Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T22:07:13.833Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The new magnetar Swift J1822.3–1606

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2013

P. Scholz ,
C.-Y. Ng ,
M. A. Livingstone ,
V. M. Kaspi ,
A. Cumming  and
R. Archibald
P. Scholz
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Rutherford Physics Building, McGill University3600 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2T8, Canada email: [email protected]
C.-Y. Ng
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Rutherford Physics Building, McGill University3600 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2T8, Canada email: [email protected]
M. A. Livingstone
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Rutherford Physics Building, McGill University3600 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2T8, Canada email: [email protected]
V. M. Kaspi
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Rutherford Physics Building, McGill University3600 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2T8, Canada email: [email protected]
A. Cumming
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Rutherford Physics Building, McGill University3600 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2T8, Canada email: [email protected]
R. Archibald
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Rutherford Physics Building, McGill University3600 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2T8, Canada email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

On 2011 July 14, a transient X-ray source, Swift J1822.3–1606, was detected by Swift BAT via its burst activities. It was subsequently identified as a new magnetar upon the detection of a pulse period of 8.4 s. Using follow-up RXTE, Swift, and Chandra observations, we have determined a spin-down rate of Ṗ ~ 3 × 10−13, implying a dipole magnetic field of ~ 5 × 1013 G, second lowest among known magnetars, although our timing solution is contaminated by timing noise. The post-outburst flux evolution is well modelled by surface cooling resulting from heat injection in the outer crust, although we cannot rule out other models. We measure an absorption column density similar to that of the open cluster M17 at 10′ away, arguing for a comparable distance of ~1.6 kpc. If confirmed, this could be the nearest known magnetar.

Keywords

pulsars: individual (Swift J1822.3–1606)stars: neutronX-rays: general
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 8 , Symposium S291: Neutron Stars and Pulsars: Challenges and Opportunities after 80 years , August 2012 , pp. 486 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2013

References

Brown, E. F. & Cumming, A. 2009, ApJ, 698, 1020Google Scholar
Cummings, J. R., Burrows, D., Campana, S., et al. 2011, The Astronomer's Telegram, 3488, 1Google Scholar
Göğüş, E., Kouveliotou, C., & Strohmayer, T. 2011, The Astronomer's Telegram, 3491Google Scholar
Göğüş, E., Cusumano, G., Levan, A. J., et al. 2010, ApJ, 718, 331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kargaltsev, O., Kouveliotou, C., Pavlov, G. G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 748, 26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livingstone, M. A., Ransom, S. M., Camilo, F., et al. 2009, ApJ, 706, 1163Google Scholar
Livingstone, M. A., Scholz, P., Kaspi, V. M., Ng, C.-Y., & Gavriil, F. P. 2011, ApJ, 743, L38Google Scholar
Nielbock, M., Chini, R., Jütte, M., & Manthey, E. 2001, A&A, 377, 273Google Scholar
Potekhin, A. Y., Baiko, D. A., Haensel, P., & Yakovlev, D. G. 1999, A&A, 346, 345Google Scholar
Rea, N., Israel, G. L., Esposito, P., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholz, P., Ng, C.-Y., Livingstone, M. A., et al. 2012, ApJ, accepted, arXiv:1204.1034Google Scholar
Townsley, L. K., Feigelson, E. D., Montmerle, T., et al. 2003, ApJ, 593, 874CrossRefGoogle Scholar