4.7 Review

Populating the Galaxy with pulsars - I. Stellar and binary evolution

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 388, Issue 1, Pages 393-415

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13402.x

Keywords

binaries : close; stars : evolution; stars : neutron; pulsars : general; Galaxy : stellar content

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The computation of theoretical pulsar populations has been a major component of pulsar studies since the 1970s. However, the majority of pulsar population synthesis has only regarded isolated pulsar evolution. Those that have examined pulsar evolution within binary systems tend to either treat binary evolution poorly or evolve the pulsar population in an ad hoc manner. Thus, no complete and direct comparison with observations of the pulsar population within the Galactic disc has been possible to date. Described here is the first component of what will be a complete synthetic pulsar population survey code. This component is used to evolve both isolated and binary pulsars. Synthetic observational surveys can then be performed on this population for a variety of radio telescopes. The final tool used for completing this work will be a code comprised of three components: stellar/binary evolution, Galactic kinematics and survey selection effects. Results provided here support the need for further (apparent) pulsar magnetic field decay during accretion, while they conversely suggest the need for a re-evaluation of the assumed typical millisecond pulsar formation process. Results also focus on reproducing the observed P<(P)over dot> diagram for Galactic pulsars and how this precludes short time-scales for standard pulsar exponential magnetic field decay. Finally, comparisons of bulk pulsar population characteristics are made to observations displaying the predictive power of this code, while we also show that under standard binary evolutionary assumption binary pulsars may accrete much mass.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available