Resolving the Emission Regions of the Crab Pulsar’s Giant Pulses. II. Evidence for Relativistic Motion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Crab Pulsar is the prime example of an emitter of giant pulses. These short, very bright pulses are thought to originate near the light cylinder, at ∼1600 km from the pulsar. The pulsar’s location inside the Crab Nebula offers an unusual opportunity to resolve the emission regions, using the nebula, which scatters radio waves, as a lens. We attempt to do this using a sample of 61,998 giant pulses found in coherently combined European VLBI network observations at 18 cm. These were taken at times of relatively strong scattering and hence good effective resolution. From correlations between pulse spectra, we show that the giant pulse emission regions are indeed resolved. We infer apparent diameters of ∼2000 and ∼2400 km for the main and interpulse components, respectively, and show that with these sizes the correlation amplitudes and decorrelation timescales and bandwidths can be understood quantitatively, both in our observations and in previous ones. Using pulse-spectra statistics and correlations between polarizations, we also show that the nebula resolves the nanoshots that comprise individual giant pulses. The implied diameters of ∼1100 km far exceed light-travel-time estimates, suggesting the emitting plasma is moving relativistically, with γ ≃ 104, as inferred previously from drifting bands during the scattering tail of a giant pulse. If so, the emission happens over a region extended along the line of sight by ∼107 km. We conclude that relativistic motion likely is important for producing giant pulses, and may be similarly for other sources of short, bright radio emission, such as fast radio bursts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".