Contents

Eddington Barbier RelationEdit

The Eddington-Barbier relation is a compact result in the theory of radiative transfer that provides a practical bridge between what is observed in a star’s light and the conditions deep inside its atmosphere. Named for early 20th-century figures in astrophysics, it offers a simple rule of thumb: the emergent intensity seen along a given line of sight is well approximated by the local state of the medium at the depth where the optical depth along that sightline equals the direction cosine. In other words, what you observe from a direction characterized by μ is closely tied to the source function at τ ≈ μ. This intuition has proven valuable for solar physicists and stellar spectroscopists alike, even as more sophisticated models have revealed its limitations.

Historically, the relation emerges from the integral form of the radiative transfer equation in a plane-parallel atmosphere. Under common simplifying assumptions—static, horizontally homogeneous layers and a source function that does not vary rapidly with depth—the emergent specific intensity Iν(0, μ) can be written as an integral over depth, weighted by the exponential attenuation e−τ/μ. The Eddington-Barbier approximation then reduces this integral to a single, physically interpretable point: Iν(0, μ) ≈ Sν(τν = μ). When the medium is in local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE), the source function Sν reduces to the Planck function Bν(T), tying the emergent light to the local temperature structure at that depth.

Eddington-Barbier relation

Statement and meaning

  • Emergent intensity: Iν(0, μ) for a ray making an angle θ with the normal, where μ = cos θ.
  • Optical depth: τν along the ray, measuring how opaque the medium is to radiation at frequency ν.
  • Source function: Sν, the ratio of emissivity to opacity at depth in the atmosphere.

The practical form is: Iν(0, μ) ≈ Sν(τν = μ)

In LTE, Sν = Bν(T), so: Iν(0, μ) ≈ Bν(T) evaluated at the depth where τν = μ.

This prescription makes intuitive sense: photons escaping toward the observer are more likely to originate from layers where the medium becomes optically thin along the path. For directions closer to the normal (larger μ), the relevant τ is larger; for more grazing angles (smaller μ), the relevant τ is smaller.

Derivation and assumptions (sketch)

  • Start with the formal solution to the radiative transfer equation for a plane-parallel atmosphere: Iν(0, μ) = ∫0^∞ Sν(τν) e−τν/μ dτν/μ.
  • If the source function Sν varies slowly with depth, the main contribution to the integral comes from around the depth where τν ≈ μ.
  • Under this slowly varying assumption, one obtains Iν(0, μ) ≈ Sν(τν = μ).
  • This is most accurate in static, one-dimensional, locally in thermodynamic equilibrium conditions with a smooth gradient in temperature; it is commonly used for continuum radiation and for weak lines in solar-type atmospheres.

Applications

  • Interpreting limb darkening and the brightness profile of stars, since different μ probe different depths.
  • Understanding the formation depth of spectral features: line cores and wings reflect the source function at somewhat different τ values.
  • Providing a physically transparent link between observed spectra and the vertical structure of a stellar atmosphere, especially in teaching contexts.
  • Serving as a quick diagnostic in solar physics when full NLTE, 3D modeling is unnecessary or impractical.

Limitations and caveats

  • Non-LTE effects: In many stellar types and spectral lines, the source function Sν is not simply the Planck function and can differ significantly from local temperature due to departures from LTE.
  • Rapid depth variation: If Sν changes steeply with depth, the approximation loses accuracy.
  • Dynamic atmospheres: In stars with strong granulation, shocks, or other time-dependent phenomena, the assumption of a static, plane-parallel structure breaks down.
  • Line formation complexities: For strong lines and in the presence of substantial velocity fields or 3D radiative transfer effects, the τν = μ prescription becomes a rough guide rather than a precise statement.
  • Model-dependence: The practical utility of the relation rests on the choice of atmospheric model; different models can yield different effective formation depths for the same μ.

Controversies and debates

Within the scientific community, the Eddington-Barbier relation is recognized as an elegant, heuristic guideline rather than a universal law. Contemporary debates often focus on when simpler 1D LTE treatments are sufficient versus when full 3D NLTE radiative transfer is required to capture the true formation physics of a spectrum. Proponents of more computationally intensive approaches argue that 1D approximations can mislead about temperature gradients or abundance determinations in stars with complex atmospheres, while supporters of simpler methods emphasize the value of physical intuition, interpretability, and speed for survey work and educational purposes. The discussions typically revolve around balancing accuracy with tractability, not about rejecting the core insight that emergent radiation encodes the state of the atmosphere at depth where the line of sight becomes effectively transparent.

Historically, the relation sits at the intersection of the ideas introduced by Arthur Eddington on radiative transfer and the practical concerns addressed by Barbier. It remains a staple reference in introductory treatments of stellar atmospheres and in quick-look analyses, even as more elaborate models—such as those incorporating 3D hydrodynamics and non-LTE physics—have refined our understanding of the precise depths of formation for different wavelengths and spectral features.

See also