Paper detail

Internal Heating of Old Neutron Stars: Contrasting Different Mechanisms

Context: The standard cooling models of neutron stars predict temperatures $T<10^{4}$ K for ages $t>10^{7}$ yr. However, the likely thermal emission detected from the millisecond pulsar J0437-4715, of spin-down age $t_s \sim 7\times10^9$ yr, implies a temperature $T\sim 10^5$ K. Thus, a heating mechanism needs to be added to the cooling models in order to obtain agreement between theory and observation. Aims: Several internal heating mechanisms could be operating in neutron stars, such as magnetic field decay, dark matter accretion, crust cracking, superfluid vortex creep, and non-equilibrium reactions ("rotochemical heating"). We study these mechanisms in order to establish which could be the dominant source of thermal emission from old pulsars. Methods: We show by simple estimates that magnetic field decay, dark matter accretion, and crust cracking mechanism are unlikely to have a significant effect on old neutron stars. The thermal evolution for the other mechanisms is computed using the code of Fernández and Reisenegger. Given the dependence of the heating mechanisms on the spin-down parameters, we study the thermal evolution for two types of pulsars: young, slowly rotating "classical" pulsars and old, fast rotating millisecond pulsars. Results: We find that magnetic field decay, dark matter accretion, and crust cracking do not produce detectable heating of old pulsars. Rotochemical heating and vortex creep can be important both for classical pulsars and millisecond pulsars. More restrictive upper limits on the surface temperatures of classical pulsars could rule out vortex creep as the main source of thermal emission. Rotochemical heating in classical pulsars is driven by the chemical imbalance built up during their early spin-down, and therefore strongly sensitive to their initial rotation period.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.