Paper detail

Constraints on kHz QPO models and stellar EOSs from SAX J1808.4-3658, Cyg X-2 and 4U 1820-30

We test the relativistic precession model (RPM) and the MHD Alfven wave oscillation model (AWOM) for the kHz QPOs by the sources with measured NS masses and twin kHz QPO frequencies. For RPM, the derived NS mass of Cyg X-2 (SAX J1808.4-3658 and 4U 1820-30) is 1.96 +/- 0.10 solar masses (2.83 +/- 0.04 solar masses and 1.85 +/- 0.02 solar masses), which is 30% (100% and 40%) higher than the measured result 1.5 +/- 0.3 solar masses (< 1.4 solar masses and 1.29 + 0.19 / - 0.07 solar masses). For AWOM, where the free parameter of model is the density of star, we infer the NS radii to be around 10 - 20 km for the above three sources, based on which we can infer the matter compositions inside NSs with the help of the equations of state (EOSs). In particular, for SAX J1808.4-3658, AWOM shows a lower mass density of its NS than those of the other known kHz QPO sources, with the radius range of 17 - 20 km, which excludes the strange quark matter inside its star.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.