Hydromagnetic and gravitomagnetic crust-core coupling in a precessing neutron star
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider two types of mechanical coupling between the crust and the core of a precessing neutron star. First, we find that a hydromagnetic (MHD) coupling between the crust and the core strongly modifies the star's precessional modes when $t_a\le\sim (T_s\times T_p)^{1/2}$; here $t_a$ is the Alfven crossing timescale, and $T_s$ and $T_p$ are the star's spin and precession periods, respectively. We argue that in a precessing pulsar PSR B1828-11 the restoring MHD stress prevents a free wobble of the crust relative to the non-precessing core. Instead, the crust and the proton-electron plasma in the core must precess in unison, and their combined ellipticity determines the period of precession. Link has recently shown that the neutron superfluid vortices in the core of PSR B1828-11 cannot be pinned to the plasma; he has also argued that this lack of pinning is expected if the proton Fermi liquid in the core is type-I superconductor. In this case, the neutron superfluid is dynamically decoupled from the precessing motion. The pulsar's precession decays due to the mutual friction between the neutron superfluid and the plasma in the core. The decay is expected to occur over tens to hundreds of precession periods and may be measurable over a human lifetime. Such a measurement would provide information about the strong n-p interaction in the neutron-star core. Second, we consider the effect of gravitomagnetic coupling between the neutron superfluid in the core and the rest of the star and show that this coupling changes the rate of precession by about 10%. The general formalism developed in this paper may be useful for other applications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".