4.7 Article

Understanding the spin-down rate changes of PSR B0919+06

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu2187

关键词

stars: neutron; pulsars: general; pulsars: individual

资金

  1. STFC in the UK
  2. STFC [ST/L000768/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/L000768/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We study the spin-down properties of PSR B0919+06 based on almost 30 years of radio observations. We confirm that the time derivative of the rotational frequency (nu) over dot is modulated quasi-periodically and show that it exhibits a repeating double-peaked structure throughout the entire observation span. We model the (nu) over dot variation of the pulsar assuming two spin-down rates with sudden switches between them in time. Our results show that the double-peak structure in (nu) over dot has a repetition time of about 630 d until MJD 52000 (2001 April) and 550 d since then. During this cycle, the pulsar spin varies from the lower spin-down rate to the upper spin-down rate twice with different amounts of time spent in each state, resulting in a further quasi-stable secondary modulation of the two-state switching. This particular spin-down state switching is broadly consistent with free precession of the pulsar; however, strong evidence linked with this mechanism is not clearly established. We also confirm that the pulsar occasionally emits groups of pulses which appear early in pulse phase, so-called flares, and these events significantly contribute to the pulse-profile shape. We find the (nu) over dot modulation and the pulse-shape variations are correlated throughout the observations. However, the flare state is not entirely responsible for this correlation. In addition to the flare state, we detect flare-like events from the pulsar in single-pulse observations. During these events, the shift in pulse phase is small compared to that of the main flare state and clearly visible only in single-pulse observations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据