For a selection of 35 pulsars with large spin-up glitches (Δ ν /ν ≥ 10⁻⁶), which are monitored by the Jodrell Bank Observatory, we analyse 157 glitches and their recoveries. All parameters are measured consistently and we choose the best model to describe the post-glitch recovery based on Bayesian evidence. We present updated glitch epochs, sizes, changes of spin down rate, exponentially recovering components (amplitude and corresponding time-scale) when present, as well as pulsars’ second frequency derivatives and their glitch-associated changes if detected. We discuss the different observed styles of post-glitch recovery as well as some particularly interesting sources. Several correlations are revealed between glitch parameters and pulsar spin parameters, including a very strong correlation between a pulsar’s interglitch |ν ̈| and ν ̇, as well as between the glitch-induced spin-down rate change Δ ν ̇ₚ that does not relax exponentially and ν ̇. We find that the ratio |Δ ν ̇ₚ/ν ̈| can be used as an estimate of glitch recurrence times, especially for those pulsars for which there are indications of a characteristic glitch size and interglitch waiting time. We calculate the interglitch braking index n and find that pulsars with large glitches typically have n greater than 3, suggesting that internal torques dominate the rotational evolution between glitches. The external torque, for example, from electromagnetic dipole radiation, could dominate the observed ν ̈ for the youngest pulsars (10⁴\,\,yr), which may be expected to display n~ 3.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: