Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Neutron star — where it appears

The degenerate remnant of a massive star's core, about twelve kilometres across and heavier than the Sun. Its moment of inertia is assumed rather than measured, and that assumption propagates into every field strength and every spin-down luminosity quoted for a pulsar.

Named by 16 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

PSR B1913+16: 45 years of periastron arriving 88 seconds early. The cumulative shift of periastron passage for PSR B1913+16, Δt = ½(Ṗ_b/P_b)T², over 45 years from its discovery in 1975. The orbital period is 0.322997449 days and is measured to be shortening at 2.423e-12 seconds per second — a change in the twelfth decimal place, which over a career accumulates to 87.5 seconds. That is the whole reason the effect is measurable. Ṗ_b is taken here as a measured quantity and no radiated power is derived from it; the parabola is the general-relativistic prediction as published, and the points are that prediction scaled by the published ratio of observed to predicted decay, 0.997 ± 0.002 (Hulse & Taylor 1975; Weisberg & Huckins 2016), which is how the agreement is quoted. The error bars are drawn: at the last point the bar is 1.25 px tall against a dot 9 pixels across, so they are invisible, and their invisibility is the result. The campaign has run 45 years.

An orbit measured to be shrinking

A 7.75-hour orbital period that shortens by 68 nanoseconds each turn is beyond any single measurement, and unmissable after fifty thousand of them, because the shift accumulates as the square of the elapsed time. Forty-five years of pulse arrival times have made it 87.5 seconds, which is why the rate is a measured quantity rather than an inferred one.

gravitation · Relativistic orbits Two measured numbers, and everything else on the page derived from them. 25 pulsars in the plane of period against period derivative, at their catalogued values. Only the two axes are measurements; the three families of contour are models. Constant surface field runs at slope −1 because B ∝ √(PṖ), constant characteristic age at slope +1 because τ = P/2Ṗ, and the two families cross the population at right angles — which is why a single dot fixes both. The Crab sits at 3.8·10¹² G and 1257 years, and its true age is 972; the millisecond pulsars at the lower left have fields ten thousand times weaker and characteristic ages of billions of years, because they were spun back up by a companion long after they died. The line at the lower right is the death line, B/P² below which the model says no pair production and therefore no radio emission — and J2144−3933 is drawn below it, an 8.5-second pulsar that is radiating anyway.

A clock that runs down and says what it is

A pulsar hands over two measured numbers, a period and its derivative. Everything else usually quoted about it — an age, a magnetic field, a luminosity — is derived from those two through a model, and the one measurement that tests the model refutes it.

stars · Pulsars A measured mass of 2.08 deletes an equation of state. Mass against radius for three neutron-star equations of state, each a polytrope P = Kρ² integrated through the Tolman–Oppenheimer–Volkoff equation from the centre outwards until the pressure reaches zero. Every sequence rises, turns over and falls; only the rising part is stable, because past the maximum adding mass makes the star smaller and the smaller star cannot hold itself up. The maxima here are 1.60, 2.10, 2.57 solar masses, in the order of increasing stiffness — the same nuclear matter with a slightly harder response to compression supports a heavier star, and nothing else in the calculation changes. The horizontal band is PSR J0740+6620, whose mass of 2.08 ± 0.07 solar masses comes from the Shapiro delay of its own pulses passing its companion, which is a timing measurement and involves no model of the star at all. It sits above the maximum of one of the three, and those are not disfavoured but excluded: an equation of state that cannot hold up two solar masses is wrong, whatever else recommends it. The two lines at the left are exact and no star may cross them — the Schwarzschild radius, and the bound above it inside which the speed of sound in the matter would exceed the speed of light. A caution about the curves themselves: a Γ = 2 polytrope is a stand-in for nuclear matter and runs a kilometre or two large in radius at fixed mass, so read the ordering and the maxima rather than the radii.

A radius that decides what matter can be

Nobody can make matter at four times the density of an atomic nucleus, and no calculation settles what it does there. What can be done is to weigh a neutron star — every candidate description of that matter predicts a heaviest star it could hold up, and a single measured mass above that value deletes the description permanently.

stars · Degeneracy A line nothing spun up by accretion can lie above, and the millisecond pulsars beneath it. The period–period-derivative diagram with the spin-up line drawn on it. An accreting neutron star is torqued by the disc until its magnetosphere turns at the same rate as the material arriving there, which fixes an equilibrium period as a function of the magnetic field and the accretion rate. Eliminating the field between that relation and the dipole formula that every point in this diagram is already read through leaves a straight line of slope 1.33, drawn here for accretion at the Eddington rate — the fastest a star can be pushed. The 7 recycled pulsars all sit below it, which is what the figure is for: none of them was spun up faster than the limit allows, and their positions are a record of how much mass each one received rather than of how old it is. The young pulsars are in the opposite corner, above the line and to the right, spinning down from birth. The two populations are not two stages of one life. A star that reaches the bottom left has been fed by a companion for a hundred million years, which is why almost every millisecond pulsar has one and almost no young pulsar does.

A corner of the diagram that has to be earned

A pulsar spinning a thousand times a second cannot have been born that way and stayed that way, because its own radiation would have slowed it in a few million years. It got there by being fed, and the line it cannot lie above is where the accretion torque balances the magnetic one.

stars · Pulsars Two bodies at a mass ratio of 2.6 to 1. Both bodies orbit their common centre of mass, on similar ellipses whose sizes are in inverse proportion to the masses — here 2.6 to 1, so the heavier body's path is 2.6 times smaller.

The companion survives, and it is moving

When one star of a close pair explodes, the other is left holding an orbital velocity and no orbit. Whether the pair stays bound turns on a single question — did more than half the total mass leave? — and the stars that answer no are running across the Galaxy at a hundred kilometres a second with nothing visible behind them.

stars · Supernovae Central pressure bracketed without a model: 6 bodies, 23 decades apart. What can be said about the middle of a body from its mass and its radius alone. The lower end of each bar is GM²/8πR⁴, which follows from hydrostatic equilibrium and nothing else — no equation of state, no composition, no temperature, no assumption whatever about how the density is arranged inside. The upper end costs one more assumption, that the density does not increase outward, and it needs a central density, which is a model output rather than an observation and is why that edge is drawn as the softer one. The dot is what a full structural model gives. For the first five bodies every dot lies inside its bar, and what is worth noticing is how wide the bar is: Sun's rigorous floor is 4.48e+13 pascals against a modelled 2.34e+16, a factor of 522. The bound is true and nearly useless there, because most of a centrally condensed body's pressure comes from the concentration and the derivation deliberately knows nothing about it. The relativistic entry is the exception, and the reason to draw the figure at all. neutron star's modelled central pressure is 8.5 times the Newtonian ceiling — a body no Newtonian arrangement of matter with density falling outward can produce. The floor still holds, and holds for a statable reason: relativity makes the pressure gradient steeper than Newtonian gravity does, so the true central pressure can only exceed what the Newtonian derivation demands. The bracket therefore does more than constrain an interior. Applied at a small enough radius it breaks, and where it breaks is where Newtonian hydrostatics has stopped being the right equation.

A floor under the centre that assumes nothing

There is a lower bound on the pressure at the centre of any body in hydrostatic equilibrium, and it needs no equation of state, no composition and no temperature — only a mass and a radius. For the Sun it is nearly useless. For a neutron star it says which theory of gravity the interior needs.

stars · Hydrostatic equilibrium 14 glitches, and the 1.5 per cent of Vela that is not slowing down. Accumulated fractional spin-up against time for a Vela-like pulsar over 40 years, in parts per million. The underlying spin-down has been removed, so a perfectly braking pulsar would be a flat line at zero. What is drawn instead is a staircase: 14 sudden jumps of a few parts per million, each rising in less than a minute and then relaxing partway back over a couple of months, leaving a permanent step behind. Nothing outside the star can deliver angular momentum on a timescale of seconds, so the source is internal, and the only internal component that could have any to give is one that has not been slowing down with the rest. That is a neutron superfluid: it carries its rotation in quantised vortices, the vortices pin to the crustal lattice and cannot migrate outward, and so the superfluid keeps the spin it had while the crust brakes past it. The reservoir grows until the pinning fails somewhere, and a glitch is the unpinning. The straight line through the staircase is the glitch activity, 0.68 parts per million per year, and it converts directly into an interior measurement: the crust cannot on average take more than the superfluid stores, so the decoupled component must hold at least 2τ_c times the activity of the star's moment of inertia, which here is 1.5 per cent. It is a lower bound rather than a value, and it is one of the very few quantitative statements about the inside of a neutron star that needs no equation of state at all. The individual glitch times and sizes here are drawn from a seeded generator rather than a catalogue; what is real is the staircase's shape, the partial healing, and the arithmetic that turns a slope into a fraction.

The part of a star that never slowed down

A pulsar's spin decays smoothly for years and then jumps upward inside a minute. Nothing outside can deliver angular momentum that fast, so something inside has been storing it — and the rate at which the jumps accumulate is a lower bound on how much of the star is not braking with the rest.

stars · Pulsars Two measured numbers, and everything else on the page derived from them. 25 pulsars in the plane of period against period derivative, at their catalogued values. Only the two axes are measurements; the three families of contour are models. Constant surface field runs at slope −1 because B ∝ √(PṖ), constant characteristic age at slope +1 because τ = P/2Ṗ, and the two families cross the population at right angles — which is why a single dot fixes both. The Crab sits at 3.8·10¹² G and 1257 years, and its true age is 972; the millisecond pulsars at the lower left have fields ten thousand times weaker and characteristic ages of billions of years, because they were spun back up by a companion long after they died. The line at the lower right is the death line, B/P² below which the model says no pair production and therefore no radio emission — and J2144−3933 is drawn below it, an 8.5-second pulsar that is radiating anyway.

A neutron star born turning too slowly

Collapse an iron core a few thousand kilometres across down to twelve, and conservation of angular momentum multiplies its rotation rate by about eighteen thousand. A model with no transport in it delivers a newborn pulsar at the break-up limit; the ones that are observed turn twenty times slower, which is a measurement of the core before it fell.

stars · Supernovae A formula everyone uses, and the number no pulsar has. Above: the braking index measured for the 4 pulsars whose spin-down has been followed long enough to give a second derivative, against the value a magnetic dipole rotating in vacuum requires. That value is exactly 3, and it is what every catalogued field strength and every characteristic age assumes. Not one measurement reaches it: they run from 1.4 to 2.839, and all of them fall short in the same direction, which is the signature of a systematic rather than of noise. Below: what that costs. The age a spin-down history gives is the period divided by (n − 1) times its derivative, so the ratio to the quoted characteristic age is 2/(n − 1) — 5.00 for Vela. The numbers are not thereby useless: an exponent recovered from the data is exactly the kind of correction a measurement can absorb. What has gone is the claim that the field strength printed beside a pulsar is a measurement of a field. It is a measurement of a spin-down rate, read through a model the same pulsar refutes.

The exponent no pulsar has

Every field strength in the pulsar catalogue comes from one formula, which assumes the star is a magnetic dipole rotating in a vacuum and therefore that its spin-down obeys an exponent of exactly three. Where that exponent has been measured it is 2.51, 2.84, 1.4 — never three, and always short.

stars · Pulsars The helium the first three minutes make, against the neutron's lifetime. The primordial helium mass fraction against the free-neutron lifetime, integrated through the first three minutes with the weak conversion rates normalised on that lifetime and free decay at the same rate, at the baryon density the microwave background gives. The line rises by 1.96 parts in ten thousand per second: a longer-lived neutron means slower conversions, an earlier freeze-out and less decay before the neutrons are locked into helium. The two laboratory lifetimes — 877.75 s from storing ultracold neutrons in a bottle, 887.7 s from counting protons in a beam — give 0.2468 and 0.2487, a difference of 19 in the fourth decimal place. The band is helium in metal-poor galaxies (Aver et al. 2015), 0.2449 ± 0.004; read back through the line it says the neutron lives 869 s, anywhere from 848 to 889 — a measurement of a laboratory constant from galaxies, good to about 20 seconds, and twice too coarse to referee a ten-second disagreement. The absolute level of the line is set to a full network's value for the bottle lifetime; the slope is computed.

The first three minutes use two lifetimes

A free neutron lives 877.75 seconds in a bottle and 887.7 in a beam. Nucleosynthesis uses the lifetime twice — once to set how fast neutrons and protons interconvert, once to set how fast the leftovers decay — and if a neutron can decay into something invisible, those are the two different numbers the laboratories measure.

cosmology · Nucleosynthesis The delay a companion's gravity puts in a pulsar's pulses, over one orbit. The Shapiro delay of a pulsar's pulses against orbital phase, for a companion of 0.5 solar masses and orbital inclinations of 89.17°, 85°, 70°, from Δ = −2r ln(1 − sin i · sin Φ), where r is the companion's mass times G/c³ = 2.46 µs. Superior conjunction, when the pulsar is behind its companion, is at 90°. For the orbit nearly edge-on (89.17°, the inclination measured for PSR J1614−2230) the delay rises in a narrow spike 48.5 µs high as the pulses graze the companion; at 85° the spike is 30.8 µs and broad, at 70° 17.1 µs and nearly a sinusoid. The height is set by the companion's mass and the sharpness by the inclination, which is how one curve returns two numbers the orbit alone cannot give.

The part of a delay no orbit can imitate

A binary pulsar's pulses are delayed by up to fifty microseconds as they pass its companion, and most of that delay is invisible — a timing fit folds it into the orbit. What survives is the third orbital harmonic and above, whose size goes as the cube of the tangent of half the inclination, and that cube, not the delay, decides which neutron stars can be weighed.

gravitation · Relativistic orbits One hot spot, seen through more and more gravity. The X-ray flux from a small hot spot at colatitude 60° on a rotating neutron star seen from inclination 60°, over one rotation, each curve divided by its own mean, for no bending, 2GM/Rc² = 0.20, 2GM/Rc² = 0.34, 2GM/Rc² = 0.48 — the last two are a 1.4 M☉ star of 12 km and a 2.0 M☉ star of 12.4 km. Light bending is computed exactly; Doppler effects are left out. With no bending the spot is behind the star for 39 per cent of the turn and the pulsed fraction is 1.00. As the compactness rises the star's gravity bends light from the far side into view: the dark interval shrinks to 27 per cent, then vanishes, and the pulsed fraction falls to 1.00, 0.99, 0.64. The more compact the star, the more of its own back it shows and the smoother its pulse.

The pulse that shows the back of the star

A hot spot on a spinning neutron star flashes once a turn, and the flash is weaker than it would be on an ordinary star because the star's gravity bends light from its far side into view. How much weaker measures the ratio of mass to radius. But on its own the flash cannot tell a compact star from a tilted one — the two trade exactly — and what separates them is the lean the spin puts into the pulse, which measures the radius directly.

stars · Degeneracy Two critical mass ratios that move with where the mass goes. The logarithmic response of the donor's Roche lobe to its own loss of mass, ζ, against the mass ratio donor over accretor, for conservative transfer (dashed) and for all of the transferred mass lost from the accretor, from the donor and to a ring. The horizontal lines are two donors' own responses: −1/3 for a deep convective envelope, which swells as it is stripped, and +2 for a radiative one, which shrinks. Transfer is stable where the donor's line lies above the lobe's curve, so each crossing is a critical mass ratio — conservatively 0.63 and 1.72. Re-emission from the accretor moves them to 0.96 and 2.25, a wind from the donor to 1.24 and beyond the range drawn; and with everything fed to a ring the convective donor is unstable at every mass ratio drawn and the radiative one only below 0.19. Nothing about the donor has changed between the curves; only the question of where a gram that is not accreted leaves from.

Mass that leaves takes the orbit's spin with it

Most of the gas a star pours onto its companion never stays there. Where it leaves from decides how much angular momentum it carries, and that one bookkeeping entry moves the largest donor that can transfer stably by a factor of two — without anything about either star having changed.

stars · Mass transfer The companion's mass against the visible star's, for f = 6.08 M☉: never below 6.08, and 7.3 M☉ for a 0.7 M☉ star seen edge-on. The mass of the unseen companion against the mass of the visible star, both in solar masses, for a mass function of 6.08 M☉, at inclinations of 90°, 70°, 55°. Every curve starts at or above 6.08 when the visible star weighs nothing and rises as it gets heavier, because a heavier visible star moves less for the same companion. For a visible star of 0.7 solar masses — V404 Cygni's donor is a cool subgiant of about that mass — the companion is 7.3 M☉ at 90°, 8.6 M☉ at 70°, 12.4 M☉ at 55°. The shaded band is the range of neutron-star masses, up to about 2.3 M☉; no curve comes near it. A mass function above that limit is a proof that the companion is too heavy to be a neutron star, without knowing the inclination or the visible star's mass at all.

A floor under the unseen companion

A star that swings back and forth in velocity with nothing visible beside it is orbiting something. One velocity curve gives one number about the something — the mass function — and that number is not an estimate of its mass but a floor under it, reached only if the visible star weighed nothing and the orbit were seen exactly edge-on. When the floor stands higher than any neutron star can, the companion is a black hole, whatever the inclination turns out to be.

gravitation · The two-body problem Dark companions' masses with and without a gap, as an astrometric survey would see them. The distribution of the masses of dark companions in a sample found by their stars' astrometric orbits, per unit of the logarithm of mass, for two hypotheses: neutron stars near 1.35 solar masses and black holes near 8 in equal numbers with nothing between 2 and 5 (solid), or the same with the gap filled at the density the black holes have at 5 (dashed; 16 per cent of the sample in it). Each is drawn as measured with mass errors of 10 per cent (blue) and 30 per cent (orange). With 10 per cent errors the empty gap stays empty: 0.2 per cent of the sample lands between 2.5 and 4.5 solar masses, against 10 per cent if it is filled. With 30 per cent errors the edges spill in — 4.3 per cent against 12 per cent — and the gap becomes a shallow dip that a modest sample cannot distinguish from a filled one.

A gap that counting can test and impostors can fill

The black holes in X-ray binaries leave a gap between the heaviest neutron stars and about five solar masses, and nobody knows whether it is real or an artefact of how those masses are measured. Astrometric orbits give masses that need no light curve, and with errors of ten per cent a few dozen of them would settle it. The difficulty is not the counting. It is that pairs of white dwarfs and neutron stars, dark and close, can weigh exactly what a gap object would.

gravitation · The two-body problem Lines from the lit face follow the star that cannot be seen. Radial velocity against orbital phase, over two orbits, for a binary like Sco X-1 — period 0.787 days, a 1.4 M☉ neutron star, a donor of 0.42 M☉, inclination 40°. The donor itself is drowned by the light of the accretion disc and is not seen. The narrow components of the Bowen blend, emitted by the donor's face lit by X-rays, move in phase with the donor but with 109 km/s rather than the 139 km/s of its centre, because the lit face lies on the side nearer the neutron star. The neutron star moves in antiphase at 42 km/s, a motion the broad lines of the disc track only roughly. Measuring the narrow lines' amplitude puts a lower limit on the donor's velocity.

A wavelength coincidence that weighs a neutron star

An ionised helium atom and a twice-ionised oxygen atom happen to have lines a sixtieth of an ångström apart in the far ultraviolet, close enough that one absorbs the other's light. The oxygen then glows in a cascade of visible lines, and so, by a second coincidence, does nitrogen. In a bright X-ray binary that glow comes from the face of the companion star turned towards the X-rays — a star otherwise lost in the light of its accretion disc — and its Doppler shifts trace the companion's orbit, weighing the neutron star it circles.

starlight · The Doppler effect

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Mass functionBinary pulsarEquation of stateGeneral relativityPulsar timingSpin-downBraking indexCharacteristic ageGlitchMillisecond pulsarMoment of inertiaThe Shapiro delay

All concepts