4.7 Article

Post-fall-back evolution of multipolar magnetic fields and radio pulsar activation

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 462, Issue 4, Pages 3689-3702

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stw1902

Keywords

stars: evolution; stars: magnetic field; stars: neutron; pulsars: general

Funding

  1. NOVA
  2. Vidi grant in the NWO
  3. RFBR [14-02-00657]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It has long been unclear if the small-scale magnetic structures on the neutron star (NS) surface could survive the fall-back episode. The study of the Hall cascade by Cumming, Arras & Zweibel hinted that energy in small-scales structures should dissipate on short time-scales. Our new 2D magneto-thermal simulations suggest the opposite. For the first similar to 10 kyr after the fall-back episode with accreted mass 10(-3) M-circle dot, the observed NS magnetic field appears dipolar, which is insensitive to the initial magnetic topology. In framework of the Ruderman & Sutherland, vacuum gap model during this interval, non-thermal radiation is strongly suppressed. After this time, the initial (i.e. multipolar) structure begins to re-emerge through the NS crust. We distinguish three evolutionary epochs for the re-emergence process: the growth of internal toroidal field, the advection of buried poloidal field, and slow Ohmic diffusion. The efficiency of the first two stages can be enhanced when small-scale magnetic structure is present. The efficient re-emergence of high-order harmonics might significantly affect the curvature of the magnetospheric field lines in the emission zone. So, only after few 10(4) yr would be the NS starts shining as a pulsar again, which is in correspondence with radio silence of central compact objects. In addition, these results can explain the absence of good candidates for thermally emitting NSs with freshly re-emerged field among radio pulsars (), as NSs have time to cool down, and supernova remnants can already dissipate.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available