Pulsars, SNRs, and Plerions

Meeting, 4 April 2006

“status report and discussion of Pulsar studies with DC2”

 

INTRODUCTION:  Since the KickOff one month ago, various people have looked at the EGRET pulsars, and some other pulsars, using the DC2 data and the Science Tools. Lots of things work well and people are enjoying practicing for real data. Some problems have also surfaced, some of which may limit our reaching some of the DC2 goals.

 

In the following, we tour various results posted to confluence. Click on the links as we work through the items.

 

1.   The six EGRET pulsars

a.   VELA

Vela is the brightest, so we’ll start there. Dave Thompson pointed out that the light curves look more ragged than they do for EGRET data:

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/Problem+with+DC2+Pulsar+Timing

 

Thierry Reposeur elaborated on this: he plots photon energy versus phase and obtains a highly non-physical plot:

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/2006/03/31/Vela+energy+spectrum

 

In his posting, Thierry refers to Luis Reye’s posting that first alerted us to the strange energy spectra:

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/2006/03/13/Sources+with+odd+spike+feature+in+their+photon+energy+counts

 

Here, Denis Dumora shows how Vela’s light curve changes depending on whether you let gtpphase take the timing parameters from the DC2 database, or you type them in by hand, using the output that gtephcomp gave you. Johan Bregeon added some comments to the subject.

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/2006/03/09/gtpphase+and+VELA+pulsar

 

A problem in the DC2 ephemerides database seems to be that some (most?) of the positions are rounded off (truncated?) to the nearest hundredth of a degree. For Vela, but even more so for some of the others seen below, taking the pulsar position from for example the Simbad database improves the light curve significantly.

Nota bene the energy spectrum problem is unrelated to the position problem. This is illustrated best in the Geminga link, below.

 

This coordinate issue is illustrated in the following posting by Thierry Reposeur. Denis Dumora verified the sensitivity to the source coordinate position by taking some CELESTE Crab optical pulsar data, changing the source coordinates a hair, and seeing the light curve degrade.

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/2006/04/04/gtbary+source+coordinates+dependency

 

Andrea Caliandro and Vela – lovely presentation (link in section 4a, below).

b.   GEMINGA

Geminga gives a nice strong signal except that P2 and P1 are inverted as compared to EGRET data. Here is Denis Dumora’s posting:

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/SCIGRPS/DC2+Analysis+of+Geminga+pulsar

Inverted…  Or rotated by about 0.7 in phase – depends on how you look at it. Johan Bregeon also saw Geminga.

 

c.   CRAB

Pat Nolan sees the Crab, and has started cleaning it up:

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/Adaptive+smoothing+of+light+curves

 

In that same page he has results for Geminga and Vela.

 

After the meeting, Pat sent the following comment --

“This morning in the VRVS I should have pointed to this:

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/SCIGRPS/Crab+frequency+is+still+a+bit+off

when you mentioned the quality of my Crab light curve. I had to fudge the frequency.  This might be due to my

use of coordinates correct to 4 decimal places, rather than the truncated coordinates in the ephemeris file.”

d.   1706-44

Dave Thompson made a posting at

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/SCIGRPS/DC2+Analysis+of+PSR+B1706-44+pulsar

 

e.   1055-52

Andrea Caliandro made the following posting:

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/SCIGRPS/DC2+Analysis+of+PSR+B1055-52+pulsar

On that page there is also

     Andrea Caliandro   https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/download/attachments/10329/PSR1055quickAnalysis.ppt

 

f.      1951+32

Damien Parent (senior thesis student in Bordeaux)  has what might be a few sigma for P2 but no P1. In progress…

 

2.   Other pulsars

Dave Thompson posted two other pulsars at :

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/SCIGRPS/Analysis+and+Internal+Catalog+of+pulsars+with+radio+counterpart

These are PSR J1420-6048  and  PSR J2229+6114.

 

3.   Searching for ATNF counterparts to the DC2 LAT Catalog

In Bordeaux we applied the Toulouse group’s  gtsrcid  tool and found that 34 ATNF pulsars have good associations with DC2 LAT catalogue sources:

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/2006/04/03/ATNF+vs+LAT+catalogs+using+gtsrcid

 

 

4.   Various other remarks

a.   Better angle cuts

(Better than cookie cutter? see Pat  Nolan’s comment at the bottom of this page:)

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/SCIGRPS/Data+Challenge+2+Activities

 

 We (Bordeaux) were thinking “energy dependent angle cut”, and we started to build our own PSF. But it depends on the photon angle relative to the LAT as well. Does anyone know how to use the Official IRF’s to extract a photon-by-photon angle cut?

 

Meanwhile, go to https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/PULSEPH and look at Andrea Caliandro’s contribution called Three alternatives way to investigate Vela Light Curve    There’s a lot of material in here, but I only found this page a few minutes before today’s meeting. We in Bordeaux will be using some of Andre’s ideas. In particular, he points out the PSF’s shown by Jim Chiang at the KickOff.

 

b.   Need to re-generate the energy spectra, don’t we?

Do we agree that we’re not going to be able to do phase resolved spectroscopy, or any spectroscopy, with the energy plots discussed above? If the bug hasn’t been found yet, call for volunteers to track it down.

c.   Absolute phases of P1’s not yet nailed down

Especially in Geminga but also in Vela, the postings above don’t always have their peaks just where we expect them from EGRET.

d.   Blind searches: help wanted

Go to the following page. There is a list of topics such as PULSNOEPH and SOURCELOC that are untouched.

https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/DC2/DC2+Analysis+Results

e.   Hearty thanks to Max Razzano and/or his cohorts.

Some problems have surfaced, nevertheless let us not lose from sight that the people who generated the simulated pulsar data set were sometimes isolated beginners and did a very big job which we are profiting from immensely. Some people who volunteered to help with this big task never showed up (yours truly, for instance).The pulsar simulators should feel very good about the job they’ve done.