CHAPTER IITHE STELLAR TEMPERATURE SCALE

IT is well to distinguish the different meanings that are to be associated with the term “stellar temperature.” The observed energy distribution in the spectrum, combined with the theory of black-body radiation, lead to a quantity known as the “effective temperature” of the star. This is the temperature of a hypothetical black body, the spectrum of which would have the observed energy distribution of the star in question. It has often been emphasized that the effective temperature is merely a label, for it is not the actual temperature of any specific portion of the star. Presumably the temperature of a star falls off, from the center outwards, according to the laws expressed by the theory of radiative equilibrium, and though it might thus be possible to specify, on certain assumptions, the depth in a star at which the effective temperature coincides with the actual temperature, no observational significance could attach to the information.

The theory of radiative equilibrium[43]enables us to specify the temperature gradient, and in particular to determine the central temperature, the effective temperature, and the boundary temperature, corresponding to a given energy output. These three quantities are essentially arbitrary, and the second is the only one susceptible of direct measurement, while none of them represents the actual temperature of any assignable region. In order to clarify ideas it is useful to regard the effective temperature as representing roughly the temperature of the photosphere, that is, of the region in the star that gives rise to the approximately black continuous background of the spectrum. It must, however, be remembered that “the theory provides a definite relation between temperature and optical depth, involving only one constant, the effective temperature. Suppose now ...we arbitrarily select a certain temperature, and name it the photospheric temperature, and name the unknown depth at which it occurs the photospheric depth; this depth will be described by some unknown transmission coefficient, to be determined. If, taking account of absorption and emission, we proceed to calculate the transmission coefficient ... we shall simply recover the optical depth predicted by Schwarzschild’s theory.” (Milne.)[44]No method of measuring the effective temperatures of the stars by comparing their energy spectrum with that of a black body can remove the arbitrariness of the quantity thus measured.

The theory of thermal ionization permits estimates to be made of the temperatures in the reversing layers of stars. These temperatures refer to the average level at which are situated the absorbing atoms corresponding to the lines used. The differences of effective level[45]for different atoms render these “ionization temperatures” difficult to define consistently, but they represent actual temperatures of assignable regions in the star, and the extent of their agreement with the temperatures derived from the distribution of energy in the continuous spectrum is a matter of extreme interest. The material and theory from which the ionization temperatures are derived is the subject matter ofChapters VItoIX. The temperature scale used in calibration and in the discussion of the theory of thermal ionization is the scale derived from the measuredeffective temperatures.

The derivation of a definitive scale of effective temperatures from the numerous available observations is probably impossible at the present time. The methods employed differ widely, and the conditions for accurate intercomparison cannot be regarded as fully established. The material at present available, however, permits some general conclusions, and as the needs of astrophysics demand aworkingtemperature scale, such conclusions are summarized in the present chapter.

In the discussion of the material a difficulty immediately arises. The scale to be derived must be based entirely, in the present stage of the observations, upon the apparently brighter stars, and it is notorious that they are not homogeneous in absolute magnitude. Theory predicts[46]that absolutely bright stars will have a lower effective temperature than stars of low luminosity belonging to the same spectral class, and this prediction is, on the whole, verified by observation. The material must therefore be selected on the basis of luminosity if a standard temperature scale is to be formed, and probably the temperature scale to be aimed at should refer to stars of some one absolute magnitude adopted as standard. Theoretically, standard mass might be preferable to standard luminosity, but, in the present state of the subject, so few masses are known that such a system would not be practicable. The ideal of referring to standard absolute magnitude was not attained by the earlier temperature scales, which were apparently based upon averages for all the available brighter stars.

The more comprehensive data for the study of the stellar temperature scale are the spectrophotometric measures of Wilsing and Scheiner,[47]of Wilsing,[48]of E. S. King,[49]and of Rosenberg.[50]The temperature scales derived by Wilsing and by Rosenberg differ by a linear factor; Rosenberg assigns higher temperatures to the hotter stars, and lower temperatures to the cooler stars. These temperature scales, and their intercomparison, have been very fully discussed by Brill,[51]who reduces all the measures to the scale given by Wilsing, and gives, for the principal Draper classes, the following comparative table for the corrected mean effective temperatures on the absolute centigrade scale.

In addition to the comprehensive data just quoted, there have beennumerous determinations of the temperatures of individual bright stars, chiefly by Abbot,[52]Coblentz,[53]Sampson,[54]and H. H. Plaskett.[55]In the main these values confirm the scale given inTable V, but sometimes considerable differences occur in the values given for individual stars by different investigators. At the same time, each observer is usually reasonably self-consistent, and the deviations must therefore be ascribed to differences of method. Some of the results are reproduced, for illustration, inTable VI.

It is seen that the effective temperatures of individual hotter stars vary widely among themselves. This is largely a result of the difficulty of making the appropriate correction for atmospheric extinction. It must, then, be supposed that the temperatures derived by spectrophotometric methods are not trustworthy for stars hotter than Class.The values determined by the earlier observers for theandclasses are almost certainly too low. Rosenberg’s value of 30,000° foris, however, most probably too high, as will be inferred later from the ionization temperature scale.

For the cooler stars small discrepancies also occur among the different observers. In the writer’s opinion, the lowest estimates for thetemperatures of the cooler stars are probably nearest to the truth.

*Temperature assumed in calibration of scale.

It was mentioned at the outset that dwarf stars appear to be at a higher temperature than giants of the same spectral class. The following table summarizes the differences in temperature, as compiled by Seares.[56]

A more detailed list of giant and dwarf temperatures was compiled in 1922 by Hertzsprung[57]from all the material then available. The tabulation that follows contains his values for(the “reciprocal temperature,” whereis 14,600), and the corresponding absolute temperature, in degrees centigrade.

The difference in temperature between giant and dwarf stars of the same spectral class is clearly shown in the foregoing tables. The relation of absolute magnitude to effective temperature within a given class must be regarded as definitely established by observation.

The temperatures for the cooler giant stars in both these lists are somewhat lower than those given for the corresponding classes inTable V. The temperature of,for instance, is placed nearer to 4000° than to 4500°. The fact that the sun, a typicaldwarf, has an effective temperature of 5600° seems to favor these lower values.

In concluding the summary of stellar temperatures, the ionization temperature scale is given in the foregoing table. The discussion on which the table is based is contained inChapters VItoIX, and it is merely placed here for comparison with the preceding tabulations.

FOOTNOTES:[43]Eddington, Zeit. f. Phys., 7, 351, 1921.[44]Phil. Trans., 223A, 201, 1922.[45]Chapter IX,p. 136.[46]Chapter XIV,p. 195.[47]Wilsing and Scheiner, Pots. Pub., 24, No. 74, 1919.[48]Pots. Pub., 24, No. 76, 1920.[49]H. A., 76, 107, 1916.[50]A.N., 193, 356, 1912.[51]A. N., 218, 210, 1923;ibid., 219, 22 and 354, 1923; Die Strahlung der Sterne, Berlin, 1924.[52]Rep., Smithsonian Ap. Obs., 1924.[53]Pop. Ast., 21, 105, 1923.[54]M. N. R. A. S., 85, 212, 1925.[55]Pub. Dom. Ap. Obs., 2, 12, 1923.[56]Ap. J., 55, 202, 1922.[57]Lei. An., 14, 1, 1922.

[43]Eddington, Zeit. f. Phys., 7, 351, 1921.

[44]Phil. Trans., 223A, 201, 1922.

[45]Chapter IX,p. 136.

[46]Chapter XIV,p. 195.

[47]Wilsing and Scheiner, Pots. Pub., 24, No. 74, 1919.

[48]Pots. Pub., 24, No. 76, 1920.

[49]H. A., 76, 107, 1916.

[50]A.N., 193, 356, 1912.

[51]A. N., 218, 210, 1923;ibid., 219, 22 and 354, 1923; Die Strahlung der Sterne, Berlin, 1924.

[52]Rep., Smithsonian Ap. Obs., 1924.

[53]Pop. Ast., 21, 105, 1923.

[54]M. N. R. A. S., 85, 212, 1925.

[55]Pub. Dom. Ap. Obs., 2, 12, 1923.

[56]Ap. J., 55, 202, 1922.

[57]Lei. An., 14, 1, 1922.

Back to Index Next