

Home Astronomy research Software instruments Stellar equation of states EOS with ionization EOS for supernovae Chemical potentials Stellar atmospheres Voigt Function Jeans escape Polytropic stars Cold white dwarfs Adiabatic white dwarfs Cold neutron stars Stellar opacities Neutrino energy loss rates Ephemeris routines FermiDirac functions Polyhedra volume Plane  cube intersection Coating an ellipsoid Nuclear reaction networks Nuclear statistical equilibrium Laminar deflagrations CJ detonations ZND detonations Fitting to conic sections Unusual linear algebra Derivatives on uneven grids Pentadiagonal solver Quadratics, Cubics, Quartics Supernova light curves Exact Riemann solutions 1D PPM hydrodynamics Hydrodynamic test cases Galactic chemical evolution Universal twobody problem Circular and elliptical 3 body The pendulum Phyllotaxis MESA MESAWeb FLASH Zingale's software Brown's dStar GR1D code Iliadis' STARLIB database Herwig's NuGRID Meyer's NetNuc Presentations Illustrations cococubed YouTube Bicycle adventures Public Outreach Education materials 2022 ASU Solar Systems Astronomy 2022 ASU Energy in Everyday Life AAS Journals AAS Youtube 2022 Earendel, A Highly Magnified Star 2022 TV Columbae, Micronova 2022 White Dwarfs and ^{12}C(α,γ)^{16}O 2022 Black Hole mass spectrum 2022 MESA VI 2022 MESA in Don't Look Up 2022 MESA Marketplace 20122023 MESA Schools 2022 MESA Classroom 2021 Bill Paxton, Tinsley Prize Contact: F.X.Timmes my one page vitae, full vitae, research statement, and teaching statement. 
Before using the software instruments below, perhaps glance at the articles that describe them. The first law of thermodynamics $$ {\rm dE = T \ dS + {P\over \rho^2} \ d\rho} \label{eq1} \tag{1} $$ is an exact differential, which requires that the thermodynamic relations $$ \eqalignno { {\rm P} \ & = \ {\rm \rho^2 \ \dfrac{\partial E}{\partial \rho} \Biggm_T \ + \ T \ \dfrac{\partial P}{\partial T} \Biggm_{\rho} } & (2) \cr {\rm \dfrac{\partial E}{\partial T} \Biggm_{\rho}} \ & = \ {\rm T \ \dfrac{\partial S}{\partial T} \Biggm_{\rho} } & (3) \cr {\rm  \dfrac{\partial S}{\partial \rho} \Biggm_T } \ & = \ {\rm {1 \over \rho^2} \ \dfrac{\partial P}{\partial T} \Biggm_{\rho} } & (4) \cr } $$ be satisfied. An equation of state is thermodynamically consistent if all three of these identities are true. Thermodynamic inconsistency may manifest itself in the unphysical buildup (or decay) of the entropy (or temperature) during numerical simulations of what should be an adiabatic flow. When the temperature and density are the natural thermodynamic variables to use, the appropriate thermodynamic potential is the Helmholtz free energy $$ {\rm F = E  T \ S} \hskip 0.5in {\rm dF = S \ dT + {P \over \rho^2} \ d\rho} \label{eq5} $$ With the pressure defined as $$ {\rm P \ = \ \rho^2 \ \dfrac{\partial F}{\partial \rho} \Biggm_T } \label{eq6} \tag{6} $$ the first of the Maxwell relations (Eq. 2) is automatically satisfied, as substitution of Eq. (5) into Eq. (6) demonstrates. With the entropy defined as $$ {\rm S \ = \ \dfrac{\partial F}{\partial T} \Biggm_{\rho} } \label{eq7} \tag{7} $$ the second of the Maxwell relations (Eq. 3) is automatically satisfied, as substitution of Eq. (5) into Eq. (7) demonstrates. The requirement that the mixed partial derivatives commute $$ {\rm \dfrac{\partial^2 F}{\partial T \ \partial \rho} \ = \ \dfrac{\partial F}{\partial \rho \ \partial T} } \label{eq8} \tag{8} $$ ensures that the third of the thermodynamic identity (Eq. 4) is satisfied, as substitution of Eq. (5) into Eq. (8) shows. Consider any interpolating function for the Helmholtz free energy $F(\rho,{\rm T})$ which satisfies Eq. (8). Thermodynamic consistency is guaranteed as long as Eq. (6) is used first to evaluate the pressure, Eq. (7) is used second to evaluate the entropy, and finally Eq. (5) is used to evaluate the internal energy. In fact, this procedure is almost too robust! The interpolated values may be a horribly inaccurate but they will be thermodynamically consistent. Here then are bzip2 tarballs of six stellar interior equations of state:
Also see Josiah Schwab's pythonhelmholtz for the Helmholtz equation of state, and Matt Coleman's port of the Helmholtz equation of state to python helmeos. The Skye EOS = an improved Helmholtz EOS for the noninteracting parts + an improved Potekhin & Chabrier EOS for the Coulomb plama parts + autodifferentiation. Its the bees knees for ionized plasmas as of 2021. Skye is avaliable at https://github.com/adamjermyn/Skye, and the article is described more on the thermodynamics research page. The Helmholtz EOS implements the formalism above on a grid, executes the fastest (memory is faster than cpu), displays perfect thermodynamic consistency, and has a maximum error on the default grid of 10$^{6}$. Helmholtz is the stellar EOS of choice in the FLASH software instrument and a backplane of the EOS module in the MESA software instrument. The Helmholtz free energy data file provided spans 10$^{12}$ ≤ density (g cm$^{3}$) ≤ 10$^{15}$ and 10$^{3}$ ≤ temperature (K) ≤ 10$^{13}$ at 20 points per decade. The Nadyozhin EOS is the fastest of the analytic routines, has very good thermodynamic consistency, a maximum error of 10$^{5}$, and is also avaliable in FLASH. The Timmes EOS is as slow as molasses during a North Dakota winter, but it computes the noninteracting electronpositron equation of state with no approximations, is exact to machine precision in IEEE double precision arithmetic, has excellent thermodynamic consistency, and serves as the reference point for comparisons to the other EOS routines. In fact, the Helmholtz free energy table used by the Helmholtz EOS is calculated from the Timmes EOS. There are times when a simpler cold fermi gas EOS is a wonderful thing. Such an EOS is in cold_fermi_gas.tbz. One can see this equation of state in action on this cold white dwarf page. 


Please cite the relevant references if you publish a piece of work that use these codes, pieces of these codes, or modified versions of them. Offer coauthorship as appropriate. 
