Muno, M. P.; Gaensler, B. M.; Clark, J. S.; De Grijs, R.; Pooley, D.; Stevens, I. R. and Portegies Zwart, S. F.
PDF (Not Set)
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
|DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link:||http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3933.2007.00317.x|
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
We describe XMM-Newton observations taken 4.3 days prior to and 1.5 days subsequent to two remarkable events that were detected with Swift on 2006 September 21 from the candidate magnetar CXOU J164710.2-455216: (1) a 20 ms burst with an energy of 1e37 erg (15-150 keV), and (2) a rapid spin-down (glitch) with a fractionap period change of 1e-4. We find that the luminosity of the pulsar increased by a factor of 100 in the interval between observations, from 1e33 to 1e35 erg/s (0.5-8.0 keV), and that its spectrum hardened. The pulsed count rate increased by a factor of 10 (0.5-8.0 keV), but the fractional rms amplitude of the pulses decreased from 65 to 11 per cent, and their profile changed from being single-peaked to exhibiting three peaks. Similar changes have been observed from other magnetars in response to outbursts, such as that of 1E 2259+586 in 2002 June. We suggest that a plastic deformation of the neutron star's crust induced a very slight twist in the external magnetic field, which in turn generated currents in the magnetosphere that were the direct cause of the X-ray outburst.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||stars: magnetic fields; stars: neutron; pulsars: individual: CXOU J164710.2–455216; X-rays: bursts;|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) > Physical Sciences
Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
|Interdisciplinary Research Centre:||Centre for Earth, Planetary, Space and Astronomical Research (CEPSAR)|
|Depositing User:||Astrid Peterkin|
|Date Deposited:||27 Nov 2008 10:33|
|Last Modified:||07 Aug 2016 02:22|
|Share this page:|
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.