mirror of
https://asciireactor.com/otho/as-500.git
synced 2024-11-24 03:15:05 +00:00
170 lines
8.8 KiB
Plaintext
170 lines
8.8 KiB
Plaintext
Homework 18, due Nov 1
|
||
The N II spectrum forms from N + , which is iso-electronic with O III / O 2+. This means that they have the same number of orbiting electrons although the nuclear charge is different. The structure of the energy levels of N II will be similar to O III although the energies and As will bedifferent. In homework 15 did O III. For this we will do N II. Go to NIST and look at the energy levels given there. 1 The lowest terms of O III are 3 P, 1 D, and 1 S, as shown in Lecture 15, top left slide of page 3. The energies of the levels are also given on that slide. How does the energies of the levels in N II compare with O III? What is the net nuclear charge of an orbiting valence electron in N II? What is the net nuclear charge for O III? For both, the net charge is the nuclear charge minus the number of inner electrons that screen the nuclear charge.
|
||
|
||
The energy levels have the same ratios, so the absolute value of each level for one ion is a scalar multiple of the absolute value of the energy of the level of the other ion.
|
||
|
||
For N II, Z[N II] = 7. For O III, Z[O III] = 8.
|
||
|
||
Net nuclear charge Q[N II] = 7 - 1 = 6, and Q[O III] = 8 - 2 = 6.
|
||
|
||
─────────────
|
||
2. Use these energies to write out the Boltzmann factor, exp −E/kT, for the 1 D and 1 S levels.
|
||
|
||
@ 10000 K, kT = 0.6333621 Rydberg
|
||
Boltzmann Factor β = exp(-E/kt) = exp(-E/(0.6333621 R))
|
||
|
||
1D 1S
|
||
E 1.396e-1 2.979e-1
|
||
β 4.0111 6.2480e-1
|
||
|
||
─────────────
|
||
3. For O III the 1 S – 1 D transition has a wavelength of 4363A. The wavelength of the 1 D – 3 P 2 level is 5007A. Use NIST and air wavelengths to find the wavelength of these two transitions for N II.
|
||
|
||
E = hf = hc/λ, λ = hc/E, where E = E₁ - E₂ (a transition from higher energy E₂ to lower energy E₁).
|
||
|
||
N II E1 (R) E2 (R) wavelength (A)
|
||
1S → 1D 2.9788E-01 1.3957E-01 5755.9878991494
|
||
1D → 3P2 1.3957E-01 1.1920E-03 6585.0757723516
|
||
|
||
─────────────
|
||
4. Use NIST to find the total Einstein A for the 1 S – 1 D and 1 D – 3 P 2 lines. How do they compare with the As for O III?
|
||
|
||
Just looking them up in the table by wavelength,
|
||
|
||
N II wavelength (A) A (1/s)
|
||
1S → 1D 5755.9878991494 1.14
|
||
1D → 3P2 6585.0757723516 8.65e-06
|
||
|
||
By the way, I see that my wavelengths are off a bit. Maybe difference between air and vacuum?
|
||
|
||
─────────────
|
||
5. What is the Boltzmann factor that predicts the LTE population ratio of the 1 D and 1 S levels? Assume LTE to predict the ratio of the 5755 to 6584 lines.
|
||
|
||
I realize now as I inspect homework 15 more closely that I should be doing these things as a function of T. Alright,
|
||
|
||
exp(-E₁₂/kT) = exp(-(E₁ᴅ - E₁ꜱ)/kT)
|
||
|
||
exp(((E₁ᴅ - E₁ꜱ)/k)/T)
|
||
= exp((0.1384 R - 0.1583)/(6.334e-6 R K⁻¹)/T)
|
||
= exp((-3147 K)/T).
|
||
|
||
Assuming LTE, the line ratio is given by g₁/g₂ A₁/A₂ λ₂/λ₁ exp((-3147 K)/T).
|
||
|
||
|
||
g₁/g₂ A₁/A₂ λ₂/λ₁ = 3.316e-5.
|
||
|
||
Seems small just based on that we'd be studying something in class that has a lot of action, but I think this should be expected considering the disparity in the einstein probabilities. I guess this just slides the action up or down the temperature scale, anyway.
|
||
|
||
─────────────
|
||
6. The ratio observed in the Orion Nebula is 0.02 ±0.003. What is the kinetic temperature, including the uncertainty? (This assumes LTE – that is not correct for the Orion Nebula.)
|
||
|
||
3.316e-5 exp((3147 K)/T) = 0.02 ±0.003.
|
||
|
||
Note: I've gone back and forth about this, because I would think this exp() factor should be negative, but from
|
||
|
||
g₁/g₂ nₜₒₜ/U U/nₜₒₜ exp(-(E₁ - E₀))/exp(-(E₂ - E₀)),
|
||
|
||
I get g₁/g₂ exp(E₂ - E₁).
|
||
|
||
3.316e-5 exp((3147 K)/T) = 0.02 ±0.003.
|
||
|
||
ln(3.316e-5) (3147 K)/T = ln(0.02 ±0.003).
|
||
|
||
T = ln(3.316e-5)/ln(0.02 ±0.003) (3147 K) = 7.966e3 K
|
||
≈ 8000 K.
|
||
|
||
This is quite high, like the photosphere of a star a bit hotter than Sol. I expected to get something more like 4000K, because of a previous assignment. I'm thinking there's an error here, but not an egregious one.
|
||
|
||
─────────────
|
||
We have demonstrated that Mathmatica cannot solve HW 17. Redo this with a spreadsheet. First derive and show the equations that will go in each column of the spreadsheet. In the spreadsheet make the first columns a log10 range in z with 10 < z < 1e5. Makecolumns giving the kinetic temperature, total hydrogen density, and age of the universe. Next use the Saha equation and electron conservation to write down the expression for the H + and H 0 density in terms of the temperature, by solving the quadratic.
|
||
|
||
Approximate relationship of redshift z to thermodynamic properties:
|
||
|
||
◆ T kinetic = 2.7 (1+z) K
|
||
◆ n(H) ≈ 2.51×10⁻⁷ (1+z)³ cm ⁻³
|
||
◆ Age ≈ 1.3×10¹⁰ (1+z)\^-1.5 yr
|
||
|
||
The Saha equation for ionized hydrogen is
|
||
nᵢₒₙ nₑ/nₐₜₒₘ = Uᵢₒₙgₑ/Uₐₜₒₘ (2πmₑkT/h²)^(3/2) exp(-Eᵢₒₙ/kT).
|
||
|
||
Checking units:
|
||
|
||
2πmₑkT/h² → g R (R*s)⁻²
|
||
→ g R⁻¹ s⁻²
|
||
→ g (g cm² s⁻²)⁻¹ s⁻²
|
||
→ cm⁻²
|
||
|
||
(2πmₑkT/h²)^3/2 → cm⁻³
|
||
|
||
Of course, nᵢₒₙ = nₑ, for ionized hydrogen.
|
||
|
||
(2πmₑkT/h²)^(3/2) = 2.415e15 cm⁻³ K^-(3/2) T^(3/2).
|
||
|
||
Established in previous assignments.
|
||
|
||
Eᵢₒₙ = 1 R.
|
||
gₑ = 2.
|
||
Uᵢₒₙ = 1.
|
||
Uₐₜₒₘ = 2.
|
||
|
||
So,
|
||
nᵢₒₙ²/nₐₜₒₘ = (2.415e15 cm⁻³ K^-(3/2) T^(3/2)) exp(-(1 R)/kT).
|
||
|
||
Set
|
||
α(T) = 2.415e15 cm⁻³ K^-(3/2) T^(3/2), and
|
||
β(T) = exp(-(1 R)/kT) = exp(-157900 K T⁻¹), and
|
||
γ(T) = α β.
|
||
|
||
Then, nᵢₒₙ²/nₐₜₒₘ = γ.
|
||
|
||
Particle conservation gives nₜₒₜ - nᵢₒₙ = nₐₜₒₘ.
|
||
|
||
To find an expression for the ionized hydrogen fraction, substitute for
|
||
|
||
nᵢₒₙ²/(nₜₒₜ - nᵢₒₙ) = γ.
|
||
|
||
nᵢₒₙ² + γ nᵢₒₙ - γ nₜₒₜ = 0.
|
||
|
||
Quadratic formula gives
|
||
|
||
nᵢₒₙ(nₜₒₜ,T) = 1/2 (-√γ √(γ + 4nₜₒₜ) - γ) and
|
||
|
||
nᵢₒₙ(nₜₒₜ,T) = 1/2 (√γ √(γ + 4nₜₒₜ) - γ).
|
||
|
||
For neutral hydrogen fraction,
|
||
|
||
(nₜₒₜ - nₐₜₒₘ)²/nₐₜₒₘ = γ.
|
||
|
||
(nₜₒₜ - nₐₜₒₘ)(nₜₒₜ - nₐₜₒₘ) = γ nₐₜₒₘ.
|
||
|
||
nₜₒₜ² - 2 nₐₜₒₘ nₜₒₜ + nₐₜₒₘ² = γ nₐₜₒₘ.
|
||
|
||
nₐₜₒₘ² + nₜₒₜ² - 2 nₐₜₒₘ nₜₒₜ - γ nₐₜₒₘ = 0.
|
||
|
||
nₐₜₒₘ² - nₐₜₒₘ(2 nₜₒₜ + γ) + nₜₒₜ² = 0.
|
||
|
||
Quadratic formula gives
|
||
|
||
nₐₜₒₘ(nₜₒₜ,T) = 1/2 (± √γ √(γ + 4 nₜₒₜ) + γ + 2 nₜₒₜ).
|
||
|
||
Reminder: α(T) = 2.415e15 cm⁻³ K^-(3/2) T^(3/2), and
|
||
β(T) = exp(-157900 K⁻¹ T).
|
||
|
||
So, I have
|
||
|
||
nᵢₒₙ(nₜₒₜ,T) = 1/2 (√γ √(γ + 4nₜₒₜ) - γ), and
|
||
|
||
nₐₜₒₘ(nₜₒₜ,T) = 1/2 (√γ √(γ + 4 nₜₒₜ) + γ + 2 nₜₒₜ), with
|
||
|
||
γ(T) = 2.415e15 cm⁻³ K^-(3/2) T^(3/2) exp(-157900 K T⁻¹).
|
||
|
||
─────────────
|
||
Make columns giving the H + and H 0 density at each redshift. Do not take the difference to two nearly identical numbers! Use different solutions for the quadratic to get the H + and H 0 densities. Plot each over the z range 10 to 1e5. The universe recombined at roughly z≈1000.
|
||
|
||
OK. I was stuck on this for a long time. I used the above equations, but I have what seems like numerical instability at high redshift. Perhaps I've used an unstable expression, but I think what I'm seeing here is a problem with librecalc when it computes √γ √(γ + 4nₜₒₜ) - γ. It seems that it's leaving out the nₜₒₜ factor where γ is very large, because of the disparity in order, I suppose. This is unfortunate, but I can't see how to fix it at the moment. However, the graph at least shows the general characteristics I'm looking for, with the ionization front at z≃1000. Plot attached.
|
||
|
||
─────────────
|
||
Find the brems opacity, recalling that the units are cm -1 . Make columns giving the photon mean free path (the inverse of the opacity) and the visible diameter of the universe. At what z do they cross? What is the temperature at that redshift? That is the photosphere we observe. Use the Wien displacement theorem to find the temperature of the blackbody we observe today.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Plot axes must be labeled with a font that can be read on a screen. Do not use a tiny font. Clearly label all lines on the plot. Especially clear and well-done examples may be posted as the solution. There will be extra credit if I use yours. |