Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:10:16.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Multiple Outputs of Energetic Pulsars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 June 2018

Roger W. Romani
Roger W. Romani*
Affiliation:
KIPAC/Dept. of Physics, Stanford University, MC 4060, Stanford, CA, USA, 94305 email: rwr@astro.stanford.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This talk commented on our progress in understanding high Ė pulsar output, with the photon power dominated by GeV radiation and the total power dominated by the e±/B wind. We are increasingly appreciating the anisotropy in these outflows, with high energy pulsar beaming probed by the distribution of γ-ray pulse profiles and wind anisotropy mapped by synchrotron images of PWNe. Possible hemispheric asymmetry and the prospects for additional probes of pulsar spindown, particularly from compact binaries in the black widow class, are briefly mentioned.

Keywords

pulsars: generalbinariesISM: supernova remnants
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 13 , Symposium S337: Pulsar Astrophysics the Next Fifty Years , September 2017 , pp. 237 - 240
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2018 

References

Abeysekara, A. U., Albert, A., & Alfaro, R., et al., 2017, ApJ, 834, 40Google Scholar
Abdo, A. A., Ajello, M., & Baldini, L., et al., 2013, ApJS, 208, 17Google Scholar
Guillemot, L., Smith, D. A., & Laffon, H., et al., 2016, A&A, 587, 109Google Scholar
Kalapotharakos, OC, Harding, A. K., Kazanas, D., & Brambilla, G., 2017, ApJ, 842, 80Google Scholar
Kargaltsev, O., Pavlov, G. G., Klinger, N., & Rangelov, B., 2017, J. Plasma Phys., submittedGoogle Scholar
Lai, D. Chernoff, D. F., & Cordes, J. M., 2001, ApJ, 549, 1111Google Scholar
Lyubarsky, Y., & Kirk, J. G., 2001, ApJ, 547, 437Google Scholar
Philippov, A. A. & Sptkovsky, A. 2017, ApJ, submitted; arXiv170704323Google Scholar
Pierbattista, M., Harding, A. K., & Grenier, I. A. et al. 2015, A&A, 575, 3Google Scholar
Porth, O., Vorster, M. J., Lyutikov, M., & Engelbrecht, N. E., 2016, MNRAS, 560, 4135Google Scholar
Posselt, B., Pavlov, G. G., Slane, P. O. et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 66Google Scholar
Rangelov, B., Pavlov, G. G., & Kargaltsev, O. et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 129Google Scholar
Rangelov, B., Pavlov, G. G., & Kargaltsev, O., et al., 2017, ApJ, 835, 264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, S. R., Pavlov, G. G., & Kargaltsev, O., et al., 2017, SSRv, 207, 175Google Scholar
Romani, R. W., Kerr, M., & Craig, H. A. et al. 2011, ApJ, 738, 1114Google Scholar
Romani, R. W., Slane, P., & Green, A., 2017, ApJ, pressGoogle Scholar
Sanchez, N., & Romani, R. W., 2017, ApJ, 845, 42Google Scholar
Van Etten, A., & Romani, R. W., 2012, ApJ, 755, 151Google Scholar
Watters, K. P., Romani, R. W., Weltevrede, P., & Johnston, S., 2009, ApJ, 695, 1289Google Scholar