Paper detail

Millisecond Pulsar Ages: Implications of Binary Evolution and a Maximum Spin Limit

In the absence of constraints from the binary companion or supernova remnant, the standard method for estimating pulsar ages is to infer an age from the rate of spin-down. While the generic spin-down age may give realistic estimates for normal pulsars, it can fail for pulsars with very short periods. Details of the spin-up process during the low mass X-ray binary phase pose additional constraints on the period (P) and spin-down rates (Pdot) that may consequently affect the age estimate. Here, we propose a new recipe to estimate millisecond pulsar (MSP) ages that parametrically incorporates constraints arising from binary evolution and limiting physics. We show that the standard method can be improved by this approach to achieve age estimates closer to the true age whilst the standard spin-down age may over- or under-estimate the age of the pulsar by more than a factor of ~10 in the millisecond regime. We use this approach to analyze the population on a broader scale. For instance, in order to understand the dominant energy loss mechanism after the onset of radio emission, we test for a range of plausible braking indices. We find that a braking index of n=3 is consistent with the observed MSP population. We demonstrate the existence and quantify the potential contributions of two main sources of age corruption: the previously known "age bias" due to secular acceleration and "age contamination" driven by sub-Eddington progenitor accretion rates. We explicitly show that descendants of LMXBs that have accreted at very low rates will exhibit ages that appear older than the age of the Galaxy. We further elaborate on this technique, the implications and potential solutions it offers regarding MSP evolution, the underlying age distribution and the post-accretion energy loss mechanism.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.