Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Strange behaviour for the KerrGeoSeparatrix for a=1 #46

Open
nielsw2 opened this issue Feb 28, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

Strange behaviour for the KerrGeoSeparatrix for a=1 #46

nielsw2 opened this issue Feb 28, 2023 · 5 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@nielsw2
Copy link
Member

nielsw2 commented Feb 28, 2023

For a prograde, inclined orbit the separatrix seems to jump at a=1:

KerrGeoSeparatrix[0.9999`30, 0.9`30, 0.5`30]
3.961820089411271084584110527

KerrGeoSeparatrix[1, 0.9`30, 0.4`30]
1.900000000000000000000000000

It looks like the correct a=1 answer should be near the top one but I could not work out why the code is jumping to the bottom answer. Seems to be something about how the root of the polynomial is bracketed in the a=1 case. Need to check carefully if this limit is meant to be continuous.

@duetosymmetry
Copy link
Member

There is definitely something funny going on with the a->1 limit as follows. Let SepPolyx by the separatrix polynomial as a function of x (called SepPoly in the package). Define a function to count the number of real roots (in the range p in (1,20)):

NumSepRoots[A_, EE_, X_] := 
 CountRoots[
  Evaluate[SepPolyx /. {a -> A, e -> EE, x -> X}], {p, 1, 20}]

Now evaluate with exact quantities (no floating point issues):

NumSepRoots[1 - 10^-30, 9/10, 1/2] (* Result is 2 *)
NumSepRoots[1, 9/10, 1/2] (* Result is 4 *)

When a=1, there is an extra root pair at p=1+e; can be easily verified:

Simplify[SepPolyx /. {a -> 1, p -> 1 + e}] (* Result is 0 *)

This is actually a quadratic root, as can be verified by polynomial division.

However I don't think we can just divide out these roots and discard them; for example the extremal equatorial separatrix is in fact at p=1+e (our Eq. (32) in our paper).

Need to do some more careful analysis. Any thoughts?

@nielsw2 nielsw2 added this to the Version 1.0.0 milestone Mar 16, 2023
@MvdMeent
Copy link
Collaborator

MvdMeent commented Jun 28, 2023

I ran into this today when testing somethings this morning. So, I think the following is true in the extremal case:

When $x^2 > \frac{-2-e+\sqrt{8+e^2}}{1-e}$, the separatrix is at $p=1+e$, otherwise it is the (second largest positive) root of SepPoly/(1+e-p)^2. This is similar to the behaviour of the lightring.

@nielsw2
Copy link
Member Author

nielsw2 commented Jul 8, 2023

We should be able to double check this from the results in this paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.03478. I've not had a chance to look yet so just putting this here as a reminder.

@GeoffreyCompere
Copy link

GeoffreyCompere commented Aug 9, 2023

I started to discuss it with Adrien today and kept working on it. Adrien then found a typo in my code. Here is the update. My conclusion is that in the $a \mapsto 1$ limit and in the range $1 \geq x^2 >x^2_c(e)\equiv \frac{\sqrt{8+e^2}-2-e}{1-e}$ (corresponding to a band close to the equator), the separatrix approaches the NHEK solution Marginal(l) as defined in https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.03478 with a double root at the horizon, which corresponds to $p=1+e$. In all other ranges, the separatrix does not belong to the (near-)NHEK region. This only happens in the range $\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}< x \leq 1$, $0 \leq e < 1$ with $x>x_c(e)$ (this latter constraint can be alternatively written as $l>\frac{2M}{\sqrt{3}}\sqrt{1+\frac{Q}{M^2}}$). This feature is not currently implemented in KerrGeoSeparatrix. I can share a mathematica file with some explanations and checks. This analysis is compatible with Maarten's.

@duetosymmetry
Copy link
Member

@GeoffreyCompere @MvdMeent Sorry I haven't touched this at all... I guess we need to do this in a LaTeX document, but I think github issues won't let us attach .tex files. I propose we do this in an overleaf document that everyone can edit.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants