curve crosses near a solar mass: a white dwarf of the Sun's mass is the size of a planet, and the ones close to the limit are a few thousand kilometres across. What the model leaves out is what actually happens at the top: at those densities electrons begin to be captured onto nuclei, which removes the very pressure holding the star up, so the collapse starts slightly below the line rather than at it.

The mass no cold matter can hold up

A white dwarf gets smaller as it gets heavier, which no ordinary object does. Follow that curve upward and the radius reaches zero at 1.46 solar masses — because once the electrons are relativistic the pressure goes as the four-thirds power of the density, and for that exponent alone the mass of a self-gravitating ball does not depend on its radius at all.

4 figures · part 3 on Self-gravity A click that arrives sorted by pitch. Arrival time against frequency for a broadband pulse travelling 40 megametres along a magnetic field line through a plasma of 1e+8 electrons per cubic metre in a field of 300 nanotesla — the magnetosphere, roughly. The gyrofrequency is 8.4 kilohertz and the plasma frequency 90 kilohertz, so this is the regime where a right-hand circularly polarised wave travels happily below both of them. It does not travel at one speed. The group velocity is 2c√ω(ω_c − ω)^(3/2)/(ω_p ω_c), which is zero at zero frequency and zero again at the gyrofrequency and peaks in between — at 2.10 kilohertz here, which is a quarter of the gyrofrequency, found by searching the drawn function rather than quoted. Everything either side of that peak is slower, so the curve has a nose: 3.21 s at 500 Hz, 2.20 s at 2000 Hz, 3.59 s at 5000 Hz. The branch below the nose is the classic whistler — a lightning stroke in one hemisphere reaching a receiver in the other as a note gliding downward over about a second, which is what gave the phenomenon its name — and the branch above it arrives as a rising tone at the same time. Both are observed, and a recording that shows the two joined at the nose is how the gyrofrequency along the path is read off directly. Read the other way it is an instrument: the product of the delay and the square root of the frequency is 79 s·Hz^½ here, nearly constant across the low end of the band, and it measures the electron content of a path through the magnetosphere that nothing else could reach.

The whistle that arrives sorted

A lightning stroke in one hemisphere reaches a receiver in the other as a note gliding downward over about a second. Nothing dispersed the sound; there was no sound. A radio pulse travelled forty megametres along a magnetic field line through a plasma whose group velocity depends on frequency, and arrived with its frequencies separated by up to three seconds.

4 figures · part 2 on Plasma oscillation Which wavelengths grow instead of oscillating. The dispersion relation of a self-gravitating isothermal gas, ω² = c²k² − 4πGρ, with each axis measured in the scale the gas sets for itself. Short wavelengths oscillate: pressure wins, and the disturbance is a sound wave. Long wavelengths do not: ω² is negative, so the disturbance grows exponentially instead of travelling, and the region collapses. The changeover is at λ_J = c√(π/Gρ), and it happens because pressure support acts on a sound-crossing time that grows with the region while gravity's collapse time does not depend on the size at all. Four densities spanning 6 decades are drawn and they lie exactly on top of one another, to 6e-16, because the criterion has no scale of its own: it is the same curve for a diffuse cloud and for a protostellar core, with different numbers written on the axes. In this gas at 10 K those numbers are 2.12 pc and 28.72 solar masses at 10² cm⁻³, 0.21 pc and 2.87 solar masses at 10⁴ cm⁻³, 4372 AU and 0.29 solar masses at 10⁶ cm⁻³, 437 AU and 0.03 solar masses at 10⁸ cm⁻³.

The disturbance that grows instead of travelling

A sound wave in a gas oscillates because pressure restores what the disturbance displaced. Add the gravity the gas exerts on itself and the restoring force acquires a competitor that does not weaken with size — so above one wavelength the sum changes sign, the frequency becomes imaginary, and the disturbance stops travelling and starts growing. It is the same wave equation with one term subtracted.

4 figures · part 4 on Self-gravity The charge a plasma hides. The potential around a charge in a plasma, as a fraction of the bare Coulomb potential at the same distance, against distance measured in screening lengths. The electrons crowd toward the charge and the ions move away until the rearrangement cancels the field, and what is left falls as exp(−r/λ_D) on top of the ordinary 1/r. At one screening length the potential is already down to 37 per cent of the bare value, at three to 5 per cent, and at ten to 4 × 10⁻⁵ — so a charge in a plasma is invisible beyond a few λ_D, and the long range of the Coulomb force, which is what makes electrostatics awkward everywhere else, is simply gone. The screening length at 10¹¹ m⁻³ is 3.8 mm at 300 K, 6.9 mm at 1000 K, 21.8 mm at 10000 K, rising as the square root of the temperature because a hotter electron is harder to hold in place. Drawn this way the three curves coincide exactly: the shape is universal and the only thing a plasma's density and temperature decide is the length written on the axis.

The long-range force that does not reach

The Coulomb force falls off as slowly as gravity does, which is what makes electrostatics awkward — every charge is in principle in contact with every other. Put the same charge into a plasma and it becomes invisible beyond a few millimetres, because the mobile charges around it rearrange until its field is cancelled. What is left is a screened potential with a definite range, and that range is what makes a plasma a plasma.

4 figures · part 3 on Plasma oscillation The brightest anything of a given mass can be. The Eddington luminosity against mass, with the main sequence drawn beside it. Radiation pushes outward on the electrons and gravity pulls inward on the protons, and both go as one over the distance squared — so the radius cancels out of the comparison entirely, checked here at three radii spanning four decades and coming out identical to 1e-20. What is left is a luminosity: L = 4πGMc/κ, which is 1.47 × 10³¹ watts per solar mass, or 3.8·10⁴ solar luminosities. Above it, radiation drives the outer layers away faster than gravity can hold them. The Sun is at 2.6e-5 of its own limit and in no danger; a star of 10 solar masses is at 1.2e-2; and a star of 100 is at 0.83, which is why the two lines converge at the top of the chart and why the most massive stars known are a few hundred solar masses rather than a few thousand. They do not fail to form for lack of gas; they blow away the gas that would have made them heavier, and once formed they shed mass continuously in a radiation-driven wind. The limit is the same expression for an accreting black hole, where it caps not the brightness but the rate at which mass can be taken on.

The brightness a mass cannot exceed

Light pushes outward on the electrons of a star and gravity pulls inward on its protons, and both forces fall off as one over the distance squared. The distance therefore cancels, and what is left is a limit on brightness rather than on size — 3.8 × 10⁴ times the Sun's luminosity for every solar mass, above which a body drives its own outer layers away.

4 figures · part 3 on Radiation pressure

Every field · every reading path · every object named · every figure · what is taught wrongly · search