REVIEW 1 cited by
Stellar evolution with rotation and magnetic fields:I. The relative importance of rotational and magnetic effects
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Stellar evolution with rotation and magnetic fields:I. The relative importance of rotational and magnetic effects
read the original abstract
We compare the current effects of rotation in stellar evolution to those of the magnetic field created by the Tayler instability. In stellar regions, where magnetic field can be generated by the dynamo due to differential rotation (Spruit 2002), we find that the growth rate of the magnetic instability is much faster than for the thermal instability. Thus, meridional circulation is negligible with respect to the magnetic fields, both for the transport of angular momentum and of chemical elements. Also, the horizontal coupling by the magnetic field, which reaches values of a few $10^5$ G, is much more important than the effects of the horizontal turbulence. The field, however, is not sufficient to distort the shape of the equipotentials. We impose the condition that the energy of the magnetic field created by the Tayler--Spruit dynamo cannot be larger than the energy excess present in the differential rotation. This leads to a criterion for the existence of the magnetic field in stellar interiors. Numerical tests are made in a rotating star model of 15 M$_{\odot}$ rotating with an initial velocity of 300 km$\cdot$s$^{-1}$.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
The IACOB project XIX. Revisiting massive-star evolution with empirical TAMS constraints: updated models, overshoot calibration, and the population of blue supergiants
Massive-star models require mass-dependent core overshoot (α_ov ≈ 0.18–0.45) to match the empirical TAMS, but still fail to explain the velocity dependence of the TAMS and the observed blue supergiant population.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.