1: %=========================================================================

2: \section{Non-linear oscillations of spherically symmetric stars}

3: \label{pert}

4: %

5: %

6: %=========================================================================

7: \subsection{Introduction}

8: %

9: %

10: In this section we will turn our attention towards the study of compact

11: stars in the framework of general relativity. The discovery of stars

12: significantly more compact than the sun goes back to observations of the

13: binary star Sirius in the middle of the 19th century.

14: Sirius is the brightest star in

15: the sky as viewed from the earth. From an astrophysical point of view,

16: however, the faint companion of the bright main star, Sirius B has provoked

17: much more interest. The astronomer Bessel was the first to

18: infer the existence of an unseen companion of Sirius from a wobble in

19: the motion of the main star. It took another twenty years

20: before Alvin Clark managed to optically resolve Sirius B.

21: By the early twentieth century it became clear from the analysis of

22: its electromagnetic spectrum that Sirius B has a rather high surface

23: temperature of about 25,000$\,K$. In view of this result the extraordinarily

24: low luminosity of Sirius B lead to the conclusion that the star is very

25: small, about the size of the earth. This type of

26: high density star was consequently named a {\em white dwarf}.

27: It was understood at the time that white dwarfs mark the final stage in the

28: evolution of stars, but it remained a puzzle how such compact objects

29: were able to support themselves against gravitational contraction.

30: The answer was first provided by Eddington and

31: Fowler who suggested that the

32: star is supported by the degenerate electron pressure, a quantum

33: effect arising from the Pauli-exclusion principle. When Chandrasekhar

34: worked out the corresponding theory for a relativistic electron gas

35: he made the remarkable discovery that

36: the degenerate electron pressure will never be sufficient

37: to support white dwarfs above a mass of about $1.4\,M_{\odot}$.

38: In his words: {\em ``For a star of small mass the natural white dwarf

39: stage is an initial step towards complete extinction. A star of

40: large mass cannot pass into the white dwarf stage and one is left

41: speculating on other possibilities.''} It did not take long before

42: such speculations were directed towards the existence of neutron stars.\\

43: The first suggestion that stars made up of nucleons may exist

44: came from Landau in 1932 just two years after the discovery of the neutron.

45: Two years later Baade and Zwicky proposed the idea that neutron stars

46: may be the product of supernova explosions and thus mark the final stage in

47: the evolution of stars of large mass. The first theoretical models of

48: neutron stars were calculated in 1939 by Tolman, Oppenheimer and Volkoff.

49: It took another thirty years, however, before neutron stars were

50: actually discovered observationally. Furthermore this

51: discovery came in a completely unexpected way. In 1967 the then

52: Cambridge graduate student Jocelyne Bell and her supervisor Antony Hewish

53: were looking for scintillations of radio sources produced

54: by the interstellar medium. On the 28th of November 1967 they discovered

55: a source with an exceptionally regular pattern of radio pulses

56: which at the time even gave

57: rise to the speculation of an extra-terrestrial, intelligent origin.

58: These speculations were quickly abandoned, however, when

59: three more ``pulsars'' were found within the next few weeks. The extremely

60: short duration of the pulses and the high pulse frequencies

61: lead to the conclusion that these sources must be significantly smaller than

62: white dwarfs. An explanation for this phenomenon was finally found

63: when a pulsar was

64: detected at the centre of the crab nebula. From historical records it is

65: known that the crab nebula marks a supernova explosion that was observed

66: in the year 1054. Pulsars are therefore identified with neutron stars,

67: the remnants of supernova explosions. In the same way that the degeneracy

68: pressure of the electrons

69: supports white dwarfs against gravitational collapse,

70: the internal pressure in neutron stars

71: arises from the degenerate nucleons. A great deal

72: of work has gone into the observational and theoretical study of these

73: compact objects. From these studies it is known that neutron stars

74: have masses of about $1.4$ solar masses and radii of about

75: $10\,{\rm km}$. Neutron stars are believed to have a solid crust in which the

76: density increases from about $10^4\,{\rm g/cm}^3$ to a few times

77: $10^{11}\,{\rm g/cm}^3$. In this density range the matter is assumed to

78: consist of a degenerate electron gas and atomic nuclei that form a

79: crystal-like structure. At larger densities the atomic nuclei gradually

80: dissolve and at about $2\cdot10^{14}\,{\rm g/cm}^3$ the matter largely

81: consists of a highly incompressible neutron fluid with small amounts

82: of protons and electrons. An interesting property of this fluid

83: arises from the thermal temperature which is commonly believed to

84: be smaller than

85: $10^{8}\,{\rm K}$. Compared with the Fermi-temperature of the nucleons of about

86: $3\cdot 10^{11}\,{K}$ this implies that the matter behaves like

87: a fluid at zero temperature and becomes superfluid and, in the case of

88: the protons, super-conductive.

89: The structure of matter and the resulting equations

90: of state at higher densities become increasingly unclear and are

91: subject to ongoing research. Near the centre of a neutron star the density

92: is assumed to be of the order of $10^{15}\,{\rm g/cm}^3$ and the matter may

93: at least partly consist of hyperons, pions or quarks, so-called {\em strange

94: matter}. \\

95: The extreme compactness of neutron stars makes them particularly interesting

96: from a relativistic point of view. We have already mentioned the significance

97: of neutron stars in the context of the search for gravitational waves.

98: In this respect the importance of neutron star oscillations

99: arises from the

100: discovery of secularly unstable oscillation modes that increase

101: in amplitude due to the spin down of the neutron star

102: while energy is radiated away in the form of gravitational waves.

103: %This class of oscillations, called {\em r-modes},

104: %(\ref{Andersson1993})

105: %gains their energy from the rotational energy

106: %of the neutron star.

107: If the attempts to measure gravitational waves

108: are indeed successful, a whole new window for astrophysical observations

109: may be opened and facilitate a unique opportunity to directly observe the

110: interior of astrophysical objects such as neutron stars.

111: In this work, however, we will not directly study

112: neutron star oscillations in the context of gravitational radiation.

113: Instead we use the simpler case of spherically symmetric dynamic

114: neutron stars in order to probe a new numerical approach

115: which enables us to

116: numerically evolve non-linear oscillations of arbitrary amplitude with

117: high accuracy. While these evolutions will not lead to the generation

118: of gravitational waves because of the spherical symmetry, the numerical

119: results, the new techniques and the discussion of numerical

120: difficulties encountered

121: in the course of this work may still be relevant for numerical

122: simulations of more general types of neutron star oscillations. \\

123: The use of oscillations as a diagnostic tool to obtain information about

124: the interior structure of an object is an old idea and by no means restricted

125: to the realm of distant stars. For example the same technique has been

126: applied to the earth where the study of artificially induced oscillations

127: and, in particular, earthquakes has lead to invaluable insight into

128: the internal structure of our planet. In the same way

129: a great deal of knowledge has been obtained about the sun and more distant

130: stars by investigating their oscillations which reveal themselves in the

131: electromagnetic spectra of these objects.

132: Whereas Newtonian theory is perfectly adequate for studying ``normal''

133: stars, i.e. stars that gain their energy from continuous nuclear burning

134: of hydrogen and other light elements,

135: accurate modelling of compact objects like neutron stars

136: requires a general relativistic description. \\

137: %An accurate description of these objects can only be achieved in the

138: %framework of general relativity.

139: %Probably the most interesting aspect of studying oscillations of compact

140: %objects is the potential generation of gravitational waves sufficiently

141: %strong to be identified with gravitational detectors that are currently

142: %under construction or have recently gone online. \\

143: The first type of neutron star oscillations to be studied extensively

144: were linear radial oscillations

145: (see for example \shortciteNP{Chandrasekhar1964a},

146: \citeyearNP{Chandrasekhar1964b})

147: which today represent a well understood

148: problem that is described in the standard literature. The same is

149: not true, however, for nonlinear radial oscillations which lead to

150: qualitatively new problems. We have already mentioned that 

151: % It is a well known result of general relativity

152: spherically symmetric spacetimes do not admit radiative solutions.

153: Instead the generation of gravitational waves

154: requires a time varying quadrupole or higher multi-pole ($l \ge 2$) moment

155: of the neutron star inertia.

156: %Consequently radial oscillations will not give rise to gravitational

157: %waves and from that point of view their study is not immediately

158: %interesting.

159: From that point of view, the study of radial oscillations is

160: not immediately interesting.

161: There are, however, several other important aspects

162: associated with radial oscillations. In the work mentioned above,

163: Chandrasekhar first revealed the existence of relativistic instability.

164: In the framework of radial oscillations this instability manifests itself

165: in the instability of the fundamental radial oscillation mode. If the frequency

166: of this mode becomes imaginary, an exponential growth of

167: physical quantities results and the star collapses or evaporates.

168: A fully non-linear evolution code

169: based on spectral methods has been developed by \lcite{Gourgoulhon1991}

170: and has been used to study various aspects of the stability of neutron stars

171: and their collapse into black holes (\citeNP{Gourgoulhon1993},

172: \shortciteNP{Gourgoulhon1994}).

173: Radial oscillations have also been considered from the point of view

174: of astrophysical observations.

175: The discovery of quasi-periodic radio sub-pulses in the spectra of pulsars

176: and periodicities in X-ray sources has lead to the suggestion that

177: radial oscillations of neutron stars may give rise to these features

178: (\citeNP{Boriakoff1976}, \citeNP{vanHorn1980}), which in turn

179: has stimulated further

180: research in this direction (see for example \shortciteNP{Marti1988},

181: \citeNP{Vaeth1992}). Furthermore the influence of radial oscillations

182: on the electromagnetic spectrum of neutron stars and their dependence

183: on the structure of matter at super-nuclear densities may provide

184: valuable information about the equation of state in the

185: high density range (\citeNP{Glass1983}).

186: The study of radial oscillations

187: is frequently carried out in the linear regime,

188: where all physical quantities have a harmonic time dependence

189: $f=f(r)e^{i\omega t}$ and the radial profiles $f(r)$ are determined

190: by an eigenvalue problem. In this work we will present explicit time

191: evolutions of the physical variables in the fully non-linear case. These

192: evolutions will serve two purposes. First we will be able to study deviations

193: from the known linearized behaviour, such as mode coupling and shock formation.

194: Secondly the spherically symmetric case can be used to investigate

195: numerical difficulties that are also expected in the more complicated

196: time evolutions in two or three spatial dimensions. A detailed analysis in

197: the computationally less expensive 1-dimensional case may lead to the

198: development of new advantageous numerical techniques or other types

199: of solutions to these problems.

200: % An explicit evolution

201: %of the time dependent quantities might, however, reveal unexpected numerical

202: %problems that are also present

203: %in more general scenarios with lower degrees of symmetry. This is

204: %particularly relevant for fully non-linear evolutions and the numerical

205: %investigation of non-linear radial oscillations will thus serve, among

206: %other purposes, also for probing numerical techniques with a wider range of

207: %applicability.

208: The work of \lcite{Gourgoulhon1991} for example has shown

209: among other results that the use of momentum densities as fundamental

210: variables may lead to

211: computation errors in passing from the momentum densities to the

212: velocity fields which can be avoided if velocity variables are used

213: in the first place. \\

214: In our discussion we will start with a

215: static spherically symmetric star which is governed by the

216: Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations (\citeNP{Tolman1939},

217: \citeNP{Oppenheimer1939}). In section \ref{STATIC} we

218: will investigate these equations and describe the numerical methods

219: we use to calculate the resulting neutron star models. In section

220: \ref{DYNAMIC} we will use the static results in order to obtain a

221: fully non-linear perturbative formulation of dynamic spherically

222: symmetric stars. As a subclass we will discuss the linearized limit of

223: these equations in section \ref{PERT_LIN} and numerically

224: calculate the corresponding eigenmode solutions. It is interesting to

225: see that the surface of the star turns out to be a problematic

226: area even in this comparatively simple case. After a more detailed

227: discussion of the general problems one faces at the surface

228: in an Eulerian formulation we describe the numerical implementation of the code.

229: Even though the code is shown to perform well

230: in the linear regime for a large variety of neutron star models

231: in section \ref{EULER_LIN}, the surface problem is shown to give rise

232: to spurious results in some special cases.

233: In order to circumvent these problems

234: we use a simplified neutron star model in section

235: \ref{MODECOUPLING} to test the code in the non-linear regime and

236: to investigate the non-linear coupling of eigenmodes.

237: We conclude this work with the development of a fully non-linear

238: perturbative Lagrangian code in section \ref{LAGR}. We demonstrate how the

239: difficulties at the surface are resolved in such a formulation and

240: extensively test this code in the linear and non-linear regime. We

241: use this code to address the question whether non-linear effects

242: are present near the surface of the neutron star models in the

243: case of low amplitude oscillations.

244: 

245: 

246: 

247: %=========================================================================

248: \subsection{Spherically symmetric static stars}

249: \label{STATIC}

250: %

251: %

252: In the fully non-linear perturbative approach to the study of

253: radial oscillations

254: we will decompose the time dependent physical quantities into static

255: background contributions and time dependent perturbations. The background

256: quantities will obey the corresponding static set of equations which will

257: then be used to remove terms of zero order from the fully non-linear

258: evolution equations in the time dependent case. In our studies we have 

259: two principal choices for the static background: vacuum flat space in

260: which case we recover the standard non-perturbative formulation of the

261: problem and a static self-gravitating perfect fluid in spherical

262: symmetry which is described by the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations.

263: It is the second case which enables us to obtain highly accurate numerical 

264: solutions for any given amplitude of the oscillations. 

265: We will therefore first discuss in detail the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) 

266: equations as well as their numerical solution.\\

267: 

268: 

269: %=========================================================================

270: \subsubsection{The Tolman Oppenheimer Volkoff equations}

271: \label{TOV_EQ}

272: %

273: %

274: In the framework of the ``3+1'' formalism described in section

275: \ref{threep1}, we start by choosing coordinates $r$, $\theta$, $\phi$ on each 

276: spatial hypersurface $\Sigma$. $\theta$ and $\phi$ are standard angular 

277: coordinates and the radius $r$ is defined by the radial gauge condition,

278: so that the area of a surface $r={\rm const}$ is $4\pi r^2$.

279: The 3-dimensional line element is then given by

280: %

281: \begin{align}

282:   ds^2 &= \mu^2 dr^2 + r^2(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2),

283: \end{align}

284: %

285: where in spherical symmetry $\mu$ is a function of $r$ only. If we label the 

286: hypersurfaces $\Sigma$ by the coordinate $t$ we can apply the polar

287: slicing condition which combined with radial gauge can be shown to imply

288: a vanishing shift vector in spherical symmetry.

289: The 4-dimensional metric is then given by

290: %

291: \begin{align}

292:   ds^2 &= -\lambda^2 dt^2 + \mu^2 dr^2 + r^2(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2).

293:   \label{TOV_LINEELEMENT}

294: \end{align}

295: %

296: Here the lapse function $\lambda$ is also a function of $r$. Alternatively

297: this metric can be described by the variables $m$ and $\phi$ defined by

298: %

299: \begin{align}

300:   \mu^2 &= \left( 1-\frac{2m}{r} \right) ^{-1}, \label{TOV_MUOFM} \\[10pt]

301:   \lambda^2 &= e^{2\phi}.

302: \end{align}

303: %

304: In the Newtonian limit $\phi$ becomes the gravitational potential and $m$

305: the gravitating mass.\\

306: Our description of the matter is based on three simplifying assumptions, which

307: we will discuss in order. 

308: 

309: \vspace{0.5cm}

310: 1) \parbox[t]{15cm}

311:   {

312:   We will describe the matter as a single component perfect fluid. 

313:   This means that the fluid is seen as isotropic by a comoving observer.

314:   %and it moves with a 4-velocity $\hbox{\vec u}^{\mu}$

315:   %which may vary from point to point.

316:   In particular no heat conduction, no shear stresses, anisotropic pressures

317:   or viscosity must be present. The deviation from the

318:   perfect fluid equilibrium due to anisotropic stresses resulting from the

319:   solid crust are found to be $<10^{-5}$ even for rotating stars

320:   (\citeNP{Friedman1992}). It is, however, not entirely clear to what

321:   extent the treatment of the neutron star matter as a {\em single}

322:   perfect fluid is too restrictive. It was suggested as early as 1959

323:   by \citeANP{Migdal1959} that nucleons might be present in the form of

324:   superfluids in the interior of neutron stars. In order to obtain

325:   more realistic descriptions of neutron stars it might therefore be

326:   necessary to describe the matter as a multicomponent fluid.

327:   These issues are subject to ongoing research (see for example

328:   \citeNP{Andersson2001}) and their investigation would exceed the scope

329:   of this work.

330:   We will therefore focus our discussion on single

331:   component perfect fluids in which case we can write the energy-momentum

332:   tensor in the form

333:   %

334:   \begin{align}

335:     \hbox{\vec{T}}^{\mu \nu} &= (\rho + P) \hbox{{\vec u}}^{\mu} 

336:     \hbox{{\vec u}}^{\nu} + P \hbox{\vec{g}}^{\mu \nu}, \label{TOV_EMTENSOR}

337:   \end{align}

338:   %

339:   }

340: 

341: \hspace{0.5cm}\parbox[t]{15cm}

342:   { 

343:   where $\rho$ is the energy density and $P$ the pressure measured by

344:   a comoving observer. In the static spherically symmetric case $\rho$

345:   and $P$ are functions of the radius $r$ and the 4-velocity 

346:   has a non-vanishing time component only. The normalisation condition

347:   $\hbox{{\vec u}}^{\mu}\hbox{{\vec u}}_{\mu}=-1$ then implies

348:   %

349:   \begin{align}

350:     \hbox{{\vec u}}^{\mu} &= \left[ \lambda^{-1},0,0,0 \right].

351:     \label{TOV_4VELOCITY}

352:   \end{align}

353:   %

354:   } \\

355: 

356: \vspace{0.5cm}

357: 2) \parbox[t]{15cm}

358:   {

359:   The neutron star matter is assumed to be at zero temperature. This is

360:   justified by comparing the thermal temperature of the stellar interior,

361:   which is assumed to be smaller than $10^8\,{\rm K}$ in mature neutron stars,

362:   with the relevant temperature scale given by the Fermi

363:   temperature of the matter. Even though the thermal temperature is

364:   large compared with terrestrial standards, it is orders of magnitude

365:   below the Fermi temperature of matter at nuclear density ($\approx 3\cdot

366:   10^{11}$\,K), so that the thermal degrees of freedom are frozen out.

367:   As a consequence the single component perfect fluid is described

368:   by a 1-parameter equation of state which is

369:   commonly chosen to be of the form $P=P(\rho)$.

370:   } \\

371: 

372: \vspace{0.5cm}

373: 3) \parbox[t]{15cm}

374:   {

375:   The equation of state (EOS) is assumed to be given by a polytropic law

376:   %

377:   \begin{align}

378:     P &= K \rho^{\gamma}, \label{POLYTROPE}

379:   \end{align}

380:   %

381:   where $K$ and $\gamma$ are constants. Instead of the polytropic exponent

382:   $\gamma$ sometimes the polytropic index $n$ is used which is defined by

383:   %

384:   \begin{align}

385:     \gamma = 1+\frac{1}{n}. \label{POLYTROPICINDEX}

386:   \end{align}

387:   %

388:   The suitability of such an EOS

389:   is certainly a debatable issue and the determination of realistic

390:   equations of state of matter at super-nuclear densities represents

391:   an entire branch of physical research. Conclusive answers have yet to be

392:   obtained, however, and by using polytropes with different indices $n$

393:   one is able to study the qualitative differences in the behaviour of

394:   neutron stars with equations of state of varying stiffness. Furthermore

395:   polytropes are given in analytic form

396:   so that no additional numerical error arises from their use.

397:   } \\

398: 

399: \vspace{0.5cm}

400: We have got all ingredients now to derive the equations governing the static

401: spherically symmetric neutron star model. Starting with the metric

402: (\ref{TOV_LINEELEMENT}) and the energy-momentum tensor given by

403: Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_EMTENSOR}) with the 4-velocity (\ref{TOV_4VELOCITY})

404: the Einstein field equations $\hbox{\vec{G}}_{\mu \nu} = 8\pi

405: \hbox{\vec{T}}_{\mu \nu}$ result in two independent equations

406: %

407: \begin{align}

408:   \frac{\lambda_{,r}}{\lambda} &= 

409:       \frac{\mu^2-1}{2r} + 4\pi r \mu^2 P, \label{TOV_LAMBDAR} \\[10pt]

410:   \frac{\mu_{,r}}{\mu} &= -\frac{\mu^2-1}{2r} + 4\pi r \mu^2 \rho. 

411:       \label{TOV_MUR}

412: \end{align}

413: %

414: All other field equations are consequences of these two equations, their

415: derivatives and the matter equation (\ref{TOV_PR}).

416: In terms of the alternative variable $m(r)$ defined by

417: Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUOFM}), the equation for $\mu$ can be rewritten as

418: %

419: \begin{align}

420:   m_{,r} &= 4\pi r^2 \rho. \label{TOV_MR}

421: \end{align}

422: %

423: From now on we will therefore refer to $m$ as the ``mass'' or

424: ``mass function'' of the neutron star.

425: Conservation of energy and momentum

426: $\nabla_{\mu}\hbox{\vec{T}}^{\mu \nu}=0$ results

427: in a single equation describing the hydrostatic equilibrium

428: %

429: \begin{align}

430:   P_{,r} &= -\frac{\la_{,r}}{\la} (\rho + P). \label{TOV_PR}

431: \end{align}

432: %

433: The system of ODEs (\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}), (\ref{TOV_MUR}), (\ref{TOV_PR}) was

434: first derived by \lcite{Tolman1939} and \lcite{Oppenheimer1939}

435: and is thus known as the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff or TOV equations.

436: Together with an

437: equation of state which we choose to be the polytropic law (\ref{POLYTROPE})

438: they describe a self-gravitating perfect fluid in spherical symmetry. \\

439: We finally need to specify appropriate boundary conditions for these

440: equations.

441: The condition for the radial component of the metric is $\mu=1$ at the origin

442: $r=0$ in order to avoid a conical singularity. This is also illustrated by

443: the requirement of a finite energy density $\rho$ at the centre which

444: according to Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MR}) implies

445: that $m_{,r} = \mathscr{O}(r^2)$ near the centre. Consequently

446: $M= \mathscr{O}(r^3)$ and Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUOFM}) leads to $\mu=1$.

447: The lapse function $\lambda$ on the other hand appears in the equations

448: in the form $\lambda_{,r}/\lambda$ and is therefore only defined 

449: up to a constant factor. Normally this factor is

450: chosen so that $\lambda$ takes on the value $\sqrt{1-2m/r}$ at the stellar 

451: surface which matches the interior metric (\ref{TOV_LINEELEMENT}) to an

452: exterior Schwarzschild metric

453: %

454: \begin{align}

455:   ds^2 &= -\left( 1-\frac{2M}{r} \right) dt^2 + \left( 1-\frac{2M}{r}

456:           \right)^{-1} + r^2 d\theta^2 + r^2 \sin^2\theta d\phi^2,

457: \end{align}

458: %

459: where $M=m(R)$ and $R$ is the radius of the star.

460: Finally the surface of the star is defined by the vanishing of the

461: pressure $P$ which for the polytropic equation of state is 

462: equivalent to $\rho=0$. We note that for some equations of state

463: the fluid extends to infinity and the energy density will vanish nowhere.

464: %Even though these equations of state do not describe neutron stars 

465: %their study may still lead to valuable insights and 

466: %an alternative boundary condition has to be used, for example by prescribing

467: %the energy density at some finite radius.

468: In this work, however, we will restrict ourselves to equations of state which

469: lead to stars of

470: finite size. We therefore summarise the boundary conditions as

471: %

472: \begin{align}

473:   \mu &= 1 \label{TOV_MUBC}

474: \end{align}

475: %

476: at the origin $r=0$ and

477: %

478: \begin{align}

479:   \lambda &= \sqrt{1-\frac{2m}{r}} = \frac{1}{\mu}, \label{TOV_LAMBDABC} \\[10pt]

480:   \rho &= 0 \label{TOV_RHOBC}

481: \end{align}

482: %

483: at the surface $r=R$, i.e. three boundary conditions for the three

484: first order ODEs (\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}), (\ref{TOV_MUR}), (\ref{TOV_PR}).

485: At first glance this seems to completely specify the physical scenario.

486: We have to note one subtlety however: the location of the stellar surface,

487: i.e. the extension of the numerical grid, is not determined at this

488: stage. For any given equation

489: of state we therefore expect a 1-parameter family of solutions parameterised

490: by the radius $R$. As we will see below we can alternatively parameterise the

491: family of solutions by the central density $\rho_{\rm c}$ of the star. Which

492: of these parameters we choose and therefore have to specify in addition to 

493: the boundary conditions (\ref{TOV_MUBC})-(\ref{TOV_RHOBC}) depends on the 

494: numerical approach we take towards solving the TOV-equations. There

495: are two main approaches to this problem.

496: %one strictly correct and one convenient.

497: % Before we turn our attention towards the numerical solution,

498: % however, we will briefly discuss the choice of physical units.

499: 

500:   

501: %=========================================================================

502: \subsubsection{The numerical treatment of the TOV-equations}

503: \label{TOV_NUM}

504: %

505: %

506: The problem we have to solve numerically is given by the TOV equations

507: (\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}), (\ref{TOV_MUR}), (\ref{TOV_PR}), the boundary conditions

508: (\ref{TOV_MUBC})-(\ref{TOV_RHOBC}) and the prescription of the free parameter.

509: From a numerical point of view this is a two-point boundary value

510: problem and should be solved accordingly with shooting or relaxation methods.

511: This is the first of the two approaches we mentioned in the previous section.

512: Here we will discuss a relaxation algorithm.

513: In this case we set up a numerical grid, thus specifying the free parameter

514: in the form of the stellar radius, and finite difference the equations as

515: described in section \ref{relaxation}.

516: The three boundary conditions then provide

517: the remaining three algebraic equations and having specified an initial guess

518: the code relaxes to the solution of the TOV-equations. The main advantages

519: of this approach are:

520: %

521: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

522:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin1cm

523:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

524: \item all boundary conditions are exactly satisfied,

525: %\item if a neutron star model with a given radius is required the prescription

526: %      of the radius is straightforward.

527: \item a neutron star model with a specified radius is obtained

528:       straightforwardly by appropriately setting up the numerical grid.

529: \end{list}

530: %

531: This code suffers from some drawbacks, however, which can be summarized

532: as follows:

533: %

534: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

535:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin1cm

536:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

537: \item the specification of initial data is non-trivial and the convergence

538:       of the code depends on a ``good'' initial guess,

539: \item obtaining high accuracy via a higher ($>2^{\rm nd}$) order 

540:       finite differencing scheme results in more complicated coefficient 

541:       matrices and inversion routines,

542: \item it is not clear how to obtain a neutron star model with a specified

543:       central density,

544: \end{list}

545: %

546: It is quite remarkable that the second numerical approach has exactly the

547: opposite properties in that the advantages and drawbacks are reversed. In this

548: approach the outer boundary conditions are ignored initially

549: and instead one starts with three boundary conditions at the centre

550: %

551: \begin{align}

552:   \mu &= 1, \\[10pt]

553:   \lambda &= 1, \\[10pt]

554:   \rho &= \rho_{\rm c}.

555: \end{align}

556: %

557: The TOV-equations can then be integrated outwards straightforwardly until the

558: energy density becomes negative and the out-most grid point will define the 

559: surface of the star. Even though the energy density will not vanish exactly

560: at this point but take on a small positive value, the accuracy thus obtained

561: is good enough for most practical purposes. The remaining freedom to multiply

562: the lapse function $\lambda$ with an arbitrary constant

563: is used to enforce the

564: boundary condition (\ref{TOV_LAMBDABC}). Alternatively one can first integrate

565: Eqs.\,(\ref{TOV_MUR}), (\ref{TOV_PR}) for $\mu$ and $P$ 

566: which decouple from $\lambda$ and afterwards obtains $\lambda$ from

567: inward integration of Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}).\\

568: In a sense the two methods complement each other and for 

569: example we use the quadrature approach to obtain an initial guess for the 

570: relaxation scheme. Throughout this work we will use both numerical methods

571: and specify in each case how the TOV solutions were calculated. \\

572: Before we

573: investigate the solutions thus obtained, however, we have to discuss two

574: technical issues, the choice of physical units and a transformation to

575: a new radial coordinate which will provide higher resolution near

576: the surface of the star. Below we will see that sufficient resolution

577: in this region can be crucial for an accurate numerical

578: evolution in the time dependent case.

579: 

580: 

581: 

582: %=========================================================================

583: \subsubsection{Physical units}

584: \label{TOV_UNITS}

585: %

586: %

587: Throughout this work we have worked with natural

588: units, i.e. $c=1=G$. This choice can be written in the form

589: %

590: \begin{align}

591:   1\,{\rm s} &= 2.9979 \cdot 10^{10}\, {\rm cm},  \label{C1} \\[5pt]

592:   1\,{\rm g} &= 7.4237 \cdot 10^{-29}\, {\rm cm}. \label{G1}

593: \end{align}

594: %

595: In astrophysics energy density is commonly measured in g/cm$^3$ and

596: pressure in dyne/cm$^2$, where 1\,dyne=1\,erg/cm. However, we prefer to

597: measure all quantities in km or corresponding powers thereof. Using

598: Eqs.\,(\ref{C1}) and (\ref{G1}) we can calculate that

599: %

600: \begin{align}

601:   1\, {\rm km}^{-2} &= 1.3477 \cdot 10^{18}\,\frac{{\rm g}}{{\rm cm^3}},\\[10pt]

602:   1\, {\rm km}^{-2} &= 1.2106 \cdot 10^{30}\,\frac{{\rm dyne}}{{\rm cm^2}}

603:                    = 1.2106 \cdot 10^{30}\, \frac{{\rm g}}{{\rm cm\, s^2}}.

604: \end{align}

605: %

606: The metric variables $\mu$ and $\la$ are dimensionless and it is obvious then

607: from Eqs.\,(\ref{TOV_MUOFM}) and (\ref{TOV_MUR}) that radius $r$ and

608: mass $m$ are

609: measured in km.

610: For example a typical central density for neutron stars is

611: $10^{15}$ g/cm$^3$ which in our units becomes 0.000742 km$^{-2}$.

612: We can also compare our results for radius and mass with the solar values

613: %

614: \begin{align}

615:   M_{\odot} &= 1.4766\, {\rm km},  \\[10pt]

616:   R_{\odot} &= 6.960 \cdot 10^5\, {\rm km}.

617: \end{align}

618: %

619: In contrast to these values typical radii and masses of neutron stars

620: are given by

621: %

622: \begin{align}

623:   M_{\rm NS} &\approx 2\,{\rm km}, \\[10pt]

624:   R_{\rm NS} &\approx 10\,{\rm km}.

625: \end{align}

626: %

627: It is a well known result that relativistic correction terms to

628: a Newtonian description of stars generally appear in terms of the ratio

629: $M/R$, so that this quotient describes the importance of relativistic effects.

630: In view of this result and the quotient $M_{\odot}/R_{\odot}=2.1\cdot 10^{-6}$

631: it is immediately obvious why a Newtonian description of the sun

632: and other ``normal'' stars is

633: perfectly adequate. In contrast we find $M/R \approx 0.2$ for neutron stars,

634: so that relativistic effects will play an important role in their behaviour

635: and accurate models need to be developed in the framework of

636: general relativity.

637: 

638: 

639: %=========================================================================

640: \subsubsection{Transformation to a new radial coordinate}

641: \label{TOV_RYTRAFO}

642: %

643: %

644: We have already mentioned that the surface of the star is defined by the

645: vanishing of the pressure which in the case of a polytropic

646: equation of state is equivalent to a zero energy density.

647: A dependent quantity frequently introduced in the study of neutron stars

648: is the speed of sound defined by

649: %

650: \begin{align}

651:   C^2 &= \frac{\partial P}{\partial \rho}, \label{TOV_C2}

652: \end{align}

653: %

654: which in the polytropic case (\ref{POLYTROPE}) becomes

655: %

656: \begin{align}

657:   C^2 &= K \gamma \rho^{\gamma-1}.

658: \end{align}

659: %

660: Consequently the speed of sound will also vanish at the surface if

661: $\gamma>1$ as will always be the case

662: for a star of finite mass. In particular we will show below that the 

663: asymptotic behaviour of the speed of sound near the surface is given by

664: %

665: \begin{align}

666:   C \sim \sqrt{R-r}. \label{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICC}

667: \end{align}

668: %

669: Taking into account the vanishing of the propagation speed

670: of sound waves at $r=R$ we now consider the qualitative behaviour

671: of a localized pulse travelling towards

672: the surface. As a result of the decreasing sound speed $C$

673: the front of the pulse will

674: in general travel more slowly than its tail and we would expect the pulse

675: to narrow. In particular the numerical resolution near the surface might

676: be inadequate to accurately evolve the pulse in this region and it might be 

677: beneficial to work with a radial coordinate in terms of

678: which the propagation speed

679: is by and large independent of the position within the star.

680: In order to study the implications of a locally vanishing 

681: propagation speed we consider the simpler scenario of the

682: 1-dimensional wave equation with variable propagation speed

683: %

684: \begin{align}

685:   u_{,tt} &= c(r)^2 u_{,rr}, \label{WAVEEQ}

686: \end{align}

687: %

688: on a physical domain $0\le r\le R$. 

689: Without loss of generality we will set $R=1$ for the rest

690: of this discussion. Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICC}) then suggests

691: to choose a propagation speed of the form

692: %

693: \begin{align}

694:   c(r) &= \sqrt{1-r}. \label{WAVE_C}

695: \end{align}

696: %

697: For the numerical implementation we introduce the

698: auxiliary variables $F=u_{,t}$ and $G=u_{,r}$ and rewrite Eq.\,(\ref{WAVEEQ})

699: as a system of two first order PDEs

700: %

701: \begin{align}

702:   F_{,t} &= c^2 G_{,r}, \label{WAVE1_FT} \\[10pt]

703:   G_{,t} &= F_{,r}, \label{WAVE1_GT}

704: \end{align}

705: %

706: and impose the boundary conditions $u=0$, $F=0$ at both

707: boundaries. The system (\ref{WAVE1_FT}), (\ref{WAVE1_GT})

708: is linear and can be written in vectorial form

709: %

710: \begin{align}

711:   \hbox{\vec{v}}_{,t} + A \hbox{\vec{v}}_{,r} &=0, \\[10pt]

712:   \hbox{\vec{v}} &= \begin{pmatrix} F \\ G \end{pmatrix}, \\[10pt]

713:   A &= \begin{pmatrix} 0 & -c^2 \\ -1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}.

714: \end{align}

715: %

716: The characteristics of the PDE are then given by

717: %

718: \begin{align}

719:   \frac{dr}{dt} &= \Lambda_i,

720: \end{align}

721: %

722: where $\Lambda_1=c$, $\Lambda_2=-c$ are the eigenvalues of the 

723: matrix $A$. At the outer boundary the slopes of the characteristics

724: collapse because of the vanishing of the wave speed $c$. \\

725: % It is

726: % this behaviour which gave rise to our suspicion in the first place.\\

727: This system has been evolved with the second order in space

728: and time McCormack finite differencing scheme described in section

729: \ref{McCormack} using a grid of 500 points.

730: In Fig.\,\ref{WAVES} we show the time evolution of $u$ obtained

731: for initial data in the form of a Gaussian pulse. Snapshots of $u$

732: are plotted at

733: $t_1 = 0.00$, $t_2=0.48$, $t_3=0.72$, $t_4=1.44$, $t_5=2.52$, $t_6=3.40$,

734: $t_7=4.44$, $t_8=4.60$, $t_9=5.60$, $t_{10}=6.56$, $t_{11}=7.20$

735: and $t_{12}=8.00$. 

736: %

737: \begin{figure}[t]

738:   \centering

739:   \epsfig{file=u_s01_03.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt,angle=-90}

740:   \epsfig{file=u_s04_06.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt,angle=-90}

741:   \epsfig{file=u_s07_09.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt,angle=-90}

742:   \epsfig{file=u_s10_12.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt,angle=-90}

743:   \caption{The numerical evolution of an initial

744:            Gaussian pulse according to the 

745:            wave equation in terms of the coordinate $r$ as obtained for

746:            the varying propagation speed given by Eq.\,(\ref{WAVE_C})

747:            which vanishes at $r=1$. The Snapshots are

748:            shown for the times $t_1,\ldots,t_{12}$.}

749:   \label{WAVES}

750: \end{figure}

751: %

752: %Nothing obviously wrong is seen in the plots although the broadening of 

753: %the pulse after reflection at the outer boundary may be unexpected.

754: In order to shed light on the quality of the numerical evolution we

755: analyse the convergence properties of the code.

756: For this purpose we have performed the same runs

757: using 1000 and 2000 grid points and calculated the time dependent convergence

758: factor according to the method described in section \ref{CCM_CONVERGENCE}.

759: Again we use a high resolution reference solution obtained for 2000 grid points

760: in place of the analytic solution. The results shown

761: in Fig.\,\ref{CONV_WAVES} demonstrate that

762: the convergence of the code drops to

763: first order at about $t=2.5$ which coincides with the snapshot at $t_5$

764: when the pulse is reflected at the outer boundary for the first time. This

765: result is confirmed by high resolution runs in which no

766: broadening of the pulse similar to that shown in Fig.\,\ref{WAVES} is observed

767: after reflections at either boundary. We

768: conclude that a naive numerical evolution can lead to spurious results

769: in regions with a vanishing propagation speed and that this problem is

770: %

771: \begin{figure}[t]

772:   \centering

773:   \epsfig{file=wave_conv_s.eps, height=300pt, width=200pt, angle=-90}

774:   \caption{The convergence factor obtained for 500 and 1000

775:            grid points as a function of time. At $t\approx 2.5$ the

776:            convergence drops to first order.}

777:   \label{CONV_WAVES}

778: \end{figure}

779: %

780: due to an insufficient spatial resolution. \\

781: A solution to this problem is obtained by transforming to a new

782: spatial coordinate $y$ in terms of which the slopes of the characteristics

783: do not vary as drastically over the numerical domain and in particular do

784: not vanish at the boundary. A simple recipe is to define this new coordinate

785: by

786: %

787: \begin{align}

788:   y = \int_0^r{\frac{1}{c(\tilde{r})}d\tilde{r}}, \label{WAVE_RY}

789: \end{align}

790: %

791: which implies

792: %

793: \begin{align}

794:   \frac{\partial}{\partial r} &= \frac{1}{c} \frac{\partial}{\partial y},

795:        \\[10pt]

796:   dr &= c\,dy.

797: \end{align}

798: %

799: In the special case where the propagation speed is given by Eq.\,(\ref{WAVE_C})

800: the coordinates $r$ and $y$ are related by

801: %

802: \begin{align}

803:   y &= 2-2\sqrt{1-r}, \\[10pt]

804:   r &= y-\frac{y^2}{4},

805: \end{align}

806: %

807: so that the interval $r \in [0,1]$ is mapped to $y \in [0,2]$.

808: In terms of the new coordinate $y$ the system (\ref{WAVE1_FT}), 

809: (\ref{WAVE1_GT}) can be rewritten as

810: %

811: \begin{align}

812:   F_{,t} &= c G_{,y}, \label{WAVE2_FT} \\[10pt]

813:   G_{,t} &= \frac{1}{c} F_{,y}, \label{WAVE2_GT}

814: \end{align}

815: %

816: and the characteristic curves are given by

817: %

818: \begin{align}

819:   \frac{dy}{dt} &= \pm 1.

820: \end{align}

821: %

822: In order to compare the new scheme with the original approach, we evolve the

823: %

824: \begin{figure}[t]

825:   \centering

826:   \epsfig{file=u_x01_03.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt,angle=-90}

827:   \epsfig{file=u_x04_06.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt,angle=-90}

828:   \epsfig{file=u_x07_09.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt,angle=-90}

829:   \epsfig{file=u_x10_12.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt,angle=-90}

830:   \caption{The same evolution as in Fig.\,\ref{WAVES}, but obtained with

831:            the new coordinate $y$ which results in a higher density

832:            of grid points near the outer boundary $r=1$.}

833:   \label{WAVEX}

834: \end{figure}

835: %

836: same initial data as above using the system (\ref{WAVE2_FT}), (\ref{WAVE2_GT})

837: on a $y$-grid again with 500 grid points and the same boundary conditions.

838: %

839: \begin{figure}[t]

840:   \centering

841:   \epsfig{file=wave_conv_x.eps, height=300pt, width=200pt, angle=-90}

842:   \caption{The time dependent convergence factor obtained for the

843:            numerical evolution of the wave equation on a $y$-grid with

844:            500 and 1000 grid points. Second order convergence is clearly 

845:            maintained throughout the evolution.}

846:   \label{CONV_WAVEX}

847: \end{figure}

848: %

849: The result is shown in Fig.\,\ref{WAVEX} where we plot 

850: the same snapshots as in Fig.\,\ref{WAVES}.

851: For comparison purposes the plots show $u$ as a function of the coordinate

852: $r$ but as a result of the computation on the $y$-grid,

853: the density of grid points is higher towards $r=1$ in Fig.\,\ref{WAVEX} whereas

854: the grid points are distributed homogeneously in Fig.\,\ref{WAVES}. In

855: contrast to the above evolution no broadening

856: of the pulse after reflection at the outer boundary is observed.

857: The time dependent convergence analysis shown 

858: in Fig.\,\ref{CONV_WAVEX}

859: demonstrates second order convergence throughout the run even though

860: small variations in the convergence factor are visible when the pulse is 

861: reflected at either boundary. We conclude that a transformation of the type

862: (\ref{WAVE_RY}) provides the necessary resolution in a region of

863: vanishing propagation speed and leads to satisfactory results at reasonable

864: grid resolutions. \\

865: We now have to apply this idea to the case of a static, spherically symmetric

866: neutron star. The role of the wave speed $c$ is now assumed by the speed

867: of sound $C$ defined in Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_C2}) and we introduce the new radial

868: coordinate

869: %

870: \begin{align}

871:   y &= \int_0^r{\frac{1}{C(\tilde{r})}d\tilde{r}}. \label{TOV_YOFR}

872: \end{align}

873: %

874: This transformation has also been successfully used by \lcite{Ruoff2000} in the

875: linearized time evolution of radial oscillations for more realistic

876: equations of state.

877: The asymptotic behaviour of the sound speed

878: in the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff case given by Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICC}) 

879: is identical to that of the wave speed

880: in the toy problem. Consequently the radial 

881: interval $r\in[0,R]$ of the

882: star will be mapped to a finite interval $y \in [0,Y]$.

883: % The numerical results

884: %shown below confirm this expectation.

885: In order to obtain a formulation which

886: includes both possible choices of the radial coordinate, we introduce

887: the variable $x$ in terms of which the TOV equations are written as

888: %

889: \begin{align}

890:   r_{,x} &= \left\{ \parbox{7cm}

891:             {

892:             $1\hspace{1cm}{\rm if}\,\,\,x=r$\\

893:             $C\hspace{0.9cm}{\rm if}\,\,\,x=y$,

894:             } \right. \label{TOV_RY} \\[10pt]

895:   \frac{\lambda_{,x}}{\lambda} &= 

896:       r_{,x} \left(\frac{\mu^2-1}{2r} 

897:       + 4\pi r \mu^2 P \right), \label{TOV_LAMBDAY}

898:       \\[10pt]

899:   \frac{\mu_{,x}}{\mu} &= r_{,x} \left( -\frac{\mu^2-1}{2r} + 4\pi r \mu^2 \rho

900:       \right), \label{TOV_MUY} \\[10pt]

901:   P_{,x} &= -\frac{\lambda_{,x}}{\lambda} (\rho + P) \label{TOV_PY}.

902: \end{align}

903: %

904: In the numerical code we are thus able to switch between the two alternative

905: modes of calculation by assigning the derivative $r_{,x}$ according to

906: either possibility of Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_RY}).

907: % No further modification is

908: %required.

909: In either case the boundary conditions are given by

910: Eqs.\,(\ref{TOV_MUBC})-(\ref{TOV_RHOBC}) supplemented with the requirement

911: that $r$ and $x$ vanish simultaneously at the origin

912: %

913: \begin{align}

914:   r &= 0 \,\,\,{\rm at}\,\,\,x=0.

915: \end{align}

916: %

917: %Unless specified otherwise, from now on we will use the rescaled

918: %radial coordinate and thus set $r_{,x}=C$.

919: One subtlety concerning the relaxation method of calculating

920: TOV solutions has to be mentioned. In this case we need to specify the

921: radius of the star. If we use the rescaled radial coordinate, however, the

922: surface value $x_{\rm s}$ is not a priori known. In practice we

923: therefore specify the free parameter in the form of the 

924: central density and solve the TOV equations via the quadrature

925: method first. This provides us with the outer boundary value of the

926: coordinate $x$ for the stellar model in question and we can solve the

927: TOV equations in a second step with the relaxation method.

928: % In the next section we will

929: %present numerical solutions for different polytropic models and also

930: %investigate the asymptotic behaviour of the solutions at both

931: %boundaries in detail.

932: 

933: 

934: %=========================================================================

935: \subsubsection{Asymptotic properties of the TOV equations}

936: \label{TOV_ASYMPTOTICS}

937: %

938: %

939: %For a given system of ordinary differential equations it is always worth

940: %studying the asymptotic behaviour of the solutions if the complexity

941: %of the equations allows such a study. In the case of the equations for

942: %a static cosmic string in section \ref{SECcsmink} for example the

943: %analysis of the

944: %asymptotic behaviour revealed the existence of exponentially diverging 

945: %unphysical solutions. This result enabled us to choose a suitable numerical

946: %technique which automatically selected the non-diverging physical solutions.

947: %In the case of the TOV equations no such exponentially diverging solutions

948: %do exist which makes the quadrature method of solving the equations such

949: %a successful tool, but we will see below that the asymptotic behaviour

950: The asymptotic behaviour of the solutions of the TOV equations

951: (\ref{TOV_RY})-(\ref{TOV_PY}) at the surface of the star has

952: serious implications for the

953: simulation of dynamic neutron stars with certain equations of state in a

954: strictly Eulerian framework. We will therefore discuss the asymptotic 

955: behaviour first and then compare the results with the numerically obtained 

956: solutions. Since the introduction of the rescaled radial coordinate resulted

957: from numerical requirements only, we use $r_{,x}=1$ i.e. the original system 

958: (\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR})-(\ref{TOV_PR}) for the asymptotic analysis.

959: We start with the behaviour at the origin, where we assume that

960: %

961: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

962:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin1cm

963:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

964: \item the energy density and thus the pressure are finite and positive,

965: \item the lapse function $\lambda$ is finite and positive.

966: \end{list}

967: %

968: We have already seen that the central value of the energy density is a

969: free parameter and the pressure follows from the equation of state.

970: The central value of the lapse function, on the other hand,

971: is determined by matching $\lambda$ to an exterior 

972: Schwarzschild metric.

973: We also know from section \ref{TOV_EQ} that our assumptions imply

974: $\mu=1$ and $m=\mathscr{O}(r^3)$ at the origin. From Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUOFM})

975: we therefore conclude that $\mu=1+\mathscr{O}(r^2)$. Inserting this result into

976: Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}) and using the second assumption we find that

977: $\lambda_{,r}/\lambda \sim r$ and thus $\lambda =\lambda_{\rm c}

978: +\mathscr{O}(r^2)$. Using this result in Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_PR}) leads to

979: $P_{,r}\sim r$, i.e. $P=P_{\rm c} + \mathscr{O}(r^2)$ and the equation

980: of state then shows that the energy density has the same behaviour.

981: In summary the results near the origin are

982: %

983: \begin{align}

984:   \lambda(r) &= \lambda_{\rm c} + \mathscr{O}(r^2), \\[10pt]

985:   \mu(r)     &= 1 + \mathscr{O}(r^2), \\[10pt]

986:   \rho(r)    &= \rho_{\rm c} + \mathscr{O}(r^2), \\[10pt]

987:   P(r)       &= K \rho_{\rm c}^{\gamma} + \mathscr{O}(r^2).

988: \end{align}

989: %

990: %We also note that $\lambda$, $\mu$, $\rho$ and $P$ are components of rank

991: %2 tensors and consequently their series expansion should contain 

992: %only even powers of $r$ in spherical symmetry for regularity reasons. Our

993: %results are compatible with this requirement. \\

994: The corresponding analysis for the surface is more complicated and the results

995: will later prove to be of more significance. For this analysis it is convenient

996: to work with the radial variable

997: %

998: \begin{align}

999:   z &:= R-r.

1000: \end{align}

1001: %

1002: We start with the following assumptions.

1003: %

1004: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

1005:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin1cm

1006:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

1007: \item The metric function $\mu$ is finite at the surface and also satisfies

1008:       the inequality $\mu > 1$. This follows from Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUOFM})

1009:       and the requirement that the mass satisfies

1010:       the condition $0 < 2m(R) < R$. The first inequality follows

1011:       from Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MR}) for any non vacuum model and the

1012:       second implies that

1013:       the neutron star extends beyond its Schwarzschild radius.

1014: \item The lapse $\lambda$ is finite and positive at the surface.

1015: \item The energy density and the pressure vanish at the surface and their

1016:       leading order terms are given by some positive powers of $z$.

1017: \end{list}

1018: %

1019: We write these assumptions as

1020: %

1021: \begin{align}

1022:   \mu &= \mu_{\rm s} + \mathscr{O}(z^{\epsilon_1}),

1023:          \label{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICANSATZMU} \\[10pt]

1024:   \lambda &= \lambda_{\rm s} + \mathscr{O}(z^{\epsilon_2}), \\[10pt]

1025:   \rho &= \rho_{\rm s} z^{\alpha} + \mathscr{O}(z^{\alpha+\epsilon_3}),

1026:           \\[10pt]

1027:   P &= P_{\rm s} z^{\beta} + \mathscr{O}(z^{\beta+\epsilon_4}),

1028:           \label{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICANSATZP}

1029: \end{align}

1030: %

1031: where $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\epsilon_1 , \ldots, \epsilon_4$ are positive

1032: constants we have yet to determine and $\mu_{\rm s}$, $\lambda_{\rm s}$,

1033: $\rho_{\rm s}$ and $P_{\rm s}$ are non vanishing constants subject to the

1034: restrictions mentioned above. We first insert the expressions for

1035: $\rho$ and $P$ into the equation of state (\ref{POLYTROPE}). Comparison of

1036: the leading order terms then leads to

1037: %

1038: \begin{align}

1039:   \beta &= \alpha \gamma, \label{TOV_ALPHABETA1} \\[10pt]

1040:   \epsilon_3 &= \epsilon_4,

1041: \end{align}

1042: %

1043: where $\gamma$ is the polytropic exponent. Similarly the leading order in

1044: Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUR}) results in

1045: %

1046: \begin{align}

1047:   \epsilon_1 = 1.

1048: \end{align}

1049: %

1050: We then combine Eqs.\,(\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}) and (\ref{TOV_PR}) to eliminate the

1051: lapse function and insert

1052: (\ref{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICANSATZMU})-(\ref{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICANSATZP}).

1053: The result of comparing the two leading orders is

1054: %

1055: \begin{align}

1056:   \alpha+1 &= \beta, \\[10pt]

1057:   \epsilon_4 &= 1.

1058: \end{align}

1059: %

1060: This provides a second condition for $\alpha$ and $\beta$ and 

1061: with Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_ALPHABETA1}) we conclude that

1062: %

1063: \begin{align}

1064:   \alpha &= \frac{1}{1-\gamma} = n, \\[10pt]

1065:   \beta &= n+1,

1066: \end{align}

1067: %

1068: where $n$ is the polytropic index defined in (\ref{POLYTROPICINDEX}).

1069: Finally we use these results in Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}) for

1070: the lapse function and obtain

1071: %

1072: \begin{align}

1073:   \epsilon_2 &= 1.

1074: \end{align}

1075: %

1076: We summarise the asymptotic behaviour at the surface:

1077: %

1078: \begin{align}

1079:   \mu &= \mu_{\rm s} + \mathscr{O}(z), \label{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICMU}

1080:          \\[10pt]

1081:   \lambda &= \lambda_{\rm s} + \mathscr{O}(z), \\[10pt]

1082:   \rho &= \rho_{\rm s} z^{n} + \mathscr{O}(z^{n+1}),

1083:           \label{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICRHO} \\[10pt]

1084:   P &= P_{\rm s} z^{n+1} + \mathscr{O}(z^{n+2}).

1085:           \label{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICP}

1086: \end{align}

1087: %

1088: As a consequence we will not be able to Taylor expand $\rho$ and $P$

1089: about the surface $z=0$ unless a polytropic equation of state with

1090: integer index $n$ is chosen. Indeed a more extensive analysis carried out with

1091: the algebraic computing package GRTensor II

1092: shows that higher

1093: order terms containing the polytropic index $n$ also appear in the expansions

1094: of $\lambda$ and $\mu$ so that these functions are subject to the same 

1095: limitations regarding Taylor expansion. \\

1096: The most important result of the asymptotic analysis concerns the

1097: behaviour of the energy density $\rho$ near the surface given by

1098: Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICRHO}). In particular we note that for a polytropic

1099: index $n < 1$ or exponent $\gamma>2$ the gradient of $\rho$

1100: with respect to the areal

1101: radius $r$ will be infinite at the surface. The case $n=1$, i.e. $\gamma=2$

1102: is the limiting case where $\rho$ has a finite gradient. This special case

1103: also implies

1104: that no fractional powers appear in the series expansions of $\lambda$,

1105: $\mu$, $\rho$ and $P$. $\gamma=2$ is considered to provide a

1106: qualitatively good description of the average stiffness of the equation

1107: of state of neutron stars and thus a popular choice for the polytropic

1108: exponent. For $n>1$ or $\gamma<2$ the energy density will have

1109: a vanishing gradient at the surface. \\

1110: It remains to check the asymptotic

1111: behaviour in terms of the rescaled radial coordinate $y$. From the definition

1112: of the speed of sound (\ref{TOV_C2}) and the results above we conclude that 

1113: near the surface

1114: %

1115: \begin{align}

1116:   C(z) &= \mathscr{O}(z^{1/2}), \label{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICC2}

1117: \end{align}

1118: %

1119: which implies that

1120: %

1121: \begin{align}

1122:   \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial y} &= C \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial r}

1123:         = \mathscr{O}(z^{n-1/2}).

1124: \end{align}

1125: %

1126: All other functions have vanishing gradients with respect to $y$ near the 

1127: surface.

1128: Consequently the rescaled coordinate allows us to calculate neutron star models

1129: for polytropic exponents up to $\gamma=3$ without encountering infinite 

1130: gradients and the corresponding numerical inaccuracies.

1131: % Since models with such

1132: %high polytropic exponents are not considered very realistic, we will restrict

1133: %ourselves to the range $\Gamma<3$. \\

1134: 

1135: 

1136: %=========================================================================

1137: \subsubsection{Solutions of the TOV equations}

1138: %

1139: %

1140: In view of the results of the asymptotic analysis we have numerically

1141: solved the TOV-equations for neutron star models with different polytropic

1142: exponents $\gamma<2$, $\gamma=2$ and $\gamma>2$.

1143: The corresponding models are listed

1144: in Table \ref{MODELS15} where we have included two further models

1145: with $\gamma=2$ but different polytropic factor $K$, which we will

1146: use to also study the variation of the solutions with $K$.

1147: %

1148: %\begin{table}[t]

1149: %\begin{center}

1150: %\caption{The parameters for five different neutron star models. We will

1151: %         refer to these as models 1-5 in this work.}

1152: %\begin{tabular}{c|ccc}

1153: %  \hline

1154: %  \hline

1155: %  model & $\gamma$ & $K$ & $\rho_{\rm c}$ \\

1156: %  \hline

1157: %  1 & $1.75$ & $25\,\, {\rm km}^{1.5}$ &

1158: %       $1.25\cdot 10^{-3}\, {\rm km}^{-2}$ \\

1159: %  2 & $2.00$ & $100\, {\rm km}^2$ &

1160: %       $1.5\cdot 10^{-3}\, {\rm km}^{-2}$ \\

1161: %  3 & $2.00$ & $150\,\, {\rm km}^2$ &

1162: %       $1.5\cdot 10^{-3}\, {\rm km}^{-2}$ \\

1163: %  4 & $2.00$ & $200\, {\rm km}^2$ &

1164: %       $1.5\cdot 10^{-3}\, {\rm km}^{-2}$ \\

1165: %  5 & $2.30$ & $1800\, {\rm km}^{2.6}$ &

1166: %       $1.0\cdot 10^{-3}\, {\rm km}^{-2}$ \\

1167: %  \hline

1168: %  \hline

1169: %\end{tabular}

1170: %\label{MODELS15}

1171: %\end{center}

1172: %\end{table}

1173: %

1174: %

1175: %

1176: \begin{table}[t]

1177: \begin{center}

1178: \caption{The parameters for five different neutron star models. We will

1179:          refer to these as models 1-5 in this work.}

1180: \begin{tabular}{c|ccccc}

1181:   \hline

1182:   \hline

1183:   model & $\gamma$ & $K$ & $\rho_{\rm c}$ [km$^{-2}$] & $M[M_{\odot}]$

1184:   & $R$ [km] \\

1185:   \hline

1186:   1 & $1.75$ & $25\,\, {\rm km}^{1.5}$ &

1187:        $0.00125$ & 1.506 & 12.593  \\

1188:   2 & $2.00$ & $100\, {\rm km}^2$ &

1189:        $0.0015$ & 1.130 & 9.653 \\

1190:   3 & $2.00$ & $150\,\, {\rm km}^2$ &

1191:        $0.0015$ & 1.554 & 10.828 \\

1192:   4 & $2.00$ & $200\, {\rm km}^2$ &

1193:        $0.0015$ & 1.878 & 11.646 \\

1194:   5 & $2.30$ & $1800\, {\rm km}^{2.6}$ &

1195:        $0.0010$ & 1.756 & 11.710 \\

1196:   \hline

1197:   \hline

1198: \end{tabular}

1199: \label{MODELS15}

1200: \end{center}

1201: \end{table}

1202: %

1203: %

1204: In the remainder of this work we will refer to these stellar models as

1205: models 1-5.

1206: The code we have used for the calculation is based on the quadrature method

1207: described in section \ref{TOV_NUM} and uses a fourth order

1208: Runge-Kutta scheme for the integration (see for

1209: example \shortciteNP{Press1989}). We note, however,

1210: that the results of the relaxation

1211: method agree with those of the quadrature scheme with high precision and the

1212: corresponding plots are indistinguishable from those we show in this section.

1213: For the calculations in this section we use the rescaled coordinate $y$ and

1214: set $r_{,x}=C$ in Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_RY}).

1215: The code has been checked for convergence by calculating

1216: models 1-5 for different grid resolutions starting with 250 grid points.

1217: The resulting convergence factors $Q$ for the variables $\lambda$,

1218: $\mu$ and $\rho$ obtained for doubling the grid resolution is shown in

1219: Table \ref{CONV_TOV} for all 5 models. The high resolution 

1220: reference solution has

1221: been calculated for 2000 grid points in all cases. For the fourth order

1222: Runge-Kutta scheme we would expect a convergence factor of 16. Even though

1223: the results show some variation around this value they are compatible

1224: with fourth order convergence.\\

1225: The numerical results obtained for the 5 stellar models we will now discuss

1226: %

1227: \begin{table}[t]

1228:   \caption{The convergence factors obtained for doubling the grid resolution

1229:            in a fourth order Runge-Kutta scheme for solving the TOV-equations

1230:            via quadrature. The high resolution reference solution has been

1231:            calculated for 2000 grid points.}

1232: \begin{center}

1233:   \begin{tabular}{c|ccc}

1234:     \hline \hline

1235:     model & $Q_{\lambda}$ & $Q{\mu}$ & $Q_{\rho}$ \\

1236:     \hline

1237:     1 & 14.23 & 15.55 & 9.69 \\

1238:     2 & 12.85 & 13.72 & 16.23 \\

1239:     3 & 17.98 & 18.40 & 18.76 \\

1240:     4 & 17.81 & 18.14 & 17.94 \\

1241:     5 & 11.64 & 16.51 & 21.13 \\

1242:     \hline \hline

1243:   \end{tabular}

1244:   \label{CONV_TOV}

1245: \end{center}

1246: \end{table}

1247: %

1248: have all been calculated by

1249: using about 600 grid points.

1250: In Fig.\,\ref{TOV_GAMMA} we plot the metric functions $\lambda$, $\mu$, 

1251: the energy density $\rho$, the pressure $P$,

1252: the mass $m$ and the sound speed $C$ as functions of the areal radius

1253: $r$ for models 1, 3 and 5. We note that the different central densities of 

1254: these

1255: models have no impact on the qualitative behaviour of the solutions and have

1256: only been chosen to obtain neutron star models of similar size.

1257: %

1258: \begin{figure}[t]

1259:   \centering

1260:   \epsfig{file=r_lambdaGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1261:   \vspace{0.5cm}

1262:   \hspace{0.5cm}

1263:   \epsfig{file=r_muGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1264:   \vspace{0.5cm}

1265:   \epsfig{file=r_rhoGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1266:   \hspace{0.5cm}

1267:   \epsfig{file=r_pGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1268:   \epsfig{file=r_mGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1269:   \hspace{0.5cm}

1270:   \epsfig{file=r_cGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1271:   \caption{The metric functions $\lambda$, $\mu$, the energy density $\rho$,

1272:            the pressure $P$, the mass $m$ and the speed of 

1273:            sound $C$ are plotted

1274:            as functions of radius for different polytropic

1275:            indices $\gamma=1.75$ (model 1), $\gamma=2.00$ (model 3)

1276:            and $\gamma=2.3$ (model 5).}

1277:   \label{TOV_GAMMA}

1278: \end{figure}

1279: %

1280: The results demonstrate the dependence of the behaviour of the star near

1281: its surface on the polytropic

1282: exponent $\gamma$. According to the asymptotic analysis we expect the

1283: gradient of the energy density to be zero for $\gamma=1.75$ in model 1, 

1284: finite for the critical case $\gamma=2$ in model 3 and infinite for 

1285: model 5 where $\gamma=2.3$. This result is compatible with the plots

1286: of $\rho(r)$ in the middle left panel of Fig.\,\ref{TOV_GAMMA}.

1287: The pressure gradient

1288: on the other hand vanishes at the surfaces for any equation of state

1289: with positive $n$ according to Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICP})

1290: which agrees with the numerical results in the middle right panel. The

1291: speed of sound shows the opposite behaviour and has an infinite gradient

1292: independent of the polytropic index which is in

1293: agreement with the asymptotic result given by

1294: Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_ASSYMPTOTICC2}). With respect to the metric

1295: we note that the radial component $\mu$ has a local maximum, while the 

1296: lapse $\lambda$ is monotonically increasing in the stellar interior.

1297: This behaviour becomes clear if we look at the corresponding equations

1298: for $\lambda$ and $\mu$. We already know that $\mu_{,r}$ vanishes

1299: at the centre. If we differentiate Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUR}) with respect to

1300: $r$ only one term on the right hand side is non zero at the centre,

1301: so that

1302: %

1303: \begin{align}

1304:   \mu_{,rr}|_{r=0} &= 4\pi \rho_{\rm c},

1305: \end{align}

1306: %

1307: and $\mu_{,r}$ will

1308: %

1309: \begin{figure}[t]

1310:   \centering

1311:   \epsfig{file=r_lambdaK.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1312:   \vspace{0.5cm}

1313:   \hspace{0.5cm}

1314:   \epsfig{file=r_muK.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1315:   \vspace{0.5cm}

1316:   \epsfig{file=r_rhoK.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1317:   \hspace{0.5cm}

1318:   \epsfig{file=r_pK.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1319:   \epsfig{file=r_mK.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1320:   \hspace{0.5cm}

1321:   \epsfig{file=r_cK.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1322:   \caption{The metric functions $\lambda$, $\mu$, the energy density

1323:            $\rho$, the pressure $P$, the mass $m$ and the speed of sound $C$

1324:            are plotted as functions of $r$ for different polytropic

1325:            factors $K=100\,\,{\rm km}^2$ (model 2), $K=150\,\,{\rm km}^2$

1326:            (model 3) and $K=200\,\,{\rm km}^2$ (model 4).}

1327:   \label{TOV_K}

1328: \end{figure}

1329: %

1330: become positive as $r$ increases. At some point in the star,

1331: however, the negative first term on the right hand side of Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUR})

1332: will dominate the positive second term which goes to zero at the

1333: surface and $\mu_{,r}$ will become negative. Since Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUR})

1334: admits only one positive solution for $\mu$ if $\mu_{,r}=0$, $\mu$ will

1335: monotonically decrease beyond this point.

1336: We have already seen, however, that it cannot decrease to

1337: $1$ or below inside the star since this conflicts with the nonzero 

1338: mass $m$ in

1339: Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MUOFM}). Consequently $\mu>1$ inside the star and the

1340: right hand side of Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}) will be positive

1341: throughout the star which explains the monotonic behaviour of $\lambda$. \\

1342: In order to study the dependence of the solutions on the polytropic

1343: factor $K$ we compare the

1344: numerical results for models 2, 3 and 4 in Fig.\,\ref{TOV_K}. In contrast to

1345: the polytropic exponent, a variation of $K$ does not qualitatively change

1346: the results. A larger factor $K$ leads to a larger mass

1347: and radius of the neutron star model if all other parameters are kept fixed.

1348: This behaviour has been observed for various polytropic models

1349: and central densities

1350: and can be attributed to the larger pressure that follows from a larger $K$

1351: according to Eq.\,(\ref{POLYTROPE}). The star will thus be able to support more

1352: mass against self gravitation and extend to larger radii. \\

1353: We conclude the analysis of the TOV equations by studying the 1-parameter

1354: families of solutions corresponding to the five stellar models. For this purpose

1355: numerous solutions of the TOV equations with equations of state as given

1356: in Table \ref{MODELS15} have been

1357: calculated for various central densities. In Fig.\,\ref{TOV_FAMILIES} we 

1358: plot the results in the form

1359: of relations between central density $\rho_{\rm c}$, total radius $R$,

1360: and total mass $M$ of the star. 

1361: %

1362: \begin{figure}[t]

1363:   \centering

1364:   \epsfig{file=m_rhocGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1365:   \epsfig{file=m_rGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1366:   \epsfig{file=r_rhocGamma.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

1367:   \caption{The 1-parameter families of static spherically symmetric neutron

1368:            star models corresponding to models 1, 3 and 5

1369:            are graphically illustrated by plotting the

1370:            relations between the total mass, the central energy density

1371:            and the radius of the star. The locations of neutron star

1372:            models 1, 3 and 5 are indicated by crosses.}

1373:   \label{TOV_FAMILIES}

1374: \end{figure}

1375: %

1376: One obvious result is the maximum of the mass curves $M(R)$ and

1377: $M(\rho_{\rm c})$ in the upper panels of the figure. It is a well known

1378: result that these maxima separate the stable and unstable branches of the

1379: neutron star families for a given equation of state

1380: (see for example \citeNP{Shapiro1983}).

1381: The stable branches consist of models with central densities below the

1382: critical value

1383: i.e. larger radii and the unstable branches correspond

1384: to larger central densities

1385: and smaller radii. In this context instability means that the frequency of 

1386: the fundamental radial oscillation mode of the neutron star becomes imaginary

1387: and thus its amplitude will grow exponentially in time and the

1388: neutron star is unstable against arbitrarily small radial perturbations. The

1389: eigenmode spectrum of radial oscillations will be discussed in the next 

1390: section when we look at dynamic spherically symmetric stars. \\

1391: Another interesting result is shown in the lower panel 

1392: of Fig.\,\ref{TOV_FAMILIES} where

1393: we plot the radius as a function of the central density. The polytropic

1394: exponent $\gamma=2$ again appears as a critical value for which

1395: the radius converges to a finite value as the central density goes

1396: to zero. For smaller exponents the radius diverges in this 

1397: limit whereas it goes to zero for exponents $\gamma>2$. We also discover

1398: this behaviour in the upper right panel where the mass is plotted as a 

1399: function of radius. For $\gamma<2$ a unique value of $M$ can be assigned to

1400: any sufficiently large radius $R$.

1401: In the critical case $\gamma=2$ equilibrium models

1402: are only found for radii below a maximal value, but the relation $M(R)$ is 

1403: still one to one near this maximum.

1404: For $\gamma>2$ this is no longer the case and

1405: for radii just below the maximal equilibrium radius we find two models

1406: with different mass. No such qualitatively different behaviour has been found

1407: when the polytropic factor $K$ is varied instead of $\gamma$.

1408: It is interesting to compare the mass-radius relation for

1409: $\gamma=2$ with the Newtonian case, where $\gamma=2$ is also a critical

1410: value and leads to the relation $R\sim M^0={\rm const}$

1411: (\citeNP{Shapiro1983}). The results in Fig.\,\ref{TOV_FAMILIES} indicate

1412: that relativistic effects break this kind of degeneracy. \\

1413: This completes our analysis of static spherically symmetric stars and in the

1414: next section we turn our attention to the dynamic case. The equations and

1415: results of this section will then be used to derive a fully

1416: non-linear perturbative formulation of radial oscillations on a static

1417: TOV background.

1418: 

1419: 

1420: 

1421: %=========================================================================

1422: \subsection{Spherically symmetric dynamic stars in Eulerian coordinates}

1423: \label{DYNAMIC}

1424: %

1425: %

1426: %The study of radial oscillations of neutron stars is frequently carried

1427: %out using the linearized form of the equations. We will see in this section,

1428: %however, that a fully non-linear formulation of the problem leads to 

1429: %a whole range of qualitatively new difficulties as well as

1430: % interesting features.

1431: %We have good reason to expect many of these difficulties and features to

1432: %also occur in more complicated oscillation modes in 2 or 3-dimensional

1433: %simulations. It is therefore well worth studying fully non-linear

1434: %radial oscillations with particular emphasis on non-linear effects and the

1435: %numerical problems resulting thereof.

1436: In this section we will develop

1437: an Eulerian formulation of a dynamic spherically symmetric neutron star.

1438: For code testing purposes

1439: it is interesting to also look at the corresponding scenario in the

1440: Cowling approximation, i.e. with the metric frozen at its equilibrium values.

1441: We will then use the results of the previous section to obtain a fully

1442: non-linear perturbative formulation of the problem. In this new

1443: approach to studying non-linear neutron star oscillations we eliminate

1444: terms of zero order in the perturbations but keep all higher order terms

1445: and thus obtain a formulation of the dynamic star which is equivalent to the

1446: original non-perturbative set of equations.

1447: % that

1448: %allows us to simulate oscillations of arbitrary amplitude with high accuracy.

1449: From the non-linear perturbative formulation it is easy to 

1450: derive the linearized equations which we will use to investigate the eigenmode

1451: spectrum of radial neutron star oscillations. After describing the numerical

1452: methods used to evolve the dynamic neutron star in the non-linear case 

1453: we have to discuss the ``surface problem'' which is intrinsic to any

1454: Eulerian formulation of non-linear oscillations that involve a radial 

1455: displacement of the stellar surface. The numerical methods we have

1456: used to circumvent this problem will then be tested by comparing the

1457: numerical results obtained in the linear regime with the analytic solution of

1458: the linearized equations. By using vacuum flat space as the background,

1459: we can emulate a non-perturbative ``standard'' approach to the numerical

1460: evolution and compare the results with the perturbative scheme using

1461: the TOV background. Even though the perturbative

1462: scheme leads to highly accurate results for most stellar

1463: models, we have not been able to find a perfectly satisfactory solution

1464: to the surface problem.

1465: We have therefore decided to follow a more cautious approach and use a

1466: simplified neutron star model to investigate non-linear effects in the

1467: evolution of radial oscillations. This model has also been used to

1468: further test the performance of the code. The surface problem will be 

1469: re-addressed with a Lagrangian approach in section \ref{LAGR}.

1470: 

1471: 

1472: 

1473: 

1474: %=========================================================================

1475: \subsubsection{The equations in the dynamic case}

1476: \label{NONP_EQ}

1477: %

1478: %

1479: We start the Eulerian formulation of the dynamic case with

1480: the line element in radial gauge and polar slicing

1481: %

1482: \begin{align}

1483:     ds^2 &= -\hat{\lambda}^2 dt^2 + \hat{\mu}^2 dr^2

1484:           + r^2 (d\theta^2 + \sin^2 \theta d\phi^2),

1485:     \label{NONP_LINEELEMENT}

1486: \end{align}

1487: %

1488: where $\hat{\lambda}$ and $\hat{\mu}$ are now functions of $t$ and $r$ and

1489: the ``hat'' has been introduced to distinguish them from their static 

1490: counterparts. As in the static case we describe the matter as a perfect fluid

1491: at zero temperature with a polytropic equation of state. As we have seen

1492: in section \ref{TOV_EQ} this enables us to write the energy 

1493: momentum tensor in the form

1494: %

1495: \begin{align}

1496:   \hbox{\vec{T}}^{\mu \nu} &= (\hat{\rho} +\hat{P}) \hbox{\vec{u}}^{\mu}

1497:   \hbox{\vec{u}}^{\nu} + \hat{P} \hbox{\vec{g}}^{\mu \nu},

1498:   \label{NONP_EMTENSOR}

1499: \end{align}

1500: %

1501: where again the ``hat'' on the functions $\hat{\rho}$, $\hat{P}$ means that

1502: they are functions of $t$ and $r$. The time dependent pressure and

1503: energy density are related by the polytropic law

1504: %

1505: \begin{align}

1506:   \hat{P} &= K\hat{\rho}^{\gamma}, \label{DYNAMICPOLYTROPE}

1507: \end{align}

1508: %

1509: where the polytropic parameters $\gamma$ and $K$ are the same as in the

1510: static case. The time dependent speed of sound is defined in analogy to

1511: Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_C2}) by

1512: %

1513: \begin{align}

1514:   \hat{C}^2 &= \frac{\partial \hat{P}}{\partial \hat{\rho}}. \label{PERT_C2}

1515: \end{align}

1516: %

1517: In contrast to the static case the

1518: 4-velocity will now have a non-vanishing radial component

1519: %

1520: \begin{align}

1521:   \hbox{\vec{u}}^{\mu} &= (v,w,0,0),

1522: \end{align}

1523: %

1524: where $v=v(r,t)$ and $w=w(r,t)$. We have

1525: not denoted these quantities by a ``hat'' since we do not use

1526: static counterparts in their case. The normalisation condition

1527: $\hbox{\vec{u}}^{\mu}

1528: \hbox{\vec{u}}_{\mu}=-1$ relates these functions by

1529: %

1530: \begin{align}

1531:   \hat{\lambda}^2 v^2 &= 1+\hat{\mu}^2 w^2. \label{PERT_NORMU}

1532: \end{align}

1533: %

1534: With the line element (\ref{NONP_LINEELEMENT}) and the energy momentum tensor

1535: (\ref{NONP_EMTENSOR}) the Einstein field equations

1536: $\hbox{\vec{G}}_{\mu \nu} = 8\pi \hbox{\vec{T}}_{\mu \nu}$ 

1537: result in two independent constraint equations

1538: %

1539: \begin{align}

1540:   \frac{\hat{\lambda}_{,r}}{\hat{\lambda}} &= \frac{\hat{\mu}^2-1}{2r} + 4\pi r

1541:       \hat{\mu}^2 \left[ \hat{P} + (\hat{\rho} + \hat{P})

1542:       \,\hat{\mu}^2w^2 \right], \label{NONP_LAMBDAR} \\[10pt]

1543:   \frac{\hat{\mu}_{,r}}{\hat{\mu}} &= -\frac{\hat{\mu}^2-1}{2r} + 4\pi r

1544:       \hat{\mu}^2 \left[ \hat{\rho} + (\hat{\rho} + \hat{P})

1545:       \hat{\mu}^2w^2 \right]. \label{NONP_MUR}

1546: \end{align}

1547: %

1548: It is a well known result that there are no gravitational degrees of freedom

1549: in spherical symmetry and we therefore expect to be able to determine

1550: the metric functions on each time slice without knowledge of their history.

1551: This is compatible with the result that the field equations can be given

1552: in the form of constraint equations only. The degrees of freedom of the 

1553: scenario are thus entirely contained in the matter variables, whose evolution

1554: is determined by the equations of hydrodynamics 

1555: $\nabla_{\mu} \hbox{\vec{T}}^{\mu \nu}=0$. In our case we can write these

1556: equations as a quasi linear system of PDEs

1557: %

1558: \begin{align}

1559:   \hat{\rho}_{,t} + \tilde{\alpha}_{11} \hat{\rho}_{,r} 

1560:                   + \tilde{\alpha}_{12} w_{,r} &= \tilde{b}_1,

1561:   \label{NONP_RHOT}  \\[10pt]

1562:   w_{,t}          + \tilde{\alpha}_{21} \hat{\rho}_{,r} 

1563:                   + \tilde{\alpha}_{11} w_{,r} &= \tilde{b}_2,

1564:   \label{NONP_WT}

1565: \end{align}

1566: %

1567: where the coefficients are given by

1568: %

1569: \begin{align}

1570:   D =&\,\, v\left( 1- \hat{C}^2\frac{\hat{\mu}^2 w^2}{1+ \hat{\mu}^2 w^2}

1571:            \right), \label{NONP_D} \\[10pt]

1572:   \tilde{\alpha}_{11} =&\,\, \frac{w(1-\hat{C}^2)}{D}, \\[10pt]

1573:   \tilde{\alpha}_{12} =&\,\, \frac{\hat{\rho} + \hat{P}}{(1+\hat{\mu}^2 w^2) D},

1574:                  \\[10pt]

1575:   \tilde{\alpha}_{21} =&\,\, \frac{\hat{C}^2}{(\hat{\rho} + \hat{P})

1576:                \hat{\mu}^2 D}, \label{NONP_ALPHA21} \\[10pt]

1577:   \tilde{b}_1         =& \,\,-\frac{1}{D}(\hat{\rho} + \hat{P})

1578:                  \left(\frac{w\hat{\mu}_{,r}/\hat{\mu}

1579:                             +v\hat{\mu}_{,t}/\hat{\mu}}

1580:                  {1+\hat{\mu}^2 w^2} + 2\frac{w}{r} \right), \\[10pt]

1581:   \tilde{b}_2        =& \,\, -\frac{1}{D}\left[

1582:                  w^2\left( \frac{\hat{\mu}_{,r}}{\hat{\mu}}

1583:                  +\frac{\hat{\lambda}_{,r}}{\hat{\lambda}}

1584:                  -\frac{2}{r}\hat{C}^2

1585:                  +2\frac{v}{w} \frac{\hat{\mu}_{,t}}{\hat{\mu}}

1586:                  \right)

1587:                  +\frac{\hat{\lambda}_{,r}/\hat{\lambda}}{\hat{\mu}^2} 

1588:                  \right]. \label{NONP_B2}

1589: \end{align}

1590: %

1591: In practice we calculate the derivatives of the metric functions 

1592: that appear in these coefficients from the constraint equations

1593: (\ref{NONP_LAMBDAR}), (\ref{NONP_MUR}) and a third field equation

1594: %

1595: \begin{align}

1596:   \frac{\hat{\mu}_{,t}}{\hat{\mu}} &= -4\pi r \hat{\mu}^2 \hat{\lambda}^2

1597:       v w (\hat{\rho} + \hat{P}), \label{NONP_MUT}

1598: \end{align}

1599: %

1600: which is an automatic consequence of the two constraints, their derivatives

1601: and the matter equations.

1602: We therefore calculate the coefficients $\tilde{\alpha}_{ij}$ and

1603: $b_{i}$ without approximating any derivatives with finite difference

1604: expressions. \\

1605: We have already mentioned in the discussion of the static case that a

1606: numerically superior performance is obtained if we transform to a new

1607: radial coordinate $y$ defined by Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_YOFR}). We note however that

1608: we need to calculate the corresponding static model first to obtain the

1609: static sound speed $C$. In the perturbative approach which we will discuss

1610: below that is done as a matter of course. There we will provide

1611: a formulation of the perturbative equations that includes both choices

1612: for the radial coordinate analogous to Eqs.\,(\ref{TOV_RY})-(\ref{TOV_PY}).

1613: In the Cowling approximation the set of equations corresponding 

1614: to (\ref{NONP_RHOT})-(\ref{NONP_B2}) describes

1615: a dynamic, spherically symmetric perfect fluid in a fixed gravitational 

1616: potential. We obtain these equations by the following modifications:

1617: %

1618: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

1619:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin0cm

1620:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

1621: \item the constraint equations for the dynamic metric functions

1622:       (\ref{NONP_LAMBDAR}), (\ref{NONP_MUR}) are replaced by the

1623:       corresponding TOV equations (\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}), (\ref{TOV_MUR})

1624:       which have to be solved only at the start of the evolution,

1625: \item in the coefficients $\tilde{\alpha}_{11}$, $\tilde{\alpha}_{12}$,

1626:       $\tilde{\alpha}_{21}$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ all occurrences

1627:       of $\hat{\mu}$, $\hat{\lambda}$,

1628:       $\hat{\lambda}_{,r}$/$\hat{\lambda}$ and $\hat{\mu}_{,r}/\hat{\mu}$

1629:       are replaced with their static

1630:       analogues $\lambda$, $\mu$, $\lambda_{,r}/\lambda$ and $\mu_{,r}/\mu$

1631:       respectively and $\hat{\mu}_{,t}/\hat{\mu}$ is set to zero,

1632: \item the coefficient function $\tilde{b}_2$ is replaced with the 

1633:       slightly modified version

1634:       %

1635:       \begin{align}

1636:         \bar{b}_2         =& \,\, -\frac{1}{D}\left\{

1637:                        w^2\left[ \left( \frac{\mu_{,r}}{\mu}

1638:                        +\frac{\lambda_{,r}}{\lambda} \right)

1639:                        \left(1-\hat{C}^2 \right) -\frac{2}{r}\hat{C}^2 \right]

1640:                        +\frac{\lambda_{,r}/\lambda}{\mu^2}

1641:                        \right\}.

1642:       \end{align}

1643:       %

1644: \end{list}

1645: %

1646: These modifications are rather simple so that we incorporate both options, the

1647: evolution with time dependent metric and the Cowling

1648: approximation in one code. A user specified initial parameter determines

1649: which version is to be run. Before we describe the numerical 

1650: implementation, we need to rewrite the equations of this subsection

1651: in a perturbative form.

1652: 

1653: 

1654: %=========================================================================

1655: \subsubsection{A fully non-linear perturbative formulation}

1656: \label{PERT_EQ}

1657: %

1658: %

1659: In this section we will decompose the time dependent quantities

1660: $\hat{\lambda}$, $\hat{\mu}$ and $\hat{\rho}$ into static 

1661: background contributions and time dependent perturbations. We will see

1662: that the TOV equations are still present in the dynamic equations,

1663: for example in the terms

1664: $\alpha_{21} \hat{\rho}_{,r} - b_2$ in Eq.\,(\ref{NONP_WT}). It is the 

1665: elimination of these zero order terms and the ensuing numerical

1666: inaccuracies which provides the motivation for our perturbative formulation.

1667: We start by decomposing the time dependent functions into a static

1668: background plus a time dependent perturbation

1669: %

1670: \begin{align}

1671:   \hat{\lambda}(t,r) &= \lambda(r) + \delta \lambda(t,r), \label{PERT_LAMBDA}

1672:   \\[10pt]

1673:   \hat{\mu}(t,r) &= \mu(r) + \delta \mu(t,r), \label{PERT_MU} \\[10pt]

1674:   \hat{\rho}(t,r) &= \rho(r) + \delta \rho(t,r), \label{PERT_RHO} \\[10pt]

1675:   \hat{P}(t,r) &= P(r) + \delta P(t,r). \label{PERT_P} 

1676: \end{align}

1677: %

1678: The radial velocity component $w$ vanishes in the static limit and therefore

1679: represents a perturbation in itself. The time dependent functions

1680: $\hat{P}$, $\hat{C}$ and $v$ are dependent variables and

1681: thus considered functions of the fundamental variables

1682: $\hat{\lambda}$, $\hat{\mu}$, $\hat{\rho}$ and $w$ according to

1683: Eqs.\,(\ref{DYNAMICPOLYTROPE}), (\ref{PERT_C2}) and (\ref{PERT_NORMU}).

1684: We stress that the perturbations are finite and that no assumption with

1685: regard to their size has been made. \\

1686: We start rewriting the dynamic

1687: equations with the constraint equation for $\hat{\lambda}$. If we

1688: insert Eqs.\,(\ref{PERT_LAMBDA})-(\ref{PERT_RHO}) into (\ref{NONP_LAMBDAR})

1689: and multiply with $\hat{\lambda}$ we obtain

1690: %

1691: \begin{align}

1692:   \begin{split}

1693:   \lambda_{,r} + \delta \lambda_{,r} =& \,\,\, \lambda

1694:       \frac{\mu^2-1}{2r} + 4\pi r

1695:       \lambda \mu^2 P + 4\pi r \lambda \mu^2

1696:       \left[\delta P + (\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P}) \hat{\mu}^2 w^2 \right]

1697:       + \lambda \frac{2\mu \delta \mu + \delta \mu^2}{2r}

1698:       \\[10pt]

1699:   &   + \delta \lambda \frac{\hat{\mu}^2-1}{2r}

1700:       +4\pi r \left[\lambda(2\mu \delta \mu + \delta \mu^2) + \delta \lambda

1701:       \hat{\mu}^2 \right] \left[ \hat{P}+(\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P})

1702:       \hat{\mu}^2 w^2 \right]. \label{COMPLETE_LAMBDAR}

1703:   \end{split}

1704: \end{align}

1705: %

1706: The crucial terms are the first on the left and the first

1707: two terms on the right hand side. We know that these terms

1708: will cancel each other

1709: identically according to Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}) if a solution of the

1710: static equations is chosen as a background. Numerically, however,

1711: this will not be the case because of truncation errors.

1712: % This becomes immediately

1713: %obvious if we assume $\lambda$, $\mu$ and $P$ given as an exact solution

1714: %of the TOV equations.

1715: This residual error will inevitably contaminate

1716: the numerical evolution of the dynamic scenario. In other words the numerical

1717: accuracy we will obtain is limited by the numerical accuracy of the static

1718: background and not by that of the dynamic signal we are interested in.

1719: The severeness of this effect will depend on the relative size of the 

1720: perturbations with respect to the background. For very large perturbations

1721: the numerical contamination will be less significant and for very small

1722: perturbations we may satisfy ourselves with a linearized code. For

1723: perturbations of intermediate strength, however, which are still 

1724: smaller than the background but are large enough to give rise to non-linear 

1725: effects, the numerical contamination will severely affect the

1726: evolution and may give rise to spurious phenomena. \\

1727: % The scenario many studies

1728: %of neutron star oscillations will ultimately target is an

1729: %oscillation mode which is unstable to the emission of gravitational waves.

1730: %Such a mode, starting with a small amplitude, will increase 

1731: %in strength and gradually enter the non-linear regime. It is therefore

1732: %of particular interest to investigate the impact of non-linear effects

1733: %in the weakly and moderately non-linear regime. Such a study will necessarily

1734: %be a study in 2 or 3 spatial dimensions and is beyond the scope of this

1735: %work. The development of a fully non-linear numerical technique which 

1736: %provides high accuracy for perturbations of any given amplitude will,

1737: %however, pave some of the way towards achieving this goal. A further benefit

1738: %of the high accuracy of this method is the possibility of testing the code

1739: %in the linear regime, the only regime where an exact solution is known

1740: %with (for all practical purposes) arbitrary accuracy. \\

1741: We return to Eq.\,(\ref{COMPLETE_LAMBDAR}) and continue the

1742: perturbative formulation of the dynamic case. Since we know that the

1743: zero order terms cancel each other, we can simply subtract them

1744: from the equation.

1745: % We thus keep higher order terms in the equations only

1746: %and ensure that the numerical accuracy we obtain will always be the

1747: %accuracy of the signal we are interested in.

1748: The perturbative equation for $\hat{\lambda}$ then becomes

1749: %

1750: \begin{align}

1751:   \begin{split}

1752:   \frac{\delta \lambda_{,x}}{r_{,x}} 

1753:       =& \,\,\, \lambda \frac{2\mu \delta \mu + \delta \mu^2}{2r}

1754:       + \delta \lambda \frac{\hat{\mu}^2-1}{2r} + 4\pi r \lambda \mu^2

1755:       \left[\delta P + (\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P}) \hat{\mu}^2 w^2 \right]

1756:       \\[10pt]

1757:   & +4\pi r \left[\lambda(2\mu \delta \mu + \delta \mu^2) + \delta \lambda

1758:       \hat{\mu}^2 \right] \left[ \hat{P}+(\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P})

1759:       \hat{\mu}^2 w^2 \right], \label{PERT_LAMBDAR}

1760:   \end{split}

1761: \end{align}

1762: %

1763: where we have also implemented the transformation to the generalised

1764: radial coordinate $x$.

1765: Proceeding in the same way we rewrite the constraint equation for $\hat{\mu}$

1766: %

1767: \begin{align}

1768:   \begin{split}

1769:   \frac{\delta \mu_{,x}}{r_{,x}} 

1770:       =&\,\,\, -\mu \frac{2\mu \delta \mu + \delta \mu^2}{2r}

1771:       -\delta \mu \frac{\hat{\mu}^2-1}{2r}

1772:       + 4\pi r \mu^3 \left[ \delta \rho + (\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P})

1773:       \hat{\mu}^2 w^2 \right] \\[10pt]

1774:   & +4\pi r (3 \mu^2 \delta \mu + 3 \mu \delta \mu^2 + \delta \mu^3)

1775:       \left[\hat{\rho} + (\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P})\hat{\mu}^2 w^2

1776:       \right]. \label{PERT_MUR}

1777:   \end{split}

1778: \end{align}

1779: %

1780: The reformulation of the matter equations (\ref{NONP_RHOT}) and (\ref{NONP_WT})

1781: is particularly simple due to their quasi linear nature. We obtain

1782: %

1783: \begin{align}

1784:   \delta \rho_{,t} + \alpha_{11} \delta \rho_{,x} + \alpha_{12} w_{,x} &= b_1,

1785:                       \label{PERT_DRHOT} \\[10pt]

1786:   w_{,t}           + \alpha_{21} \delta \rho_{,x} + \alpha_{11} w_{,x} &= b_2,

1787:                       \label{PERT_WT}

1788: \end{align}

1789: %

1790: with the coefficient functions

1791: %

1792: \begin{align}

1793:   D =&\,\, v\left( 1- \hat{C}^2\frac{\hat{\mu}^2 w^2}{1+ \hat{\mu}^2 w^2}

1794:            \right), \label{PERT_D} \\[10pt]

1795:   \alpha_{11} =&\,\, \frac{w(1-\hat{C}^2)}{r_{,x}D},

1796:            \label{PERT_ALPHA11} \\[10pt]

1797:   \alpha_{12} =&\,\, \frac{\rho + \delta \rho

1798:            + \hat{P}}{(1+\hat{\mu}^2 w^2)r_{,x} D},

1799:                  \label{PERT_ALPHA12} \\[10pt]

1800:   \alpha_{21} =&\,\, \frac{\hat{C}^2}{(\rho +\delta \rho + \hat{P})

1801:                \hat{\mu}^2r_{,x} D}, \label{PERT_ALPHA21} \\[10pt]

1802:   b_1         =& \,\,-\frac{1}{D}\left[(\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P})

1803:                  \left(\frac{w\hat{\mu}_{,r}/\hat{\mu}

1804:                             +v\hat{\mu}_{,t}/\hat{\mu}}

1805:                  {1+\hat{\mu}^2 w^2} + 2\frac{w}{r} \right)

1806:                  + \rho_{,r} w (1-C^2)\right], \\[10pt]

1807:   \begin{split}

1808:   b_2         =& \,\, -\frac{1}{D}\left\{

1809:                  w^2\left( \frac{\hat{\mu}_{,r}}{\hat{\mu}}

1810:                  +\frac{\hat{\lambda}_{,r}}{\hat{\lambda}}

1811:                  -\frac{2}{r}\hat{C}^2

1812:                  +2\frac{v}{w} \frac{\hat{\mu}_{,t}}{\hat{\mu}}

1813:                  \right) +

1814:                  \frac{1}{\hat{\mu}^2 (\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P})}

1815:                   \right. \\[10pt]

1816:                &  \left. \left[ (\hat{C}^2 - C^2) \rho_r 

1817:                  + \frac{\delta \lambda}{\hat{\lambda}}

1818:                  C^2 \rho_r + \frac{\delta \lambda_r}{\hat{\lambda}} (\rho + P)

1819:                  + \frac{\hat{\lambda}_r}{\hat{\lambda}}(\delta \rho 

1820:                  + \delta P) \right] \right\}. \label{PERT_B2}

1821:   \end{split}

1822: \end{align}

1823: %

1824: Except for the coefficient $b_2$ where background terms have been eliminated

1825: by using the TOV-equations

1826: we note the similarity with the coefficients given

1827: in Eqs.\,(\ref{NONP_D})-(\ref{NONP_B2}) in the non-perturbative formulation. \\

1828: In order to derive the equations in the Cowling approximation we

1829: have to proceed in analogy to the previous section.

1830: %

1831: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

1832:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin0cm

1833:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

1834: \item The metric perturbations $\delta \mu$ and $\delta \lambda$ are

1835:       set to zero.

1836: \item All occurrences of $\hat{\lambda}_{,r}/\hat{\lambda}$ and

1837:       $\hat{\mu}_{,r}/\hat{\mu}$ are replaced with $\lambda_{,r}/\lambda$

1838:       and $\mu_{,r}/\mu$ which are given by the TOV equations

1839:       (\ref{TOV_LAMBDAR}), (\ref{TOV_MUR}).

1840: \item $\hat{\mu}_{,t}/\hat{\mu}$ is set to zero.

1841: \item The coefficient $b_2$ is replaced by 

1842:       %

1843:       \begin{align}

1844:       \begin{split}

1845:       b_2         =& \,\, -\frac{1}{D}\left\{

1846:                      w^2\left[ \left( \frac{\hat{\mu}_{,r}}{\hat{\mu}}

1847:                      +\frac{\hat{\lambda}_{,r}}{\hat{\lambda}} \right)

1848:                      (1-\hat{C}^2)-\frac{2}{r}\hat{C}^2

1849:                      +2\frac{v}{w} \frac{\hat{\mu}_{,t}}{\hat{\mu}}

1850:                      \right] +

1851:                      \frac{1}{\hat{\mu}^2 (\rho + \delta \rho + \hat{P})}

1852:                       \right. \\[10pt]

1853:                    &  \left. \left[ (\hat{C}^2 - C^2) \rho_r 

1854:                      + \frac{\delta \lambda}{\hat{\lambda}} C^2 \rho_r 

1855:                      +\frac{\delta \lambda_r}{\hat{\lambda}} (\rho + P)

1856:                      + \frac{\hat{\lambda}_r}{\hat{\lambda}}(\delta \rho 

1857:                      + \delta P) \right] \right\}.

1858:       \end{split}

1859:       \end{align}

1860:       %

1861: \end{list}

1862: %

1863: This completes our derivation of the equations for a dynamical spherically

1864: symmetric neutron star. In later sections we will numerically investigate

1865: the system of partial differential equations

1866: (\ref{PERT_LAMBDAR})-(\ref{PERT_WT}) with the

1867: coefficient functions (\ref{PERT_D})-(\ref{PERT_B2}) and

1868: the corresponding system in the Cowling approximation. Before that, we will

1869: turn our attention towards the linearized equations and the resulting

1870: eigenmode spectrum. These results will not only be used as initial data,

1871: but also provide one of the fundamental test beds for the code.

1872: 

1873: 

1874: %=========================================================================

1875: \subsubsection{The linearized equations and the eigenmode spectrum}

1876: \label{PERT_LIN}

1877: %

1878: %

1879: {\em (a) The equations} \\[5pt]

1880: In this section we will discuss the linearized equations for a dynamic

1881: spherically symmetric neutron star. For this purpose we will

1882: explicitly assume that the background is given by a non-vacuum solution

1883: of the TOV equations. If we further assume that all perturbations are small

1884: compared with their background

1885: values and the radial velocity $w$ is small compared with the speed of light,

1886: i.e. $w \ll 1$, the higher order terms in

1887: Eqs.\,(\ref{PERT_LAMBDAR})-(\ref{PERT_B2}) become negligible and can

1888: be omitted from the equations. It is convenient to follow e.g.

1889: \lcite{Misner1973} and introduce the variable $\xi$ which measures 

1890: the displacement of the fluid elements. An observer who is comoving with the

1891: fluid and is located at $r_0$ in the equilibrium case will find herself at

1892: position $r_0+\xi(t,r_0)$ during the evolution. The displacement vector $\xi$

1893: is therefore related to our variables by

1894: %

1895: \begin{align}

1896:   \xi_{,t} &= \lambda w. \label{LIN_XI}

1897: \end{align}

1898: %

1899: We note that the background value of the lapse function is used in this

1900: equation because higher order terms have been neglected.

1901: Another variable which facilitates a particularly simple formulation of the

1902: resulting equations is the rescaled displacement $\zeta$ defined by

1903: %

1904: \begin{align}

1905:   \zeta &= \frac{r^2}{\lambda} \xi \label{LIN_ZETA}.

1906: \end{align}

1907: %

1908: If we insert this definition into the linearized form of

1909: equation (\ref{PERT_WT}) and use the linearized versions of

1910: Eqs.\,(\ref{PERT_LAMBDAR})-(\ref{PERT_DRHOT}) to eliminate the perturbations

1911: $\delta \lambda$, $\delta \mu$ and $\delta \rho$ we obtain the second order

1912: in time and space differential equation

1913: %

1914: \begin{align}

1915:   W \zeta_{,tt} &= \frac{1}{r_{,x}}\left( \frac{\Pi}{r_{,x}}

1916:       \zeta_{,x} \right)_{,x}

1917:       + Q \zeta, \label{LIN_ZETATT}

1918: \end{align}

1919: %

1920: where the auxiliary functions $W$, $\Pi$ and $Q$ are defined by

1921: %

1922: \begin{align}

1923:   \Pi &= C^2(\rho + P) \frac{\mu \lambda^3}{r^2}, \label{LIN_PI} \\[10pt]

1924:   W   &= (\rho +P) \frac{\mu^3 \lambda}{r^2}, \label{LIN_W} \\[10pt]

1925:   Q   &= \frac{\mu \lambda^3}{r^2}(\rho + P) \left[ \left(\frac{\lambda_{,r}}

1926:          {\lambda} \right)^2 + 4\frac{\lambda_{,r}}{r\lambda} -8\pi \mu^2P

1927:          \right].

1928:          \label{LIN_Q}

1929: \end{align}

1930: %

1931: These equations describe the dynamics of a

1932: spherically symmetric neutron star in the linearized limit.

1933: If we insert the ansatz $\zeta(t,x)={\zeta(x)} f(t)$ into

1934: Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_ZETATT}) we find that

1935: the solution has harmonic time dependence

1936: %

1937: \begin{align}

1938:   \zeta(t,x) &= {\zeta}(x) e^{i \omega t}.

1939: \end{align}

1940: %

1941: and the spatial profile is determined by the

1942: ordinary differential equation

1943: %

1944: \begin{align}

1945:   \frac{1}{r_{,x}} \left( \frac{\Pi}{r_{,x}} \zeta_x\right)_x

1946:      + (\omega^2 W + Q) \zeta=0. \label{LIN_ZETARR}

1947: \end{align}

1948: %

1949: %where we have omitted the ``tilde'' from the spatial function $\zeta(r)$.

1950: For the ensuing discussion it is convenient

1951: to work with the areal radius

1952: $r$ and therefore set $r_{,x}=1$. The ordinary differential equation

1953: (\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) can then be written in the form

1954: %

1955: \begin{align}

1956:   \mathcal{L} \zeta &= -\omega^2 \zeta,

1957: \end{align}

1958: %

1959: where the differential operator $\mathcal{L}$ is defined by

1960: %

1961: \begin{align}

1962:   \mathcal{L} &= \frac{1}{W}\left[ \frac{d}{dr} \left( \Pi \frac{d}{dr} \right)

1963:                  - Q\right].

1964: \end{align}

1965: %

1966: This type of ODE is called an {\em eigenvalue problem} and the

1967: particular structure of the differential operator $\mathcal{L}$

1968: classifies it as a {\em Sturm-Liouville problem} if the function $\zeta$

1969: satisfies so-called homogeneous boundary conditions

1970: (see for example \citeNP{Simmons1991}).

1971: Due to the asymptotic behaviour of the background

1972: solutions the functions $\Pi$, $W$ and $Q$ will either diverge or vanish

1973: at the boundaries, however, and the problem we are facing is 

1974: a {\em singular Sturm-Liouville problem}. An important subclass of this type

1975: of problems is the {\em self-adjoint eigenvalue problem}

1976: which is defined by the requirement that

1977: %

1978: \begin{align}

1979:   \langle \mathcal{L}u,v \rangle &= \langle \mathcal{L}v,u \rangle,

1980:   \label{SELFADJOINED}

1981: \end{align}

1982: %

1983: for all solutions $u$, $v$. Here the inner product is defined by the

1984: {\em weighting function} $W(r)$

1985: %

1986: \begin{align}

1987:   \langle f,g \rangle &= \int_a^b{W(r)\, f(r)\, g(r)\,dr},

1988:         \label{LIN_INNERPRODUCT}

1989: \end{align}

1990: % 

1991: where $a$ and $b$ are the boundaries, i.e. the centre and surface of the

1992: star in our case. A short calculation shows that condition

1993: (\ref{SELFADJOINED}) is ensured if the solutions satisfy the

1994: self-adjoint boundary condition

1995: %

1996: \begin{align}

1997:   \left[ \vphantom{\frac{1}{x}} \Pi (v u_{,r} - u v_{,r}) \right]_a^b &= 0.

1998:       \label{BCSELFADJOINED}

1999: \end{align}

2000: %

2001: Below we shall see that any solution $\zeta$ of the eigenvalue problem

2002: (\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) will be $\mathscr{O}(r^3)$ at the origin and

2003: be finite at the surface. In combination with the asymptotic behaviour of the

2004: TOV solutions determined in section \ref{TOV_ASYMPTOTICS} we can see that

2005: Eq.\,(\ref{BCSELFADJOINED}) is satisfied so that

2006: the differential equation (\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) represents a self-adjoint

2007: eigenvalue problem. For this type of equations one can show the

2008: following properties (see for example \citeNP{Coddington1955})

2009: %

2010: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

2011:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin0cm

2012:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

2013: \item There exist an infinite number of solutions $\zeta_1(r)$, 

2014:       $\zeta_2(r)$, $\zeta_3(r),\ldots$ which are called eigenfunctions

2015:       and the corresponding eigenvalues are real and can be ordered

2016:       %

2017:       \begin{align}

2018:         (\omega^2)_1 < (\omega^2)_2 < (\omega^2)_3 <\ldots.

2019:       \end{align} 

2020:       %

2021:       We note that in our case the real eigenvalues are $\omega^2$ and

2022:       the corresponding frequencies will be imaginary if $\omega^2<0$.

2023: %      Below we will see that this will indeed be the case for the fundamental

2024: %      eigenmodes of gravitationally unstable neutron stars.

2025: \item After appropriate normalisation the eigenfunctions form an orthonormal

2026:       set, i.e.

2027:       %

2028:       \begin{align}

2029:         \langle \zeta_i, \zeta_j \rangle &= \delta_{i,j}.

2030:         \label{LIN_ORTHONORMALITY}

2031:       \end{align}

2032:       %

2033: \item The eigenfunctions $\zeta_i$ form a complete set, i.e. any function

2034:       $f(r)$ which satisfies the self-adjoint boundary conditions

2035:       (\ref{SELFADJOINED}) can be expanded in a series of eigenmodes

2036:       %

2037:       \begin{align}

2038:         f(r) &= \sum_i{A_i \zeta_i(r)},

2039:       \end{align}

2040:       %

2041:       where the eigenmode coefficients of the function $f$ are given by

2042:       %

2043:       \begin{align}

2044:         A_i &= \langle f, \zeta_i \rangle.

2045:       \end{align}

2046:       %

2047: \end{list}

2048: %

2049: Before we investigate Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) numerically, we

2050: consider the asymptotic behaviour of the solutions. At the

2051: origin the displacement vectors $\xi$ and $\zeta$ have to vanish because

2052: of the spherical symmetry. If we therefore assume $\zeta(r) \sim r^{\alpha}$

2053: near the origin where $\alpha>0$, insert this ansatz into 

2054: Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) and use the asymptotic behaviour of the TOV solution,

2055: we obtain the leading order

2056: %

2057: \begin{align}

2058:   \zeta(r) \sim \mathscr{O}(r^3). \label{LIN_ASSYMPTOTICZETA}

2059: \end{align}

2060: %

2061: At the surface we only require $\xi$ and $\zeta$ to be finite but allow

2062: for non-zero displacements

2063: %

2064: \begin{align}

2065:   \zeta(z) \sim \mathscr{O}(z^0).

2066: \end{align}

2067: %

2068: It is of particular interest to consider the impact of these results

2069: on the asymptotic behaviour of the energy density perturbation

2070: $\delta \rho$ which is related to the displacement by the linearized

2071: version of Eq.\,(\ref{PERT_DRHOT})

2072: %

2073: \begin{align}

2074:   \delta \rho &= -\frac{\lambda}{r^2} \left[(\rho + P) \zeta_{,r} 

2075:       + \rho_{,r} \zeta \right]. \label{LIN_DRHOOFZETA}

2076: \end{align}

2077: %

2078: At the centre the $r^3$ behaviour of the displacement $\zeta$ results in

2079: %

2080: \begin{align}

2081:   \delta \rho \sim \mathscr{O}(r^0),

2082: \end{align}

2083: %

2084: so that the condition we imposed on $\zeta$ also guarantees a finite

2085: energy density perturbation at the origin. At the surface, however, the 

2086: leading term on the right hand side of Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_DRHOOFZETA}) is the

2087: term involving the derivative of the background energy density. This

2088: term is responsible for the asymptotic behaviour of $\delta \rho$ at

2089: the surface

2090: %

2091: \begin{align}

2092:   \delta \rho &\sim \mathscr{O}(z^{n-1}). \label{LIN_ASSYMPTOTICDRHO}

2093: \end{align}

2094: %

2095: Consequently the energy density perturbation is zero at the surface

2096: for $n > 1$, finite

2097: for $n=1$ and it diverges for $n<1$ i.e. $\gamma>2$. Even worse we

2098: also obtain the result

2099: %

2100: \begin{align}

2101:   \frac{\delta \rho}{\rho} \sim \mathscr{O}(z^{-1})\label{DRHOOVERRHO}

2102: \end{align}

2103: %

2104: independent of the polytropic index.

2105: The energy density perturbation will therefore necessarily be larger than

2106: the background $\rho$ in a finite interval around the surface.

2107: This is in obvious conflict with the initial assumption

2108: $\delta \rho \ll \rho$ we used in the linearisation process and raises

2109: doubts about the validity of the results. Below we will see, however,

2110: that the linearized equations can be derived without any implicit

2111: contradiction from the fully non-linear Lagrangian formulation of

2112: the problem. This is already illustrated by a closer investigation of

2113: Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_DRHOOFZETA}) which can be rewritten as

2114: %

2115: \begin{align}

2116:   \delta \rho &= \Delta \rho - \xi \rho_{,r}. \label{LIN_DRHOEULERLAGR}

2117: \end{align}

2118: %

2119: Here $\Delta \rho$ is the Lagrangian energy density perturbation measured

2120: by an observer moving with the fluid and is given by

2121: %

2122: \begin{align}

2123:   \Delta \rho &= -\frac{\lambda}{r^2}(\rho + P) \zeta_{,r}.

2124:   \label{LIN_LAGRDRHO}

2125: \end{align}

2126: %

2127: [cf. Eq.\,(\ref{LLIN_DRHO})].

2128: The asymptotic behaviour of $\Delta \rho$ is perfectly regular

2129: $\Delta \rho \sim x^{n}$ and the difficulties purely originate from the term

2130: $\xi \rho_{,r}$ on the right hand side of Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_DRHOEULERLAGR}).

2131: This correction term which facilitates the transformation

2132: between the Eulerian and 

2133: Lagrangian perturbations is based on a Taylor expansion of $\rho$ which, as 

2134: we have already seen above, is not generally permissible. For polytropic

2135: indices $n<1$ the derivative of $\rho$ does indeed diverge

2136: and Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_DRHOEULERLAGR}) is not a valid relation between the Eulerian

2137: and Lagrangian quantities. This is the first indication that a Lagrangian

2138: formulation is a somewhat more natural way of describing radial oscillations

2139: of neutron stars. From this point of view it is a remarkable fact

2140: that the linearisation of the Eulerian case leads to the ``correct''

2141: equations in spite of the internal inconsistency of the derivation. 

2142: Finally it is worth pointing out that the irregular behaviour of

2143: $\delta \rho$ is not merely down to a poor choice of dependent variables.

2144: It is certainly possible to formulate the problem in Eulerian coordinates

2145: in terms of regular variables such as $\zeta$

2146: or $\xi$. We have seen, however, that such a regular formulation of the

2147: problem still leads to the unphysical result of a diverging

2148: total energy density $\rho+ \delta \rho$

2149: if the equations of state has an asymptotic power law behaviour $P\sim

2150: \rho^n$ with $n<1$. In view of these difficulties one may ask the question

2151: why we have decided to use an Eulerian rather than a Lagrangian

2152: formulation in the first place. Our main motivation for studying

2153: Eulerian schemes is to probe a method in spherical symmetry

2154: which enables one to accurately

2155: model a wide range of different types of non-linear neutron star oscillations.

2156: Below we shall see that the Lagrangian approach is a very powerful tool

2157: for the study of dynamic stars in spherical symmetry. However, it is a

2158: generic problem of Lagrangian methods that it is not clear how to generalise

2159: them to two or three spatial dimensions, where the paths of fluid elements

2160: may intersect and give rise to caustics. The vast majority of neutron star

2161: oscillations on the other hand will only be present if one drops

2162: the assumption of spherical symmetry, so that their numerical simulation

2163: requires the use of two or three spatial dimensions. In default

2164: of higher dimensional generalisations of Lagrangian techniques these

2165: simulations are generally performed in an Eulerian framework. \\

2166: We will now turn our attention towards the numerical solution of the

2167: linearized equations. From the asymptotic behaviour, we expect, however, that

2168: the results we obtain for $n<1$ will diverge at the surface

2169: and thus not represent a physical solution.

2170: From a numerical point of view it turns out to be beneficial to reformulate

2171: Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) in terms of the displacement vector $\xi$. This is due

2172: to the asymptotic behaviour of $\zeta$ at the origin given

2173: by Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_ASSYMPTOTICZETA}).

2174: Below we will use the numerically calculated eigenmodes as initial data for

2175: the fully non-linear evolutions and for that purpose the solution for

2176: $\zeta$ would have to be converted into data for $w$ or in the Lagrangian

2177: code discussed in section \ref{LAGR} for $\xi$. The corresponding division by

2178: $r^2$ combined with the second order accuracy of the numerical eigenmode 

2179: solutions results in poor accuracy of these initial data near the origin.

2180: We therefore rewrite Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) in terms of $\xi$

2181: and introduce the auxiliary variable $A$

2182: to write the result as a first order system

2183: %

2184: \begin{align}

2185:   &\Pi \xi_{,x} - A = 0, \label{LIN_XIY} \\[10pt]

2186:   & A_{,x} + (r_{,x})^2\frac{\lambda^2}{r^4} \left( \frac{r^2}{\lambda r_{,x}} 

2187:       \right)_{,r} A + (r_{,x})^2\left\{ \frac{\lambda}{r^2}

2188:       \left[ \Pi \left(\frac{r^2}{\lambda}\right)_{,r} 

2189:       \right]_{,r} + \omega^2 W + Q \right\} \xi =0.

2190:       \label{LIN_AY}

2191: \end{align}

2192: %

2193: We note that the occurrence of $r$-derivatives in equation (\ref{LIN_XIY}) 

2194: is purely a convenient notation. In practice all these

2195: derivatives are eliminated

2196: via the TOV equations. If we use the rescaled radial coordinate, we have

2197: $r_{,x}=C$ and the $r$-derivative of $r_{,x}$ can

2198: be calculated from the relation

2199: %

2200: \begin{align}

2201:   C^2_{,r} &= (\gamma-1) \frac{P_{,r}}{\rho},

2202: \end{align}

2203: %

2204: which is a consequence of the equation of state and the definition of 

2205: the sound speed. The only derivatives

2206: in Eqs.\,(\ref{LIN_XIY}), (\ref{LIN_AY}) that have to be represented

2207: by finite differencing are the $x$-derivatives of $\xi$ and

2208: $A$. \\

2209: In the Cowling approximation all these results remain unchanged except for

2210: the function $Q$ which has to be replaced by

2211: %

2212: \begin{align}

2213:   \tilde{Q} &= \lambda^2 (\rho + P) \left[ \left( \frac{\lambda_{,r} 

2214:          C^2 \mu}{r^2} \right)_r - \mu \left( \frac{\lambda_{,r}}{r^2}

2215:          \right)_r + \lambda \mu

2216:          \left( \frac{C^2 \mu_r}{r^2 \mu} \right)_r \right].

2217: \end{align}

2218: %

2219: and the relation between displacement and energy density perturbation which

2220: becomes

2221: %

2222: \begin{align}

2223:   \delta \rho &= -(\rho + P) \frac{\lambda}{r^2} \left[

2224:       \left(\frac{\lambda_{,r}}{\lambda} + \frac{\mu_{,r}}{\mu} \right)

2225:       \zeta +\zeta_{,r} \right] - \frac{\lambda}{r^2} \rho_{,r} \zeta.

2226: \end{align}

2227: %

2228: It is an interesting fact that in both cases the results are simpler

2229: due to the cancellation of terms if gravity is included. \\

2230: 

2231: {\em (b) The numerical implementation} \\[5pt]

2232: We have numerically calculated solutions of the eigenvalue problem

2233: (\ref{LIN_XIY}), (\ref{LIN_AY}) using a relaxation method. % as described

2234: %in section\,\ref{relaxation}.

2235: For this purpose

2236: we introduce an additional differential equation for the eigenvalues

2237: %

2238: \begin{align}

2239:   (\omega^2)_{,x} &= 0, \label{LIN_OMEGAY}

2240: \end{align}

2241: %

2242: which states that the eigenmode frequency is constant throughout the star.

2243: The value of $\omega$ is not known at this stage but will result from the

2244: relaxation algorithm.

2245: In order to solve the system (\ref{LIN_XIY}), (\ref{LIN_AY}),

2246: (\ref{LIN_OMEGAY}) we need to supply three boundary conditions. At the centre

2247: we require that

2248: %

2249: \begin{align}

2250:   \xi(0) &= 0, \\[10pt]

2251:   A(0) &= \mathrm{const} \ne 0.

2252: \end{align}

2253: %

2254: The vanishing of the displacement $\xi$ at the origin is a necessary

2255: condition in spherical symmetry. The value of $A$ at the origin is allowed

2256: to take on any non-zero value because an eigenfunction is only defined

2257: up to a constant factor. At the outer boundary we have the condition

2258: %

2259: \begin{align}

2260:   A &= 0, \label{LIN_BCOUTA}

2261: \end{align}

2262: %

2263: which follows from the definition of $A$ and the vanishing of the energy

2264: density at the surface of the star. 

2265: An initial guess for $\omega$ enables us to calculate

2266: the initial functions $\xi$ and $A$ by integrating Eqs.\,(\ref{LIN_XIY}),

2267: (\ref{LIN_AY}) outwards. The solution including the eigenvalue $\omega^2$

2268: is then obtained by relaxation as described in section\,\ref{relaxation}. \\

2269: 

2270: {\em (c) Testing the code} \\[5pt]

2271: For sufficiently low eigenmodes both alternative choices of the radial

2272: coordinate lead to good agreement between the predicted frequencies

2273: up to the fourth significant digit. As we will see below high order

2274: %

2275: \begin{table}[t]

2276:   \caption{The convergence factors obtained for doubling the grid resolution

2277:            in the relaxation code for calculating the eigenmodes of

2278:            the neutron star models 1 - 5. Grid resolutions

2279:            of 500, 1000 and 2000 points have been used.}

2280: \begin{center}

2281:   \begin{tabular}{c|cc}

2282:     \hline \hline

2283:     model & fundamental mode & $10^{\rm th}$ eigenmode \\

2284:     \hline

2285:     1 & 4.75  & 5.05  \\

2286:     2 & 4.76  & 4.85   \\

2287:     3 & 4.80  & 3.97   \\

2288:     4 & 4.75  & 4.82   \\

2289:     5 & 4.75  & 4.82   \\

2290:     \hline \hline

2291:   \end{tabular}

2292:   \label{CONV_EIG}

2293: \end{center}

2294: \end{table}

2295: %

2296: eigenmode profiles show rapid oscillations near the surface of the star

2297: %

2298: \begin{table}[t]

2299:   \caption{Radius, mass and frequencies of the lowest three eigenmodes

2300:            for three randomly chosen models of Kokkotas and Ruoff have

2301:            been recalculated with our codes and agree well with their values.}

2302: \begin{center}

2303:   \begin{tabular}{l|ccccccccc}

2304:     \hline \hline

2305:     & $\gamma$ & $K$ & $\rho_{\rm c}$ & $R$ & $M$ 

2306:     & $\nu_1$ & $\nu_2$ & $\nu_3$ \\

2307:     & & & $[10^{15}\,\,{\rm g/cm}^3]$ 

2308:     & $[{\rm km}]$ & $[M_{\odot}]$ 

2309:     & [kHz] & [kHz] & [kHz]  \\

2310:     \hline \\[-10pt]

2311:     Kokkotas \& Ruoff & 2.00 & $100\,\,{\rm km}^2$ & 5.000 & 7.787

2312:     & 1.348 & 1.129 & 7.475 & 11.365 \\

2313:     this work & 2.00 & $100\,\,{\rm km}^2$ & 5.000 & 7.788

2314:     & 1.348 & 1.128 & 7.470 & 11.355 \\

2315:     \hline \\[-10pt]

2316:     Kokkotas \& Ruoff & 2.25 & $700\,\,{\rm km}^{2.5}$ & 4.000 & 8.199

2317:     & 1.600 & 1.455 & 7.610 & 11.573 \\

2318:     this work & 2.25 & $700\,\,{\rm km}^{2.5}$ & 4.000 & 8.200

2319:     & 1.600 & 1.443 & 7.594 & 11.544 \\

2320:     \hline \\[-10pt]

2321:     Kokkotas \& Ruoff & 3.00 & $2\cdot 10^5\,\,{\rm km}^4$ & 2.200 & 9.419

2322:     & 1.988 & 2.716 & 8.305 & 12.516 \\

2323:     this work & 3.00 & $2\cdot 10^5\,\,{\rm km}^4$ & 2.200 & 9.419

2324:     & 1.988 & 2.637 & 8.215 & 12.389 \\

2325:     \hline \hline

2326:   \end{tabular}

2327:   \label{COMPEIGS}

2328: \end{center}

2329: \end{table}

2330: %

2331: which

2332: % depending on the number of grid points

2333: may not be well resolved if we

2334: work with the areal radius $r$. The frequencies deviate more significantly

2335: in these cases. In the rest of this section we will therefore work with

2336: the rescaled coordinate and set $r_{,x}=C$.

2337: The resulting code has been checked in four independent ways. First

2338: we have computed the eigenfunctions of the fundamental and the tenth

2339: mode for the neutron star models listed in Table \ref{MODELS15}

2340: and checked for convergence using 500, 1000 and 2000 grid points. The results

2341: shown in Table \ref{CONV_EIG} clearly demonstrate second order convergence

2342: as expected for the second order finite differencing scheme applied

2343: in the relaxation algorithm. \\

2344: Next we have randomly chosen three of the stellar models

2345: listed in \lcite{Kokkotas2001} and recalculated radius, mass of the neutron

2346: stars as well as the frequencies of the lowest three eigenmodes. The

2347: results are compared in Table \ref{COMPEIGS} and show good agreement. \\

2348: For the third test we recall the 1-parameter families of neutron stars

2349: shown in Fig.\,\ref{TOV_FAMILIES}. We have already

2350: mentioned that the maxima in the mass vs. central density plots separate the

2351: stable and unstable branches of neutron star models and that the frequency

2352: of the fundamental eigenmode becomes zero at the critical point

2353: and imaginary on the unstable branch. We have therefore

2354: determined the critical central densities for the five neutron star

2355: models of Table \ref{MODELS15}

2356: and calculated the frequency of the fundamental modes

2357: just below and above the critical densities. The numerical results 

2358: are shown in Table \ref{CRITFREQS} and confirm this picture. The frequencies

2359: of the fundamental mode are very small but real for central densities

2360: %

2361: \begin{table}[t]

2362:   \caption{The critical central densities corresponding to

2363:            the neutron star models 1-5

2364:            are given to four significant digits together with the

2365:            frequency of the fundamental mode just below and above the

2366:            critical point. Above the critical density the frequencies

2367:            become imaginary as expected.}

2368: \begin{center}

2369:   \begin{tabular}{l|ccccccccc}

2370:     \hline \hline

2371:     model & $\rho_{\rm c,crit}$ 

2372:     & $\nu (\rho_{\rm c,crit}-10^{-6})\,{\rm km^{-2}}$

2373:     & $\nu (\rho_{\rm c,crit}+10^{-6})\,{\rm km^{-2}}$ \\

2374:     & [km$^{-2}$] & [kHz] & [kHz] \\

2375:     \hline \\[-10pt]

2376:     1 & 0.002179 & 0.0294 & 0.0477$\,i$ \\

2377:     2 & 0.004205 & 0.0578 & 0.0429$\,i$ \\

2378:     3 & 0.002804 & 0.0629 & 0.0350$\,i$ \\

2379:     4 & 0.002103 & 0.0409 & 0.0592$\,i$ \\

2380:     5 & 0.002233 & 0.0591 & 0.0627$\,i$ \\

2381:     \hline \hline

2382:   \end{tabular}

2383:   \label{CRITFREQS}

2384: \end{center}

2385: \end{table}

2386: %

2387: just below the critical value and become imaginary for larger densities.\\

2388: A further test for the eigenmode frequencies arises from a relation

2389: between the period of the fundamental mode $T_1$ of a neutron star model

2390: and the deviation of the radius $R$ from the critical radius $R_{\rm c}$

2391: that has been suggested by \scite{Harrison1965} [see their Eq.\,(155)]

2392: %

2393: \begin{align}

2394:   (R-R_{\rm c})\cdot T_1^{\,2} &= \mathrm{const}. \label{LIN_HARRISON}

2395: \end{align}

2396: %

2397: In Table \ref{LIN_RCT0} we show the results obtained for neutron star

2398: models identical to model 1 and 3 with central densities as indicated.

2399: %

2400: \begin{table}[t]

2401:   \caption{Equation\,(\ref{LIN_HARRISON}) is checked for neutron star models

2402:            1 and 3 for various central densities.}

2403: \begin{center}

2404:   \begin{tabular}{ccc|ccc}

2405:     \hline \hline

2406:     \multicolumn{3}{c|}{model 1} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{model 3} \\

2407:     $\rho_{\rm c}$ & $\omega_1$ & $(R-R_{\rm crit})/\omega_1^2$ 

2408:     & $\rho_{\rm c}$ & $\omega_1$ & $(R-R_{\rm crit})/\omega_1^2$ \\

2409:     $[{\rm km}^{-2}]$ & [km$^{-1}$] & [km$^3$] & [km$^{-2}$] & [km$^{-1}$]

2410:     & [km$^3$] \\

2411:     \hline

2412:     0.0021785 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.000187 & 187.96 &

2413:     0.0028035 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.000172 & 97.55 \\

2414:     0.0021780 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.000616 & 192.72 &

2415:     0.0028030 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.000773 & 85.21 \\

2416:     0.0021775 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.000850 & 192.34 &

2417:     0.0028025 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.001080 & 84.89 \\

2418:     0.0021750 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.001563 & 192.59 &

2419:     0.0028020 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.001317 & 84.77 \\

2420:     0.0021700 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.002424 & 193.00 &

2421:     0.0028000 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.002002 & 84.87 \\

2422:     0.0020000 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.010939 & 207.93 &

2423:     0.0027000 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.010838 & 86.97 \\

2424:     0.0015000 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.020261 & 236.69 &

2425:     0.0020000 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.029622 & 106.64 \\

2426:     0.0011775 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.023606 & 235.61 &

2427:     0.0015000 & \hspace{0.3cm} 0.036427 & 128.95 \\

2428:     \hline \hline

2429:   \end{tabular}

2430:   \label{LIN_RCT0}

2431: \end{center}

2432: \end{table}

2433: %

2434: Even though a deviation from Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_HARRISON}) up to $20\,\%$

2435: is observed for both models,

2436: this is rather small if one considers the variation of the frequency

2437: $\omega_1$ over several orders of magnitude. \\

2438: 

2439: {\em (d) The eigenmode solutions} \\[5pt]

2440: We will now turn our attention to the eigenmode profiles of the

2441: physical variables.

2442: We have already noted that the eigenvalue problem has an enumerable infinite

2443: set of solutions which can be ordered with respect to their eigenvalues.

2444: This order is also reflected in the spatial profiles of the corresponding 

2445: eigenfunctions. We have numerically calculated the first four 

2446: eigenmodes in terms of the displacement vector $\xi$ for model 3

2447: with polytropic exponent $\gamma=2$. The velocity $w$, 

2448: the rescaled displacement $\zeta$ and the energy density perturbation

2449: $\delta \rho$ then follow from Eqs.\,(\ref{LIN_XI}) where we use harmonic time 

2450: dependence, (\ref{LIN_ZETA}) and (\ref{LIN_DRHOOFZETA}).

2451: The results are shown in Fig.\,\ref{MODES1_4}, 

2452: where we have also included the solution

2453: for $\xi$ corresponding to the tenth eigenmode.

2454: Since the eigenmode solutions are determined

2455: up to a constant factor only, we have rescaled them to about unit amplitude.

2456: For all variables we see that the number of nodes is given by the order

2457: of the mode and the number of local maxima or minima is given by

2458: the order minus one.

2459: This behaviour remains valid for higher modes and is characteristic of the

2460: eigenmode solutions.

2461: In order to illustrate the significance of the transformation to the

2462: rescaled radius $y$ we have plotted $\xi$ as a function of $r$ as well.

2463: In the upper panels of Fig.\,\ref{MODES1_4} we can see that the

2464: oscillations in the spatial profile of the eigenmodes become more

2465: concentrated towards larger radii $r$ the higher the order of the mode.

2466: In terms of the rescaled radius $y$, however, the oscillations are evenly

2467: distributed over the entire interval. This behaviour is reminiscent of the

2468: narrowing of the wave pulse we observed in section \ref{TOV_RYTRAFO} 

2469: and illustrates why

2470: a superior numerical performance is obtained when using the coordinate $y$,

2471: especially when higher order modes are present in the evolution. \\

2472: %

2473: \begin{figure}[t]

2474:   \centering

2475:   \epsfig{file=m3_eigrxi.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

2476:   \epsfig{file=m3_eigxi.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

2477:   \epsfig{file=m3_eigw.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

2478:   \epsfig{file=m3_eigdrho.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

2479:   \caption{The displacement $\xi$ as a function of the areal radius $r$

2480:            and the rescaled radius $y$ as well as the velocity $w$ and

2481:            the energy density $\delta \rho$ as a function of $y$ are

2482:            shown for the first four eigenmodes of model 3. 

2483:            For $\xi$ we have also

2484:            plotted mode 10 to illustrate the concentration of oscillations

2485:            towards larger $r$.}

2486:   \label{MODES1_4}

2487: \end{figure}

2488: %

2489: %

2490: \begin{figure}[ht]

2491:   \centering

2492:   \epsfig{file=m1_eigdrho.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

2493:   \epsfig{file=m5_eigdrho.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

2494:   \caption{The energy density perturbation $\delta \rho$ obtained for the

2495:            first four eigenmodes of stellar model 1 (left panel) and 5 

2496:            (right panel) is plotted as a function of $y$.}

2497:   \label{EIG_DRHO}

2498: \end{figure}

2499: %

2500: The corresponding eigenmodes obtained for the other stellar models look 

2501: qualitatively similar in all variables except for the energy density 

2502: perturbation $\delta \rho$. We have already noted that the asymptotic 

2503: behaviour of $\delta \rho$ depends on the polytropic exponent $\gamma$.

2504: This is confirmed by the numerical solutions shown in Fig.\,\ref{EIG_DRHO} 

2505: where we plot the profiles of the energy density perturbation obtained

2506: for the stellar models 1 and 5 with polytropic exponents $\gamma=1.75$

2507: and $2.3$ respectively. For model 1 the energy density perturbation

2508: goes to zero at the surface, although with a non-zero gradient. In

2509: comparison the gradient of the background density of the same model vanishes

2510: in Fig.\,\ref{TOV_GAMMA} and the 

2511: quotient $\delta \rho/\rho$ can indeed be shown to diverge

2512: in agreement with Eq.\,(\ref{DRHOOVERRHO}).

2513: For the larger polytropic index 2.3 the 

2514: perturbation $\delta \rho$ itself diverges at the surface as expected

2515: from Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_ASSYMPTOTICDRHO}). \\

2516: The corresponding results obtained in the Cowling approximation are

2517: very similar to those shown above. The only notable difference is the

2518: frequency of the fundamental mode which does not decrease towards

2519: zero as the central density approaches the critical value but instead

2520: remains real and positive. This result is to be expected since a fluid

2521: will not become gravitationally unstable if the gravitational field is

2522: kept fixed. \\

2523: The eigenmode solutions obtained in this section will be used extensively

2524: as initial data in the non-linear evolutions. We have seen, however, 

2525: that the stellar surface represents a problematic area even in the linearized

2526: case. The difficulties are more pronounced in the non-linear case

2527: and need to be investigated in more detail before we can study the

2528: fully non-linear numerical evolutions.

2529: 

2530: 

2531: %=========================================================================

2532: \subsubsection{The surface problem}

2533: \label{SURFACE}

2534: %

2535: %

2536: When we formulated the description of non-linear radial oscillations

2537: of neutron stars in section \ref{NONP_EQ} we consciously omitted the issue

2538: %

2539: \begin{figure}[t]

2540:   \centering

2541:   \epsfig{file=surface.eps, height=300pt, width=200pt, angle=-90}

2542:   \caption{The energy density profile of an oscillating neutron

2543:            star is schematically plotted at three different

2544:            stages of one oscillation.

2545:            Initially the stellar radius is at its equilibrium value,

2546:            at the later time $t_1$ the star has expanded and at $t_2$

2547:            it has shrunk below its initial radius. The vertical

2548:            line indicates the extension of the numerical grid.}

2549:   \label{NONL_SURFACE}

2550: \end{figure}

2551: %

2552: of boundary conditions. The difficulties involved in specifying outer boundary

2553: conditions in an Eulerian code are so complex that we dedicate a whole

2554: subsection to this topic.

2555: We have already mentioned that the surface is defined by the condition

2556: $\hat{P}=0$ which is equivalent to $\hat{\rho}=0$ for a polytropic

2557: equation of state. With respect to the fixed numerical grid,

2558: however, the surface of the star is moving and we cannot apply this condition

2559: at the outer grid boundary. This is a further indication that one may

2560: have to emulate a Lagrangian treatment of the surface in order to

2561: accurately model neutron star oscillations involving radial displacements

2562: of the surface.

2563: The situation is graphically illustrated in

2564: Fig.\,\ref{NONL_SURFACE} where the total energy density profile is

2565: schematically plotted as a function of radius. At time

2566: $t_0$ an equilibrium star (solid curve)

2567: is perturbed with a velocity field that causes the star to

2568: expand. The initial

2569: configuration also determines the extension of the numerical grid indicated

2570: by the vertical line. At a later time $t_1$ the star has expanded

2571: (long dashed curve). The outer part of the star has therefore moved out of

2572: the numerical grid (dotted part of the curve) and the corresponding

2573: information would be lost in a non-linear numerical evolution.

2574: At time $t_2$ the star 

2575: has shrunk and is completely contained inside the numerical grid.

2576: Outside of the star the energy density will be zero. In general,

2577: therefore, the energy density profile or its derivatives will have a

2578: discontinuity at the stellar surface. Worse from a numerical point of view

2579: is the region between the stellar surface and the outer

2580: grid boundary.

2581: Even though the energy density will be zero at these points theoretically, 

2582: numerically this will not exactly be the case. At some of these points the

2583: total energy density will have small negative values due to numerical

2584: noise, unless the

2585: values are manipulated in some form. A negative energy density, however,

2586: means that the pressure can no longer be calculated from the equation of 

2587: state which normally terminates the evolution. There are several 

2588: possibilities for dealing with these difficulties. We will discuss

2589: four methods and implement two of them in the course of this work. \\

2590: %

2591: \begin{list}{\rm{\arabic{count}.)}}{\usecounter{count}

2592:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.0cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin0cm

2593:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

2594: \item

2595: The first method consists in embedding the star in an atmosphere

2596: of low density. In this method the numerical grid extends

2597: well beyond the size of the neutron star and no information is lost at

2598: any stage of the evolution. The boundary conditions are then applied

2599: to the atmosphere whereas the star will always be confined to the interior

2600: numerical grid and the surface of the star is entirely described by

2601: the interior numerical evolution, for example by shock capturing methods.

2602: It is a non-trivial question, however, to what extent the atmosphere

2603: and the numerical treatment of the surface discontinuities

2604: will affect the evolution of the neutron star.

2605: % especially at reasonably

2606: %small amplitudes.

2607: For this reason it seems plausible to use an atmosphere

2608: of low density. A low density, however, will in general be accompanied by a

2609: small speed of sound and we have already seen in the discussion of the 

2610: wave equation in section \ref{TOV_RYTRAFO} that such regions require

2611: a careful numerical treatment. An insufficient resolution

2612: may result in spurious phenomena. In terms of a rescaled radius such as

2613: the coordinate $y$ defined in Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_YOFR}) we have been able to obtain

2614: a sufficient resolution, but a large number of grid points would be required

2615: to simulate an atmosphere of significant spatial extension. \\

2616: An interesting variation of this method consists in viewing the surface

2617: of the star as an interface to an exterior vacuum region and explicitly

2618: tracking the movement of the interface. Sophisticated techniques such as

2619: {\em level set methods} and {\em fast marching methods}

2620: have been developed for these

2621: purposes (see for example \citeNP{Sethian1999}) and may provide an answer to

2622: the surface problem in Eulerian formulations. One may even go a step further

2623: and recall the strikingly similar concept of Cauchy-characteristic

2624: matching and, thus, consider a combination of these ideas. It is, however,

2625: well beyond the scope of this work to investigate these methods in more

2626: detail and we will therefore focus on simpler techniques.

2627: %

2628: \item

2629: The second method is a modified version of the atmosphere approach discussed

2630: above. Instead of using an external atmosphere, we

2631: modify the equation of state of the neutron star at low densities

2632: and thus view the outer layers of the neutron star itself as an atmosphere.

2633: For that purpose we use an equation of state given by

2634: %

2635: \begin{align}

2636:   P &= K\,\rho^{\gamma}\hspace{4.17cm} \mathrm{if }\,\,

2637:       \rho > \rho_{\rm t}, \\[10pt]

2638:   P &= a_1 \rho + a_2\rho^2 + a_3 \rho^3 + a_4 \rho^4 \hspace{0.8cm} 

2639:       \mathrm{if }\,\, \rho \le \rho_{\rm t},

2640: \end{align}

2641: %

2642: where $a_2$, $a_3$ and $a_4$ are coefficients determined by the continuity

2643: of $P$ and its first two derivatives with respect to $\rho$. The

2644: coefficient $a_1$ and the transition density $\rho_{\rm t}$ are free

2645: parameters that are specified by the user. A consequence of this definition

2646: is that $P\sim \rho$ at low densities and the behaviour will

2647: be similar to that of a $\gamma=1$ polytrope in this region, i.e.

2648: extend beyond the surface of the original purely polytropic model. The

2649: low density part of the neutron star can thus be viewed as an atmosphere

2650: smoothly attached to a polytropic neutron star truncated at $\rho_{\rm t}$.

2651: Whenever the energy density falls below a threshold value $\rho_{\rm min}$

2652: during the evolution, it is set to this threshold value. The

2653: parameter $\rho_{\rm min}$ also needs to be specified by the user.

2654: This requirement avoids the occurrence of negative total energy densities,

2655: but introduces ad hoc discontinuities in the $\delta \rho$ profile. We take

2656: care of these discontinuities by introducing artificial viscosity of the

2657: %``standard'' modification of the 

2658: modified von Neumann-Richtmyer form (see for example \citeNP{Fox1962})

2659: %

2660: \begin{align}

2661:   q &= \left\{ \parbox{7cm}

2662:                  {

2663:                  $\displaystyle{b \Delta y^2 \hR w_{,y}^2}

2664:                  \hspace{1.5cm} {\rm if}\,\,\, w_{,y} < 0 \\[10pt]

2665:                  \displaystyle{0 \hspace{2.9cm} {\rm if} \,\,\, w_{,y} \ge 0},$

2666:                  } \right. \label{qrv2}

2667: \end{align}

2668: %

2669: where $b$ is the viscosity parameter. In many

2670: cases $b=2$ leads to satisfactory results.

2671: This viscosity term is added to the pressure perturbation $\delta P$

2672: wherever it occurs in the equations. With careful choices of the

2673: free parameters $a_1$, $\rho_{\rm t}$, $\rho_{\rm min}$ and $b$ we have

2674: obtained long term stable evolutions of localised wave pulses. The particular

2675: values we have to choose for a stable evolution, 

2676: especially the density values $\rho_{\rm t}$

2677: and $\rho_{\rm min}$, do however depend sensitively on the initial data.

2678: Furthermore the manipulation of the energy density perturbation $\delta \rho$

2679: in cases of a negative total energy density leads to a contamination

2680: of the evolution of eigenmodes in the low density range. The resulting

2681: disturbances then travel into the stellar interior within a few

2682: oscillation periods. In view of these difficulties we have decided to

2683: use a different treatment of the stellar surface. \\

2684: %

2685: \item

2686: A fully satisfactory solution to the surface problem in one spatial

2687: dimension can be obtained with

2688: a Lagrangian formulation either of the surface or the whole star. 

2689: In the first case this can be implemented by rescaling to a new

2690: radial coordinate

2691: %

2692: \begin{align}

2693:   s&:= \frac{r}{R(t)},

2694: \end{align}

2695: %

2696: where $R$ is the time dependent total radius of the star. This transformation

2697: leads to a few extra terms in the equations in the radial gauge,

2698: but is more complicated

2699: to implement in terms of the rescaled coordinate $y$. For this reason

2700: and because of the wider range of applications we have chosen instead

2701: to reformulate the non-linear radial oscillations entirely within

2702: a Lagrangian framework. Combined with the singularity avoiding properties

2703: of the polar slicing condition the resulting code can not only be used for 

2704: the simulation of radial oscillations but also allows high resolution

2705: studies of spherically symmetric gravitational collapse. This code and the

2706: corresponding testing will be discussed in detail in section \ref{LAGR}. \\

2707: Even though Lagrangian methods represent a formidable

2708: tool for 1-dimensional problems,

2709: we have already mentioned that there is no

2710: straightforward generalisation to two or three spatial

2711: dimensions, where the paths of fluid elements may intersect and give

2712: rise to caustics. \\

2713: %

2714: \item

2715: The method we will be using in the remainder of this section can be considered

2716: the inverse of the atmospheric treatments discussed above. Instead

2717: of adding matter in the form of an atmosphere the outer layers of the

2718: star are removed. In this context it is worth remembering that

2719: the solution of the TOV equations via quadrature does not go all the way

2720: out to $\rho=0$ and a fully non-linear perturbative code working with

2721: such a background intrinsically describes a truncated neutron star.

2722: The percentage of mass that we will remove from the star will be very

2723: small in most cases ($\ll 1 \%$). We will see below that the

2724: resulting code behaves well in the linearized limit in most cases.

2725: % The truncation

2726: % density below which the outer layers are removed from the background star,

2727: %has to be chosen larger for higher amplitude perturbations, however, which

2728: %leads to spurious numerical effects in the evolution of marginally

2729: %stable neutron stars, i.e. stars with a central density just below

2730: %the critical value. Consequently we will follow a more conservative approach

2731: %and study non-linear effects in a simplified neutron star model. Such

2732: %a model, albeit less realistic, is numerically under control in the sense

2733: %that no modifications of the model are required throughout the

2734: %amplitude range of interest and thus spurious numerical effects are

2735: %avoided. This model will enable us to study non-linear effects

2736: %in radial oscillations of a neutron star like dynamic system. \\

2737: \end{list} 

2738: 

2739: 

2740: %=========================================================================

2741: \subsubsection{The numerical implementation in Eulerian coordinates}

2742: \label{PERT_NUMERICS}

2743: %

2744: %

2745: In section \ref{PERT_EQ} we have derived the equations for a fully non-linear

2746: perturbative formulation of a dynamic spherically

2747: symmetric star in terms of the generalised coordinate $x$. In the

2748: remainder of the Eulerian discussion we will restrict ourselves to the

2749: rescaled version and set $r_{,x} = C$ and $x=y$.

2750: In order to numerically solve these equations, we

2751: also have to specify appropriate boundary conditions. 

2752: We start with the origin and recall that the displacement $\xi$ of a 

2753: fluid element at the centre of a spherically symmetric star

2754: vanishes. As a consequence the radial velocity will also vanish at

2755: the origin.

2756: As far as the energy energy density is concerned, we note that

2757: $\hat{\rho}$ is a component of a rank 2 tensor

2758: and therefore the spatial derivative $\hat{\rho}_{,y}$ will vanish

2759: in spherical symmetry. The same is true for the background density

2760: $\rho$ and therefore we obtain the inner boundary condition

2761: $\delta \rho_{,y}=0$. Finally we require the vanishing of

2762: $\delta \mu$ to avoid a conical singularity. \\

2763: At the outer boundary we match

2764: the lapse function to an exterior Schwarzschild metric as in the static

2765: case which results in the condition $\hat{\lambda}\cdot \hat{\mu}=1$. As

2766: far as the matter variables are concerned, the situation is a bit

2767: more complicated. For the velocity we use the regularity condition $w_{,y}=0$.

2768: In view of the definition of the radial coordinate $y$ this is equivalent

2769: to demanding that the velocity

2770: has a finite gradient with respect to $r$ at the surface. 

2771: This condition is satisfied by the eigenmode solutions obtained

2772: in section \ref{PERT_LIN}.

2773: In Fig.\,\ref{MODES1_4} we can see that the gradient $w_{,y}$ vanishes

2774: for all three polytropic exponents $\gamma=1.75$, $2.00$

2775: and $2.3$.

2776: In contrast to the velocity gradient the derivative of the energy density

2777: perturbation $\delta \rho_{,y}$ will in general not vanish at the surface.

2778: If we consider the stellar models listed in Table \ref{MODELS15}

2779: it can be shown that $\delta \rho_{,y}$ will only vanish in the

2780: case $\gamma=2$ which is also illustrated in Figs.\,\ref{MODES1_4}

2781: and \ref{EIG_DRHO}. In summary the boundary conditions are

2782: %

2783: \begin{align}

2784:   \delta \rho_{,y} &= 0, \label{PERT_BCINDRHO} \\[10pt]

2785:   w &= 0, \label{PERT_BCINW} \\[10pt]

2786:   \delta \mu &= 0. \label{PERT_BCINDMU}

2787: \end{align}

2788: %

2789: at the origin and

2790: %

2791: \begin{align}

2792:   w_{,y} &= 0, % \hspace{0.5cm} \mathrm{or} \hspace{0.5cm} w =0,

2793:   \label{PERT_BCOUTW} \\[10pt]

2794:   \hat{\lambda} \cdot \hat{\mu} &= 1

2795: \end{align}

2796: %

2797: at the surface. \\

2798: In this context it is worth mentioning a subtlety concerning

2799: second order finite differencing schemes used for evolution

2800: equations such as (\ref{PERT_DRHOT}), (\ref{PERT_WT}).

2801: In general this system of equations 

2802: has one ingoing and one outgoing characteristic at each boundary

2803: and physical information has to be specified in the form of one

2804: condition for either $w$ or $\delta \rho$ at either boundary. The centred

2805: finite differencing scheme (or variation thereof) used in second order 

2806: techniques, however, cannot be applied at the grid boundaries and the

2807: variables must be evolved in an alternative way. The physical

2808: boundary conditions do not necessarily provide enough information

2809: for this. In our case, for example, we have two variables $\delta \rho$, $w$ 

2810: that need to be updated at

2811: two grid points respectively which requires four conditions, but only 

2812: two conditions are required to provide information for the

2813: characteristics entering the numerical grid.

2814: The remaining boundary values not determined by these two conditions

2815: have to be obtained in alternative ways,

2816: for example by extrapolation or the use of one sided derivatives in the

2817: evolution equations. We have obtained optimal performance in the evolution

2818: of $\delta \rho$ and $w$ by using conditions (\ref{PERT_BCINDRHO})

2819: and (\ref{PERT_BCINW}) at the centre and (\ref{PERT_BCOUTW}) at the

2820: surface. The outer boundary value of $\delta \rho$ is then obtained

2821: by extrapolation on each new time slice.

2822: It is worth pointing out that this problem is not apparent in the implicit

2823: finite difference methods applied to the cosmic string in section \ref{cstr}

2824: or the Lagrangian code in section \ref{LAGR}. \\

2825: Before we schematically outline the computational steps involved in

2826: the time evolution we need to discuss one final numerical issue,

2827: the CFL stability condition. We have mentioned in section \ref{stability}

2828: that the stability criterion of Courant, Friedrichs and Lewy requires

2829: the physical domain of dependence to be included in the numerical

2830: domain of dependence. A standard method to ensure that this criterion

2831: is met in a hydrodynamical evolution is based on calculating the

2832: slopes of the characteristics at each point on the numerical grid.

2833: In our case we consider the system of evolution equations

2834: (\ref{PERT_DRHOT}), (\ref{PERT_WT}). The quasi-linear nature of this

2835: system enables us to calculate the characteristics from

2836: %

2837: \begin{align}

2838:   \frac{dy_i}{dt} &= \Lambda_i,

2839: \end{align}

2840: %

2841: where $\Lambda_i$ are the eigenvalues of the coefficient matrix

2842: and are defined by the equation

2843: %

2844: \begin{align}

2845:   \left[ \begin{pmatrix} \alpha_{11} & \alpha_{12} \\

2846:                   \alpha_{21} & \alpha_{11} \\

2847:   \end{pmatrix} -\Lambda \cdot \hbox{\oneone{1}} \right]

2848:   \begin{pmatrix} \delta \rho \\ w

2849:   \end{pmatrix} &= 0.

2850: \end{align}

2851: %

2852: The solution for the coefficient functions 

2853: (\ref{PERT_ALPHA11})-(\ref{PERT_ALPHA21}) is given by

2854: %

2855: \begin{align}

2856:   \Lambda &= \frac{1}{r_{,x}D} \left( w(1-\hat{C}^2) \pm \frac{\hat{C}}

2857:              {\hat{\mu}\hat{\lambda}v} \right).

2858: \end{align}

2859: %

2860: If the characteristics are straight lines, the Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy

2861: condition is satisfied if the time step $dt$ obeys the inequality

2862: %

2863: \begin{align}

2864:   dt &\le \frac{dy}{\max{|\Lambda_i|}}. \label{PERT_DT}

2865: \end{align}

2866: %

2867: We therefore calculate the eigenvalue fields $\Lambda_1$, $\Lambda_2$ on each

2868: time slice and determine the value of $\max{|\Lambda_i|}$.

2869: Even though the characteristics will in general not be straight lines,

2870: the deviation is small on time scales of $dt$ and we allow for

2871: this effect by multiplying the resulting time step by a factor of 0.9. With

2872: that choice and about 500 grid points

2873: we have obtained stable evolutions over several 100000

2874: time steps which corresponds to more than $0.1$ s of proper time

2875: as measured by an observer at infinity.\\

2876: We have got all ingredients now to summarise the individual steps involved in

2877: the fully non-linear numerical evolution.

2878: %

2879: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

2880:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin1cm

2881:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

2882: \item A static background model is calculated according to the

2883:       TOV equations (\ref{TOV_RY})-(\ref{TOV_PY}), where

2884:       we set $r_{,x}=C$. For this

2885:       purpose the polytropic exponent $\gamma$, the polytropic factor

2886:       $K$, the central density $\rho_{\rm c}$ and the surface density

2887:       $\rho_{\rm s}$ need to be specified by the user. A non-zero

2888:       surface density will result in a truncated neutron star model.

2889:       The results are given in the form of data

2890:       files containing the background variables $\lambda$, $\mu$,

2891:       $\rho$ and $r$ as functions of $y$.

2892: \item If initial data is required in the form of eigenmode profiles,

2893:       the eigenmode solutions can be calculated according to the

2894:       method described in section \ref{PERT_LIN}. The order of the eigenmode is

2895:       determined by the initial guess for the frequency which needs

2896:       to be specified. The amplitude of the eigenmode is a free parameter

2897:       in the evolution code.

2898: \item There are several alternative choices for the initial data. Among

2899:       these are localised perturbations of Gaussian shape and

2900:       linear combinations of different eigenmodes.

2901: \item With the initial velocity $w$ and energy  

2902:       density $\delta \rho$ specified, the metric 

2903:       perturbations follow from the constraint

2904:       equations (\ref{PERT_LAMBDAR}) and (\ref{PERT_MUR}).

2905:       These equations are numerically integrated with a fourth

2906:       order Runge-Kutta scheme.

2907: \item The initial data is evolved according to the second order in

2908:       space and time McCormack scheme described in section \ref{McCormack}.

2909:       One evolution cycle

2910:       consists of the following steps. \\[4pt]

2911:       a) Calculation of the Courant factor, \\

2912:       b) predictor step for $\delta \rho$ and $w$,\\

2913:       c) application of the inner boundary conditions for

2914:          $\delta \rho$ and $w$,\\

2915:       d) \parbox[t]{12.7cm}{integration of the constraint equations 

2916:          to obtain preliminary values for $\delta \lambda$ and $\delta \mu$

2917:          on the new time slice,}\\[10pt]

2918:       e) corrector step for $\delta \rho$ and $w$,\\

2919:       f) application of boundary conditions for $\delta \rho$ and $w$,\\

2920:       g) \parbox[t]{12.7cm}{integration of the constraint equation on the 

2921:          new slice to obtain the final values of $\delta \lambda$ 

2922:          and $\delta \mu$.}

2923: \end{list}

2924:      

2925: 

2926: %=========================================================================

2927: \subsubsection{The performance of the code in the linear regime}

2928: \label{EULER_LIN}

2929: %

2930: %

2931: We will now investigate the performance of the code in the linear regime,

2932: where we know the exact solution with high accuracy.

2933: If initial data is provided in the form of an eigenmode profile $w_i(y)$

2934: and zero $\delta \rho$, we know that

2935: the time dependent solution in the linear regime is given by

2936: %

2937: \begin{align}

2938:   \delta \rho(t,y) &= -\delta \rho_i(y) \sin{\omega_i t}, \label{LIN_DRHOOFT}

2939:   \\[10pt]

2940:   w(t,y) &= w_i(y) \cos{\omega_i t}. \label{LIN_WOFT}

2941: \end{align}

2942: %

2943: For finite amplitudes this solution is not exact, but for 

2944: sufficiently small amplitudes

2945: the deviation of the exact solution from (\ref{LIN_DRHOOFT}),

2946: (\ref{LIN_WOFT}) is negligible

2947: compared with the truncation error of the numerical scheme.

2948: We have therefore calculated the fundamental mode for stellar model

2949: 3 of Table \ref{MODELS15} using 1600 grid points and a truncation density

2950: $\rho_{\rm s}=1.0\cdot 10^{-7}\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$. This

2951: density corresponds to the removal of about $3\cdot 10^{-8}$ of the

2952: neutron star mass which is one order of magnitude smaller than the accuracy

2953: of the numerically calculated total mass.

2954: The amplitude of the eigenmode corresponds to an oscillation

2955: of the stellar radius of about $10\,\,{\rm cm}$, i.e. a relative

2956: displacement of about $10^{-5}$. In Fig.\,\ref{PERT_LINEVOL}

2957: we show the time evolution

2958: of $\delta \rho$ and $w$ together with the deviation from

2959: the analytic solution (\ref{LIN_DRHOOFT}), (\ref{LIN_WOFT}).

2960: %

2961: \begin{figure}[t]

2962:   \centering

2963:   \epsfig{file=pert_test_drho.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

2964:   \epsfig{file=pert_test_w.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

2965:   \caption{The left panels show the time evolution of $\delta \rho$ and $w$

2966:            obtained for neutron star model 3 with $\gamma=2.00$.

2967:            The initial perturbation

2968:            is given in the form of the fundamental mode in the velocity field

2969:            $w$. The right panels show the deviation from the exact

2970:            solution of the linearized equations.}

2971:   \label{PERT_LINEVOL}

2972: \end{figure}

2973: %

2974: The numerical evolution reproduces the expected harmonic time dependence

2975: with high accuracy. Because of its low frequency the fundamental mode

2976: is particularly suitable for this graphical illustration. The code

2977: reproduces the sinusoidal evolution of higher modes with comparable

2978: accuracy, but the large number of oscillations is not well resolved in plots

2979: similar to Fig.\,\ref{PERT_LINEVOL}.

2980: For the same reason we have shown the earlier stages

2981: of the evolution up to $t=600\,\,{\rm km}$ only in the figure. The whole run

2982: lasts more than ten times longer and shows no significant loss

2983: of accuracy. It is worth

2984: mentioning that the accuracies obtained here are limited not only by

2985: the evolution code but also by the results for the static background,

2986: the eigenmode profiles and, most importantly, the eigenmode

2987: frequencies used in the calculation of the analytic solution.

2988: The same long term stability and high accuracy has been observed in

2989: similar evolutions for a variety of different neutron star models with 

2990: polytropic indices $\gamma\le 2$. Below we will see, however, that the code 

2991: does not perform equally satisfactorily if we use a larger truncation density

2992: in combination with a marginally stable

2993: neutron star model with a central density just below the

2994: critical value. \\

2995: For neutron star models sufficiently far away from the stability limit,

2996: we can also check the performance of the code in the linear regime by

2997: comparing the frequency spectrum of the time evolution with the

2998: values predicted by the eigenmode calculations of section \ref{PERT_LIN}.

2999: For this purpose initial velocity fields have been calculated 

3000: for models 1 and 3 by

3001: adding the first ten eigenmode profiles whereas the initial density

3002: perturbation is set to zero. The combined amplitude of the perturbations is

3003: similar to that used above for determining the

3004: deviation from harmonic time dependence. 

3005: In Fig.\,\ref{PERT_LINFOUR} we show the Fourier spectra for the 

3006: corresponding time evolutions of the

3007: %

3008: \begin{figure}[t]

3009:   \centering

3010:   \epsfig{file=four_gamma175.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

3011:   \epsfig{file=four_gamma200.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

3012:   \caption{The power spectra of the time evolution of the central

3013:            density for neutron star models 1 and 3. The vertical bars

3014:            indicate the frequencies predicted by the linear analysis.}

3015:   \label{PERT_LINFOUR}

3016: \end{figure}

3017: %

3018: central density perturbation $\delta \rho(t,0)$. The frequencies

3019: predicted by the eigenmode analysis are indicated by vertical bars

3020: and show good agreement with the peaks in the Fourier spectra. \\

3021: Next we compare the performance of the perturbative

3022: approach with that of a ``standard'' non-perturbative method.

3023: We have already mentioned that we can simulate a non-perturbative approach

3024: by using vacuum flat space for the background variables. In this case we

3025: only use the TOV-model to determine the numerical grid as well as the areal

3026: radius $r$ and the sound speed $C$ as functions of $y$.

3027: The background variables, however, are

3028: specified as $\lambda=1$, $\mu=1$ and $\rho=0$. If we insert these

3029: values into the perturbative equations

3030: (\ref{PERT_LAMBDAR})-(\ref{PERT_B2}) they will become identical to the

3031: non-perturbative system (\ref{NONP_LAMBDAR})-(\ref{NONP_B2})

3032: (after transformation to the radial coordinate $y$) with

3033: $\hat{\lambda}$, $\hat{\mu}$, $\hat{\rho}$ and $\hat{P}$ replaced by

3034: $1+\delta \lambda$, $1+\delta \mu$, $\delta \rho$ and $\delta P$. The

3035: occurrence of the constant 1 in the metric variables has no implications

3036: on the numerical performance. We have thus evolved

3037: initial data in the form of a fundamental eigenmode profile in the

3038: velocity field $w$ for neutron star model 3.

3039: First we have used the TOV-background and a resolution of 600

3040: grid points. We have then repeated the evolution with a flat space

3041: background using 600 and 1200 grid points in order to check the dependence

3042: of the non-perturbative results on the spatial resolution.

3043: It is important

3044: to note that the same code and the same evolution algorithm has been

3045: used in both cases. 

3046: %We have only altered the outer boundary

3047: %conditions in the non-perturbative case where

3048: %we use the first order evolution of the predictor

3049: %step. With this choice we have obtained the best performance of 

3050: %our non-perturbative code.

3051: %If we use the original boundary conditions we obtain

3052: %virtually the same result but on a shorter time scale.

3053: The amplitude of the perturbation corresponds

3054: to an oscillation of the surface of several metres. For this

3055: amplitude we still expect the evolution to be dominated by the

3056: harmonic time dependence, although the results of section \ref{MODECOUPLING}

3057: below indicate the presence of weak non-linear effects.

3058: The numerical results are shown in Fig.\,\ref{PERT_NONP}, where the

3059: central density perturbation is plotted as a function of time.

3060: %

3061: \begin{figure}[t]

3062:   \centering

3063:   \epsfig{file=pert_nonp.eps, height=320pt, width=220pt,

3064:           angle=-90}

3065:   \caption{The central density perturbation corresponding to the

3066:            fundamental oscillation mode of model 3 as obtained

3067:            with a perturbative method for 600 grid points

3068:            (dotted curve) and a non-perturbative method for 600

3069:            (solid) 

3070:            and 1200 grid points (dashed curve). See text for details.}

3071:   \label{PERT_NONP}

3072: \end{figure}

3073: %

3074: We clearly see that the perturbative evolution results in the expected

3075: sinusoidal time dependence. In the non-perturbative case the

3076: central density shows similar oscillations but simultaneously

3077: the mean value decreases significantly.

3078: In longer runs this decrease is revealed

3079: to be exponential and thus indicates a starting evaporation of the star.

3080: Neutron star model 3, however, is located on the

3081: stable branch as we can clearly see in Fig.\,\ref{TOV_FAMILIES}

3082: and no collapse or evaporation is expected.

3083: Indeed the higher resolution run indicates that the non-perturbative scheme

3084: converges to the harmonic solution. In order

3085: to understand this behaviour of the non-perturbative scheme we recall

3086: the presence of background terms in the evolution equation

3087: for $w_{,t}$. If we consider the coefficients $\tilde{b}_2$ and 

3088: $\tilde{\alpha}_{21}$ given by Eqs.\,(\ref{NONP_ALPHA21}), (\ref{NONP_B2}),

3089: we can see that the evolution equation (\ref{NONP_WT}) contains the

3090: background in the form

3091: %

3092: \begin{align}

3093:   e(y) &:= \frac{1}{\mu^2 D} \left[ \frac{\lambda_{,r}}{\lambda} 

3094:   + \frac{C^2 \rho_{,r}}{(\rho + P)} \right]. \label{NONP_ERROR}

3095: \end{align}

3096: %

3097: We know that this term vanishes by virtue of the TOV equation

3098: %

3099: \begin{figure}[t]

3100:   \centering

3101:   \epsfig{file=sourcew.eps, height=300pt, width=220pt,

3102:           angle=-90}

3103:   \caption{The source terms of the evolution equation for $w$

3104:            (\ref{PERT_WT}) at the

3105:            first computational step are shown for the perturbative (solid curve)

3106:            and the non-perturbative scheme (dashed curve). The dotted

3107:            curve shows the numerical error of the background terms

3108:            and demonstrates the significance of the spurious source terms.}

3109:   \label{SOURCEW}

3110: \end{figure}

3111: %

3112: (\ref{TOV_PR}) and it has been removed from the equations in the perturbative

3113: formulation. In the non-perturbative case, however, it will manifest itself

3114: in the form of a residual numerical error.

3115: This error is shown in Fig.\,\ref{SOURCEW} for the first

3116: step in the evolution with

3117: 600 grid points together with the entire source terms of $w_{,t}$ as

3118: given by Eq.\,(\ref{NONP_WT}) in the non-perturbative and

3119: Eq.\,(\ref{PERT_WT}) in the perturbative case. Because of the cosine time

3120: dependence of the velocity the source terms should nearly vanish at $t=0$.

3121: It can be seen, however, that

3122: the source terms are dominated by the residual numerical

3123: error in the non-perturbative scheme which is particularly large

3124: at the centre and the surface. On the time scale of one oscillation period,

3125: about $150\,\,{\rm km}$, the spurious acceleration of up to

3126: $10^{-4}\,\,{\rm km}^{-1}$ will have a significant impact on the 

3127: oscillation of several metres of the star. A closer investigation

3128: of the velocity field reveals that the integral effect of the residual

3129: error is an increase in the velocity field near the surface. We

3130: attribute the gradual evaporation of the star to this disturbance

3131: in the velocity field which gradually radiates matter off the numerical 

3132: grid. \\

3133: Considering that the same code has been used for the comparison just described,

3134: it is necessary to check the perturbative scheme for similar

3135: spurious effects. After all the main advantage of the perturbative

3136: scheme lies in higher accuracy which may postpone the onset

3137: of a spurious collapse or evaporation but not necessarily avoid it.

3138: We have already mentioned, however, that no significant deviation

3139: from the harmonic time dependence has been observed in the case of model 3

3140: and initial data in the form of eigenmodes over very long times.

3141: In order to avoid even longer integration times and the associated

3142: computational costs, we have

3143: chosen an alternative way of testing the code for this behaviour. We use a

3144: stellar model identical to model 3 but with a central density of

3145: $\rho_{\rm c}=0.002802\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ which is just below the

3146: critical value given in Table \ref{CRITFREQS}.

3147: The initial data consist of the

3148: fundamental velocity mode with an amplitude corresponding to a

3149: surface displacement of about $10\,\,{\rm cm}$

3150: and we use a numerical grid with 600

3151: grid points. In the first calculation we have imposed a truncation density

3152: of $\delta \rho_{\rm s}=5\cdot 10^{-6}\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ and in a second run

3153: the intrinsic value of the TOV 

3154: %

3155: \begin{figure}[t]

3156:   \centering

3157:   \epsfig{file=marg_stable.eps, height=300pt, width=220pt,

3158:           angle=-90}

3159:   \caption{The central density resulting from the evolution of the

3160:            fundamental eigenmode of 

3161:            a neutron star corresponding to model 3 with a central density just

3162:            below the critical value is plotted for a truncation

3163:            density of $5\cdot 10^{-6}\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ (dashed curve)

3164:            and $2.5\cdot 10^{-8}\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ (solid curve).

3165:            }

3166:   \label{PERT_MARGSTABLE}

3167: \end{figure}

3168: %

3169: code $\delta \rho_{\rm s}=2.5\cdot 10^{-8}\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ is used.

3170: In Fig.\,\ref{PERT_MARGSTABLE}

3171: we show the resulting central density perturbation as a function of time.

3172: For the small truncation density we obtain the expected sinusoidal

3173: time dependence whereas the larger value significantly affects the evolution,

3174: even though only a fraction of $10^{-5}$ of the stellar mass has been neglected

3175: in this case. This result demonstrates the limitations of the code in its 

3176: current form. For larger truncation densities it does not necessarily

3177: guarantee mass conservation which we attribute to the boundary condition

3178: (\ref{PERT_BCOUTW}) which is strictly valid only if the numerical grid

3179: extends to $\rho=0$. For sufficiently small truncation densities

3180: the resulting numerical error is

3181: negligible and has no significant effect on the evolution. For larger

3182: truncation densities, however, it can result in spurious phenomena similar

3183: to those observed in the non-perturbative case. This is particularly

3184: problematic

3185: since the investigation of non-linear effects will require perturbations

3186: of larger amplitudes and consequently larger truncation densities are

3187: necessary in order to avoid total negative energy densities. From here

3188: on we will therefore proceed in two different ways. In the remainder

3189: of section \ref{DYNAMIC} we will investigate a simplified

3190: neutron star model for

3191: which the code ensures mass conservation for arbitrary amplitudes

3192: and negative energy densities are still avoided. This model will

3193: necessarily provide a less realistic description of a neutron star, but

3194: the general structure of the eigenmodes remains the same and it

3195: is not unrealistic to expect that non-linear effects such as mode coupling

3196: will be qualitatively similar in

3197: more realistic models. Considering the sensitivity of the numerical

3198: evolutions to the treatment of the surface, it is, however, desirable to

3199: develop a formulation of the dynamic neutron star which unambiguously 

3200: provides a correct treatment of the surface. This will be done in

3201: section \ref{LAGR} where we develop a fully non-linear perturbative Lagrangian

3202: code.

3203: 

3204: 

3205: %=========================================================================

3206: \subsubsection{A simplified neutron star model}

3207: \label{NEWMODEL}

3208: %

3209: %

3210: In the previous section we have seen that a sufficiently large

3211: truncation density in combination with the boundary condition

3212: (\ref{PERT_BCOUTW}) may result in a continuous loss or gain of mass.

3213: In order to avoid total negative energy densities, however, we have to use

3214: sufficiently large truncation densities when we study

3215: non-linear effects in the time evolution of large amplitude

3216: perturbations. We have therefore decided to ensure mass conservation

3217: by using the alternative boundary condition

3218: %

3219: \begin{align}

3220:   w &= 0 \label{PERT_BCOUTWMOD}

3221: \end{align}

3222: %

3223: at the surface instead of Eq.\,(\ref{PERT_BCOUTW}). This means that

3224: the surface of the star remains at a fixed position in space and

3225: only fluid elements in the interior of the star are displaced during the

3226: evolution. It is the fixed location of the surface

3227: which avoids the main problems

3228: we have encountered with the Eulerian formulation so far.

3229: The model we use for the following analysis

3230: has the same equation of state as model 3 of Table \ref{MODELS15}

3231: and a central density $\rho_{\rm c}=1.224\cdot 10^{-3}

3232: \,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ which implies a radius $R=11.34\,\,{\rm km}$

3233: and a total mass $M=2.18\,\,{\rm km}$.

3234: The truncation density is fixed at $\rho_{\rm s}=2.0\cdot 10^{-4}

3235: \,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ which means that the simplified model contains

3236: $90\,\%$ of the mass of the original star and extends to $84\,\%$ of the

3237: original radius. Apart from changing the

3238: truncation density in the calculation of the TOV-background

3239: and implementing the new boundary condition in the evolution code

3240: only one further modification in the numerical setup described in

3241: section \ref{PERT_NUMERICS} is required. The outer

3242: boundary condition (\ref{LIN_BCOUTA})

3243: in the calculation of the eigenmodes is replaced by

3244: %

3245: \begin{align}

3246:   \xi(R) &= 0.

3247: \end{align}

3248: %

3249: The resulting eigenmodes can be ordered in the same way as described in 

3250: section \ref{PERT_LIN} and the evolution of eigenmodes 

3251: in the linear regime again results

3252: in harmonic time dependence as in the original case with

3253: the frequencies predicted by the eigenmode calculation. The first

3254: four eigenmode profiles of $\delta \rho$ and $w$ for the model mentioned 

3255: above are shown in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_MODES}.

3256: %

3257: \begin{figure}[t]

3258:   \centering

3259:   \epsfig{file=mod_eigdrho.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

3260:   \hspace{0.5cm}

3261:   \epsfig{file=mod_eigw.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

3262:   \caption{The profiles of the lowest four eigenmodes in $\delta \rho$

3263:            and $w$ for the simplified neutron star model.}

3264:   \label{MOD_MODES}

3265: \end{figure}

3266: %

3267: The plots show that the number of local maxima and minima of the

3268: %

3269: \begin{figure}[b]

3270:   \centering

3271:   \epsfig{file=mod_eigdrho2.eps, height=220pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

3272:   \hspace{0.5cm}

3273:   \epsfig{file=mod_eigddrho2.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

3274:   \caption{The evolution of the central density for initial data in the form

3275:            a fundamental eigenmode in the velocity field for model 3

3276:            with a central density $\rho_{\rm c}=0.002802\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$.}

3277:   \label{MOD_DRHOC}

3278: \end{figure}

3279: %

3280: profiles still corresponds to the order of the mode.

3281: 

3282: %=======================================================================

3283: \subsubsection{Testing the code with the new model}

3284: %

3285: %

3286: The only modification of the code that needed to be implemented for the

3287: new model is the outer boundary condition (\ref{PERT_BCOUTWMOD}).

3288: The performance of the code in the linear regime is thus well established

3289: by the results of section \ref{EULER_LIN} and we merely have to demonstrate

3290: that no spurious results are obtained for larger truncation densities.

3291: This is the only case where we will depart from the model parameters listed

3292: in the previous section and use a central density

3293: $\rho_{\rm c}=0.002802\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ instead. We thus recover the

3294: parameters of the model which lead to a spurious evaporation of the star in

3295: Fig.\,\ref{PERT_MARGSTABLE}.

3296: For this model we have again evolved initial data in the form of the

3297: fundamental mode of the velocity with an amplitude of $10\,{\rm cm}$

3298: using 600 grid points. In Fig.\,\ref{MOD_DRHOC} we show the resulting

3299: central density $\delta \rho_{\rm c}$

3300: together with the deviation from the harmonic

3301: solution of the linearized case. For presentation purposes

3302: we only show the evolution up to $t=6000\,\,{\rm km}$. The harmonic

3303: time dependence is reproduced with reasonable accuracy as the deviation

3304: increases linearly up to about $1\,\%$. In general we have found the

3305: eigenmode frequency the quantity most vulnerable to numerical error as

3306: can be seen for example by varying the resolution. Because of this

3307: observation and the oscillatory character of the deviation in

3308: the figure

3309: we attribute the error mainly to the limited accuracy of the frequency

3310: rather than the numerical error of the time evolution itself.

3311: The increasing phase shift between the numerical and the analytic solution

3312: arising from the limited accuracy of the frequency

3313: %

3314: \begin{figure}[t]

3315:   \centering

3316:   \epsfig{file=qdrho.eps, height=200pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

3317:   \epsfig{file=qw.eps, height=200pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

3318:   \epsfig{file=qdlam.eps, height=200pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

3319:   \epsfig{file=qdmu.eps, height=200pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

3320:   \caption{The convergence factor obtained for evolving the second

3321:            eigenmode with an amplitude of $70\,\,{\rm m}$ is shown

3322:            for the variables $\delta \rho$, $w$, $\delta \lambda$

3323:            and $\delta \mu$.}

3324:   \label{MOD_CONV}

3325: \end{figure}

3326: %

3327: will result in a linear increase

3328: of the deviation as observed in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_DRHOC}.

3329: In spite of the small deviation this calculation

3330: is in sharp contrast with that shown in Fig.\,\ref{PERT_MARGSTABLE}, where

3331: a much smaller truncation density resulted in an exponential decay of the

3332: central density. We conclude that using a large truncation density

3333: in combination with the boundary condition (\ref{PERT_BCOUTWMOD})

3334: the code performs well in the linearized regime. \\

3335: We now return to the model parameters of the previous section and use

3336: $\rho_{\rm c}=0.001224\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$.

3337: In order to test the code for convergence in the non-linear regime

3338: we have evolved the second eigenmode with an amplitude

3339: corresponding to a maximal displacement of fluid elements of $70\,\,{\rm m}$.

3340: % For this amplitude strong non-linear effects are present as we will

3341: %see below.

3342: The calculation has been carried out with 400, 800 and

3343: 1600 grid points and the resulting convergence factors

3344: are shown in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_CONV}. In spite of variations

3345: around the expected value 4, the results for all variables are compatible

3346: with second order convergence. \\

3347: For the next test we will use the code in the Cowling approximation, since

3348: the static metric provides a straightforward recipe to calculate

3349: conserved quantities. We have seen in section \ref{PERT_EQ} that 

3350: only minor modifications are required

3351: to switch between the Cowling approximation and a dynamic metric.

3352: The conservation properties with a fixed metric will therefore represent

3353: a good test for the matter evolution in the general case.

3354: The first step in the derivation of a conserved quantity is to find a time-like

3355: Killing field. The existence of such a vector

3356: field follows from the static nature of the metric in the Cowling

3357: approximation. The Killing vector can be found by looking at the

3358: Killing equation

3359: %

3360: \begin{align}

3361:   \nabla_{\mu} \hbox{\vec X}_{\nu} + \nabla_{\nu} \hbox{\vec X}_{\mu} &= 0.

3362: \end{align}

3363: %

3364: The resulting 10 differential equations can be solved rather easily

3365: and define the solution up to a constant

3366: factor. We choose this factor so that the Killing field can be written as

3367: %

3368: \begin{align}

3369:   \hbox{\vec X}_{\mu} &= \left[ \lambda^2,0,0,0 \right].

3370: \end{align}

3371: %

3372: The conserved quantity then follows from contraction of the Killing field

3373: with the energy momentum tensor

3374: %

3375: \begin{align}

3376:   \hbox{\vec J}^{\mu} &= \hbox{\vec{T}}^{\mu \nu} \hbox{\vec X}_{\nu}.

3377: \end{align}

3378: %

3379: By virtue of conservation of energy momentum this vector satisfies the

3380: condition

3381: %

3382: \begin{align}

3383:   \nabla_{\mu} \hbox{\vec J}^{\mu} &= 0.

3384: \end{align}

3385: %

3386: With the metric (\ref{TOV_LINEELEMENT}) and the energy momentum tensor

3387: %

3388: \begin{figure}[t]

3389:   \centering

3390:   \epsfig{file=time_E.eps, height=300pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3391:   \caption{The numerical evolution of the function $E$ obtained in the

3392:            Cowling approximation. The quantity is conserved with an accuracy

3393:            better than $10^{-4}$.}

3394:   \label{CONSERVED}

3395: \end{figure}

3396: %

3397: (\ref{NONP_EMTENSOR}) this equation can be written in conservative form

3398: %

3399: \begin{align}

3400:   \partial_t \left( \lambda \mu r^2 \hbox{\vec J}^t \right) + \partial_r \left(

3401:       \lambda \mu r^2 \hbox{\vec J}^r \right) &= 0,

3402: \end{align}

3403: %

3404: where the $t$ and $r$ components of $\hbox{\vec{J}}$ are given by

3405: %

3406: \begin{align}

3407:   \hbox{\vec J}^t &= (1+\mu^2 w^2) \hat{\rho} + \mu^2 w^2 \hat{P}, \\[10pt]

3408:   \hbox{\vec J}^r &= \frac{w}{v} (1+\mu^2 w^2) (\hat{\rho} +\hat{P}).

3409: \end{align}

3410: %

3411: If we consider a general conservation law in one dimension

3412: %

3413: \begin{align}

3414:   u_{,t} + F(u)_{,r} &= 0,

3415: \end{align}

3416: %

3417: we obtain after integration over $t$ and $r$

3418: %

3419: \begin{align}

3420:   \int_0^R{[u(T,r)-u(0,r)]}dr + \int_0^T{[F(t,R)-F(t,0)]}dr &= 0.

3421: \end{align}

3422: %

3423: In our case the flux function is given by $F = \lambda \mu r^2 \hbox{\vec J}^r$

3424: and vanishes at $r=0$ and $r=R$ because the velocity $w$ vanishes

3425: at both boundaries. Consequently

3426: %

3427: \begin{align}

3428:   E &= \int_0^R{\lambda \mu r^2 \hbox{\vec J}^t}dr

3429: \end{align}

3430: %

3431: is a conserved quantity. \\

3432: In order to test the conservation properties of the code

3433: we have evolved the same initial data as in the convergence

3434: analysis with the metric fixed at the background values.

3435: In Fig.\,\ref{CONSERVED}

3436: we show $E$ as a function of time as calculated with 800 grid points.

3437: The quantity

3438: is conserved with a relative accuracy better than

3439: $10^{-4}$. Even higher accuracy is 

3440: obtained for smaller amplitudes of the initial data. 

3441: We have thus demonstrated that the code performs well in the linear

3442: as well as the non-linear regime. The applicability of the

3443: code to a wide range of amplitudes will be crucial when we study

3444: non-linear effects in the evolution of eigenmodes in the next subsection.

3445: 

3446: 

3447: %=========================================================================

3448: \subsubsection{Non-linear mode coupling}

3449: \label{MODECOUPLING}

3450: %

3451: %

3452: {\em (a) Measuring the eigenmode coefficients} \\[5pt]

3453: We will now use the simplified neutron star model described in

3454: section\,\ref{NEWMODEL} to study the coupling of eigenmodes

3455: in non-linear evolutions of

3456: radial oscillations.

3457: % It is necessary therefore to find a way of measuring

3458: %the presence of the individual eigenmodes in the evolution. For this

3459: %purpose we recall the {\em Sturm-Liouville problem} (\ref{LIN_ZETARR})

3460: %which determines the eigenmode solutions in terms of the displacement

3461: %vector $\zeta$.

3462: In order to measure the presence of the individual eigenmodes

3463: in the evolution we recall the {\em Sturm-Liouville problem}

3464: (\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) which determines the eigenmode solutions

3465: in terms of the rescaled displacement vector $\zeta$.

3466: In section \ref{PERT_LIN} we have seen that the solutions

3467: $\zeta_i$ form a complete orthonormal system with respect to

3468: the inner product defined in Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_INNERPRODUCT}). This

3469: property enables us to quantify the contributions of the different

3470: eigenmodes in the evolution at any given time.

3471: We need to calculate the displacement $\zeta(t,r)$ of a

3472: fully non-linear evolution from the fundamental variables $\delta \rho$

3473: and $w$. For this purpose we eliminate $\xi$ from Eqs.\,(\ref{LIN_XI})

3474: and (\ref{LIN_ZETA}) and obtain

3475: %

3476: \begin{align}

3477:   \zeta_{,t} &= r^2 w. \label{MC_ZETAT}

3478: \end{align}

3479: %

3480: The initial values of $\zeta$ follow from the initial data

3481: which we provide in the

3482: form of an eigenmode in the velocity field $w$ and

3483: zero energy density perturbation $\delta \rho$. We can see from

3484: Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_DRHOOFZETA}) that the initial displacement $\zeta$

3485: vanishes as a consequence.

3486: At any time $t$ we can then expand the non-linear

3487: displacement $\zeta(t,r)$ in terms of the eigenmodes

3488: %

3489: \begin{align}

3490:   \zeta(t,r) &= \sum_i{A_i(t) \zeta_i(r)}, \label{ZETAEXPANSION}

3491: \end{align}

3492: %

3493: where the time dependent coefficients are given by the inner product

3494: %

3495: \begin{align}

3496:   A_i(t) &= \langle \zeta(t,r),\zeta_i(r) \rangle .

3497: \end{align}

3498: %

3499: In practice we prefer to calculate the eigenmode coefficients from

3500: the time derivative of this equation

3501: %

3502: \begin{align}

3503:   \frac{\partial A_i}{\partial t} &= \langle \zeta_{,t}, \zeta_i \rangle,

3504: \end{align}

3505: %

3506: where we have dropped the $t$ and $r$ dependence for convenience.

3507: If we substitute Eq.\,(\ref{MC_ZETAT}) for $\zeta_{,t}$ we obtain the

3508: final result

3509: %

3510: \begin{align}

3511:   \frac{\partial A_i}{\partial t} &= \langle r^2 w, \zeta_i \rangle.

3512: \end{align}

3513: %

3514: We can thus calculate the time derivative of the coefficients

3515: and use the initial values to obtain the coefficients at

3516: any given time $t$. In our case all coefficients are zero initially

3517: because of the vanishing of $\zeta$. The integral appearing

3518: in the definition of the inner product is calculated with the

3519: fourth order Simpson method (see for example \shortciteNP{Press1989}). \\

3520: It is also interesting to consider the relative coefficients defined by

3521: %

3522: \begin{align}

3523:   R_i(t) &= \frac{\langle \zeta , \zeta_i \rangle}

3524:                  {\langle \zeta, \zeta \rangle},

3525: \end{align}

3526: %

3527: whenever $\zeta$ is a non-zero function. If we multiply this equation

3528: %

3529: \begin{figure}[t]

3530:   \centering

3531:   \epsfig{file=Rsum.eps, height=300pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3532:   \caption{The sum of the first ten $R_i$ has been calculated

3533:            for evolving the second eigenmode with an amplitude of

3534:            $70\,\,{\rm m}$.}

3535:   \label{MOD_SUMR}

3536: \end{figure}

3537: %

3538: by $A_i$ and sum over $i$, we can use Eq.\,(\ref{ZETAEXPANSION}) to

3539: obtain the relation

3540: %

3541: \begin{align}

3542:   \sum_i{R_i} &= 1, \label{MC_RSUM}

3543: \end{align}

3544: %

3545: which can be used to check the completeness of the numerically

3546: calculated eigenmodes. For this purpose we have

3547: evolved the second eigenmode with a large amplitude corresponding to

3548: a maximum displacement of

3549: $70\,\,{\rm m}$ and calculated the sum of the first ten weighted coefficients

3550: $R_i$ using 600 grid points. The result is shown in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_SUMR}

3551: and demonstrates

3552: that Eq.\,(\ref{MC_RSUM}) is satisfied to within less than one per cent.

3553: This does not only confirm the completeness of the system of eigenmodes,

3554: but also indicates that the energy essentially remains within the lowest

3555: ten eigenmodes.

3556: In order to check the orthonormality we have calculated the inner products

3557: of the eigenmodes. The results for

3558: the lowest five eigenmodes are shown in Table \ref{MOD_ORTHONORMALITY}

3559: and demonstrate that

3560: %

3561: \begin{table}[t]

3562:   \caption{The inner product $\langle \zeta_i, \zeta_j \rangle$ between

3563:            the five lowest eigenmodes.}

3564: \begin{center}

3565:   \begin{tabular}{c|ccccc}

3566:     \hline \hline

3567:     & $\zeta_1$ & $\zeta_2$ & $\zeta_3$ & $\zeta_4$ & $\zeta_5$\\

3568:     \hline

3569:     $\zeta_1$ & 1.0 & $-2.1\cdot 10^{-6}$ & $-6.3\cdot 10^{-6}$ 

3570:               & $-1.2\cdot 10^{-6}$ & $-2.6\cdot 10^{-6}$ \\

3571:     $\zeta_2$ & $-2.1\cdot 10^{-6}$ & 1.0 & $-8.0\cdot 10^{-6}$

3572:               & $-1.5\cdot 10^{-5}$ & $-6.3\cdot 10^{-6}$ \\

3573:     $\zeta_3$ & $-6.3\cdot 10^{-6}$ & $-8.0\cdot 10^{-6}$ & 1.0 

3574:               & $-1.8\cdot 10^{-5}$ & $-2.7\cdot 10^{-5}$ \\

3575:     $\zeta_4$ & $-1.2\cdot 10^{-6}$ & $-1.5\cdot 10^{-5}$ 

3576:               & $-1.8\cdot 10^{-5}$ & 1.0 & $-3.2\cdot 10^{-5}$ \\

3577:     $\zeta_5$ & $-2.6\cdot 10^{-6}$ & $-6.3\cdot 10^{-6}$

3578:               & $-2.7\cdot 10^{-5}$ & $-3.2\cdot 10^{-5}$ & 1.0 \\

3579:     \hline \hline

3580:   \end{tabular}

3581:   \label{MOD_ORTHONORMALITY}

3582: \end{center}

3583: \end{table}

3584: %

3585: the orthonormality condition (\ref{LIN_ORTHONORMALITY}) is satisfied with high

3586: accuracy. \\

3587: 

3588: {\em (b) Non-linear coupling between eigenmodes} \\[5pt]

3589: In order to study the coupling of modes due to non-linear effects we have

3590: provided initial data in the form of one velocity eigenmode. The order

3591: of the eigenmode $j$ and the amplitude of the initial data $K_j$ are

3592: free parameters that determine the physical setup. We will specify the

3593: amplitude of the initial perturbation by the maximum value of the

3594: eigenmode profile of the displacement vector $\xi$ corresponding to the

3595: initial velocity perturbation. This is a measure

3596: for the maximum displacement a fluid element of the interior of the

3597: star will undergo. During the evolution

3598: we calculate the eigenmode coefficients

3599: $A_i(t)$ with $1\le i \le 10\,\,{\rm or}\,\,15$

3600: according to the method described above. Due to the oscillatory character

3601: of the modes, the coefficients will also oscillate during the evolution.

3602: This is shown in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_EVOLA2A4}

3603: where we plot the coefficients $A_2(t)$ and

3604: $A_4(t)$ for evolving the second eigenmode. A large amplitude

3605: corresponding to a maximum displacement of $70\,\,{\rm m}$ has been used

3606: %

3607: \begin{figure}[t]

3608:   \centering

3609:   \epsfig{file=time_A2.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

3610:   \epsfig{file=time_A4.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

3611:   \caption{The coefficients $A_2(t)$ and $A_4(t)$ obtained for initial

3612:            data in the form of the second eigenmode with an amplitude

3613:            of $70\,{\rm m}$.}

3614:   \label{MOD_EVOLA2A4}

3615: \end{figure}

3616: %

3617: for this calculation and we can clearly see the transfer of energy

3618: between the second and the fourth mode. It is interesting to see

3619: that the energy transferred to the fourth mode does not remain there

3620: but instead is periodically passed back and forth between the two modes.

3621: We observe

3622: a qualitatively similar behaviour for the other eigenmodes, although these are

3623: excited less efficiently.

3624: If we want to investigate this coupling between eigenmodes more systematically,

3625: we need to quantify the degree to which a particular mode has been excited

3626: in an evolution. For this purpose we will use

3627: the maximum value of the corresponding coefficient 

3628: obtained during that evolution. We will refer to these maxima by

3629: $A_i$ as opposed to $A_i(t)$ used for the time dependent coefficients.

3630: We have thus evolved the eigenmodes $i=1$, 2 and 3, referred to

3631: %

3632: \begin{figure}[t]

3633:   \centering

3634:   \epsfig{file=A0ia.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3635:   \epsfig{file=A0ib.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3636:   \caption{The eigenmode coefficients for the first ten eigenmodes are

3637:            shown as a function of the amplitude $K_1$

3638:            for initial data in the form of the fundamental velocity

3639:            mode.}

3640:   \label{MOD_COUPLING1A}

3641: \end{figure}

3642: %

3643: as case 1, 2 and 3 from now on, with amplitudes

3644: ranging between $1\,\,{\rm cm}$ and $100\,\,{\rm m}$.

3645: At some stage in the range between about $50\,{\rm m}$

3646: and $100\,{\rm m}$ we observed the onset of shock formation.

3647: The accuracy of the eigenmode coefficients resulting from these

3648: evolutions is not clear. In this discussion we have therefore only

3649: used amplitudes for which no discontinuities are observed.

3650: %

3651: \begin{figure}[h]

3652:   \centering

3653:   \epsfig{file=square01a.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3654:   \epsfig{file=square01b.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3655:   \caption{The excitation of eigenmodes has

3656:            been fitted with quadratic power

3657:            laws in the range between

3658:            $K_1=1\,\,{\rm m}$ and $10\,\,{\rm m}$.}

3659:   \label{MOD_COUPLING1B}

3660: \end{figure}

3661: %

3662: For the numerical runs we have used 3200 grid points and an integration time

3663: of $1500\,\,{\rm km}$. Test runs over significantly longer times

3664: did not lead to significantly different results for the $A_i$

3665: which is compatible with the periodic exchange of energy shown in

3666: Fig.\,\ref{MOD_EVOLA2A4}.

3667: The high grid resolution on the other hand enables us to measure small

3668: eigenmode coefficients with good accuracy. \\

3669: 

3670: {\sl Case 1:} \\[5pt]

3671: We start our analysis with case 1, where the fundamental mode is excited

3672: initially. In Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING1A} we plot the coefficients

3673: $A_i$ as a function of the initial amplitude $K_1$ for the first ten

3674: %

3675: \begin{figure}[h]

3676:   \centering

3677:   \epsfig{file=combined01a.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3678:   \caption{The eigenmode coefficients $A_2$, $A_3$

3679:            and $A_4$ are fitted with linear combinations of power laws

3680:            according to Eqs.\,(\ref{FIT_01A2})-(\ref{FIT_01A4}).}

3681:   \label{MOD_COUPLING1C}

3682: \end{figure}

3683: %

3684: eigenmodes.

3685: We find that the coefficient $A_1$ increases linearly with the amplitude

3686: $K_1$ as expected. A closer investigation of the higher eigenmode

3687: coefficients, however, reveals the presence of two distinct regimes.

3688: %

3689: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

3690:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin1cm

3691:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

3692: \item In a weakly non-linear regime

3693:       for amplitudes up to about $10\,\,{\rm m}$ all coefficients

3694:       $A_2,\ldots A_{10}$ increase quadratically with the amplitude $K_1$.

3695:       Deviations from this quadratic power law at very small amplitudes

3696:       are due to the limited numerical accuracy in calculating

3697:       the coefficients.

3698: \item At larger amplitudes all eigenmode coefficients except for $A_2$

3699:       show a transition to power laws with larger exponent which marks

3700:       a moderately non-linear regime.

3701: \end{list}

3702: %

3703: We have illustrated this behaviour in

3704: Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING1B}

3705: where the eigenmode coefficients have been approximated with

3706: quadratic power laws

3707: %

3708: \begin{align}

3709:   A_i &= c_i\cdot K_1^{\,\,2}. \label{MOD_SQUARE01}

3710: \end{align}

3711: %

3712: The coupling coefficients $c_i$ which represent the coupling strength in the

3713: weakly non-linear regime have been obtained from least square fits of

3714: quadratic power laws to the eigenmode coefficients in amplitude ranges

3715: between $0.1\,\,{\rm m}$ and $10\,\,{\rm m}$. It is interesting to investigate

3716: the dependence of the coupling coefficients

3717: on the order of the eigenmodes. This is shown in the upper left panel

3718: of Fig.\,\ref{MOD_CI}, where we plot $c_i$ over the order $i-1$.

3719: %

3720: \begin{figure}[t]

3721:   \centering

3722:   \epsfig{file=ci.eps, height=215pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

3723:   \epsfig{file=ci02.eps, height=215pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

3724:   \epsfig{file=ci03.eps, height=215pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

3725:   \caption{The coupling coefficients $c_i$ defined in Eq.\,\ref{MOD_SQUARE01}

3726:            are plotted as a function of the mode number $i-1$ for case 1

3727:            in the upper left panel. In the upper right and lower panel

3728:            we plot the corresponding

3729:            coefficients for case 2 and 3

3730:            as a function of the mode number $i-3$ and $i-5$ respectively.

3731:            In all cases the coefficients can be approximated with

3732:            inverse cubic power laws as indicated by the solid lines.}

3733:   \label{MOD_CI}

3734: \end{figure}

3735: %

3736: The solid line in this figure shows a power law fit for these coupling

3737: coefficients given by

3738: %

3739: \begin{align}

3740:   c_i &= 3.2\cdot 10^{-7}\cdot (i-1)^{-3}. \label{CI}

3741: \end{align}

3742: %

3743: This result is compatible with the expectation that $c_i \rightarrow 0$

3744: as $i\rightarrow \infty$. Otherwise an infinite number of modes would each be

3745: excited with a finite amount of energy.

3746: In the moderately non-linear regime the eigenmode coefficients

3747: $A_3,\ldots,A_{10}$ show a higher order growth with the amplitude

3748: $K_1$. For the most efficiently excited modes 2, 3 and 4 we have been able

3749: to approximate the eigenmode coefficients with the following combinations

3750: of power laws

3751: %

3752: \begin{align}

3753:   A_2 &= 3.6\cdot10^{-7}\cdot K_1^{\,2}, \label{FIT_01A2} \\[10pt]

3754:   A_3 &= 3.4\cdot 10^{-8}\cdot K_1^2+9.7\cdot 10^{-10}\cdot K_1^3,

3755:      \label{FIT_01A3} \\[10pt]

3756:   A_4 &= 1.0\cdot 10^{-8}\cdot K_1^2+1.2\cdot 10^{-11}\cdot K_1^4.

3757:      \label{FIT_01A4}

3758: \end{align}

3759: %

3760: Here the higher order power laws have been obtained from fitting

3761: the eigenmode coefficients after subtracting the quadratic contributions.

3762: The resulting fits are shown in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING1C}.

3763: The higher order contributions for the higher eigenmodes is rather

3764: weak so that it is difficult to obtain accurate measurements of the

3765: %

3766: \begin{figure}[t]

3767:   \centering

3768:   \epsfig{file=even_A0i.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3769:   \epsfig{file=odd_A0i.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3770:   \caption{The eigenmode coefficients for the first ten eigenmodes are

3771:            shown for initial data in the form of the second velocity mode.}

3772:   \label{MOD_COUPLING2A}

3773: \end{figure}

3774: %

3775: corresponding power law exponents. It is thus not clear whether the regular

3776: pattern suggested by Eqs.\,(\ref{FIT_01A2})-(\ref{FIT_01A4}) remains valid

3777: for higher modes. The steepening of the curves in the

3778: %

3779: \begin{figure}[t]

3780:   \centering

3781:   \epsfig{file=square02a.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3782:   \epsfig{file=square02b.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3783:   \caption{The excitation of eigenmodes in case 2 has been fitted with

3784:            quadratic power laws in the range between $K_1=0.1\,\,{\rm m}$

3785:            and $10\,\,{\rm m}$.}

3786:   \label{MOD_COUPLING2B}

3787: \end{figure}

3788: %

3789: moderately non-linear regime, however, can be clearly seen in

3790: Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING1B}. \\

3791: 

3792: {\sl Case 2:} \\[5pt]

3793: We will now address the question to what extent these results remain valid

3794: if we initially excite higher modes. For this purpose we have repeated the

3795: %

3796: \begin{figure}[t]

3797:   \centering

3798:   \epsfig{file=higher02.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3799:   \epsfig{file=combined02.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3800:   \caption{In the upper panel we show the higher order power law contributions

3801:            of Eqs.\,(\ref{FIT02_04})-(\ref{FIT02_10}) which fit the

3802:            even eigenmode coefficients rather well in the moderately

3803:            non-linear regime. The lower panel shows the

3804:            resulting fits obtained from the sum of the quadratic and the higher

3805:            order power laws according to the same equations.}

3806:   \label{MOD_COUPLING2C}

3807: \end{figure}

3808: %

3809: numerical analysis by providing initial data in the form of the second

3810: velocity mode. The resulting eigenmode coefficients are shown

3811: as a function of the amplitude $K_2$ in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING2A}.

3812: The presence of the two distinct regimes is again clearly demonstrated by the

3813: figures and a closer investigation confirms the quadratic growth of the

3814: eigenmode coefficients in the weakly non-linear regime. This is demonstrated

3815: in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING2B} where the corresponding quadratic power law

3816: fits are shown for the eigenmodes. We also observe a similar dependence

3817: of the quadratic coupling coefficients $c_i$ on the mode number. In

3818: case 1 we observed a power law relation given by Eq.\,(\ref{CI}) between the

3819: coefficients $c_i$ and the mode number $i-1$. In case 2 we can also

3820: approximate the coefficients $c_i$ reasonably well with

3821: an inverse cubic power law if we use the number $i-3$ instead which is

3822: demonstrated in the right panel of Fig.\,\ref{MOD_CI}. The lower order

3823: modes 1 and 3 do not fit into this pattern and we shall

3824: %In Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING2B} we furthermore observe the

3825: %super-quadratic dependence of the eigenmode

3826: %coefficients $A_i$ on the amplitude $K_2$ in the moderately non-linear

3827: %region. \\

3828: readdress their behaviour in the quadratic regime below when we discuss

3829: case 3. \\

3830: Apart from these similarities there are some interesting

3831: differences between case 1 and case 2:

3832: %

3833: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

3834:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.0cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin0cm

3835:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

3836: \item The transition from the weakly to the moderately non-linear

3837:       regime occurs at smaller amplitudes than in case 1. This

3838:       is particularly pronounced in the case of

3839:       mode 6 (see Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING2B}).

3840: \item The regular pattern observed in case 1 in the moderately non-linear

3841:       regime for the strongly excited modes 2, 3

3842:       and 4, which is expressed in Eqs.\,(\ref{FIT_01A2})-(\ref{FIT_01A4}),

3843:       is now being observed for the eigenmodes of even order

3844:       $2n$. We obtain excellent fits for the data if we model the even

3845:       eigenmode coefficients with the following linear combinations of

3846:       power laws.

3847:       %

3848:       \begin{align}

3849:         A_4&=1.9\cdot10^{-6}\cdot K_1^2, \label{FIT02_04} \\[10pt]

3850:         A_6&=2.5\cdot10^{-8}\cdot K_1^2+8.7\cdot10^{-9}\cdot K_1^3,

3851:       \end{align}

3852:       \begin{align}

3853:         A_8&=4.9\cdot10^{-9}\cdot K_1^2+6.2\cdot10^{-11}\cdot K_1^4, \\[10pt]

3854:         A_{10}&=1.8\cdot10^{-9}\cdot K_1^2+4.9\cdot10^{-13}\cdot K_1^5.

3855:             \label{FIT02_10}

3856:       \end{align}

3857:       %

3858:       In Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING2C} we show the curves resulting from the

3859:       higher order power laws as well as those corresponding to the

3860:       linear combinations.

3861:       For the odd modes the higher order contributions are rather

3862:       small so that we cannot accurately measure the corresponding power

3863:       law indices. The steepening of the curves and thus the onset

3864:       of the moderately non-linear regime, however, is clearly visible.

3865: \item Whereas the quadratic coupling coefficients $c_i$ shown in the right

3866:       panel of Fig.\,\ref{MOD_CI} show a continuous decrease with the

3867:       order of the mode starting with mode 4,

3868:       a clear preference of the second mode to

3869:       couple to modes

3870:       of even order $2n$ is observed in the moderately non-linear regime.

3871:       This is indicated by the rather efficient coupling to mode 4

3872:       and the significantly steeper increase of the

3873:       eigenmode coefficients $A_6$, $A_8$ and $A_{10}$ for

3874:       larger amplitudes $K_2$ in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING2B}.

3875: \item A small flattening of the even eigenmode coefficients at

3876:       large amplitudes in Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING2C} may indicate the onset

3877:       of saturation effects. A possible mechanism for saturation is

3878:       the formation of discontinuities. As we have already mentioned

3879:       we have chosen an amplitude range in which no shock formation is

3880:       observed. At the high end of our amplitude range, it may be

3881:       possible, however, that

3882:       similar dissipative effects due to the strong non-linearity

3883:       start having an effect on the coupling of eigenmodes.

3884: \end{list}

3885: %

3886: {\sl Case 3:} \\[5pt]

3887: Next we consider case 3 where we perturb the star with the third velocity

3888: mode. The fundamental observations we have made in the previous two cases

3889: %

3890: \begin{table}[t]

3891:   \begin{center}

3892:   \caption{The quadratic coupling coefficients $c_i$ for the lower modes

3893:            in case 3.}

3894:     \vspace{0.5cm}

3895:   \begin{tabular}{c|c}

3896:     \hline \hline

3897:     $i$ & $c_i$ \\

3898:     \hline

3899:      1 & $2.0\cdot10^{-7}$ \\

3900:      2 & $1.2\cdot10^{-7}$ \\

3901:      4 & $6.7\cdot10^{-8}$ \\

3902:      5 & $3.0\cdot10^{-8}$ \\

3903:         \hline \hline

3904:   \end{tabular}

3905:   \label{MOD_CI03}

3906:   \end{center}

3907: \end{table}

3908: %

3909: are confirmed by the results in this case. In the weakly

3910: non-linear regime all eigenmode coefficients (except for $A_3$) grow

3911: quadratically with the amplitude $K_3$. The corresponding quadratic

3912: coupling coefficients can once more be approximated with a power law

3913: with exponent $-3$. We find, however, that the relevant mode number is

3914: now $i-5$. This behaviour is graphically illustrated in the lower panel

3915: of Fig.\,\ref{MOD_CI} where the coupling coefficients are shown together

3916: with the power law approximation.

3917: The results of this figure suggest the following

3918: regular pattern: For initial data in the form of eigenmode $j$ the quadratic

3919: coupling coefficients starting with mode $2j$

3920: are well approximated by an inverse cubic power law of a

3921: relative mode number $i+1-2j$ which is $1$ for mode $2j$, $2$ for

3922: mode $2j+1$ and so on. \\

3923: We still have to analyse the quadratic coupling

3924: coefficients of the modes below $2j$. In case 1 and 2 we did not have

3925: enough data to derive any results for these modes. For case 3 we have listed

3926: the corresponding coefficients $c_i$ in Table \ref{MOD_CI03}.

3927: The coefficients $c_i$ are approximately reduced by a factor of 2 each time the

3928: mode number is increased which may indicate an exponential decrease of the

3929: quadratic coupling coefficients for the low order modes. 

3930: %

3931: \begin{figure}[t]

3932:   \centering

3933:   \epsfig{file=combined03a.eps, height=375pt, width=250pt, angle=-90}

3934:   \caption{The eigenmode coefficient $A_3$, $A_6$,$\ldots$,$A_{15}$ are

3935:            shown for case 3 together with the resulting fits

3936:            according to Eqs.\,(\ref{FIT03_06})-(\ref{FIT03_15}).}

3937:   \label{MOD_COUPLING3A}

3938: \end{figure}

3939: %

3940: This is only a vague conclusion from a small data set, however, and needs to

3941: be confirmed by studies of higher eigenmodes. \\

3942: In the moderately non-linear regime we have seen for case 2

3943: a preferred coupling to modes with an even order

3944: $2n$. In analogy we find that the

3945: third eigenmode couples more efficiently to modes of order $3n$ for larger

3946: amplitudes. Again

3947: we can approximate the results with good accuracy with combinations of

3948: two power laws analogous to Eqs.\,(\ref{FIT02_04})-(\ref{FIT02_10})

3949: %

3950: \begin{align}

3951:   A_6 &= 1.2\cdot 10^{-6}\cdot K_3^2, \label{FIT03_06} \\[10pt]

3952:   A_9 &= 0.9\cdot 10^{-8}\cdot K_3^2+6.5\cdot 10^{-9}\cdot K_3^3, \\[10pt]

3953:   A_{12} &= 2.2\cdot 10^{-9}\cdot K_3^2+4.6\cdot 10^{-11}\cdot K_3^4, \\[10pt]

3954:   A_{15} &= 7.8\cdot 10^{-10}\cdot K_3^2+4.5\cdot 10^{-13}\cdot K_3^5.

3955:        \label{FIT03_15}

3956: \end{align}

3957: %

3958: We recognise the same pattern of increasing integer power law indices in the

3959: higher order terms that we have already found in case 1 and 2.

3960: These results are graphically illustrated in

3961: Fig.\,\ref{MOD_COUPLING3A}. Again the higher order contributions in the

3962: other eigenmodes is clearly present but too weak to facilitate an accurate

3963: measurement of the exponents. \\

3964: We conclude the study of non-linear mode coupling with a summary of the

3965: key results.

3966: %

3967: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

3968:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.0cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin0cm

3969:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

3970: \item We clearly observe two distinct regimes in the non-linear

3971:       coupling of eigenmodes. In the weekly non-linear regime,

3972:       normally up to amplitudes of several metres, all eigenmode

3973:       coefficients grow

3974:       quadratically with the amplitude $K_j$. In the moderately

3975:       non-linear regime we observe a steeper increase of

3976:       the coefficients $A_i$.

3977:       % which in many cases can be reasonably well modelled

3978:       % with higher order power laws.

3979: \item In the quadratic regime the coupling coefficients $c_i$ generally

3980:       decrease with increasing order of the eigenmodes. If the initial

3981:       perturbation is given in the form of mode $j$, we can model the

3982:       behaviour of the quadratic coupling coefficients with an inverse

3983:       cubic power law of the mode number

3984:       starting with mode $2j$. The coupling to lower

3985:       modes does not obey the same pattern, but we also observe a decrease

3986:       of the $c_i$ with increasing mode number for these modes.

3987:       This decrease may have exponential character.

3988: \item In the moderately non-linear regime an initially present mode $j$

3989:       shows a preference to couple to modes of order $n\cdot j$ where

3990:       $n\ge 2$ is an integer number. In these

3991:       cases we can accurately model the dependence of the eigenmode

3992:       coefficients on

3993:       the amplitude $K_j$ with the sum of a quadratic and a higher order power

3994:       law with exponent $n$: $A_i=c_i\cdot K_j^{\,2} + d_i \cdot K_j^{\,n}$

3995:       for $i=n\cdot j$.

3996: \item In some cases we observe a flattening of the eigenmode coefficients

3997:       at amplitudes of about $50\,{\rm m}$ which may indicate the onset

3998:       of saturation.

3999: \end{list}

4000: %

4001: 

4002: 

4003: %=========================================================================

4004: \subsubsection{Discussion of the non-linear mode-coupling}

4005: %

4006: %

4007: In the previous section we have studied the coupling of eigenmodes due

4008: to non-linear effects by evolving a single eigenmode with varying

4009: amplitude. Concerning the transfer of energy to other modes

4010: we have found two distinct regimes, a weakly non-linear regime where the

4011: excitation of modes grows quadratically with the initial amplitude and

4012: a moderately non-linear regime, where this increase can be reasonably

4013: well described by power laws of higher order. \\

4014: % Given an initial mode

4015: %$j$ we have also seen that the coupling to modes $n\cdot j$ is particularly

4016: %efficient in the moderately non-linear regime. \\

4017: In the analytic study of non-linear mode coupling one normally views the

4018: eigenmode coefficients as harmonic oscillators and the non-linear interaction

4019: between eigenmodes is represented in the form of driving terms which are

4020: quadratic or of higher order in the amplitudes (see for example

4021: \citeNP{VanHoolst1996})

4022: %

4023: \begin{align}

4024:   \frac{d^2 A_i}{dt^2} + \omega_i^2 A_i &= c_i^{jk} A_jA_k + d_i^{jkl}

4025:       A_j A_k A_l + \ldots,

4026:       \label{FORCEDOSCILLATOR}

4027: \end{align}

4028: %

4029: where the $c_i^{jk}$, $d_i^{jkl},\ldots$ are the quadratic, cubic

4030: and higher order coupling coefficients and summation over $j,k,l$

4031: is assumed. In our analysis the initial data

4032: consists in one isolated eigenmode $j$, so that the right hand side

4033: can be approximated by $c_i A_j^2 + d_i A_j^3 + \ldots$

4034: In analytic studies this series expansion is normally truncated at second

4035: or third order. In view of our results

4036: the omission of higher order terms

4037: seems to be justified in the weakly non-linear regime, where

4038: our fully non-linear simulations confirm that quadratic terms in the

4039: initial amplitude dominate the coupling between eigenmodes.

4040: This is no longer true,

4041: however, in the moderately non-linear regime, where higher order terms

4042: are more important. In particular the regular pattern suggested

4043: for example by Eqs.\,(\ref{FIT02_04})-(\ref{FIT02_10}) indicates that

4044: the excitation of higher order modes is dominated by increasingly

4045: higher order powers of the initial amplitude. It is not clear how 

4046: this behaviour can be modelled in the framework of a finite

4047: series expansion of the type (\ref{FORCEDOSCILLATOR}). It rather seems

4048: that the use of fully non-linear methods such as the numerical

4049: technique described in this work is necessary in order to obtain

4050: a comprehensive description of the coupling between eigenmodes

4051: in the moderately non-linear regime. In terms of the maximum displacement

4052: of fluid elements in the star this corresponds to initial amplitudes

4053: as low as a couple of metres. \\

4054: We have also observed that given an initial mode

4055: $j$ the coupling to modes $n\cdot j$ is particularly

4056: efficient in the moderately non-linear regime. We interprete this as a

4057: resonance effect, which we illustrate in the simple case of a forced oscillator

4058: %

4059: \begin{align}

4060:   \frac{d^2 A_i}{dt^2} + \omega_i^2 A_i = F\sin{\Omega t},

4061: \end{align}

4062: %

4063: where $\Omega$ is the frequency and $F$ the amplitude of the external force.

4064: The particular

4065: integral of this ordinary differential equation is

4066: %

4067: \begin{align}

4068:   A_i(t) &= \frac{F}{\omega_i^2 - \Omega^2} \sin{\Omega t},

4069: \end{align}

4070: %

4071: which implies resonance if $\omega_i=\Omega$.

4072: If we assume that resonance occurs for any integer multiple

4073: of the frequency $\Omega$ in the general non-linear case,

4074: we can schematically write the eigenmode coefficients in the form

4075: %

4076: \begin{align}

4077:   A_i(t) &= \sum_n \frac{F_n}{\omega_i^2 - (n\Omega)^2}, \label{RESONANCE}

4078: \end{align}

4079: %

4080: where the $F_n$ may depend on the frequencies.

4081: The analytic study of non-linear mode coupling up to

4082: cubic order leads to eigenmode coefficients which resemble this pattern

4083: [see for example Eqs.\,(18), (19) of \citeNP{VanHoolst1996}].

4084: In our case the

4085: external force is provided by the non-linear coupling to the initial mode $j$,

4086: so that $\Omega=\omega_j$. We therefore obtain

4087: resonance in Eq.\,(\ref{RESONANCE}) if $\omega_i = n \omega_j$. As can

4088: be seen for example in Fig.\,\ref{PERT_LINFOUR}, the eigenfrequencies

4089: of radial neutron star oscillations

4090: are fairly equally spaced in the frequency domain with the exception of the

4091: fundamental mode and we can reasonably well approximate

4092: $\omega_i\approx (i \omega_j)/j$ for $i,j\ge 2$. The condition for resonance

4093: then becomes

4094: %

4095: \begin{align}

4096:   i &= n\cdot j,

4097: \end{align}

4098: %

4099: which is exactly the relation we have observed in section \ref{MODECOUPLING}. \\

4100: From the relativistic point of view

4101: the non-linear coupling of eigenmodes in the weak and moderately

4102: non-linear regime is of particular interest in the discussion of

4103: unstable modes of rotating neutron stars. The underlying principle of

4104: these unstable oscillation modes is the increase in amplitude of the

4105: oscillation due to the emission of gravitational waves. The

4106: increased amplitude in turn gives rise to stronger gravitational radiation

4107: and so on. The

4108: conservation of energy is ensured in this case by the spin-down of the

4109: neutron star and the resulting decrease of rotational energy which sets

4110: a natural upper limit on this run-away effect.

4111: The physical mechanism which facilitates this remarkable instability

4112: is known as the

4113: CFS-instability (\citeNP{Chandrasekhar1970}, \citeNP{Friedman1978}).

4114: In order for a neutron star oscillation mode to be subject to the

4115: CFS-instability two conditions must be satisfied: (1) the mode must

4116: be retrograde with respect to the star but prograde with respect to a

4117: distant inertial observer and (2) the energy loss in the rotating frame

4118: due to dissipative effects must be smaller than the amount of energy

4119: gained from the gravitationally driven instability.

4120: The particular importance of

4121: the so-called $r$-modes in this respect arises from the fact that the

4122: dominating $l=m=2$ $r$-mode satisfies the first

4123: CFS-condition for arbitrarily small

4124: values of the angular frequency of the neutron star

4125: (\citeNP{Andersson1998}). One of the most important questions

4126: raised in connection

4127: with the $r$-modes concerns the efficiency with which energy is dissipated for

4128: example due to viscosity or non-linear effects. \\

4129: Considering the gradual increase in the oscillation amplitude, it is

4130: important to understand how the instability of the mode is affected

4131: in the weakly non-linear regime. To our knowledge the

4132: numerical studies presented

4133: in this work provide the first fully non-linear time evolutions

4134: of neutron star oscillations with high accuracy for amplitudes going

4135: all the way down to the weakly non-linear regime. Our results may

4136: therefore pave some of the way towards understanding non-linear effects

4137: in a wider class of neutron star oscillations. 

4138: In particular we have managed to quantify the transfer of energy

4139: from low into higher eigenmodes. The picture that emerges from these

4140: evolutions is that only a rather small fraction of energy is shifted away

4141: from the low eigenmodes. In particular the results shown in

4142: Fig.\,\ref{MOD_EVOLA2A4} indicate that the energy shifted towards higher

4143: eigenmodes does not accumulate in time but is rather transferred back and

4144: forth between the initially present and the higher mode.

4145: Correspondingly we do not observe an efficient cascade of

4146: energy into higher modes.

4147: It is not clear,

4148: however, to what extent this picture will change if the energy residing

4149: in the higher order modes is gradually dissipated.

4150: In the context of $r$-modes it is expected that

4151: the energy in higher order modes is dissipated on a much

4152: shorter timescale than that of the dominating $l=m=2$ mode.

4153: The numerical techniques and the code developed in this work may

4154: facilitate a corresponding study in the framework of radial oscillations

4155: by introducing an artificial damping of higher order modes

4156: and an external force which drives the fundamental mode.

4157: One may then look for steady state situations arising from

4158: this model, where the amount of energy transfered to higher modes and thus

4159: dissipated equals that gained from the external driving mechanism.\\

4160: From a numerical point of view we emphasise the new perturbative

4161: approach which enabled us to obtain highly accurate fully non-linear evolutions

4162: over a large range of amplitudes. This technique can be applied for

4163: any physical problem where there exists a non-trivial static limit.

4164: The dynamic evolution can always be considered a finite perturbation

4165: of the static case and a corresponding perturbative formulation will

4166: provide a numerical accuracy that is determined by the amplitude of the

4167: perturbation rather than the static background. We expect this method to

4168: be particularly effective in higher dimensional evolutions where

4169: the grid resolution is rather limited by computational costs and

4170: the ensuing residual error arising from background terms in a non-perturbative

4171: formulation will be more significant. 

4172: 

4173: 

4174: \newpage

4175: %=========================================================================

4176: \subsection{Radial oscillations in a Lagrangian formulation}

4177: \label{LAGR}

4178: %

4179: 

4180: In the previous section we have seen that an Eulerian description of

4181: radial oscillations encounters difficulties at the stellar surface for several

4182: reasons. For certain equations of state the eigenmode profiles

4183: predicted by the linearized theory result in a diverging energy density

4184: perturbation. A purely numerical problem arises from the movement of the 

4185: stellar surface with respect to the numerical grid. Highly sophisticated 

4186: techniques may be required to adequately describe the surface of a neutron star

4187: in Eulerian coordinates

4188: and it is not clear to what extent these will lead to a fully satisfactory

4189: performance in the linear regime where the exact solution is

4190: known to high accuracy and facilitates a quantitative test for the code.

4191: It is interesting to see that these problems

4192: vanish immediately once the problem is described in a formalism where

4193: the coordinates follow the movement of the fluid elements. Even though

4194: it is not obvious how to generalise a Lagrangian approach to

4195: scenarios in two or three spatial dimensions, it still seems to

4196: be the natural choice for the 1-dimensional case. Lagrangian codes

4197: have often been based on the formulation of \lcite{May1966}

4198: and \citeyear{May1967}

4199: who following \lcite{Misner1964} use a vanishing shift vector and define

4200: the radial coordinate in terms of the interior rest mass. 

4201: In order to facilitate a simple comparison with the Eulerian code

4202: discussed in section \ref{DYNAMIC}, however, it will be convenient

4203: for us to use as similar a gauge choice to the Eulerian case as possible.

4204: For this purpose we will follow \scite{Schinder1988} and use a Lagrangian

4205: gauge in combination with the polar slicing condition which is also

4206: implemented in the Eulerian code (cf. section \ref{NONP_EQ}).

4207: As a particularly useful consequence the singularity avoiding

4208: properties of this condition in combination with the Lagrangian gauge make

4209: this code highly suitable for studying spherically symmetric

4210: gravitational collapse. We will

4211: not exhaustively study this type of scenarios in this work, but will

4212: use the analytic solution by \lcite{Oppenheimer1939b} which

4213: describes the collapse of a homogeneous dust sphere

4214: for testing the code. \\

4215: 

4216: 

4217: %=========================================================================

4218: \subsubsection{The equations in the Lagrangian formulation}

4219: %

4220: %

4221: The derivation of the Lagrangian equations for a dynamic spherically symmetric

4222: neutron star was largely inspired by the work of \scite{Schinder1988}.

4223: We will, however, slightly deviate from their approach

4224: and work with a different set of variables and equations. \\

4225: We start by considering the line element of a spherically

4226: symmetric space time in polar slicing and Lagrangian gauge.

4227: As a result of the polar slicing condition, we are able to choose the same

4228: time coordinate $t$ as in the Eulerian case. The radial coordinate $x$ will

4229: label the fluid elements and generally differ from the

4230: areal radius $r$ which is intrinsically not comoving with the matter.

4231: Finally we choose standard angular coordinates

4232: $\theta$ and $\phi$ as above. Below we will see that the polar slicing 

4233: condition implies a non-vanishing shift vector so that the line

4234: element

4235: % in polar slicing and Lagrangian gauge

4236: becomes

4237: %

4238: \begin{align}

4239:   ds^2 &= \left(-\hat{\lambda}^2+\frac{\hat{\Gamma}\beta^2}{\hat{r}_{,x}^2}

4240:           \right) dt^2

4241:           +2\beta dt\, dx + \frac{\hat{r}_{,x}^2}{\hat{\Gamma}} dx^2 

4242:           + \hat{r}^2 (d\theta^2 +\sin^2{\theta} d\phi^2).

4243:           \label{LAGR_LINEELEMENT}

4244: \end{align}

4245: %

4246: It turns out to be convenient for our discussion if we introduce the variables

4247: %

4248: \begin{align}

4249:   w &= \frac{\hat{r}_{,t}}{\hat{\lambda}},    \label{LAGR_U} \\[10pt]

4250:   \Omega^2 &= \hat{\Gamma} - w^2,  \label{LAGR_OMEGA2} \\[10pt]

4251:   \hat{m} &= \frac{\hat{r}}{2}(1-\hat{\Gamma}), \label{LAGR_M}

4252: \end{align}

4253: %

4254: where the velocity is identical to that used in the Eulerian case.

4255: As before we use the ``hat'' to distinguish

4256: between the time dependent variables and their counterparts in the static 

4257: case. We note that we need to distinguish between the time dependent

4258: areal radius $\hat{r}$ and the static value $r$, since the areal

4259: radius corresponding to the position of a fluid element

4260: is a dependent variable and will generally vary with time. In

4261: the Eulerian case the areal radius was a coordinate and therefore 

4262: intrinsically independent of time. 

4263: If we compare the Lagrangian line element 

4264: (\ref{LAGR_LINEELEMENT}) with the Eulerian one given by

4265: Eq.\,(\ref{NONP_LINEELEMENT}) we therefore have to use the time dependent

4266: $\hat{r}$ in the latter line element instead of $r$. The coordinate 

4267: transformation relating the two line elements is described by

4268: %

4269: \begin{align}

4270:   \hat{r} &= \hat{r}(t,x).

4271: \end{align}

4272: %

4273: The transformation law for the metric components corresponding to the

4274: transformation from coordinates $\hbox{\vec $x$}^{\mu}=(t,x,\theta, \phi)$ to

4275: $\hbox{\vec $x$}^{'\mu}=(t,r,\theta,\phi)$ is given by

4276: %

4277: \begin{align}

4278:   \hbox{\vec g}'_{\mu\nu} &= \frac{\partial \hbox{\vec $x$}^{\rho}}

4279:              {\partial \hbox{\vec $x$}^{'\mu}} 

4280:              \frac{\partial \hbox{\vec $x$}^{\sigma}}

4281:              {\partial \hbox{\vec $x$}^{'\nu}} \hbox{\vec g}_{\rho \sigma},

4282: \end{align}

4283: %

4284: and leads to the two non-trivial equations

4285: %

4286: \begin{align}

4287:   \beta &= \hat{r}_{,x} \hat{r}_{,t} \hat{\mu}^2, \\[10pt]

4288:   \hat{\Gamma}&= \frac{1}{\hat{\mu}^2}. \label{LAGR_GAMMAOFMU}

4289: \end{align}

4290: %

4291: As a consequence the shift vector $\beta$ is related to the 

4292: components of the Lagrangian metric by

4293: %

4294: \begin{align}

4295:   \beta = \hat{\lambda} \frac{w\,\hat{r}_{,x}}{\hat{\Gamma}}. \label{LAGR_BETA}

4296: \end{align}

4297: %

4298: In terms of the extrinsic curvature defined in Eq.\,(\ref{BACKGR_EXTRCURV})

4299: this relation can be

4300: written as $\hbox{\vec{K}}^{\theta}_{\,\,\,\theta}=

4301: \hbox{\vec{K}}^{\phi}_{\,\,\,\phi}=0$ and we

4302: have recovered the polar slicing condition. The non-vanishing shift vector

4303: (\ref{LAGR_BETA}) is the price we have to pay for keeping the

4304: polar slicing condition in the Lagrangian gauge. \\

4305: As far as the matter is concerned, we use again a single component

4306: perfect fluid

4307: and thus the energy momentum tensor given by Eq.\,(\ref{NONP_EMTENSOR}).

4308: Since the fluid elements do not move with respect to the radial coordinate

4309: $x$, the 4-velocity has zero spatial components and is determined by the

4310: normalisation $\hbox{\vec u}^{\mu} \hbox{\vec u}_{\mu}=-1$

4311: %

4312: \begin{align}

4313:   \hbox{\vec u}^{\mu} &= \left( \frac{\sqrt{\hat{\Gamma}}}{\hat{\lambda}

4314:          \Omega}, 0,0,0 \right).

4315: \end{align}

4316: %

4317: The resulting field equations

4318: $\hbox{\vec{G}}_{\mu \nu} = 8\pi \hbox{\vec{T}}_{\mu \nu}$ can

4319: be written as

4320: %

4321: \begin{align}

4322:   \frac{\hat{\lambda}_{,x}}{\hat{\lambda}} &= \frac{\hat{r}_{,x}}

4323:     {\hat{r} \hat{\Gamma}}

4324:     \left( \frac{\hat{m}}{\hat{r}} + 4\pi \hat{r}^2 \frac{w^2 \hat{\rho}

4325:     + \hat{\Gamma} \hat{P}} {\Omega^2} \right), \label{LAGR_LAMBDAX} \\[10pt]

4326:   \hat{m}_{,x} &= 4\pi \hat{r}^2 \hat{r}_{,x} \frac{\hat{\Gamma} \hat{\rho}

4327:          +w^2 \hat{P}}{\Omega^2} \label{LAGR_MX}, \\[10pt]

4328:   \hat{m}_{,t} &= -4\pi \hat{r}^2 \hat{\lambda} w \hat{P} \label{LAGR_MT}.

4329: \end{align}

4330: %

4331: Similarly the conservation of energy and

4332: momentum $\nabla_{\mu} \hbox{\vec{T}}^{\mu}_{\,\,\,\,{\nu}}=0$

4333: leads to two evolution equations for the matter variables

4334: %

4335: \begin{align}

4336:   &\hat{\rho}_{,t} +(\hat{\rho}+\hat{P}) \frac{\Omega}{\hat{r}^2\hat{r}_{,x}}

4337:     \left( \frac{\hat{r}^2 \hat{r}_{,x}}{\Omega} \right)_{,t}=0,

4338:     \label{LAGR_RHOT} \\[10pt]

4339:   &\Omega^4 \frac{\hat{P}_{,x}}{\hat{r}_{,x}} + \hat{P}_{,t} 

4340:     \frac{w}{\hat{\lambda}} \Omega^2

4341:     + (\hat{\rho} + \hat{P})\left[ \hat{\gamma}\frac{w_{,t}}{\hat{\lambda}}

4342:     +(\hat{\gamma}-2w^2) \left( \frac{\hat{m}}{\hat{r}^2} + 4\pi \hat{r}\hat{P}

4343:     \right) \right] = 0, \label{LAGR_UT}

4344: \end{align}

4345: %

4346: and the system is closed by the polytropic equation

4347: of state (\ref{DYNAMICPOLYTROPE}).

4348: It is worth pointing out that the appearance of the time derivative in the 

4349: field equation (\ref{LAGR_MT})

4350: does not contradict the absence of gravitational degrees of 

4351: freedom in spherical symmetry. This equation can be shown to be a consequence

4352: of the constraints (\ref{LAGR_LAMBDAX}), (\ref{LAGR_MX}) and

4353: the matter equations (\ref{LAGR_RHOT}), (\ref{LAGR_UT}).

4354: In this sense the degrees of freedom still reside in

4355: the matter variables and the metric is determined at each time irrespective

4356: of its history. In practice, however,

4357: we will use the rather simple equation (\ref{LAGR_MT}) to evolve the variable

4358: $\hat{m}$ instead of evolving $\hat{\rho}$ via the matter equation

4359: (\ref{LAGR_RHOT}). \\

4360: If we consider the static limit of the system of equations 

4361: (\ref{LAGR_LAMBDAX})-(\ref{LAGR_UT}) we expect to recover the 

4362: Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations (\ref{TOV_RY})-(\ref{TOV_PY}).

4363: That this is indeed the case can be seen if we set all time derivatives

4364: including the velocity $w$ to zero and assume that $x$ is identical to the

4365: coordinate $x$ we used in the static case.

4366: The second condition can always be satisfied since the fluid elements are

4367: not moving and can be labelled by the areal radius of their position or

4368: the rescaled coordinate $y$ defined in Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_YOFR}). 

4369: Then Eq.\,(\ref{LAGR_MX}) directly reduces to Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_MR}) or the

4370: transformed version thereof expressed in terms of the coordinate $y$.

4371: From Eq.\,(\ref{LAGR_GAMMAOFMU}) we conclude that $\Gamma=1/\mu^2$ and the

4372: constraint (\ref{LAGR_LAMBDAX}) becomes identical to (\ref{TOV_LAMBDAY}).

4373: Finally the matter equation (\ref{LAGR_UT}) reduces to Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_PY}) and

4374: the evolution equations (\ref{LAGR_MT}) 

4375: and (\ref{LAGR_RHOT}) vanish identically.

4376: 

4377: 

4378: %=========================================================================

4379: \subsubsection{The linearized evolution equations}

4380: %

4381: %

4382: We have seen that the static limit of the evolution equations

4383: (\ref{LAGR_LAMBDAX})-(\ref{LAGR_RHOT}) is given by the TOV equations.

4384: We can therefore linearise the dynamic equations around this background and

4385: compare the results with the Eulerian case described in section \ref{PERT_LIN}.

4386: In order to distinguish between Eulerian and Lagrangian perturbations

4387: we will use a capital $\Delta$ in the Lagrangian case.

4388: The only exception is the radial displacement which is identical

4389: in both formulations so that we keep the variable name $\xi$. \\

4390: We start the linearisation with the definition of the radial velocity

4391: $w$ (\ref{LAGR_U}). In terms of the radial displacement this equation

4392: becomes

4393: %

4394: \begin{align}

4395:   w &= \frac{\xi_{,t}}{\lambda}. \label{LLIN_U}

4396: \end{align}

4397: %

4398: We note that the background value of the lapse $\lambda$ appears

4399: in the denominator instead of the time dependent $\hat{\lambda}$.

4400: In the same way we will neglect higher order terms in the other equations.

4401: If we substitute this expression for $w$ in the evolution

4402: equation (\ref{LAGR_MT})

4403: for $m$ and integrate over time, we obtain

4404: %

4405: \begin{align}

4406:   \Delta m &= -4\pi r^2 P \xi. \label{LLIN_DM}

4407: \end{align}

4408: %

4409: The constant of integration vanishes because a zero displacement $\xi$

4410: of the fluid elements implies $\Delta m=0$.

4411: We can use this expression for $\Delta m$ in the definition (\ref{LAGR_M})

4412: to obtain the result for the auxiliary variable $\hat{\Gamma}$

4413: %

4414: \begin{align}

4415:   \Delta \Gamma &= 8\pi r P \xi + \frac{\xi}{r} (1-\Gamma). \label{LLIN_DGAMMA}

4416: \end{align}

4417: %

4418: The energy density perturbation then follows from substituting 

4419: Eqs.\,(\ref{LLIN_U})-(\ref{LLIN_DGAMMA}) in the evolution equation

4420: (\ref{LAGR_RHOT}) 

4421: and integrating over time. With the constant of integration vanishing as

4422: before the result is

4423: %

4424: \begin{align}

4425:   \Delta \rho &= \frac{(\rho +P)}{r_{,x}}

4426:         \left( \frac{\xi r^2}{\lambda} \right)_{,x}.

4427:   \label{LLIN_DRHO}

4428: \end{align}

4429: %

4430: From the definition of the speed of sound we can calculate the pressure

4431: perturbation

4432: %

4433: \begin{align}

4434:   \Delta P &= C^2 \Delta \rho. \label{LLIN_DP}

4435: \end{align}

4436: %

4437: If we substitute the results (\ref{LLIN_U})-(\ref{LLIN_DP}) in the

4438: evolution equation (\ref{LAGR_UT}) we get exactly the second order

4439: differential equation (\ref{LIN_ZETATT}) of the Eulerian case with

4440: the coefficient functions (\ref{LIN_PI})-(\ref{LIN_Q}). No substitution

4441: for $\Delta \lambda$ is necessary here, because

4442: all terms containing $\Delta \lambda$ drop out by virtue of the

4443: TOV background equations. Writing the displacement as a product

4444: $\xi(x) f(t)$ we obtain again harmonic time dependence

4445: and finally arrive at the ordinary differential

4446: equation (\ref{LIN_ZETARR}) so that we can use the whole machinery

4447: developed in section \ref{PERT_LIN} to calculate the eigenmodes.

4448: It is interesting,

4449: however, to contrast Eq.\,(\ref{LLIN_DRHO}) for the Lagrangian $\Delta \rho$

4450: with the Eulerian analogue Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_DRHOOFZETA}). We have seen in section

4451: \ref{PERT_LIN} that the extra term in the Eulerian relation leads to the

4452: problematic asymptotic behaviour of $\delta \rho$ at the surface. No

4453: such problem occurs in the Lagrangian case which thus provides a 

4454: self-consistent way of deriving the linearized equations.

4455: 

4456: 

4457: %=========================================================================

4458: \subsubsection{The equations for the numerical implementation}

4459: %

4460: %

4461: The Lagrangian evolution of a dynamic neutron star in spherical

4462: symmetry is described by the system of equations (\ref{LAGR_U}),

4463: (\ref{LAGR_LAMBDAX})-(\ref{LAGR_MT}), (\ref{LAGR_UT}), where the auxiliary 

4464: variables $\hat{\Gamma}$ and $\Omega$ are defined by Eqs.\,(\ref{LAGR_OMEGA2})

4465: and (\ref{LAGR_M}). This choice of variables and equations, however, did

4466: not lead to an entirely satisfactory performance of the code. This

4467: became most obvious in the simulation of the Oppenheimer-Snyder dust

4468: collapse where the energy density

4469: showed an increasing deviation from the analytic solution near the centre

4470: of the star. When the dust sphere had collapsed close to its

4471: Schwarzschild radius,

4472: the deviation was larger than $10\,\%$. In order to understand this

4473: inaccuracy, we consider Eq.\,(\ref{LAGR_MX}) which relates

4474: the energy density to the mass. If we solve this equation for

4475: $\hat{\rho}$ we see that the mass appears in the form

4476: $\hat{m}_{,x}/\hat{r}^2$, which will be of the order $\mathscr{O}(1)$

4477: near the origin. The second order accuracy of the finite differencing

4478: scheme we have used, however, implies that the variable

4479: $\hat{m}$ is known with a local error

4480: $\mathscr{O}(\Delta x^3)$ only and consequently

4481: the numerical derivative $\hat{m}_{,x}$ has an error

4482: $\mathscr{O}(\Delta x^2)$. Near the origin

4483: the radius $\hat{r}$ is of the same order of magnitude as $\Delta x$ and

4484: the error of $\hat{m}_{,x}/\hat{r}^2$ and thus the energy density $\hat{\rho}$

4485: is large. This problem is a consequence of the $\hat{r}^3$ behaviour of the

4486: mass $\hat{m}$ near the origin combined with the strong variation

4487: of the variables in the dust collapse and persists in a perturbative

4488: formulation. In the numerical evolution we therefore use the

4489: variable

4490: %

4491: \begin{align}

4492:   \hat{N} &= \frac{\hat{m}}{\hat{r}^2}, \label{NLAGR_NOFM}

4493: \end{align}

4494: %

4495: instead of the mass $\hat{m}$.

4496: The Lagrangian equations

4497: (\ref{LAGR_U}), (\ref{LAGR_LAMBDAX})-(\ref{LAGR_MT}), (\ref{LAGR_UT})

4498: then become

4499: %

4500: \begin{align}

4501:   & \hat{\Gamma} \Omega^2 \hat{\lambda}_{,x} - \hat{r}_{,x} \hat{\lambda} \left[

4502:     \Omega^2 \hat{N} + 4\pi \hat{r} (w^2 \hat{\rho} + \hat{\Gamma} \hat{P})

4503:     \right] = 0, \label{NLAGR_LAMBDAX} \\[10pt]

4504:   & \hat{r}\Omega^2 \hat{N}_{,x} + 2\Omega^2 \hat{r}_{,x} \hat{N}

4505:     -4\pi \hat{r} \hat{r}_{,x}

4506:     (\hat{\Gamma} \hat{\rho} + w^2 \hat{P}) = 0, \label{NLAGR_NX} \\[10pt]

4507:   & \hat{r}\hat{N}_{,t} + 2\hat{\lambda} w \left( \hat{N} + 2\pi \hat{r}

4508:     \hat{P} \right) =0, \\[10pt]

4509:   & \hat{r}_{,t} - \hat{\lambda} w = 0, \\[10pt]

4510:   & \hat{\lambda} \Omega^4 \hat{P}_{,x} + \hat{r}_{,x} w \Omega^2 \hat{P}_{,t}

4511:     + \hat{r}_{,x} (\hat{\rho}+\hat{P}) \left[ \hat{\Gamma} w_{,t}

4512:     + \hat{\lambda} (\hat{\Gamma}-2w^2)(\hat{N} + 4\pi \hat{r} \hat{P}) \right],

4513:     \label{NLAGR_UT}

4514: \end{align}

4515: %

4516: where $\hat{\Gamma}$ is now defined by

4517: %

4518: \begin{align}

4519:   \hat{\Gamma} &= 1-2\hat{N}\hat{r}.

4520: \end{align}

4521: %

4522: In the static limit these equations reduce to the TOV equations

4523: %

4524: \begin{align}

4525:   & \Gamma \lambda_{,x} - r_{,x}\lambda (N + 4\pi r P ), \\[10pt]

4526:   & r N_{,x} + r_{,x} \left( 2 N - 4\pi r \rho \right) = 0, \\[10pt]

4527:   & \Gamma P_{,x} + r_{,x} (\rho+P) (N+4\pi r P)=0, \\[10pt]

4528:   & \Gamma = 1-2Nr.\end{align}

4529: %

4530: In order to derive a fully non-linear perturbative formulation, we decompose

4531: the time dependent quantities into static background contributions

4532: and time dependent perturbations

4533: %

4534: \begin{align}

4535:   \hat{r}(t,x) &= r(x) + \xi(t,x), \\[10pt]

4536:   \hat{\lambda}(t,x) &= \lambda(x) + \Delta \lambda(t,x), \\[10pt]

4537:   \hat{N}(t,x) &= N(x) + \Delta N (t,x), \\[10pt]

4538:   \hat{\Gamma}(t,x) &= \Gamma(x) + \Delta \Gamma(t,x), \\[10pt]

4539:   \hat{\rho}(t,x) &= \rho(x) + \Delta \rho(t,x).

4540: \end{align}

4541: %

4542: With these definitions the fully non-linear perturbative version

4543: of Eqs.\,(\ref{NLAGR_LAMBDAX})-(\ref{NLAGR_UT}) becomes

4544: %

4545: \begin{align}

4546:   \begin{split}

4547:   & \hat{\Gamma}^2 \Delta \lambda_{,x} + \Delta \Gamma (2\Gamma

4548:     + \Delta \Gamma) \lambda_{,x} - (\xi_{,x} \lambda \Gamma

4549:     + \hat{r}_{,x} \Delta \lambda \Gamma + \hat{r}_{,x} 

4550:     \hat{\lambda}\Delta \Gamma ) (N+4\pi r P)\\[10pt]

4551:   & + w^2 \left[ -\hat{\Gamma} \hat{\lambda}_{,x} + \hat{r}_{,x}\hat{\lambda}

4552:     (\hat{N}-4\pi \hat{r} \hat{\rho}) \right] - \hat{r}_{,x} \hat{\lambda}

4553:     \hat{\Gamma} \left[ \Delta N + 4\pi (\xi P + \hat{r} \Delta P)

4554:     \right] = 0,

4555:   \end{split} \label{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX} \\[20pt]

4556:   \begin{split}

4557:   & -w^2(\hat{r}\hat{N}_{,x} +2\hat{r}_{,x} \hat{N} + 4\pi \hat{r}

4558:     \hat{r}_{,x} \hat{P}) + \Delta \Gamma (\hat{r}\hat{N}_{,x}

4559:     + 2\hat{r}_{,x} \hat{N} -4\pi \hat{r}\hat{r}_{,x} \hat{\rho} )

4560:     \\[10pt]

4561:   & + \Gamma \left[ \xi N_{,x} + \hat{r} \Delta N_{,x} + 2\xi_{,x} N

4562:     + 2\hat{r}_{,x} \Delta N - 4\pi( \xi \rho r_{,x} + \hat{r}\xi_{,x}

4563:     \rho + \hat{r} \hat{r}_{,x} \Delta \rho ) \right] = 0,

4564:   \end{split} \label{NLAGR_DNX} \\[20pt]

4565:   & \hat{r}\hat{N}_{,t} + 2\hat{\lambda} w (\hat{N} + 2\pi \hat{r} \hat{P}) = 0,

4566:     \label{NLAGR_DNT} \\[20pt]

4567:   & \xi_{,t} - \hat{\lambda} w = 0, \label{NLAGR_XIT} \\[20pt]

4568:   \begin{split}

4569:   & \hat{\lambda}(-2\hat{\Gamma} w^2 + w^4) \hat{P}_{,x} + \hat{r}_{,x}

4570:     w \Omega^2 \hat{P}_{,t} + (\hat{\rho}+\hat{P}) \hat{r}_{,x} \left[

4571:     \hat{\Gamma} w_{,t} -2\hat{\lambda}w^2(\hat{N} + 4\pi \hat{r} \hat{P}) 

4572:     \right] \\[10pt]

4573:   & + (\Delta \lambda \Gamma + \hat{\lambda} \Delta \Gamma)

4574:     \left[ \hat{\Gamma} \hat{P}_{,x} + (\hat{\rho} + \hat{P}) \hat{r}_{,x}

4575:     (\hat{N} + 4\pi \hat{r} \hat{P}) \right] + \lambda \Gamma \left\{

4576:     \Delta \Gamma P_{,x} + \hat{\Gamma} \Delta P_{,x} \right. \\[10pt]

4577:   & \left. + \left[ (\Delta \rho

4578:     + \Delta P)r_{,x} + (\hat{\rho} + \hat{P}) \xi_{,x} \right] (N+4\pi r P)

4579:     + (\hat{\rho} + \hat{P}) \hat{r}_{,x} (\Delta N + 4\pi \xi P

4580:     + 4\pi \hat{r}\Delta P) \right\} = 0.

4581:   \end{split}  \label{NLAGR_DPT}

4582: \end{align}

4583: %

4584: This is the final system of equations used in the numerical implementation.

4585: 

4586: 

4587: %=========================================================================

4588: \subsubsection{Initial data and boundary conditions}

4589: %

4590: %

4591: In order to numerically evolve the system of partial differential 

4592: equations (\ref{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX})-(\ref{NLAGR_DPT}) we have to specify

4593: initial data and boundary conditions. We will start with the initial data. \\

4594: In the Eulerian case we have determined the physical setup by providing

4595: initial data for the matter variables $\hat{\rho}$ and $w$. This

4596: gave us energy density and velocity at each radial position $\hat{r}$.

4597: In order to provide the same information in the Lagrangian case

4598: it is not sufficient to give initial data in the form of

4599: $\hat{\rho}(x)$ and $w(x)$ because the meaning of the spatial

4600: coordinate $x$ is not determined at this stage. Indeed it can easily be

4601: seen that the system of equations

4602: (\ref{NLAGR_LAMBDAX})-(\ref{NLAGR_UT}) is invariant under

4603: any transformation $x\rightarrow \bar{x}(x)$ which corresponds to a relabelling

4604: of the fluid elements. Consequently we also need to establish a relation

4605: between the Lagrangian coordinate $x$ and the areal radius $\hat{r}$ on

4606: the initial slice. The initial data for $\hat{r}(x)$ serve this purpose.

4607: Alternatively this additional requirement becomes obvious if we

4608: consider the structure of the system (\ref{NLAGR_LAMBDAX})-(\ref{NLAGR_UT}).

4609: These equations contain the time derivatives of $\hat{r}$, $w$,

4610: $\hat{N}$ and $\hat{P}$. In addition to the lapse function $\hat{\lambda}$

4611: only one of these quantities is determined by the constraint equations

4612: (\ref{NLAGR_LAMBDAX}), (\ref{NLAGR_NX}). The remaining three variables follow

4613: from the time evolution and thus require the specification of initial

4614: data. In the perturbative formulation the background functions

4615: $r(x)$, $\rho(x)$, $N(x)$ and $\lambda(x)$ follow from the

4616: solution of the TOV equations and we prescribe initial data for the

4617: perturbations $\xi$, $w$ and $\Delta \rho$. The values of $\Delta N$

4618: and $\Delta \lambda$ are then calculated from the constraint equations

4619: (\ref{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX}) and (\ref{NLAGR_DNX}). For this purpose we use

4620: an implicit second order scheme based on the finite differencing

4621: given for these equations in appendix \ref{LAGR_FDE}. \\

4622: The specification of boundary conditions, in particular at the

4623: stellar surface, turned out to be the most problematic part in the

4624: Eulerian formulation of the dynamic star. In contrast the boundary

4625: conditions are well defined in the Lagrangian case. At the centre

4626: we demand

4627: %

4628: \begin{align}

4629:   \xi &= 0, \label{NLAGR_BCINXI} \\[10pt]

4630:   w &= 0, \\[10pt]

4631:   \Delta N &= 0.

4632: \end{align}

4633: %

4634: The first two conditions guarantee that the centre of the star does not

4635: move which immediately follows from the spherical symmetry and the third

4636: condition

4637: avoids the appearance of a conical singularity. At the surface we require

4638: %

4639: \begin{align}

4640:   \Delta \rho &= 0, \label{NLAGR_BCOUTDRHO} \\[10pt]

4641:   \hat{\lambda}^2 &= 1-2\hat{N}\hat{r}, \label{NLAGR_BCOUTLAMBDA}

4642: \end{align}

4643: %

4644: which follows from the definition of the surface and the matching

4645: to an exterior Schwarzschild metric.

4646: % For the numerical evolution

4647: %we will use an implicit second order in space and time finite

4648: %differencing scheme.

4649: If $K$ is the number of grid points used, the

4650: finite differencing of the evolution equations

4651: (\ref{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX})-(\ref{NLAGR_DPT}) results in $5K-5$ algebraic

4652: relations between the $5K$ function values. The boundary

4653: conditions (\ref{NLAGR_BCINXI})-(\ref{NLAGR_BCOUTLAMBDA}) provide

4654: the remaining 5 relations to determine the evolution and no additional

4655: treatment of boundary values is required.

4656: 

4657: 

4658: %=========================================================================

4659: \subsubsection{The finite differencing of the equations}

4660: %

4661: %

4662: We numerically solve the system of partial differential equations

4663: (\ref{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX})-(\ref{NLAGR_DPT}) by using an implicit

4664: second order in space and time finite differencing scheme. The

4665: particular choice of stencils has been guided by the presence of

4666: derivatives in the individual differential equations. This is illustrated

4667: in Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_STENCILS} where the grid points $k$ and $k+1$

4668: are shown for the time levels

4669: %

4670: \begin{figure}[t]

4671:   \centering

4672: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

4673: \begin{picture}(0,0)%

4674: \epsfig{file=lagrgrid.pstex}%

4675: \end{picture}%

4676: \setlength{\unitlength}{3947sp}%

4677: %

4678: \begingroup\makeatletter\ifx\SetFigFont\undefined%

4679: \gdef\SetFigFont#1#2#3#4#5{%

4680:   \reset@font\fontsize{#1}{#2pt}%

4681:   \fontfamily{#3}\fontseries{#4}\fontshape{#5}%

4682:   \selectfont}%

4683: \fi\endgroup%

4684: \begin{picture}(5717,1620)(301,-811)

4685: \put(1170,299){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k$}}}

4686: \put(2861,-800){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k$}}}

4687: \put(5230,-800){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k$}}}

4688: \put(2566,-589){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$n$}}}

4689: \put(4934,-589){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$n$}}}

4690: \put(831,-800){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k$}}}

4691: \put(536,-589){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$n$}}}

4692: \put(3200,299){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k$}}}

4693: \put(5568,299){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k$}}}

4694: \put(3376,-811){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k+1$}}}

4695: \put(5776,-811){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k+1$}}}

4696: \put(1351,-811){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k+1$}}}

4697: \put(3751,314){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$k+1$}}}

4698: \put(301, 89){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$n+1$}}}

4699: \put(2326, 89){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$n+1$}}}

4700: \put(4651, 89){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\itdefault}$n+1$}}}

4701: \put(301,689){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\updefault}Eqs.\,(\ref{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX}), (\ref{NLAGR_DNX})}}}

4702: \put(2551,689){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\updefault}Eqs.\,(\ref{NLAGR_DNT}), (\ref{NLAGR_XIT})}}}

4703: \put(5101,689){\makebox(0,0)[lb]{\smash{\SetFigFont{11}{13.2}{\rmdefault}{\mddefault}{\updefault}Eq.\,(\ref{NLAGR_DPT})}}}

4704: \end{picture}

4705: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

4706:   \caption{The stencils used for the finite differencing of

4707:            Eqs.\,(\ref{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX})-(\ref{NLAGR_DPT}).}

4708:   \label{LAGR_STENCILS}

4709: \end{figure}

4710: %

4711: $n$ and $n+1$. The filled circles indicate grid points that have been used

4712: for the finite differencing, the crosses those points which have not 

4713: been used. The constraint equations (\ref{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX}) and

4714: (\ref{NLAGR_DNX}) contain spatial derivatives only. It is therefore

4715: suitable to use two neighbouring grid points on the new time slice $n+1$.

4716: In contrast Eqs.\,(\ref{NLAGR_DNT}) and (\ref{NLAGR_XIT}) contain time 

4717: derivatives only and we use two grid points at spatial position $k+1$

4718: on neighbouring time slices for the finite differencing. Both

4719: kinds of derivatives are present in Eq.\,(\ref{NLAGR_DPT}) and we need to use

4720: all four grid points as a consequence. Fig.\,{\ref{LAGR_STENCILS}

4721: also illustrates an

4722: extra option that has been included in the finite differencing.

4723: In the case of the Oppenheimer-Snyder dust collapse it turns out

4724: to be necessary to interpret the values of the energy density

4725: $\rho^n_k$, $\Delta \rho^n_k$ as cell averages and correspondingly

4726: use a staggered grid for these variables. This is indicated by the

4727: empty circles in Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_STENCILS}.

4728: In the finite differencing equations we will

4729: therefore introduce a parameter $\sigma$ which allows us to switch between

4730: a staggered and the ``normal'' grid for $\rho$ and $\Delta \rho$.

4731: The staggering, however, is only needed for the dust collapse and will not

4732: be used when we simulate neutron stars. \\

4733: The resulting finite difference equations are listed in appendix

4734: \ref{LAGR_FDE}

4735: together with the additional relations we use to calculate auxiliary 

4736: functions and derivatives of the background variables. The parameter

4737: $\sigma$ will be zero in all cases except for the simulation

4738: of the Oppenheimer-Snyder dust collapse, where we will use the staggered grid

4739: for the energy density and set $\sigma=1$. Before we turn our attention

4740: towards solving this system of algebraic equations, we need to comment on some

4741: of its properties.

4742: %

4743: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

4744:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin1cm

4745:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

4746: \item If we use the staggered grid to calculate the energy density,

4747:       the outer boundary condition (\ref{FDE_BCOUTDRHO}) is only a

4748:       formal condition because $\Delta \rho_K$ decouples from the 

4749:       remaining $5K-1$ variables. In the analysis of the dust collapse

4750:       we will therefore use the interior values

4751:       $\Delta \rho_k$ for $k=1,\ldots ,K-1$ only.

4752: \item We also note that the finite difference expression (\ref{FDE_EQ5DRHOX})

4753:       for $\Delta \rho_{,x}$ is only a first order accurate approximation

4754:       if the staggered grid is used for the energy density. This does 

4755:       not affect the accuracy of the numerical scheme, however, since 

4756:       this derivative appears in the form of the pressure gradient

4757:       $\Delta P_{,x}$ only in Eq.\,(\ref{NLAGR_DPT}). The only scenario where

4758:       we use the staggering is the dust collapse, where

4759:       the pressure and thus its gradient vanish identically.

4760: \item Finally we note that the finite differencing scheme used here

4761:       slightly differs from that used for the evolution of

4762:       cosmic strings in section \ref{dynstring}. The scheme used here

4763:       was partly inspired by the work of \scite{Schinder1988}

4764:       and partly resulted

4765:       from attempts to eliminate numerical noise that we encountered

4766:       during the development of the code. It turned out, however, that

4767:       this noise originated from the numerical inaccuracy associated with

4768:       the $\hat{r}^3$ behaviour of the variable $\hat{m}$ we discussed above.

4769:       We have no reason therefore to question the applicability

4770:       of the Crank-Nicholson scheme described in section \ref{FDE_CN}.

4771: \end{list}

4772: %

4773: In order to solve the system of $5K$ non-linear algebraic relations we

4774: use the Newton-Raphson method described in section \ref{relaxation}.

4775: The initial

4776: guess is given by the values on the previous time slice and convergence 

4777: is typically achieved after three iterations.

4778: 

4779: 

4780: %=========================================================================

4781: \subsubsection{Testing the code}

4782: %

4783: %

4784: In order to check the performance of the code we subject it to

4785: three independent tests. As in the Eulerian case, we will compare

4786: the numerical results with the

4787: approximative analytic solution obtained from the linearized equations of a

4788: dynamic spherically symmetric neutron star. Secondly we will test the 

4789: convergence properties of the code in the non-linear regime. Finally

4790: we calculate the deviation of the numerical results from the analytic

4791: solution by \lcite{Oppenheimer1939b} which describes the collapse of

4792: a homogeneous dust sphere. \\

4793: We start by testing the performance of the code in the linear regime.

4794: In the Eulerian analysis we have seen that the eigenmodes for

4795: stellar models with polytropic indices $\gamma > 2$

4796: lead to a diverging energy density perturbation at 

4797: the surface and thus could not be used for a time evolution. We have seen,

4798: however, that this divergence results from a coordinate singularity

4799: at the stellar surface and the Lagrangian energy density perturbation is

4800: well behaved for any polytropic index. It is tempting therefore to

4801: use a stellar model with a large polytropic index to test the performance

4802: of the Lagrangian code in the linear regime. We choose a model with

4803: polytropic exponent $\gamma=3.0$, polytropic factor $K=2\cdot10^5\,\,

4804: {\rm km}^{-2}$ and central density $\rho_{\rm c}= 2.2\cdot

4805: 10^{15}\,\,{\rm g/cm}^3$. This is the third model of Table \ref{COMPEIGS} 

4806: where we compared our results of the eigenmode frequencies with

4807: those of \lcite{Kokkotas2001}. \\

4808: In general we have achieved better performance with

4809: the Lagrangian code if the outer boundary condition $\rho=0$ is satisfied

4810: %

4811: \begin{figure}[t]

4812:   \centering

4813:   \epsfig{file=llincomp_Drho.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

4814:   \epsfig{file=llincomp_xi.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

4815:   \epsfig{file=llincomp_u.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

4816:   \caption{The left panels show the time evolution of $\Delta \rho$,

4817:            $\xi$ and $w$ obtained for 1600 grid points. The initial

4818:            perturbation is given as the fundamental mode in the

4819:            displacement vector $\xi$. The right panels show the

4820:            deviation from the exact solution of the linearized equations.}

4821:   \label{LAGR_LINTEST}

4822: \end{figure}

4823: %

4824: exactly. In the remainder of the Lagrangian discussion we will therefore

4825: use the relaxation method described in section \ref{TOV_NUM}

4826: to calculate the TOV background. Unless specified otherwise we will

4827: use the rescaled coordinate $y$ for this calculation and the time evolution

4828: and thus set $r_{,x}=C$.\\

4829: The next step

4830: consists in calculating the eigenmode profiles for the variables

4831: $\xi$, $w$ and $\Delta \rho$. These results enable us to specify initial 

4832: data and calculate the analytic solutions. In this case the initial

4833: perturbation of the star consists in a displacement $\xi$ of the fluid

4834: elements corresponding to the fundamental mode with a surface amplitude

4835: of about $5\,\,{\rm cm}$. The initial velocity is set to zero and

4836: the energy density corresponding to this eigenmode follows from

4837: Eq.\,(\ref{LLIN_DRHO}). The remaining initial variables are calculated

4838: from the constraint equations (\ref{NLAGR_DLAMBDAX}), (\ref{NLAGR_DNX}).

4839: The resulting

4840: data on the initial slice are then evolved in time according to the method

4841: described in the previous section. The analytic solution for the

4842: fundamental variables $\xi$, $w$, $\Delta \rho$ is given by

4843: %

4844: \begin{align}

4845:   \xi(t,x) &= \xi_1(x) \cos{\omega t}, \\[10pt]

4846:   w(t,x) &= -w_1(x) \sin{\omega t}, \\[10pt]

4847:   \Delta \rho &= \Delta \rho_1(x) \cos{\omega t},

4848: \end{align}

4849: %

4850: where $\omega$ is the frequency derived from the eigenmode calculation.

4851: In Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_LINTEST} we show the numerical

4852: results obtained for 1600 grid points together with their

4853: deviation from the harmonic solutions.

4854: These results show that the code reproduces the analytic solution

4855: %

4856: \begin{figure}[t]

4857:   \centering

4858:   \epsfig{file=lfour175.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

4859:   \epsfig{file=lfour300.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

4860:   \caption{Frequency spectra obtained for stellar models with polytropic

4861:            indices $\gamma = 1.75$ (left) and 3.0 (right). The initial

4862:            data consists of a displacement $\xi$ given by the sum of the

4863:            first 10 eigenmodes. The vertical bars indicate the frequencies

4864:            predicted by the eigenmode calculations.}

4865:   \label{LAGR_FOUR}

4866: \end{figure}

4867: %

4868: with a relative accuracy of about $10^{-4}$. For presentation purposes

4869: the time evolution is shown up to $t=500\,\,{\rm km}$ only. No

4870: significant loss of accuracy has been observed for longer evolutions. \\

4871: We have also compared the frequency spectrum resulting from time evolutions

4872: with the corresponding predictions by the eigenmode calculation. For

4873: this purpose we have used the same stellar model as in the previous test

4874: as well as model 1 of Table \ref{MODELS15} which has a polytropic index 

4875: $\gamma = 1.75$. In both cases the initial

4876: perturbation is given by the sum of the first ten eigenmodes in

4877: the displacement $\xi$. The combined amplitude is about $10\,\,{\rm cm}$

4878: in both cases, so that the deviation from the linear approximation should

4879: again be very small. In Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_FOUR} we show

4880: the Fourier spectra of the central energy density perturbation

4881: $\Delta \rho(t,0)$ obtained

4882: for time evolutions over $1500\,\,{\rm km}$ using 600 grid points.

4883: The vertical bars indicate the frequencies predicted for the first 10

4884: eigenmodes and coincide well with the peaks in the power spectra. \\

4885: In order to test the performance of the code in the non-linear regime

4886: %

4887: \begin{figure}[t]

4888:   \centering

4889:   \epsfig{file=lqxi.eps, height=180pt, width=130pt, angle=-90}

4890:   \hspace{1cm}

4891:   \epsfig{file=lqu.eps, height=180pt, width=130pt, angle=-90}

4892:   \epsfig{file=lqDN.eps, height=180pt, width=130pt, angle=-90}

4893:   \hspace{1cm}

4894:   \epsfig{file=lqDrho.eps, height=180pt, width=130pt, angle=-90}

4895:   \epsfig{file=lqDlam.eps, height=180pt, width=130pt, angle=-90}

4896:   \caption{The convergence factor for $\xi$, $w$, $\Delta N$, $\Delta \rho$

4897:            and $\Delta \lambda$ obtained for 400 and 800 grid points.

4898:            The reference solution has been calculated for 1600

4899:            grid points.}

4900:   \label{LAGR_CONV}

4901: \end{figure}

4902: %

4903: we have performed a convergence

4904: analysis for an initial displacement with the profile of the second

4905: eigenmode and an amplitude of about $50\,\,{\rm m}$ for the stellar model

4906: with $\gamma=3$ and $K=2.0\cdot 10^5\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$. In this amplitude range

4907: non-linear effects are present, but shock formation is not yet expected

4908: for initial data with sufficiently weak spatial variation. We have

4909: evolved these initial data using 400, 800 and 1600 grid points and

4910: have calculated the time dependent convergence factor according to the

4911: method described in section \ref{CCM_CONVERGENCE}. Since the exact

4912: solution is not known, we use the reference solution for 1600 grid points

4913: in its place. The result obtained for the

4914: variables $\xi$, $w$, $\Delta N$, $\Delta \rho$ and $\Delta \lambda$

4915: is shown in Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_CONV} and

4916: demonstrates second order convergence throughout the evolution. \\

4917: Finally we have tested the code with the analytic solution

4918: by \lcite{Oppenheimer1939b}

4919: which describes the collapse of a homogeneous spherically symmetric

4920: dust cloud. \scite{Petrich1986} have expressed this analytic solution in

4921: polar slicing combined with radial or isotropic gauge. Even though

4922: we are using a Lagrangian gauge condition here, we can use their

4923: results for a comparison with our numerical simulation. \\

4924: %In their calculation Petrich et al. consider the dust collapse from the

4925: %point of view of the closed Friedmann metric

4926: %%

4927: %\begin{align}

4928: %  ds^2 &= -d\tau^2 + a(\tau)^2 (d\chi^2 + \sin^2{\chi} d\Omega^2).

4929: %\end{align}

4930: %%

4931: %Furthermore they use the conformal time $\eta$ 

4932: %which is related to $\tau$ via

4933: %%

4934: %\begin{align}

4935: %  \tau &= (\sin{\chi_{\rm s}})^{-3} (\eta - \sin{\eta}).

4936: %\end{align}

4937: %%

4938: %Here $\chi_{\rm s}$ is the value of the coordinate $\chi$ at the surface

4939: %of the dust cloud. The time parameter $\eta$ varies between $-\pi$ and $0$

4940: %as the dust sphere collapses from initial radius to $r=0$. On given

4941: %time slice $t=\mathrm{const}$, where $t$ is the time coordinate defined

4942: %by polar slicing $\eta$ is given as a function of $\chi$ by

4943: %

4944: %

4945: In their calculation of the analytic solution \shortciteANP{Petrich1986} use

4946: a Lagrangian coordinate $\chi$ and a time parameter $\eta$ which

4947: varies from $-\pi$ to $0$ as the dust sphere collapses from initial radius to

4948: $\hat{r}=0$. On a given time slice $t=\mathrm{const}$, where $t$ is the time

4949: coordinate defined by the polar slicing condition, $\eta$ is given as a 

4950: function of $\chi$ by

4951: %

4952: \begin{align}

4953:   \cos{\frac{\eta}{2}} &= \cos{\frac{\eta_{\rm s}}{2}}

4954:       \sqrt{\frac{\cos{\chi_{\rm s}}}{\cos{\chi}}},

4955:       \label{OS_ETAOFCHI}

4956: \end{align}

4957: %

4958: where $\eta_{\rm s}$ and $\chi_{\rm s}$ are the values of 

4959: $\eta$ and $\chi$ at the surface of the dust cloud. If we label

4960: the initial slice by $\eta_{\rm s}=-\pi$, this equation implies that

4961: $\eta=-\pi$ everywhere on the initial slice. 

4962: At any given time $t$ the areal radius is then shown to be related to the

4963: coordinate $\chi$ by

4964: %

4965: \begin{align}

4966:   \hat{r} &= 2M \frac{\sin{\chi}}{\sin^3{\chi_{\rm s}}} \left( 1- \cos^2

4967:        \frac{\eta_{\rm s}}{2} \cdot \frac{\cos{\chi_{\rm s}}}{\cos{\chi}}

4968:        \right), \label{OS_ROFCHI}

4969: \end{align}

4970: %

4971: where $M$ is the Schwarzschild mass of the dust cloud.

4972: If we consider the special case of this equation at the surface and on

4973: the initial slice we can calculate $\chi_{\rm s}$ from

4974: %

4975: \begin{align}

4976:   \sin^2{\chi_{\rm s}} &= \frac{2M}{R},

4977: \end{align}

4978: %

4979: where $R$ is the initial radius of the dust sphere. For reasons that will

4980: be given below we will identify the radial coordinate $x$ with the

4981: areal radius of the initial location of the fluid elements. We

4982: can therefore set $\eta_{\rm s}=-\pi$ and $\hat{r}=x$ in Eq.\,(\ref{OS_ROFCHI})

4983: and use the result to calculate $\chi(x)$ on the initial slice.

4984: Since

4985: both coordinates are comoving with the fluid elements, this relation

4986: between $\chi$ and $x$

4987: remains valid at any time $t$. In order to calculate $\eta(x)$ at a given time

4988: $t$ we still need to find the value $\eta_{\rm s}$. This is done by

4989: inverting the relation

4990: %

4991: \begin{align}

4992:   t &= M \frac{\cos{\chi_{\rm s}}}{\sin^3{\chi_{\rm s}}} \left\{

4993:          (\eta_{\rm s} - \sin{\eta_{\rm s}}) + 2 \sin^2{\chi_{\rm s}}

4994:          \left[ \eta_{\rm s} - 2\tan{\chi_{\rm s}} \artanh{\left(

4995:          \tan{\chi_{\rm s}} \cot{\frac{\eta_{\rm s}}{2}}\right)} \right]

4996:          \right\},

4997: \end{align}

4998: % 

4999: for which we use a Newton-Raphson method. Once $\eta_{\rm s}$ has been 

5000: calculated, we can use Eq.\,(\ref{OS_ETAOFCHI}) to calculate $\eta(x)$

5001: on that time slice. The physical variables $\hat{r}$, $\hat{\rho}$,

5002: $\hat{\Gamma}$ and $\hat{\lambda}$ then follow from Eq.\,(\ref{OS_ROFCHI})

5003: and further relations by \shortciteANP{Petrich1986} which we write in the form

5004: %

5005: \begin{align}

5006:   \hat{\rho} &= 6 \frac{a_0}{a^3} \frac{1}{8\pi M^2}, \\[10pt]

5007:   \hat{\Gamma} &= \frac{\cos^3{\chi}-\cos^2{\frac{\eta_{\rm c}}{2}}}

5008:        {\cos{\chi}-\cos^2{\frac{\eta_{\rm c}}{2}}}, \\[10pt]

5009:   \hat{\lambda} &= -\frac{\hat{\lambda}_{\rm c}}{\sin{\frac{\eta_{\rm c}}{2}}}

5010:        \frac{\cos{\chi}-\cos^2{\frac{\eta_{\rm c}}{2}}}

5011:        {\sqrt{\cos^3{\chi}-\cos^2{\frac{\eta_{\rm c}}{2}}}},

5012: \end{align}

5013: %

5014: where $\lambda_{\rm c}$ is the central value of the lapse function

5015: and $a_0$ and $a$ are given by

5016: %

5017: \begin{align}

5018:   a_0 &= \frac{1}{\sin^3{\chi_{\rm s}}}, \\[10pt]

5019:   a &= a_0 (1-\cos{\eta}).

5020: \end{align}

5021: %

5022: In practice we specify the initial energy density and radius 

5023: of the dust sphere and set the velocity to zero.

5024: The functions $\hat{N}$ and $\hat{\lambda}$ are

5025: then calculated from the constraint equations and the total mass

5026: of the sphere follows from the definition (\ref{NLAGR_NOFM}). \\

5027: From the numerical point of view the dust collapse is a special

5028: %

5029: \begin{figure}[t]

5030:   \centering

5031:   \epsfig{file=OSr.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

5032:   \epsfig{file=OSrho.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

5033:   \caption{The numerical simulation of the Oppenheimer-Snyder

5034:            dust collapse for a dust sphere of $10\,\,{\rm km}$ radius

5035:            and initial density $2\cdot 10^{-4}\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$.

5036:            The left panels show the numerical results for the

5037:            radius $\hat{r}$ and the energy density $\hat{\rho}$, the right

5038:            panels the deviation from the analytic solution.}

5039:   \label{OS_RRHO}

5040: \end{figure}

5041: %

5042: %

5043: \begin{figure}[t]

5044:   \centering

5045:   \epsfig{file=OSGam.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

5046:   \epsfig{file=OSlam.ps, height=400pt, width=175pt, angle=-90}

5047:   \caption{Same as Fig.\,\ref{OS_RRHO} for the metric variables

5048:            $\hat{\Gamma}$ and $\hat{\lambda}$.}

5049:   \label{OS_GAMLAM}

5050: \end{figure}

5051: %

5052: case in several aspects which restricts our choice of the

5053: available options of the code.

5054: \begin{list}{\rm{(\arabic{count})}}{\usecounter{count}

5055:              \labelwidth1cm \leftmargin1.5cm \labelsep0.4cm \rightmargin1cm

5056:              \parsep0.5ex plus0.2ex minus0.1ex \itemsep0ex plus0.2ex}

5057: \item By definition the pressure vanishes in the dust sphere. As

5058:       a result there is no static configuration analogous to the

5059:       static neutron star governed by the TOV equations. We therefore

5060:       need to use vacuum flat space as the background and run the

5061:       code in the non-perturbative mode.

5062: \item The vanishing of the pressure also implies that the speed of sound

5063:       is zero throughout the dust sphere so that it cannot be used

5064:       to rescale the radial coordinate according to Eq.\,(\ref{TOV_YOFR}).

5065:       The radial coordinate $x$ is therefore

5066:       defined by the areal radius of the initial positions of the

5067:       fluid elements and we use the condition $r_{,x}=1$ in the code.

5068: \item The surface of a neutron star with a polytropic equation of

5069:       state is defined by the vanishing of the energy density $\hat{\rho}$

5070:       which provided the outer boundary condition in the numerical evolution.

5071:       For the dust sphere this relation is not valid any more and the

5072:       energy density is finite at the outer boundary. The exact value,

5073:       however, is not known, so that we cannot use it to derive an

5074:       alternative boundary condition. The boundary condition $\hat{P}=0$

5075:       is trivially satisfied in the case of a dust sphere and does not

5076:       provide any extra information either. If we consider the

5077:       structure of equations (\ref{NLAGR_LAMBDAX})-(\ref{NLAGR_UT}),

5078:       however, we can see that all spatial derivatives of the energy density

5079:       appear in the form of pressure gradients. These terms are

5080:       identically zero in this case and disappear from the equations.

5081:       We can therefore use the staggered grid for the energy density

5082:       and thus eliminate the need of a boundary condition for $\hat{\rho}$.

5083:       For this purpose we set the parameter $\sigma$ to 1 in the evolution

5084:       of the dust sphere.

5085: \end{list}

5086: %

5087: In Figs.\,\ref{OS_RRHO} and \ref{OS_GAMLAM}

5088: we show the results obtained for a dust sphere with initial 

5089: density $\hat{\rho}_0 = 2\cdot10^{-4}\,\,{\rm km}^{-2}$ and radius

5090: $R_0=10\,\,{\rm km}$ which corresponds to a total mass of 

5091: $M=0.838\,\,{\rm km}$.

5092: A grid resolution of 800 points has been used for this calculation.

5093: The results demonstrate the good accuracy with which the code

5094: reproduces the analytic solution. Near the surface of the dust sphere,

5095: however, the numerical error increases significantly as the

5096: sphere approaches its Schwarzschild radius. We attribute this behaviour

5097: to the steep gradient of the lapse function near the surface that

5098: arises in the late stages of the evolution. \\

5099: This simulation also illustrates the singularity avoiding properties of the

5100: polar slicing condition. As the dust sphere collapses towards its Schwarzschild

5101: radius, the lapse function decreases towards zero and the evolution is

5102: practically frozen. This effect, the so called {\em collapse of the lapse},

5103: is responsible for the apparent slow down of the collapse of the

5104: radial function $r$ that can be seen in the upper left panel of

5105: Fig.\,\ref{OS_RRHO}. It is this property that makes polar

5106: slicing a popular choice for

5107: the numerical analysis of 1-dimensional gravitational collapse.

5108: 

5109: 

5110: %=======================================================================

5111: \subsection{Do shocks form at the surface for low amplitude oscillations?}

5112: %

5113: %

5114: We will now address a question that implicitly arose in the discussion

5115: of the linearized equations in the Eulerian formulation. We have seen

5116: in Eq.\,(\ref{DRHOOVERRHO})

5117: that the linearized equations predict a diverging ratio $\delta \rho /\rho$

5118: at the surface. For polytropic indices $\gamma>2$ we know that the

5119: divergence of $\delta \rho$ is a result of the Taylor expansion used

5120: to relate the Eulerian energy density perturbation to the Lagrangian one

5121: in Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_DRHOOFZETA}) and thus a non-physical result. For

5122: polytropic exponents $\gamma\le 2$, however, Eq.\,(\ref{LIN_DRHOOFZETA})

5123: represents a valid relation to first order in the perturbations,

5124: so that the Eulerian density perturbation

5125: will indeed be large compared with the background value near the surface.

5126: This behaviour raises the question whether non-linear effects will

5127: affect the evolution near the surface and give rise to

5128: the formation of discontinuities. From a different point of view one may

5129: consider the speed of sound which vanishes at the surface for a

5130: polytropic exponent $\gamma > 1$ and the particle speed $w$ which

5131: is finite because of the movement of the stellar surface. Consequently the

5132: velocity of the fluid elements will exceed the speed of sound and

5133: one may again ask whether this leads to shock formation.

5134: We will investigate this by using the exact treatment of the

5135: surface provided by the Lagrangian code. \\

5136: For this purpose we consider the neutron star model 3 of Table \ref{MODELS15}

5137: and provide initial data in the form of a displacement $\xi$ corresponding

5138: to a single eigenmode. For reasonably low order eigenmodes and amplitudes up to

5139: several metres we have not observed any significant deviation from

5140: the expected harmonic time dependence. For eigenmodes of very high order,

5141: however, this picture changes. We illustrate this in the case of an

5142: initial displacement of the fluid elements corresponding to

5143: a high order eigenmode (about 50) and an amplitude of about $1\,{\rm m}$

5144: at the surface. The high resolution of 3200 grid points has been used for

5145: this calculation to adequately resolve the high order mode. We stress that

5146: this evolution is only possible because of the high resolution near the

5147: surface provided by the rescaled variable $y$.

5148: %

5149: \begin{figure}[t]

5150:   \centering

5151:   \epsfig{file=sh0010.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

5152:   \epsfig{file=sh2030.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

5153:   \epsfig{file=sh4050.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

5154:   \epsfig{file=sh6063.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

5155:   \caption{The numerical evolution of the energy density

5156:            perturbation $\Delta \rho$ as a function of $y$

5157:            obtained for an initial displacement corresponding to about the

5158:            50th eigenmode with amplitude $1\,{\rm m}$.

5159:            Snapshots are shown

5160:            at times $t_1\ldots,t_8$.}

5161:   \label{LAGR_SHOCKS}

5162: \end{figure}

5163: %

5164: In Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_SHOCKS} we show snapshots of the time evolution of

5165: the energy density perturbation at times $t_1=0.0$, $t_2=0.5$,

5166: $t_3=1.0$, $t_4=1.5$, $t_5=2.0$, $t_6=2.5$, $t_7=3.0$ and

5167: $t_8=3.1\,{\rm km}$. We note that only the small radial

5168: range $28\,{\rm km} \le y \le 31.7\,{\rm km}$ is shown in the figure.

5169: In terms of the areal radius this corresponds to a range of about

5170: $120\,{\rm m}$ below the surface. We can see that for this small

5171: amplitude a steep gradient forms near the surface

5172: after about $t=3.1\,{\rm km}$ which

5173: corresponds to less than two oscillation periods of the eigenmode.

5174: This indicates the formation of a discontinuity. At later times than shown

5175: here the code fails to converge which we attribute to the numerical

5176: noise caused by the shock formation and the extreme sensitivity of the

5177: code near the surface of the star.

5178: In order to demonstrate that this result is not merely due to

5179: numerical inaccuracies, we have evolved the same initial data with

5180: the smaller amplitude of $1\,{\rm cm}$. In Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_NOSHOCKS}

5181: we show the same snap shots for this evolution

5182: as in Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_SHOCKS}. In this case we

5183: obtain harmonic time dependence as expected in the linear limit.

5184: %

5185: \begin{figure}[t]

5186:   \centering

5187:   \epsfig{file=sm0010.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

5188:   \epsfig{file=sm2030.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

5189:   \epsfig{file=sm4050.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

5190:   \epsfig{file=sm6063.eps, height=200pt, width=150pt, angle=-90}

5191:   \caption{The same as Fig.\,\ref{LAGR_SHOCKS} but for an amplitude of

5192:            $1\,{\rm cm}$.}

5193:   \label{LAGR_NOSHOCKS}

5194: \end{figure}

5195: %

5196: By using eigenmodes with even higher order we have observed shock formation

5197: at the surface for smaller amplitudes.

5198: % In the case of initial

5199: %displacements in the form of lower order modes

5200: %we can go up to amplitudes significantly larger than those used here

5201: %without any indication of discontinuities.

5202: In view of the results for low order modes where no significant non-linear

5203: effects are observed for similar amplitudes,

5204: we conclude that the magnitude

5205: of non-linear effects is not only determined by the size of the perturbations

5206: relative to the background variables, but also by the length scale on which

5207: the perturbations vary significantly. We finally note that the surface of

5208: a neutron star is too complicated to be accurately described by

5209: the polytropic equation of state used for these evolutions. It is not clear

5210: whether discontinuities will form in the same way for more realistic

5211: descriptions of neutron stars. Nevertheless our results demonstrate that

5212: the surface requires a careful numerical treatment.

5213: 

5214: 

5215: 

5216: 

5217: