Paper detail

Quark matter under strong magnetic fields

We revisit three of the mathematical formalisms used to describe magnetized quark matter in compact objects within the MIT and the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio models and then compare their results. The tree formalisms are based on 1) isotropic equations of state, 2) anisotropic equations of state with different parallel and perpendicular pressures and 3) the assumption of a chaotic field approximation that results in a truly isotropic equation of state. We have seen that the magnetization obtained with both models is very different: while the MIT model produces well-behaved curves that are always positive for large magnetic fields, the NJL model yields a magnetization with lots of spikes and negative values. This fact has strong consequences on the results based on the existence of anisotropic equations of state. We have also seen that, while the isotropic formalism results in maximum stellar masses that increase considerably when the magnetic fields increase, maximum masses obtained with the chaotic field approximation never vary more than 5.5$\%$. The effect of the magnetic field on the radii is opposed in the MIT and NJL models: with both formalisms, isotropic and chaotic field approximation, for a fixed mass, the radii increase with the increase of the magnetic field in the MIT bag model and decrease in the NJL, the radii of quark stars described by the NJL model being smaller than the ones described by the MIT model.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

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.