Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T01:50:00.704Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pulsar glitch and nuclear EoS: Applicability of superfluid model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 June 2018

Ang Li  and
Rui Wang
Ang Li
Affiliation:
Department of Astronomy, Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian 361005, China email: [email protected]
Rui Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Astronomy, Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian 361005, China email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this contribution, we have made use of the contemporary equation of states (EOSs) for the complete neutron star structure, and confronted them with one particular glitch constrain for the crustal moment of inertia (MOI). We find that with these EOSs, the radii of three millisecond pulsars selected by NICER: PSR J0437-4715, PSR J1614-2230, PSR J0751+1807, are all around 12.5 km. Also, a star with M ≲ 1.55M⊙ would fulfill the MOI calculation for glitch constrain with the latest neutron superfluidity density, and the glitch crisis might not be present.

Keywords

equation of statestars: neutron(stars:) pulsars: general
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 13 , Symposium S337: Pulsar Astrophysics the Next Fifty Years , September 2017 , pp. 360 - 361
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2018 

References

Andersson, N., Glampedakis, K., Ho, W. C., & Espinoza, C. M., 2012, Phys. Rev. Lett., 109, 241103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamel, N., 2013, Phys. Rev. Lett., 110, 011101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamel, N. 2017, arXiv:1707.07854Google Scholar
Hooker, J., Newton, W. G., & Li, B. A., 2015, MNRAS, 449, 3559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lattimer, J. M. 2012, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci., 62, 488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, A., 2015, Chin. Phys. Lett., 32, 079701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, A., Dong, J.-M., Wang, J.-B., & Xu, R.-X., 2016a, ApJS, 223, 16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, A., Zhang, B., Zhang, N.-B., et al. 2016b, Phys. Rev. D, 94, 083010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, A., Zuo, W., & Peng, G. X., 2015, Phys. Rev. C, 91, 035803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Link, B., Epstein, R. I., & Lattimer, J. M., 1999, Phys. Rev. Lett., 83, 3362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potekhin, A. Y., Fantina, A. F., Chamel, N., Pearson, J. M., & Goriely, S., 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 560, A48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, B. K., Centelles, M., Vinas, X., Baldo, M., & Burgio, G. F., 2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 584, A103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, G., Pethick, C. J., 2017, Phys. Rev. Lett., 119, 062701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, Z.-Y., Li, A., Hu, J.-N., & Sagawa, H., 2016, Phys. Rev. C, 94, 045803CrossRefGoogle Scholar