Astrophysics and Space Science (2022) 367:4

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10509-021-04035-0

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Analytical model on mass limits of strange stars

Sajahan Molla1 · Masum Murshid2 · Mehedi Kalam2

Received: 9 August 2021 / Accepted: 21 December 2021 / Published online: 6 January 2022
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022

Abstract
In this paper, we present a new kind of stellar model using the Nariai IV metric. This model can be used to study the
strange/quark stars (which is our current interest, although it can also be applicable to neutron stars). We present a mass-
radius region where all regularity conditions, energy conditions, the TOV equation, and stability conditions are satisfied.
According to our model, strange stars with masses up to 1.9165M (= 2.81 km) are stable. A strange star with a mass
greater than 1.9165M violates the stability conditions. This model can be very useful to predict the radius of strange stars
with a mass greater than 1M .

Keywords Relativistic stars · Structure · Stability · Radius · Compactness · Redshift

1 Introduction and Busse (2001) based on the mass-radius relation, differ-

The study of compact stars drew attention of many scientists
for numerous years. The compact stars are the end product
of the thermonuclear powered stars. The mass of the ther-
monuclear powered stars determines what state the compact
star will be in. The degeneracy pressure of the constitut-
ing fermions (electrons for the white dwarf and neutrons
for the neutron star) of the compact stars balances the self-
gravitational force. A neutron star is the extreme state of a
compact star before it turns into a black hole and the gravita-
tional force overwhelms the degeneracy pressure. A neutron
star also has several substates like a hyperon star, a hybrid
star or a strange star. These three sub-states of the neutron
star are just hypothetical states that have not yet been di-
rectly observed. The strange star (made of strange quarks)
and a normal neutron star (fundamentally constructed of
neutrons) can be distinguished in three different ways Xu
 M. Kalam
kalam@associates.iucaa.in
S. Molla
sajahan.phy@gmail.com
M. Murshid
masummurshid2012@gmail.com
1 Department of Physics, New Alipore College, L Block, New
Alipore, Kolkata 700053, India
2 Department of Physics, Aliah University, IIA/27, New Town,
Kolkata 700160, India
ences in viscosity and surface condition. The neutron and
strange stars have almost the same radius, while the mass
of the star is about 1M . Whereas the low mass neutron
and strange stars radius significantly differ from each other
Alcock et al. (1986), Bombaci (1997), Li et al. (1999), Xu
(2005). A neutron star with mass ∼ 0.2M has a radius of
> 15 km, whereas a strange star with mass ∼ 0.2M is only
< 5 km. Another difference is that a neutron star has a lower
mass limit of about ∼ 0.2M , whereas a strange star has no
lower mass limit Xu (2005).
In four-dimensional spacetime, general relativity de-
scribes the gravitational interaction and its consequences
very nicely. Einstein’s theory of general relativity placed
the ground of our understanding of compact stars. In 1916,
Schwarzschild (1916) first solved the exact solution of Ein-
stein’s field equations. He had calculated the gravitational
field equation of a homogeneous incompressible fluid sphere
which had finite radius. Oppenheimer, Volkoff and Tolman
(Oppenheimer and Volkoff 1939; Tolman 1939) in 1939 suc-
cessfully derived the balancing equations of relativistic stel-
lar structures from Einstein’s field equations. They also cal-
culated the limit for the mass of a stable relativistic incom-
pressible fluid sphere. After the discovery of neutron stars,
a connecting bridge is built between theoretical and obser-
vational astrophysics. Though few studies related to com-
pact star masses Heap and Corcoran (1992), Lattimer and
Prakash (2005), Stickland et al. (1997), Orosz and Kuulkers
(1999), Van Kerkwijk et al. (1995), which are in binaries,
have been proposed (with negligible error), there is no in-
4 Page 2 of 11 S. Molla et al.

formation on the radius. Therefore, the theoretical study of Our main objective in this study is to give an estimate of the
stellar structure is required to follow the correct direction possible radius, central pressure, compactness and redshift
for the newly observed stellar masses and to get some new of the wide mass range of the strange star.
pieces of information. By the compact star modeling, some The material of the paper is organised as follows: In
interesting results have been found in terms of important pa- Sect. 2 we give the basic field equations in connection to
rameters like stability factor, radius, compactness, redshift, the compact star of Narai IV metric. In Sect. 3, we discuss
etc., which cannot be inferred from direct observations. The matching condition. In Sect. 4, we talk about the physical
study of the interior region of compact stars is not straight- conditions required for the star model. In Sect. 5, we review:
forward. Numerous authors Rahaman et al. (2012a,b, 2014), (5.1) Density and isotropic pressure behavior at the interior
Hossein et al. (2012), Kalam et al. (2012, 2013, 2014, of the star, (5.2) energy conditions, (5.3) TOV equations,
2016, 2017, 2018), Maurya et al. (2016), Dayanandan et al. (5.4) stability condition, (5.5) compactness and surface red-
(2016), Maharaja et al. (2014), Ngubelanga et al. (2015), shift. In Sect. 6, we give our concluding remark.
Paul et al. (2015), Pant et al. (2014), Bhar et al. (2017), Lobo
(2006), Bronnikov and Fabris (2006), Egeland (2007), Dym-
nikova (2002), Chakraborty et al. (2017), Singh et al. (2021),
Sharma et al. (2021), Paul and Dey (2018), Goswami et al. 2 Interior solution
(2020), Biswas et al. (2020), Aziz et al. (2019), Chowdhury
et al. (2019), Deb et al. (2017), Jasim et al. (2021) estab- We consider the static and spherically symmetric metric in
lished different models to enlighten several features of the isotropic co-ordinates as
interior of compact objects using various types of metric  
pleasing Einstein equations, as well as all the conditions re- ds 2 = c2 eα dt 2 − eβ dr 2 + r 2 d2 (1)
quired for a stellar model to be causal.
We study the field equations and mathematical solutions where α and β are function of r.
of strange star within Nariai spacetime. Several studies have Einstein’s field equations of gravitation for a non empty
been performed using the Nariai spacetime by other authors space-time are
to understand various astrophysical aspects. Nariai IV met-
ric has also been used to describe neutron stars Lattimer 1 8πG
Rij − Rgij = − 4 Tij (2)
and Prakash (2001, 2005), Lattimer (2005) by Moustakidis 2 c
(2017). Shaikh et al. (2020) studied the curvature prop-
where Rij is a Ricci tensor, Tij is energy momentum tensor
erties of a charged Nariai type spacetime and found that
and R is the scalar curvature.
such a metric is not locally symmetric but semi symmet-
The energy-momentum tensor Tij is defined as
ric and its Ricci tensor is neither Codazzi nor cyclic par-
allel or recurrent, but generalized recurrent. Carlos Batista  
(2016) presented some solutions which are made of the di- Tij = p + ρc2 vi vj − pgij (3)
rect product of several 2-spaces with constant curvature.
These solutions turn out to have many magnetic charges, where p denotes the isotropic pressure and ρ is the density
contrary to the usual higher-dimensional generalization of distribution.
Nariai spacetime, which has no magnetic charge at all. Fen- The velocity vector vi satisfying the relation
nen and Giulini (2015) investigated exact solutions of Ein-
stein’s equations corresponding to the two spherically sym- gij v i v j = 1 (4)
metric stars, which are made of an incompressible perfect
fluid, possibly oppositely charged. The negative pressure of Since the field is static, therefore
the positive cosmological constant keeps these two stars sep-
1
arated. But there is no cosmological horizon separating these v1 = v2 = v3 = 0 and v4 = √ (5)
g44
two stars. They showed that the solution gives rise to the
Nariai metric or an oversight generalization thereof in the Thus for a matter distribution with isotropic pressure, the
charged case.
field equation eqn. (2) reduces as Pant et al. (2012):
In this paper, we want to study the physical behavior of
the strange star. For this, we have considered the isotropic 8πGρ −β  (β  )2 2β 
stellar model to study the fluid sphere. We have found a so- = −e [β + + ] (6)
c2 4 r
lution for the fluid sphere where metric constants depend
absolutely on star’s mass and radius. In this paper we have 8πGp (β  )2 β  α  β  α 
4
= e−β [ + + + ] (7)
also discussed the dynamical stability analysis of the system. c 4 r 2 r
Analytical model on mass limits of strange stars Page 3 of 11 4

8πGp  α  (α  )2 β  α
−β β We assume that the interior space-time of a star is de-
= e [ + + + + ] (8)
c4 2 2 4 2r 2r scribed by the metric propose by H. Nariai (1950, 1951)
where, prime () denotes differentiation with respect to r.  √   
2Mr 2 −2 Mr 2
Now from eqn. (7) and eqn. (8) we get the following dif- ds = A cos a −
2 2
cos b+ dt 2
4 4
ferential equation in term of α and β as
 
−2 Mr 2  2 
(α  )2 (β  )2 β  α −A cos b+ dr + r 2 d2 (10)
β  + α  + − − αβ  − ( + ) = 0 (9) 4
2 2 r r
Our task is to obtain the physical properties (ρ and p) of the where A, M, a, b are constants.
fluid sphere from the above equations. Now using the metric eqn. (10) we get,

      
Mr 2 Mr 2
M −Mr 2 sin2 b + 4 + 2 − 6 sin 2b + 2
8πρ = (11)
4A

  √          
Mr 2 2 Mr 2 Mr 2 Mr 2
M cos2 b + 4 2 2 tan a − Mr
√ Mr 2 tan b + 4 + 2 + tan b + 4 3Mr 2 tan b + 4 +8
2 2
8πp =
4A
(12)

 √     2
3 Matching conditions 2MR 2 MR 2 1− m
A cos 2
a− cos−2 b + = 2R
4 4 1+ m
2R
It is well known to us that the interior metric of a compact
star should be matched to the Schwarzschild exterior solu- (16)
tion at the boundary.   
MR 2 m 4
    A cos−2
b+ = 1+ (17)
2m 2m −1 2 4 2R
ds 2 = 1 − dt 2 − 1 − drs − rs2 d2 (13)
rs rs
and the continuity of the metric components gtt and grr at
It is always possible to transform this standard form the boundary gives
of the Schwarzschild metric into the isotropic form Nariai     
(1950) (see Eq. (1)) by putting √ MR 2 MR 2
MR 2 tan a − √ + tan b +
2 2 4
m2
rs = m + +r (14) 8m
4r =− 2 (18)
4m − R 2
where m = mass, r = radial co-ordinate. After using this  
transformation, the standard Schwarzschild metric trans- MR 2 8m
MR tan b + =− (19)
forms into isotropic form as Hajj Boutros (1986) 4 2mR + R 2
 2 
1− m
m 4  2  We solve the above four eqns. (16), (17), (18) & (19) to
ds =
2 2r
dt 2 − 1 + dr + r 2 d2 (15) get the metric coefficient in terms of the mass (m) and radius
1+ m
2r 2r
(R) of the star as follows:
The matching of Nariai IV metric at the boundary (r = R,
where R is radius of the star) with the exterior Schwarzschild
metric gives rise to

(m − 4R)2 (m + 2R)4
A=  (20)
2(m + 4R) m5 + 8m4 R + 28m3 R 2 + 48m2 R 3 + 40mR 4 + 32R 5
4 Page 4 of 11 S. Molla et al.
√
8 2m(m − 4R)
M =±   (21)
(m + 2R) m m2 + 6mR + 16R 2 m3 + 6m2 R + 8mR 2 + 16R 3
√
2 2mR 2 (m − 4R)
b=∓   (22)
(m + 2R) m m2 + 6mR + 16R 2 m3 + 6m2 R + 8mR 2 + 16R 3
⎛ ⎞
√ 2
⎜ 2 2R (m − 4R) ⎟
+ cos−1 ⎝∓  ⎠
(m + 4R) m5 + 8m4 R + 28m3 R 2 + 48m2 R 3 + 40mR 4 + 32R 5
 
4mR 2 (m − 4R) −1 4R 2 (m − 2R)
a=±   + cos ± (23)
(m + 2R) m m2 + 6mR + 16R 2 m3 + 6m2 R + 8mR 2 + 16R 3 (m + 2R)3

These two set of solutions also satisfy p|r=R = 0 equa- with a slightly shifted wavelength. The shift causes
tion, i.e. the pressure get vanished at the boundary. an increase in the wavelength and a decrease in the
frequency or energy of the electromagnetic radiation,
called redshift. The redshift is written as follows
4 Conditions for well behaved solution
1
Z(r) = −1 (24)
2M(r)
For well-behaved nature of the solution in spherical coordi- 1− r )
nates, the following conditions should be satisfied Delgaty
and Lake (1998), Pant et al. (2010, 2012), Pant and Maurya The redshift (Z) should be positive and finite for
(2012a): the stellar model. The maximum allowed value for the
surface redshift is Z ≤ 0.85 Haensel et al. (2000).
(i) The solution should be free from physical and geo-
metrical singularities, i.e. finite and positive values of Under these conditions, the solution should behave well.
central density and central pressure i.e. ρc > 0 and
pc > 0.
(ii) The solution should give rise to positive and monoton- 5 Analysis of physical properties
ically decreasing expressions for the density (ρ) and
the pressure (p) with the increase of r. 5.1 Density and pressure behavior of the star
(iii) The pressure at the boundary should vanish.
(iv) The ratio of pressure to density (p/ρ) should decrease The internal metric is free from physical and geometrical
monotonically with the increase of r. ( dρdr )r=0 = 0 and singularities. Thus, central density and central pressure must
2
( ddrρ2 )r=0 < 0 so that the density gradient dρ
dr is neg-
be positive and finite, i.e. ρc > 0 and pc > 0. The central
d2p density and pressure are given by
ative for 0 < r ≤ R. ( dp
dr )r=0 = 0 and ( dr 2 )r=0 < 0
so that the pressure gradient ( dp
dr ) is negative for 0 <
3M sin(b) cos(b)
ρc = − >0 (25)
r ≤ R. These conditions imply that the pressure and 8πA
density are maximal in the centre and monotonically √ 
decrease towards the pressure-free interface. M cos2 (b) 2 tan(a) + 2 tan(b)
(v) The solution should satisfy all energy conditions, i.e. pc = >0 (26)
8πA
the weak energy condition, the strong energy condi-
tion, the null energy condition and the dominant en- and since the energy density and pressure is a monotonically
ergy condition. decreasing function, we have
(vi) The solution should obey the casualty condition vs2 =  
dρ  dp 
( dp
dρ ) ≤ 1, i.e. speed of sound should be less than that
= 0 and =0 (27)
dr r=0 dr r=0
of light throughout the model.
(vii) Stellar equilibrium exists everywhere within the star. and
(viii) When the observer and the source of light are in rel- 
ative motion, the observer, instead of receiving the d 2 ρ  5M 2 cos2 (b)
= − <0 (28)
light with its original wavelength, receives the light dr 2 r=0 16πA
Analytical model on mass limits of strange stars Page 5 of 11 4
 
d 2 p  M 2 2 − 2 sec2 (a) cos2 (b) − sin2 (b)
= <0
dr 2 r=0 16πA
(29)

5.2 Energy conditions

From Fig. 5 we see that all the energy conditions such as

the null energy condition (NEC), weak energy condition
(WEC), the strong energy condition (SEC) and the dominant
energy condition (DEC) are simultaneously satisfied at ev-
ery point in the interior of the compact star simultaneously.
These energy conditions are as follows:

i) NEC: ρ +p≥0
ii) WEC: ρ + p ≥ 0, ρ ≥ 0
iii) SEC: ρ + p ≥ 0, ρ + 3p ≥ 0
iv) DEC: ρ > |p| (30)

5.3 TOV equation Fig. 1 Graphical representation of the allowed mass-radius region

The stellar equation (some authors consider it to be a TOV

equation) can be written as

dp 1 
+ ν (ρ + p) = 0 (31)
dr 2
The stellar equation (TOV equation) describes the equilib-
rium condition for the strange star subject to the effective
gravitational (Fg ) and effective hydrostatic (Fh ) force na-
ture of the stellar object as

Fh + Fg = 0, (32)

where,
1
Fg = ν  (ρ + p) (33) Fig. 2 Variation of the density ρ against the radial parameter r of the
2 star
dp
Fh = (34)
dr
Therefore, from Fig. 6 we see that static equilibrium exists
in the presence of gravitational and hydrostatic forces.

5.4 Stability

For a physically acceptable model, the speed of sound

should be within the range 0 ≤ v 2 = ( dp dρ ) ≤ 1 Herrera
(1992), Abreu et al. (2007), Chengjun Xia et al. (2021),
Ma and Rho (2019), Bedaque and Steiner (2015), Cher-
man et al. (2009), Hohler and Stephanov (2009), Benincasa
and Buchel (2006), Mateos et al. (2007), Benincasa et al.
(2006a), Borsanyi et al. (2010), Alford et al. (2013). Figure 7
indicates that the sound speed is a monotonically decreasing Fig. 3 Variation of the pressure p against radial parameter r
4 Page 6 of 11 S. Molla et al.

Fig. 4 Equation of state of four strange stars, where α, β, γ are constants

function of radial distance. The sound speed in the center is 5.5 Compactness and surface redshift
given by
From eqn. (17), we get the compactness and redshift written
1  
as follows:
0 ≤ vc2 = 4 sec2 (a) + 2 tan2 (b) − 4 sec2 (b) ≤ 1 (35)
10 ⎛ ⎞
 2

m(r) Mr
The adiabatic Index should be Chandrasekhar (1964), u(r) = = 2 ⎝ 4 A sec2 b + − 1⎠ (38)
r 4

p + ρ dp 4
γ= > (36) and
p dρ 3
1
Figure 8 shows that the adiabatic index within the star is Z(r) =    −1 (39)
 
always greater than 43 . The adiabatic index in the centre is Mr 2
1−4 4
A sec2 b+ 4 −1
given by

 √  According to Buchdahl (1959), for a static spherically sym-

tan(b) − 2 tan(a) −2 sec2 (a) + sec2 (b) + 1 metric perfect fluid the allowable mass-radius ratio should
γc = √  be 2M 8
5 2 tan(a) + 2 tan(b) R < 9 and Mak et al. (2001) also gave a more gen-
eralized expression for the same manner. The maximum al-
4 lowed value of the surface redshift is Z ≤ 0.85 Haensel et al.
> (37)
3 (2000). The central compactness and the central redshift are
Analytical model on mass limits of strange stars Page 7 of 11 4

Fig. 5 Energy conditions in the stellar interior

given by 6 Conclusions
  4
uc = 2
4
A sec2 (b) − 1 < (40) In this article, we present a strange star model (with mass
9 up to 1.9165M (= 2.81 km)) using the Nariai IV metric.
Using this model, we study the strange stars physical prop-
1
Zc =    − 1 ≤ 0.85 (41) erties. We present a mass-radius region where all regular-
1 − 4 4 A sec2 (b) − 1 ity conditions, energy conditions, the TOV equation and
stability conditions are satisfied. We show, in Fig. 4, how
the pressure depends on the energy in four cases and note
Figures 9 & 10 show that the compactness and redshift that the mathematical relation between them has a form like
within the star are always less than 49 and less than the value p = α + βρ + γρ 2 . From the EOS graph (see Fig. 4), one
of 0.85. can see that the slope of these plots is high, which indi-
Now, if we take all these conditions (Eqs. (25), (26), cates that our EOS is stiff. This kind of stiffness in EOS is
(27), (28), (29), (35), (37), (40), (41)) alongside the de- found in SQM(1-3) EOS Prakash et al. (1995), Lattimer and
mand that the central density of the star Bombaci and Lo- Prakash (2001). The maximum mass (1.9165M ) found in
goteta (2018) at least be of the order of the nuclear den- our model is also very similar to the maximum mass (around
sity, i.e. 2.7 × 1014 g/cc, then we get the important mass- 2M ) found for SQM3 EOS (see Fig. 2 of Lattimer and
radius relation (Fig. 1). Figure 1 presents the allowed region Prakash (2001)). That’s why we are claiming that strange
of the mass-radius graph. The minimum radius for a given stars are made of, mainly, quarks with a little bit mixture of
mass (m) is Rmin = 4.4857m km (m in km). Table 1 enlists baryons. According to Chengjun Xia et al. (2021), we see
the maximum radius Rmax , the minimum central pressure that our model satisfies the causality limit ( ccs < 1). We see
pc(max) , the minimum compactness umin and the minimum in ref. Chakraborty et al. (2017) that for a hybrid star (which
redshift Zmin for a given mass. We see from the Figs. 2-3 is made by quark matter and nuclear (baryonic) matter, con-
that the energy density and the pressure decrease monotoni- sidered as two different fluids) the square of sound speed is
cally with the radial distance. less than 1/3. We also see in Alford et al. (2013) that the
4 Page 8 of 11
Fig. 6 Behavior of the gravitational and the hydrostatic force in the stellar interior
Fig. 7 Variation of the sound speed in the stellar interior
square of sound speed may be greater than 1/3 if the quark
matter is strongly coupled. Therefore, we can argue that our
strange star model is applicable to both cases: (i) a strange
star made by quark matter which is strongly coupled in
which square of sound speed greater than 1/3; (ii) Also a hy-
brid star made by quark matter and nuclear(baryonic) mat-
ter, in which the square of sound speed is less than 1/3. Ac-
cording to our model, strange stars with a mass greater than
1.9165M violate the stability conditions. This upper limit
S. Molla et al.
Fig. 8 Variation of the adiabatic index in the stellar interior
for the mass of a strange star comes out as a consequence
of imposing regularity conditions, stability conditions and
taking the minimum central density of the value of nuclear
density (2.7 × 1014 g/cc) Bombaci and Logoteta (2018). For
a given mass (m), we get a range of radii by imposing the
regularity conditions, the energy conditions, the TOV equa-
tion, and the stability conditions. The minimum radius for
a given mass (m) of a strange star is Rmin = 4.4857m km
(m in km), and the upper limit of the mass is enlisted in
Analytical model on mass limits of strange stars Page 9 of 11 4

Table 1 List of the maximum

radius for a given mass of a Mass Maximum Minimum Central Minimum Minimum
strange star, and the (M ) Radius pressure (pc(min) in Compactness Redshift
corresponding minimum central (Rmax in km) 10−6 km−2 ) (umin ) (Zmin )
pressure, minimum compactness
and minimum redshift 0.01 2.78414 0.50505 0.005304 0.005346
0.05 4.70399 1.51260 0.015695 0.016075
0.1 5.86247 2.45425 0.025187 0.026181
0.2 7.25713 4.03779 0.040694 0.043359
0.3 8.18254 5.45781 0.054137 0.058972
0.4 8.88272 6.80319 0.066493 0.073957
0.5 9.44583 8.11042 0.078161 0.088709
0.7 10.3150 10.6820 0.100205 0.118320
0.8 10.6616 11.9675 0.110797 0.133436
0.9 10.9653 13.2622 0.121195 0.148886
1. 11.2366 14.5567 0.131409 0.164696
1.2 11.6854 17.2502 0.151634 0.198029
1.3 11.8765 18.6274 0.161627 0.215590
1.4 12.0482 20.0345 0.171580 0.233871
1.5 12.2027 21.4746 0.181508 0.252957
1.6 12.3417 22.9511 0.191428 0.272937
1.7 12.4668 24.4672 0.201352 0.293914
1.8 12.5791 26.0261 0.211292 0.315999
1.9 12.6799 27.6314 0.221258 0.339318
1.91 12.6894 27.7946 0.222256 0.341723
1.915 12.6941 27.8764 0.222755 0.342930
1.916 12.6950 27.8927 0.222855 0.343172
1.91675 12.6957 27.9050 0.222930 0.343354

Fig. 9 Variation of the compactness u against the radial parameter r Fig. 10 Variation of the redshift Zs against the radial parameter r of
the star

Table 1. This maximum radius is the immediate result of

imposing the fact that the central density is at least of the
order of the nuclear density. If we change the minimum cen-
tral density from the order of magnitude of the nuclear den-
sity, then the maximum radius for a given mass also devi-
ates from Table 1. We see that as we increase the minimum
central density (here we take the minimum central density
to be 2.7 × 1014 g/cc), the upper bound of the radius for a
given mass get squeezed. However, the minimum radius of
this strange star does not depend on the minimum central
density at all. It is determined by the fact that the causality
condition must be obeyed. We substitute the value of Rmin
in eqn. (25) & (26) to get the maximum value of central en-
ergy density and central pressure, and we get the value of
maximum surface energy density, surface compactness and
4 Page 10 of 11
Table 2 List of maximum
values of some parameters Maximum Central Maximum Surface
corresponding to the minimum Energy Density Energy Density
radii Rmin = 4.4857m km (m in (ρc(max) ) in km−2 (ρR(max) ) in km−2
km)
0.00160562 0.0012333
m2 m2
surface redshift by substituting the value of Rmin in eqn.
(11), (38) & (39), respectively, which are depicted in Ta-
ble 2. Here we see interesting results. The maximum central
energy density and pressure and the maximum surface en-
ergy density are inversely proportional to the square of the
mass of a strange star corresponding to the minimum radius.
But the maximum compactness and the maximum redshift
are independent of the mass of the strange star. For a given
mass, we get a range for the central energy density as well
as a range for the radius of the star from our model. There-
fore, for a given mass, one can get the radius by fixing the
central density or vice versa. As we approach the maximum
mass, the range of the radius for a given mass shrinks. For
more than one solar mass, this range of radius is very nar-
row, which is useful for predicting the radius of a strange
star from a single input parameter, that is the mass of the
strange star. Therefore, we think that this model can be very
beneficial to predict the radius for a strange star with a mass
greater than one solar mass.
Acknowledgements MM is thankful to CSIR (Grand No.-09/1157-
(0007)/2019-EMR-I) for providing financial support. SM and MK is
grateful to the Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics
(IUCAA), Pune, India for providing Associateship programme under
which a part of this work was carried out.
References
Abreu, H., Hernandez, H., Nunez, L.A.: Class. Quantum Gravity 24,
4631 (2007)
Alcock, C., et al.: Astrophys. J. 310, 261 (1986)
Alford, M.G., Han, S., Prakash, M.: Phys. Rev. D 88, 083013 (2013)
Aziz, A., Ray, S., Rahaman, F., Khlopov, M., Guha, B.K.: Int. J. Mod.
Phys. D 28(13), 1941006 (2019)
Batista, C.: Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 48, 160 (2016)
Bedaque, P., Steiner, A.W.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 031103 (2015)
Benincasa, P., Buchel, A.: Phys. Lett. B 640, 108 (2006)
Benincasa, P., Buchel, A., Starinets, A.O.: Nucl. Phys. B 733, 160
(2006a)
Bhar, P., Newton Singh, K., Sarkar, N., Rahaman, F.: Eur. Phys. J. C
77, 9 (2017)
Biswas, S., Shee, D., Guha, B.K., Ray, S.: Eur. Phys. J. C 80(2), 175
(2020)
Bombaci, I.: Phys. Rev. C 55, 1587 (1997)
Bombaci, I., Logoteta, D.: Astron. Astrophys. 609, A128 (2018)
Borsanyi, S., Endrodi, G., Fodor, Z., Jakovac, A., Katz, S.D., Krieg, S.,
Ratti, C., Szabó, K.K.: J. High Energy Phys. 11, 077 (2010)
Bronnikov, K., Fabris, J.C.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 251101 (2006)
Buchdahl, H.A.: Phys. Rev. 116, 1027 (1959)
Chakraborty, K., Rahaman, F., Mallick, A.: Mod. Phys. Lett. A 32(10),
1750055 (2017)
S. Molla et al.
Maximum Central Maximum Maximum
Pressure (pc(max) ) Compactness Redshift
in km−2 (umax ) (Zmax )
0.000223533
m2
0.222841 0.343188
Chandrasekhar, S.: Astrophys. J. 140, 417 (1964)
Cherman, A., Cohen, T.D., Nellore, A.: Phys. Rev. D 80, 066003
(2009)
Chowdhury, S.R., Deb, D., Ray, S., Rahaman, F., Guha, B.K.: Eur.
Phys. J. C 79, 547 (2019)
Dayanandan, B., Maurya, S.K., Gupta, Y.K., Smitha, T.T.: Astrophys.
Space Sci. 361, 160 (2016)
Deb, D., Chowdhury, S.R., Ray, S., Rahaman, F., Guha, B.K.: Rel-
ativistic model for anisotropic strange stars. Ann. Phys. 387,
239–252 (2017)
Delgaty, M.S.R., Lake, K.: Comput. Phys. Commun. 115, 395 (1998)
Dymnikova, I.: Class. Quantum Gravity 19, 725 (2002)
Egeland, E.: In: Compact Star, Trondheim, Norway (2007)
Fennen, M., Giulini, D.: Class. Quantum Gravity 32, 045008 (2015)
Goswami, K.B., Saha, A., Chattopadhyay, P.K.: Astrophys. Space Sci.
365(8), 141 (2020)
Haensel, P., et al.: Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 80, 1110 (2000)
Hajj Boutros, J.: J. Math. Phys. 27, 1363 (1986)
Heap, S.R., Corcoran, M.F.: Astrophys. J. 387, 340 (1992)
Herrera, L.: Phys. Lett. A 165, 206 (1992)
Hohler, P.M., Stephanov, M.A.: Phys. Rev. D 80, 066002 (2009)
Hossein, Sk.M., et al.: Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 21, 1250088 (2012)
Jasim, M.K., Maurya, S.K., Ray, S., Shee, D., Deb, D., Rahaman, F.:
Results Phys. 20, 103648 (2021)
Kalam, M., et al.: Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 2248 (2012)
Kalam, M., et al.: Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2409 (2013)
Kalam, M., et al.: Astrophys. Space Sci. 349, 865 (2014)
Kalam, M., et al.: Mod. Phys. Lett. A 31, 1650219 (2016)
Kalam, M., et al.: Mod. Phys. Lett. A 32, 1750012 (2017)
Kalam, M., et al.: Res. Astron. Astrophys. 18(o), 3,025 (2018)
Lattimer, J.M.: Neutron stars. In: Lectures Delivered at the 33rd SLAC
Summer Institute on Particle Physics (SSI 2005) 25 July - 5 Au-
gust (2005)
Lattimer, J.M., Prakash, M.: Astrophys. J. 550, 426 (2001)
Lattimer, J.M., Prakash, M.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 111101 (2005)
Li, X.D., Bombaci, I., Dey, M., Dey, J., van den Heuvel, E.P.J.: Phys.
Rev. Lett. 83, 3776 (1999)
Lobo, F.: Class. Quantum Gravity 23, 1525 (2006)
Ma, Y.L., Rho, M.: Phys. Rev. D 100, 114003 (2019)
Maharaja, S.D., Sunzub, J.M., Ray, S.: Eur. Phys. J. Plus 129, 3 (2014)
Mak, M.K., Dobson, P.N., Harko, T.: Europhys. Lett. 55, 310 (2001)
Mateos, D., Myers, R.C., Thomson, R.M.: J. High Energy Phys. 05,
067 (2007)
Maurya, S.K., Gupta, Y.K., Dayanandan, B., Ray, S.: Eur. Phys. J. C
76, 266 (2016)
Moustakidis, Ch.C.: Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 49, 68 (2017)
Nariai, H.: Sci. Rep. Tohoku Univ., Ser. 1 34(3), 160 (1950)
Nariai, H.: Sci. Rep. Tohoku Univ., Ser. 1 25, 62 (1951)
Ngubelanga, S., Maharaj, S.D., Ray, S.: Astrophys. Space Sci. 357, 74
(2015)
Oppenheimer, J.R., Volkoff, G.M.: Phys. Rev. 55, 374 (1939)
Orosz, J.A., Kuulkers, E.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 305, 132 (1999)
Pant, N., Maurya, S.K.: Appl. Math. Comput. 218, 8260 (2012a)
Pant, N., et al.: Astrophys. Space Sci. 330, 353 (2010)
Pant, N., Fuloria, P., Tewari, B.C.: Astrophys. Space Sci. 340, 407
(2012)
Pant, N., Pradhan, N., Murad, M.H.: Int. J. Theor. Phys. 53, 11 (2014)
Paul, B.C., Dey, S.: Astrophys. Space Sci. 363(11), 220 (2018)
Analytical model on mass limits of strange stars
Paul, B.C., Chattopadhyay, P.K., Karmakar, S.: Astrophys. Space Sci.
356, 327 (2015)
Prakash, M., Cooke, J.R., Lattimer, J.M.: Phys. Rev. D 52, 661 (1995)
Rahaman, F., et al.: Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 44, 107 (2012a)
Rahaman, F., et al.: Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 2071 (2012b)
Rahaman, F., Chakraborty, K., Kuhfittig, P.K.F., Shit, G.C., Rahman,
M.: Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 3126 (2014)
Schwarzschild, K.: Sitz.ber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 189, 424 (1916)
Shaikh, A.A., et al.: Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. 17, 3 (2020)
Sharma, R., Ghosh, A., Bhattacharya, S., Das, S.: Eur. Phys. J. C 81(6),
527 (2021)
Singh, K.N., Maurya, S.K., Dutta, A., Rahaman, F., Aktar, S.: Eur.
Phys. J. C 81(10), 909 (2021)
Page 11 of 11 4
Stickland, D., Lloyd, C., Radzuin-Woodham, A.: Mon. Not. R. Astron.
Soc. 286, L21 (1997)
Tolman, R.C.: Phys. Rev. 55, 364 (1939)
Van Kerkwijk, J.H., van Paradijis, J., Zuiderwijk, E.J.: Astron. Astro-
phys. 303, 497 (1995)
Xia, C., et al.: Chin. Phys. C 45(5), 055104 (2021)
Xu, R.X.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 356(1), 359 (2005)
Xu, R.X., Busse, F.H.: Astron. Astrophys. 371, 963–972 (2001).
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20010450
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Astrophysics & Space Science is a copyright of Springer, 2022. All Rights Reserved.