4.7 Article

Neutron star glitches have a substantial minimum size

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu395

关键词

stars: neutron; pulsars: general; pulsars: individual: PSR B0531+21

资金

  1. UK Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)
  2. STFC
  3. FONDECYT [3130512]
  4. NWO Vidi Grant
  5. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/L000768/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. STFC [ST/F002874/1, ST/L000768/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glitches are sudden spin-up events that punctuate the steady spin-down of pulsars and are thought to be due to the presence of a superfluid component within neutron stars. The precise glitch mechanism and its trigger, however, remain unknown. The size of glitches is a key diagnostic for models of the underlying physics. While the largest glitches have long been taken into account by theoretical models, it has always been assumed that the minimum size lay below the detectability limit of the measurements. In this paper we define general glitch detectability limits and use them on 29 yr of daily observations of the Crab pulsar, carried out at Jodrell Bank Observatory. We find that all glitches lie well above the detectability limits and by using an automated method to search for small events we are able to uncover the full glitch size distribution, with no biases. Contrary to the prediction ofmostmodels, the distribution presents a rapid decrease of the number of glitches below similar to 0.05 mu Hz. This substantial minimum size indicates that a glitch must involve the motion of at least several billion superfluid vortices and provides an extra observable which can greatly help the identification of the trigger mechanism. Our study also shows that glitches are clearly separated from all the other rotation irregularities. This supports the idea that the origin of glitches is different to that of timing noise, which comprises the unmodelled random fluctuations in the rotation rates of pulsars.

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