Paper detail

Comparison of pulsar parameters for some anomalous types

The comparative analysis of parameters is carried out for two samples of radio pulsars. Objects of the first sample have periods P > 2 sec, the second is characterized by magnetic fields at the neutron star surface $Bs > 4.4\times10^{13}$ G. The main goal of this analysis is to find some differences between normal pulsars and anomalous X-ray pulsars (AXP) and soft gamma-ray repeaters (SGR) with the similar values of periods and magnetic fields. It is shown that the dependence of period derivatives on periods for pulsars with long periods is $dP/dt \propto P^{1.67}$. This means that we must search for another braking mechanism differing from the magnetic dipole one which gives $dP/dt \propto P^{-1}$ or use some specific distributions of parameters. On the other hand, radio pulsars with strong magnetic fields and AXP/SGR can be described by the magnetic dipole model. Radio pulsars with P > 2 sec have ages on average two orders of magnitude higher than objects with $Bs > 4.4 \times 10^{13}$ G and are located much higher above the Galactic plane. The obtained results show that the main feature of AXP/SGR is the strong magnetic field and not the large period.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.