Sunday, September 27, 2015

Blog Post 13, Famous Astronomers: Charles Messier

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Charles_Messier.jpg

Charles Messier was born on June 26th, 1730 and died on April 12th, 1817, living 86 years.  Messier was French and lived in the city of Badonviller.  It is said that his interested in astronomy was piqued by the pass of the "great 6 tailed comet" in 1744.  This comet, as it's name would suggest, had 6 tails of dust and matter, and was very visible to the naked eye.

Messier found a job under French Navy Astronomer Joseph Nicoas Delisle.  Under Delisle's tutelage, Messier's first major observation was a transit of mercury in 1753.  later, as a member of the Royal Society, he worked in the French Academy of Sciences.

Messier's research focus was comet hunting, although he is ironically remembered for the opposite.  While he did discover 13 comets, his greater legacy is his grand list of "not comets."  As comets vary greatly in appearance, it was easy in Messier's day to mistake galaxies and nebulas for comets.  As a byproduct of his comment hunt, Messier managed to accumulate a list of other objects that he initially considered comets but discarded later.  By maintaining this catalogue, now known as the Messier Catalogue, Messier kept track of objects that he already knew were not comets.  With the improvement of telescope technology, most of Messier's objects are now identified as galaxies, nebulae, and star clusters.

The 110 Messier objects (named M1, M2... M110) are popularly used for amateur astronomy, as each is very visible with a small telescope equal to Messier's when he found them.

My personal favorite Messier Objects is the somewhat cliche M51 whirlpool galaxy.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Messier51_sRGB.jpg/1280px-Messier51_sRGB.jpg
Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Comet_of_1744
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Messier
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whirlpool_Galaxy

Blog Post 12, Free Form: A Brief History of Gravitational Lensing

So, this week we worked with gravitational lensing and its subtype: microlensing.  Let's take a step back and examine the history of this phenomenon.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/A_Horseshoe_Einstein_Ring_from_Hubble.JPG
In 1784 and 1801 respectively, Henry Cavendish and Johann Georg von Soldner (both really epic names in my opinion) used Newtonian mechanics just like we did in WS 4.1, Problem 1 to determine a photon's deflection due to the gravity of a massive object.  Of course, at the time, the photon had yet to be discovered or accepted, rather light was still considered to be a simple wave, so the conclusion was that "starlight" was bent by massive objects.  Later in 1915, Einstein's General Relativity explained this phenomenon as light following straight paths in curved spacetime.  Just like we did in WS 4.1, general relativity added an additional factor of two into the bending calculation to yield a final bending angle of:
\[\alpha = \frac{4GM_L}{bc^2}\]
Where \(G\) is Newton's gravity constant, \(M_L\) is the mass of the lensing object, \(c\) is the speed of light in a vacuum, and \(b\) is the impact parameter, or the distance through which a photon is mostly affected by the lens' gravity.

In a rather famous experiment, this figure was experimentally tested during a solar eclipse.  The approach was clever.  At the time, the sun was the easiest object to use as a lens.  It was massive, and quite close by.  The primary problem was the the sun is rather... bright.  So to view the effect on the light of background stars from the sun's gravity,the sun had to be booked out.  Conveniently, the moon takes care of that during solar eclipses.  (Just for the record, tonight (September 27, 2015) a superman lunar eclipse will occur.  This should be very cool, as the next one of these will not occur until 2033).  The solar eclipse occurred in 1919, and successfully confirmed the lensing equation.

Later in 1937, Fritz Zwicky decided to think outside the box, and realized that entire galaxies could be used for lensing.  Zwicky's idea was not tested until 1979 when eh first observable lens was discovered.  Discovered by Dennis Walsh, Bob Carswell, and Ray Weymann, it was named SBS 0957+561.  If this is a bit too boring, it also had the nickname "Twin QSO" (QSO = Quasi-Stellar Object) due to the fact that it looked like two QSO's next to one another.  This was actually just a consequence of the lensing effect, there is only one object, the other is just a lensed image.

Since then, the number of known lenses has exploded with our better telescope and computer technology and CCD cameras.  We currently use lenses to look into deep space to observe galaxies that would normally be far too far away to normally observe.  Lenses are also important in the search for MACHO's (MAssive Compact Halo Objects) since most of these objects should serve as excellent lenses due to their high mass and lack of self-illumination.  With that, let's look at the future brightly with a smile.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/HST-Smiling-GalaxyClusterSDSS-J1038%2B4849-20150210.jpg

Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lens
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon
http://www.planetary.org/explore/space-topics/exoplanets/microlensing.html

Blog Post 11, WS 4.1, Problem 4: Microlensing Magnification

Just like an optical lens, the gravitational lens distorts the shapes and sizes of the images. Let’s qualitatively reason out what the shape and area of the images are.
In Question 3, you assumed that the lens and sources were point sources. You found that the lens projects the source into two images on opposing sides of the chord connecting the lens and source, one outside the Einstein ring (positive, or major image) and the other inside (negative, or minor image).
For sources with finite area, the images are elongated tangentially (i.e. in the axis perpendicular to the lens-source alignment) and compressed radially (i.e. in the axis parallel to this alignment). The geometry for a circular source is shown below.


(a) Referring to the picture above, reason that the factor by which each image is tangentially elongated is y/u

(b) Reason that the factor by which each image is radially compressed is dy/du.

(c) Therefore, show the area of each image is enlarged by the factor
\[A_{\pm}=\left|\frac{y_{\pm}}{u}\right| \left|\frac{dy_{\pm}}{du}\right|\]
(d) The surface brightness per area of the source is conserved in the images. This means that the total brightness of the images scales directly with its area. Consequently, the total magnification of the system during a microlensing event is found by adding the area the images and dividing by the area of the original source. That is, 
\[A \equiv |A_+| + |A_-|\]
After class, feel free to convince yourself that
\[A=\frac{u^2+2}{u(u^2+4)^{1/2}}\]

Using Equation 4, what is the maximum magnification of a source crossing tangent to the Einstein ring of the lens?

(e) For an additional challenge after class, you can try to show that the maximum magnification in a microlensing event where the source crosses well within the Einstein ring of the lens (i.e. u << 1) approaches:
\[A(u \rightarrow 0) \rightarrow 1/u\]
(a) Referring to the picture above, reason that the factor by which each image is tangentially elongated is y/u

First we need to define \(u\) and \(y\).  \(u\) is the angle between the source and the lens measured from Earth divided by the angular radius of the Einstein ring.  Basically it is a unit-less quantity that measures the visual distance between the source and the lens.  in the above diagram, \(u\) is the vertical axis.  \(y\) is another unit-less quantity which is the ratio of a) the angular distance between the lens and the image, and b) the Einstein ring radius.  Basically, it measure the separation of the center of the ring and the upper image.

Looking at the picture, we can form a triangle with 2 legs being the distance from S to L and the third being the diameter of S.  The distance from S to L is \(u\), and the distance from L to the upper image I is \(y\).  These two triangles are similar, so:
\[\frac{S}{u}={I}{y}\]
We want to solve for the stretch factor, so we want:
\[\frac{I}{S}={u}{y}\]
Which checks out perfectly.

(b) Reason that the factor by which each image is radially compressed is dy/du.

This is a bit less obvious.  It follows the same principle as a move, but now we need to imagine that a little bit of the sphere is put through the lens transformation at a time.  This small bit follows the same reasoning as before, but because we are using radial compression with small pieces, instead of \(u\) and \(y\) we use \(du\) and \(dy\).  Thus:
\[\frac{I}{S}=\frac{du}{dy}\]

(c) Therefore, show the area of each image is enlarged by the factor 
\[A_{\pm}=\left|\frac{y_{\pm}}{u}\right| \left|\frac{dy_{\pm}}{du}\right|\]

Area is proportional to both length and height, so we can simply multiply our modification factors for this variables to gather to get the factor for area.
\[\boxed{A_{\pm}=\left|\frac{y_{\pm}}{u}\right| \left|\frac{dy_{\pm}}{du}\right|}\]

(d) The surface brightness per area of the source is conserved in the images. This means that the total brightness of the images scales directly with its area. Consequently, the total magnification of the system during a microlensing event is found by adding the area the images and dividing by the area of the original source. That is, 
\[A \equiv |A_+| + |A_-|\]
After class, feel free to convince yourself that 
\[A=\frac{u^2+2}{u(u^2+4)^{1/2}}\]
Using Equation 4, what is the maximum magnification of a source crossing tangent to the Einstein ring of the lens? 

We are told that:
\[A=\frac{u^2+2}{u(u^2+4)^{1/2}}\]
and we are asked to maximize \(A\). Well, since there is a \(u\) in the denominator, if we bring this to 0, the equation will blow up to infinity. That sounds pretty maximized in my book.

So, \(A\) is maximized when \(u \rightarrow 0\).

(e) For an additional challenge, you can try to show that the maximum magnification in a microlensing event where the source crosses well within the Einstein ring of the lens (i.e. u << 1) approaches:
\[A(u \rightarrow 0) \rightarrow 1/u\]

Here is our equation:

\[A=\frac{u^2+2}{u(u^2+4)^{1/2}}\]
We know that \(u\) is going to approach 0, so let's make some comparisons. \(u^2\) will be insignificant when added to 2 or 4, so let's just ignore it. Why not? 1+0.00000000000001 is pretty much 1 as far as anyone is concerned.
\[A=\frac{2}{u(4)^{1/2}}\]
Now can take the easy square root.
\[A=\frac{2}{2u}\]
Let's cancel the 2's, and get our answer.\[\boxed{A=\frac{1}{u}}\]
That's not exactly rigorous mathematics, but I don't see any glaring flaws.

I worked with B. Brzycki, G. Grell, and N. James on this problem.

Saturday, September 26, 2015

Blog Post 10, WS 4.1, Problem 1: Photon Deflection


Mass bends space-time! This is a prediction of general relativity, but fortunately we can heuristically derive the effect (up to a factor of 2) using Newtonian mechanics and some simplifying assumptions.

Consider a photon of “mass” mγ passing near an object of mass ML; we’ll call this object a “lens” (the ‘L’ in ML stands for ‘lens’, which is the object doing the bending). The closest approach (b) of the photon is known as the impact parameter. We can imagine that the photon feels a gravitational acceleration from this lens which we imagine is vertical (see diagram).

(a) Give an expression for the gravitational acceleration in the vertical direction in terms of M, b and G.

(b) Consider the time of interaction, ∆t. Assume that most of the influence the photon feels occurs in a horizontal distance 2b. Express ∆t in terms of b and the speed of the photon.

(c) Solve for the change in velocity, ∆v, in the direction perpendicular to the original photon path, over this time of interaction.

(d) Now solve for the deflection angle (α) in terms of G,ML,b, and c using your answers from part (a), (b) and (c). This result is a factor of 2 smaller than the correct, relativistic result.


Diagram from AY17 WS 4.1

(a) Give an expression for the gravitational acceleration in the vertical direction in terms of M, b and G.

We know that gravitational acceleration is the force of Gravity felt by an object divided by that object's mass.  We will let gravitational acceleration be represented by \(g\).
\[F_g=\frac{Gym}{r^2}\]
\[g=\frac{GM_L}{r^2}=\boxed{\frac{GM_L}{b^2}}\]

(b) Consider the time of interaction, ∆t. Assume that most of the influence the photon feels occurs in a horizontal distance 2b. Express ∆t in terms of b and the speed of the photon. 

All photons travel at the speed of light \(c\), so for this we will use a simple formula:
\[v=\frac{d}{t}\]
\[\boxed{\Delta t =\frac{2b}{c}}\]

(c) Solve for the change in velocity, ∆v, in the direction perpendicular to the original photon path, over this time of interaction. 

This draws on simple kinematics.  
\[\Delta v=a\times t\]
\[\Delta v= g \Delta t= \boxed{\frac{2GM_L \Delta t}{bc}}\]

(d) Now solve for the deflection angle (α) in terms of G,ML,b, and c using your answers from part (a), (b) and (c). This result is a factor of 2 smaller than the correct, relativistic result.




Here is where we have to be creative.  Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, so we are going to use an approximation.  Note that our new diagram is not in distances but rather in velocities. Using the original velocity vector of the photon c, we will add our new perpendicular vector ∆v.  
Conveniently, due to the perpendicular legs, this is a right triangle. 
\[tan(\alpha)=\frac{\Delta v}{c}\]
Since the speed of light is ridiculously large, our velocity adjustment is very small in comparison, so our angle is very small.  We can thus use a small angle approximation. 
\[tan(\alpha) \approx \alpha = \frac{\Delta v}{c}\]
\[\alpha = \frac{2GM_L \Delta t}{bc^2}\]
Adding in the relativistic correction factor gives us:
\[\boxed{\alpha = \frac{4GM_L \Delta t}{bc^2}}\]

I worked with B. Brzycki, G. Grell, and N. James on this problem.

Sunday, September 20, 2015

Blog Post 9, Free Form: Sagittarius A*

In the last few weeks we have dissected the Milky Way galaxy and analyzed it's composition and structure.  Central to the Milky Way's construction is it's reigning Supermassive Black Hole, Sagittarius A* (pronounced "Sagittarius A-Star").

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Sagittarius_A%2A.jpg
Firstly, black holes are the remnants of exploding stars that actually impose on themselves, leaving a singularity in spacetime.  This draws on some intensive math form General Relativity, but basically, it goes like this.  Matter and energy "warp" the fabric of spacetime around themselves.  To use a classic example, imagine a stretchable rubber sheet suspended by it's edges.  Now imagine putting a bowling ball on the sheet.  The "spacetime" will warp around the bowling ball creating a gravity well.  Now imagine placing an extremely dense and heavy BB on the sheet, causing it to stretch downward to almost a point.  That is a good analogy for a black hole.  In reality, the mass of the exploding star implodes on itself, and riches a density that sufficiently warps spacetime to cause a singularity, or a curvature of spacetime too great for light to escape.  That's a normal black hole.

Supermassive Black holes are even more fun.  So, the average "normal" black hole weighs in at about  5-50 solar masses.  For reference, that's about \(10^6\) to \(10^7\) Earths.  Supermassive black holes are a whole other story.  They weigh in at about 100,000 to 1,000,000,000 solar masses.  So, that's about \(3\times 10^{10}\) to \(3\times 10^{14}\) Earths.  These are far to large to be caused by a single star's collapse.  So, how do they grow?  They grow just like anything else: by eating.  Black holes by definition draw everything near them into them.  This let's them accumulate more and more matter through a process called accretion.  Nearby stars, gas clouds, and other black holes are simply consumed by the sheer size of the supermassive black hole and once accreted, simply add to its power.

So, this leads us to Sgr A*.  Our central black hole is the primary force that holds the galaxy together.  By this I mean, it holds the core together, which holds the matter outside of it, which holds the matter outside of it... etc.  Current estimates for Sgr A*'s mass are between 1-5 million solar masses, so it's a nice sized supermassive black hole.  It is likely that in the Milkomeda collision, Sgr A* and Andromeda's central black hole will combine to form a new black hole that will begin to eat it's surrounding post-collision matter and may even ignite into a quasar.

References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda–Milky_Way_collision
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermassive_black_hole
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagittarius_A*
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0210426

Blog Post 8, WS 3.1, Problem 4: Missing Matter

We actually observe a flat rotation curve in our own Milky Way. (You will show this with a radio telescope in your second lab!) This means v(r) is nearly constant for a large range of distances.

(a) Lets call this constant rotational velocity Vc. If the mass distribution of the Milky Way is spherically symmetric, what must be the M(<r) as a function of r in this case, in terms of Vc, r, and G?

(b) How does this compare with the picture of the galaxy you drew last week with most of the mass appearing to be in bulge?

(c) If the Milky Way rotation curve is observed to be flat (Vc = 240 km/s) out to 100 kpc, what is the total mass enclosed within 100 kpc? How does this compare with the mass in stars? Recall the total mass of stars in the Milky Way, a number you have been given in your first assignment and should commit to memory.


(a) Lets call this constant rotational velocity Vc. If the mass distribution of the Milky Way is spherically symmetric, what must be the M(<r) as a function of r in this case, in terms of Vc, r, and G? 

Let's start with our answer for last time.  Now V is a constant, and we are solving for M.
\[V(r)=\left(\frac{GM_{enc}}{r}\right)^{1/2}\]
\[\boxed{M(<r)=\frac{V_C^2 r}{G}}\]
This implies that mass must increase as a function of \(r\).

(b) How does this compare with the picture of the galaxy you drew last week with most of the mass appearing to be in bulge? 

This is a disastrous contradiction.  Our new equation implies that the mass density must increase as a function of distance form the center of the galaxy, but a galaxy with the majority of the mass in the center would never exhibit this behavior.  Beyond the central bulge, the mass would increase very slowly, less and less as radius increased.  Something is wrong with our model.

(c) If the Milky Way rotation curve is observed to be flat (Vc = 240 km/s) out to 100 kpc, what is the total mass enclosed within 100 kpc? How does this compare with the mass in stars? Recall the total mass of stars in the Milky Way, a number you have been given in your first assignment and should commit to memory. 

Let's plug in numbers:
\[M(<r)=\frac{V_C^2 r}{G}=\frac{(2.4\times 10^7 cm/s)^2 \left(100kpc \times \frac{3.1\times 10^{21}cm}{1 kpc}\right)}{6.7\times 10^{-8}cm^3g^{-1}s^{-2}}=\boxed{2.7\times 10^{45}g}\]
The stellar mass of the Milky Way is \(5\times 10^{10} M_{\odot}\) which is about \(1\times 10^{44} g\).  The ratio of these two masses is 3.7%.  Thus, stars make up only 3.7% of the Milky Way's mass.  The resolution to this problem is the speculated existence of Dark Matter, matter that we cannot yet detect that leads to the gravitational effects that we measure on the galactic level.

I worked with B. Brzycki, G. Grell, and N. James on this problem.

Blog Post 7, WS 3.1, Problem 3: Keplerian Rotation Curve

Last time we approximated the shape of our Galaxy as a cylinder. This time it will be a sphere. If there are no other large-scale forces other than gravity (a good approximation in most galaxies), then an object’s orbit around the galactic center will be approximately circular.

(a) Show that Kepler’s 3rd can be expressed in terms of the orbital frequency Ω =2π/P (i.e. orbits/time) and the distance from the center \(r^3\Omega^2=GM_{tot}\)

(b) Now, assume that the Milky Way has a spherical mass distribution – this is a good approximation when talking about the total mass distribution. Using what you learned from Problem 2, rewrite the above for an object orbiting a radius r from the center of the galaxy.

(c) Next, let’s call the velocity of this object at a distance r away from the center, v(r). Use Kepler’s Third Law as expressed above to derive v(r) for a mass m if the central mass is concentrated in a single point at the center (with mass \(M_{enc}\)), in terms of \(M_{enc}\), G, and r. This is known as the Keplerian rotation curve. As you saw earlier, it describes the motion of the planets in the solar system, since the Sun has nearly all of the mass.


(a) Show that Kepler’s 3rd can be expressed in terms of the orbital frequency Ω =2π/P (i.e. orbits/time) and the distance from the center \(r^3\Omega^2=GM_{tot}\) 

Let's start with Kepler's 3rd law.
\[P^2=\frac{4\pi^2r^3}{GM}\]
Next Let's solve our new equation for P.
\[P=\frac{2\pi}{\Omega}\]
Now we substitute the second equation into the first.
\[\frac{4 \pi^2}{\Omega^2}=\frac{4\pi^2r^3}{GM}\]
The \(4\pi^2\)'s cancel, leaving us with our answer:
\[\boxed{r^3\Omega^2=GM}\]

(b) Now, assume that the Milky Way has a spherical mass distribution – this is a good approximation when talking about the total mass distribution. Using what you learned from Problem 2, rewrite the above for an object orbiting a radius r from the center of the galaxy. 

In Problem 2 we determined that the mass inside a certain radius of a spherical mass distribution is defined as:
\[M_{enc}=\frac{4}{3}\pi \rho r^3\]
Where \(\rho\) is a mass density constant.
Substituting in for M, we get:
\[r^3\Omega^2=G\frac{4}{3}\pi \rho r^3\]
\[\boxed{\Omega=\left(\frac{4}{3}G\pi\rho\right)^{1/2}}\]

(c) Next, let’s call the velocity of this object at a distance r away from the center, v(r). Use Kepler’s Third Law as expressed above to derive v(r) for a mass m if the central mass is concentrated in a single point at the center (with mass \(M_{enc}\)), in terms of \(M_{enc}\), G, and r. This is known as the Keplerian rotation curve. As you saw earlier, it describes the motion of the planets in the solar system, since the Sun has nearly all of the mass.

Let's start with Kepler's Third as usual.
\[r^3\Omega^2=GM_{enc}\]
Earlier we defined \(\Omega=\frac{2\pi}{P}\).  With a simple modification of a factor of r, we can relate it to V. \(\Omega r=\frac{2\pi r}{P}=V\)
Substituting in, we get:
\[V^2(r)r=GM_{enc}\]
\[\boxed{V(r)=\left(\frac{GM_{enc}}{r}\right)^{1/2}}\]


I worked with B. Brzycki, G. Grell, and N. James on this problem.

Blog Post 6, WS 3.1, Problem 1: Solar System Orbital Velocities

1. Below are the orbital distances and periods of solar system planets.



(a) Calculate the orbital speed of each planet assuming that the orbits are perfectly circular. Report these speeds in AU/year.

(b) Recall that Kepler’s Third Law has the form:
\[P^2=\frac{4\pi^2a^3}{GM}\]
where P is the orbital period, a is the semimajor axis, M is the sum of the two masses in the system, and \(G=6.67\times 10^{-8}cm^3 f^{-1} s^{-2}\) . Calculate the orbital speeds of the planets predicted by Kepler’s Third Law for each planet.

(c) Plot the observed orbital speeds against the semimajor axis of each planet. In the same graph, plot the curve predicted by Kepler’s Third Law. Describe the shape of the resultant graph. What you have plotted is a rotation curve for the solar system, and the shape you observe is characteristic of Keplerian systems where one central mass dominates (e.g. the Sun).




(a) Calculate the orbital speed of each planet assuming that the orbits are perfectly circular. Report these speeds in AU/year.

If the orbits are completely circular, then each planet passes through a distance of \(2\pi a)\ AU per orbit since the is simply the circumference of a circle.
\[Velocity=\frac{Distance}{Time}=\frac{2\pi a}{P}\]
Plugging in numbers for Mercury, we get:
\[V=\frac{2\pi a}{P}=\frac{2\pi (0.39 AU)}{0.24 years}=10.2AU/Year\]
The rest of the planets follow the same system, yielding:

(b) Recall that Kepler’s Third Law has the form:
\[P^2=\frac{4\pi^2a^3}{GM}\]
where P is the orbital period, a is the semimajor axis, M is the sum of the two masses in the system, and \(G=6.67\times 10^{-8}cm^3 f^{-1} s^{-2}\) . Calculate the orbital speeds of the planets predicted by Kepler’s Third Law for each planet. 

There is a far easier way to do this.  Since our units are AU and years, we can ignore all of the constants and get:
\[P^2=a^3\]

From earlier we established that \(V=\frac{2\pi a}{P}\).  Solving for P we get:
\[P=\frac{2\pi a}{V}\]
Plugging this into Kepler's 3rd Law, we get:
\[\frac{4 \pi^2 a^2}{V^2}=a^3\]
Solving for V yields:
\[V=2\pi a^{-1/2}\]
Solving for Mercury yields:
\[V=2\pi a^{-1/2}=2\pi (0.39AU)^{-1/2}=10.06AU/Year\]
The rest of the planets follow the same equation yielding:

(c) Plot the observed orbital speeds against the semimajor axis of each planet. In the same graph, plot the curve predicted by Kepler’s Third Law. Describe the shape of the resultant graph. What you have plotted is a rotation curve for the solar system, and the shape you observe is characteristic of Keplerian systems where one central mass dominates (e.g. the Sun). 

The curve corresponds to an exponential decay defined by \(a^{-1/2}\).

I worked with B. Brzycki, G. Grell, and N. James on this problem.

Sunday, September 13, 2015

Blog Post 5, WS 2.1, Problem 4: Supernova Distance

A supernova goes off and you can barely detect it with your eyes. Astronomers tell you that supernovae have a luminosity of \(10^{42}\) erg/s; what is the distance of the supernova?
Assume the supernova emits most of its energy at the peak of the eye’s sensitivity and that it explodes isotropically.

This problem is remarkably similar to Problem 3a from WS 2.1. We can use the same equation relating distance, flux, and luminosity.
\[d=\left(\frac{L}{4\pi F}\right)^{1/2}\]
The tricky part is finding the flux.  
\[F=\frac{energy}{Area\times Time}=\frac{erg}{cm^2s}\]
We are told in the problem that the supernova is just barely visible to the human eye.  This is the key to the flux problem.  
Here are some facts about the human eye. The eye needs to receive 10 photons in order to get a light signal.  The eye refreshes itself on average 60 times per second.  The pupil has a radius of about 0.35cm.
Let's change these into variables:
Signal \(s=10 photons\), refresh rate \(f_p=60hz\), and radius \(r=0.35cm\)
The eye's peak frequency sensitivity is \(f=5.4\times 10^{14} hz\)
We can calculate the energy in a photon (\(E_p\)) using Planck's constant \(h=6.63\times 10^{-27} erg\times s\)
\[E_p=hf\]
We need 10 photons per refresh cycle, so:
\[E=s E_p=s hf\]
We need energy per second, so we should introduce the eye's refresh rate.
\[\frac{E}{t}=s hf f_p\]
This is the energy per second received by the eye.
Next, we need the eye's area.  Since the pupil is a circle, this is elementary.
\[A=\pi r^2\]
So, putting this together, we get:
\[F=\frac{E}{tA}\]
\[F=\frac{shff_p}{\pi r^2}\]
We want distance, so when we contend this with our original equation, we get:
\[d=\left(\frac{L\pi r^2}{4\pi shf_p f}\right)^{1/2}\]
It's time to plug in numbers:
\[d=\left(\frac{(10^{42}erg/s) (0.35cm)^2}{4 (10)(6.63\times 10^{-27}ergs\times s)(60hz)(5.4\times 10^{14}hz)}\right)^{1/2}\]
\[\boxed{d=3.8\times 10^{24}cm \approx 1200 kpc}\]

I worked with B. Brzycki, G. Grell, and N. James on this problem.

Blog Post 4, WS 2.1, Problem 3: Flux and Luminosity


You observe a star you measure its flux to be F*. If the luminosity of the star is L*,
(a) Give an expression for how far away the star is. 

(b) What is its parallax?
(c) If the peak wavelength of its emission is at λ0, what is the star’s temperature? 
(d) What is the star’s radius, R*?

(a) Give an expression for how far away the star is. 
Let's start with the star's distance away.  Imagine that the star is emitting a fixed number of photons in all directions (which it is).  Now imagine that you have a a sheet of cardboard (red lines).  When you are close to the star, this sheet will block a greater number of photons (blue rays) than when you are far away from the star.  Since luminosity is the total amount of energy radiated form the star, and flux is the energy received per unit of area, this lines up with our cardboard analogy to get us the equation that we want, where \(d\) is distance away from the star. 
\[F_*=\frac{L_*}{4\pi d^2}\]
\[d^2=\frac{L_*}{4\pi F_*}\]
\[\boxed{d=\left(\frac{L_*}{4\pi F_*}\right)^{1/2}}\]

(b) What is its parallax? 
Parallax angle (\(P\)), is the angle formed between a star and Earth when the Earth is 3 months further around the sun.  Parallax angle relates to the star's distance in the following way:
\[d=\frac{1}{P}\]
\[P=\frac{1}{d}\]
We solved for \(d\) in the previous problem, so let's plug that in to get our answer.
\[\boxed{P=\left(\frac{4\pi F_*}{L_*}\right)^{1/2}}\]

(c) If the peak wavelength of its emission is at λ0, what is the star’s temperature? 
Peak wavelength and stellar temperature are related by Wien's Law which states:
\[\lambda_0=\frac{b}{T_*}\]
Where \(b\) = Wien's constant = \(2.9\times 10^{-3}mK\)
Solving for temperature, we get:
\[\boxed{T_*=\frac{b}{\lambda_0}}\]

(d) What is the star’s radius, R*? 
The luminosity of a star is dependent upon it's radius and temperature.
\[L_*=4\pi R_*^2 \sigma T_*^4\]
Where \(\sigma\) is Stefan's Constant with a value of \(5.67\times 10^{-5} erg\text{ }cm^{-2}s^{-1}K^{-4}\)
Solving for radius, we get:
\[R_*=\left(\frac{L_*}{4 \pi \sigma T_*^4}\right)^{1/2}\]
Plugging in for \(T_*\), we are left with:
\[R_*=\left(\frac{L_* \lambda_0^4}{4 \pi \sigma b^4}\right)^{1/2}\]
\[\boxed{R_*=\frac{\lambda_0^2}{2b^2}\left(\frac{L_*}{\pi \sigma}\right)^{1/2}}\]

I worked with B. Brzycki, G. Grell, and N. James on this problem.

Saturday, September 12, 2015

Blog Post 3, WS 1.2, Problem 1: Drawing the Galaxy


Create an illustration of the Milky Way galaxy as viewed from outside the galaxy, viewed from the side and from above. You can draw by hand, or use a digital drawing tool such as Google Draw, Gimp or Illustrator. Post your illustration as a blog post, along with descriptive text of the figure. Your audience is a high school senior interested in astronomy, so don’t let them down with an obfuscated or incorrect description! Be sure to include the components in the list below. You may use any resource you find on the internet, but be sure that you have two sources for each bit of information you find so as to not post embarrassingly erroneous information. Wikipedia provides pretty solid information, but you should use library books, lecture notes, online books and/or Youtube videos as supporting information.
(a) Location of the Sun
(b) Thin/thick disks, bulge, halo
(c) Globular clusters
(d) The Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC) and the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC)
(e) Sgr A* (Black hole)
(f) Location of Orion star forming region, and the nearest and furthest (known) open clusters to the Sun
(g) Scale length and scale height (in order to draw galaxy to scale)


 
 Here we see the Milky Way galaxy as viewed from above.  The basic layout of the galaxy is a disk with a central bulge of stars and clusters with a supermassive black hole named Sagittarius A* (Not to scale, exaggerated for ease of location) at the center.  The various "arms" of the galaxy are pictured and labeled above.  Spot "A" is the location of the furthest observed open star cluster from Earth, vbD-Hagen 217.  This object is around 12 kpc from our Sun.  Spot "B" is the location of the closest observed open cluster from Earth, Mamajek 1.  This object is only 97 pc away, very close on galactic scales.  Spot "C" is the location of the Orion Nebula, a place were new stars are born.  Aptly, it is located in the Orion arm of the galaxy.  Globular Clusters are scattered around the galaxy, but are concentrated in the rings and in the galactic budge/core.

Here we see the Milky Way as pictured from the side/edge.  The Galactic Bulge is very visible at the center of the galaxy. The light blue disk along the middle of the diagram consists of the Thick and Thin Disks where most of the stars in the galaxy reside along with the bulge.  Below th galaxy are two dwarf galaxies, the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) and the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC).  These two dwarf galaxies are trapped in the Milky Way's gravitational field and it.  The yellow glow around the galaxy is the galactic Halo, a collection of stars, dust, and dark matter that is separate from the disks.  In elliptical galaxies, there is no clear break between the main part of the galaxy and the halo, but in spiral galaxies such as our galaxy, the break is very obvious.


References:
http://www.univie.ac.at/webda/recent_data.html
http://www.astrodigital.org/astronomy/milkywaygalaxy.html
http://www.sslmit.unibo.it/zat/images/cartography/M-Way_2.htm
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/AKARI_presents_detailed_all-sky_map_in_infrared_light/(print)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_coordinate_system
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/features/cosmic/milkyway_info.html
https://dept.astro.lsa.umich.edu/ugactivities/Labs/MWgalStruct/index.html
http://earthsky.org/clusters-nebulae-galaxies/the-small-magellanic-cloud
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/06/09/the-first-globular-cluster-out/
http://archive.cosmosmagazine.com/news/milky-way-inner-halo-reveals-its-age/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_Nebula
http://www.robertmartinayers.org/tools/coordinates.html

All diagrams were made using Microsoft Powerpoint for Mac 2011.

Blog Post 2, WS 1.1, Problems 2-4: Mikomeda Collision

How long will it take for Andromeda to collide with the Milky Way? The time-scale here is the free-fall time, tff . One way of finding this is to assume that Andromeda is on a highly elliptical orbit (\(e \rightarrow 1\)) around the Milky Way. With this assumption, we can use Kepler’s Third Law 
\[P^2=\frac{4\pi^2a^3}{G(M_{MW}+M_{And})}\]
where P is the period of the orbit and a is the semi-major axis. How does free fall time relate to the period? Estimate it to an order of magnitude. 



We already have our equation, but we need to modify it sightly.  Normally the period of an orbit is the length of time needed for the orbiting body to complete one full orbit.  Since we are assuming a highly elliptical orbit that ends in collision, we only need half of an orbit.

\[P^2=\frac{4\pi^2a^3}{G(M_{MW}+M_{And})}\]
\[P=\left(\frac{4\pi^2a^3}{G(M_{MW}+M_{And})}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\]
\[T_{ff}=\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)\left(\frac{4\pi^2a^3}{G(M_{MW}+M_{And})}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\]

Now let's plug in numbers:
\[T_{ff}=\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)\left(\frac{4\pi^2(2.4\times 10^{24} cm)^3}{(6.67\times 10^{-8}cm^3 g^{-1}s^{-2})(1.6\times 10^{45}g+3\times10^{45}g)}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\]

\[\boxed{T_{ff}=7\times 10^{17} sec \approx 4\text{ billion years}}\]

Let’s estimate the average number density of stars throughout the Milky Way, n. First, we need to clarify the distribution of stars. Stars are concentrated in the center of the galaxy, and their density decreases exponentially:
\[n(r)\propto e^{-r/R_s}\]
Rs is also known as the “scale radius” of the galaxy. The Milky Way has a scale radius of 3.5 kpc.
With this in mind, estimate n in two ways:
(a) Consider that within a 2 pc radius of the Sun there are five stars: the Sun, α Centauri A and B, Proxima Centauri, and Barnard’s Star.


So, we have a small sample, but we can work with it. 
\[n=\frac{stars}{volume}\]
A radius around the sun is a sphere, so \(V=\frac{4}{3}\pi r^3\).
\[n=\frac{stars}{\frac{4}{3}\pi r^3}\]
One parsec is \(3\times 10^{18} cm\) so 2 parsecs is \(6\times 10^{18} cm\).  We have 5 stars in this radius.
\[n=\frac{5\text{ stars}}{\frac{4}{3}\pi (6\times 10^{18}cm)^3}\]
\[\boxed{n=5.5\times 10^{-57} \frac{stars}{cm^3}}\]

(b) The Galaxy’s “scale height” is 330 pc. Use the galaxy’s scale lengths as the lengths of the volume within the Galaxy containing most of the stars. Assume a typical stellar mass of 0.5M. 

In this part, we are approximating the galaxy as a cylinder of radius \(R_s\) and height 330 pc.  We can then use the total solar mass of the galaxy and the average solar mass to find out the total density of stars.
\[n=\frac{stars}{volume}\]
\[V=\pi R_s^2 h\]
\[stars=\frac{M_{galaxy}}{M_*}\]
\[n=\frac{\frac{M_{galaxy}}{M_*}}{\pi R_s^2 h}\]
330 pc is about \(10^{21} cm\), and 3.5kpc is about \(10^{22}cm\), so:
\[n=\frac{\frac{10^{10}M_*}{0.5M_*}}{\pi (10^{22}cm)^2 (10^{21}cm)}\]
\[\boxed{n=6.3\times 10^{-55} \frac{stars}{cm^3}}\]

Determine the collision rate of the stars using the number density of the stars (n), the cross-section for a star σ ̊, and the average velocity of Milkomeda’s stars as they collide v.

For this part, we will use a mechanism known as dimensional analysis to get an approximation for a complicated process. 
We want to solve for the collision rate \(C\) in \(\frac{1}{time}\).
We know Stellar Density \(n=\frac{stars}{length^3}\), galactic velocity \(v=\frac{length}{time}\), and stellar cross section \(\sigma = \frac{length^2}{star}\)
Conveniently, the units of \(nv\sigma=\left(\frac{stars}{length^3}\right)\left(\frac{length}{time}\right)\left(\frac{length^2}{star}\right)=\frac{1}{time}=C\)
This means that:
\[C= nv\sigma\]
(Technically the equals sign should be a proportionate sign since dimensional analysis doesn't include coefficients, but we will ignore this for our rough approximation).
Let's break down our variables.  
\(n\) is stellar density, which we solved for above.  Thus \(n=6.3\times 10^{-55}\frac{stars}{cm^3}\).
\(v\) is galactic velocity, which Wikipedia claims right now is about \(1\times 10^7 cm/sec\).  However, when the galaxies collide this will be much greater due to gravitational acceleration.  We can use conservation of energy to find this.  Let\(M_{MW}\) and \(M_{And}\) be the masses of the two galaxies, \(U\) be gravity potential energy, and \(a\) be their current separation.
\[U=\frac{GM_{MW}M_{And}}{a}\]
This energy will be converted to kinetic energy at the time of collision, so:
\[\frac{GM_{MW}M_{And}}{a}=\frac{1}{2}(M_{MW}+M_{And})v_1^2\]
Thus:
\[v=v_0+\left(\frac{2GM_{MW}M_{And}}{(M_{MW}+M_{And})a}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\]


\[v=1\times 10^7cm/s+\left(\frac{2(6.7\times 10^{-8}cm^3g^{-1}s^{-2})(1.6\times 10^{45}g \times 3\times 10^{45}g)}{(1.6\times 10^{45}g+3\times 10^{45}g)(2.4\times 10^{24}cm)}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\]
\[v=1.8\times 10^7cm/s\]
\(\sigma\) is the cross sectional area of a star.  If we assume that a star's radius is \(7\times 10^{10}cm\), then \(\sigma=\pi (7\times 10^{10})^2=1.5\times 10^{22}cm^2\)
It's time to put this all together:

\[C= nv\sigma=(6.3\times 10^{-55}stars/cm^3)(1.8\times 10^7 cm/s)(1.5\times 10^{22}cm^2/star)\]
\[\boxed{C=1.7\times 10^{-25} collisions/sec}\]


How many stars will collide every year? Is the Sun safe, or likely to collide with another star?
This is about \(5.3\times 10^{-18}\) collisions per year.
If we invert this to find how long it would take for a single collision, we find that a collision will occur once every  \(1.9\times 10^{17} years\).  This equates to pretty much never.
The sun is very safe.

I worked with M. Bledsoe, B. Brzycki, G. Grell, and N. James on these problems.

Blog Post 1, Hello Universe

I am Anthony Taylor, Harvard Class of 2018. I grew up in Endicott, NY (Greater Binghamton). I graduated from Maine Endwell Senior High School in 2014. I plan to concentrate in both Astrophysics and Physics. I anticipate attending graduate school and working for either academia or the private sector in a research position.

From a young age I have been interested in astronomy, outer space, and space exploration. I believe that with the continued improvements in technology, astronomy is a field of study that has great potential in advancing scientific knowledge in a variety of fields across the board form theoretical physics to biology. I would like to contribute to and to be a part of this process.  


I am taking Astronomy 17 out of interest in the subject matter and as part of the Astrophysics curriculum.

On a lighter note, my personal hobbies include distance running, computers, technology, martial arts, and riding my 2015 BMW F800R motorcycle.