4.6 Article

THE BRAKING INDEX OF A RADIO-QUIET GAMMA-RAY PULSAR

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
卷 832, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.3847/2041-8205/832/1/L15

关键词

gamma rays: stars; pulsars: individual (PSR J1208-6238)

资金

  1. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (MPG)
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) through an Emmy Noether research grant [PL 710/1-1]
  3. NSF [1104902]
  4. Commonwealth Government
  5. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  6. Division Of Physics [1104902] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report the discovery and timing measurements of PSR J1208-6238, a young and highly magnetized gammaray pulsar, with a spin period of 440 ms. The pulsar was discovered in gamma-ray photon data from the Fermi Large Area Telescope (LAT) during a blind-search survey of unidentified LAT sources, running on the distributed volunteer computing system Einstein@Home. No radio pulsations were detected in dedicated follow-up searches with the Parkes radio telescope, with a flux density upper limit at 1369 MHz of 30 mu Jy. By timing this pulsar's gamma-ray pulsations, we measure its braking index over five years of LAT observations to be n = 2.598 +/- 0.001 +/- 0.1, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second estimates the bias due to timing noise. Assuming its braking index has been similar since birth, the pulsar has an estimated age of around 2700 years, making it the youngest pulsar to be found in a blind search of gamma-ray data and the youngest known radio-quiet gamma-ray pulsar. Despite its young age, the pulsar is not associated with any known supernova remnant or pulsar wind nebula. The pulsar's inferred dipolar surface magnetic field strength is 3.8 x 10(13) G, almost 90% of the quantum-critical level. We investigate some potential physical causes of the braking index deviating from the simple dipole model but find that LAT data covering a longer time interval will be necessary to distinguish between these.

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

4.6
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