HONOURS COURSE IN SPACE

SCIENCE

2005–2006
 ASSOCIATION BETWEEN SUPERNOVA
REMNANTS AND PULSARS

Karthik.V

Introduction

2
 When Baade & Zwicky proposed in 1934 that collapsed stars
composed of neutrons could be formed in supernova explosions, they had
little notion of how such creatures would manifest themselves
observationally.

The surprise discovery of pulsars, and in particular, of the Crab and

Vela pulsars in their respective supernova remnants, heralded the first
visual image of the isolated neutron star, that of a compact, highly
magnetized (surface field ~ 1012 G) star, spinning down slowly due to
magnetic braking, emitting a collimated beacon, and exciting its
surroundings via the injection of ultra-relativistic particles. However,
even the simplest follow-up questions, such as whether all neutron stars
form in supernovae, what fraction of supernovae produce neutron stars,
and in particular, whether all young pulsars are born with properties like
those of the Crab and Vela pulsars remain to this day naggingly
unanswered.(Kaspi 1998)

This is an attempt to summarize the available literature, the

arguments – for and against the association of pulsars and supernova
remnants and the discrepancies in the observational and theoretical data
as interpreted by the researchers in the field.

Birth and Birthrates of Pulsars, SNRs and Frequency of Supernovae

and Their Age Discrepancies

Pulsars are thought to be born in the core collapse and explosion of

massive stars, so that the initial evolution and observability of the PWNe
(pulsar wind nebulae) depends on the properties of the supernova and the
supernova remnant evolution. Several phases of evolution are expected

3
(Chevalier 1998). Initially the radiation from the PWN is absorbed by the
surrounding supernova gas; high energy photons may be reprocessed and
appear at a lower energy. After ~ >10’s of years, the supernova becomes
optically thin and the PWN radiation directly escapes. The Crab Nebula
may be in this phase of evolution. After ~ 103 years for a pulsar like that
in the Crab, the spin down power from the pulsar decreases and the PWN
fades. After ~ 104 years, the reverse shock wave from the supernova
remnant moves to the center of the remnant, crushing the PWN and
leading to an increase in brightness of the nebula.

Though no supernova has been sighted in our Galaxy since the

time of Kepler historical observations suggest they occur about once in
30 years. At any rate, supernova do leave behind relatively long lived
remnants if pulsars are associated with every supernova explosion, then
the birthrates of pulsars must be consistent with the frequency of
supernovae and the birthrate of SNRs. Current estimates of pulsar
birthrate of one in twenty to forty years are indeed consistent with the
supernova rate of one in thirty years and the estimates of birthrate of shell
remnants one in thirty years. Admittedly there is considerable uncertainty
in all these birthrates; nevertheless, the overlap of these rates may be
significant. (Srinivasan.G 1985)

Many associations between supernova remnants and pulsars have

been claimed in the literatures. In virtually all cases the pulsar has a
characteristic age, τ, which is less than 100000 years. A sizeable fraction
of these pulsars are located outside the supernova remnant shell which
requires that these pulsars have extremely high velocities which seem
unreasonable. (Gaensler, Johnston 1995)

4
 Most pulsars have a radio lifetime (106-107 yr) which is much
larger than the age <104 yr of an SNR. Therefore pulsars will remain
visible long after the associated SNR has moved into the interstellar
medium. The pulsar then moves as an isolated pulsar through the
interstellar medium.

The interesting fact is that the total number of firm association of

SNRs with pulsars remained at two i.e. The Crab nebula and the Vela
SNR for over a decade or so since their discovery although the total
number of pulsars and SNRs discovered mounted with time. Since then,
the number of associations has blossomed to between 7 and 23,
depending on one’s criteria for certainty.

Proposed associations may be merely a result of coincidental

projection of the pulsar and remnant on the sky; the probability for
chance alignment is generally significant, particularly for the inner
Galactic plane. The burden of proof therefore rests on the observer.
Evidence comes from consideration of whether independent distance and
age estimates agree, whether there is an interaction between the pulsar
and remnant, whether the transverse velocity implied by the angular
displacement of the pulsar from the approximate remnant geometrical
center, its (perhaps naively) assumed birthplace, is consistent with the
known pulsar velocity distribution, and, even better, if the measured
pulsar velocity’s magnitude and direction is as predicted. For most
proposed associations, few of these questions have clear answers. (Kaspi
1998)
The proposed associations are compiled in the table given below

5
 S-Shell P-Plerions C-Composite

Now, it would be worthwhile to dwell a bit into the types of

supernovae, their remnants and plerions. SNRs come in three broad
classes: (Narayan, Schaudt 1988)

6
 • “Shells” which consist of step-spectrum rings of radio
emission
• “Plerions” which consist of diffuse filled centre flat
spectrum synchrotron nebulae visible in radio and/or X-ray
• “Composites” which consist of plerions inside shells.

Supernovae themselves are classifies into categories

• Type 1 Supernovae
A Type 1 Supernova occurs where there are binary stars, or
two stars that orbit closely with each other. The Type 1
Supernova occurs when one of the two stars is a dense, small
star known as a white dwarf. When the two stars get too
close to one another, the gravitational pull from the white
dwarf pulls matter from the other star, and it becomes larger.
When the white dwarf builds up enough matter from the
other star, it collapses, ejecting matter outward and creating
a Type 1 Supernova.

• Type 2 Supernovae
A Type 2 Supernova occurs when the life of a star with great
mass come to an end. As a massive star (more than 5 times
the size of our sun) gets older, its core shrinks as its outer
layers expand. It turns into one of two very large types of
stars- a giant or a super giant. The star continues expanding
as it gets older. While the outer layers are expanding, the
core creates energy and creates outward pressure. When the

7
 core becomes mainly iron and cannot create any more fusion
(to create energy), it cannot create outward pressure to resist
the gravitational pull of the star. The gravity of the star
overpowers the outward pressure of the core, and the star
collapses. The star’s outer layers rebound off of the star’s
core and eject into space as an enormous cloud of gas and
dust, creating a gigantic explosion, the Type 2 Supernova.

It is generally believed that in galaxies like ours, the frequency of

type I and type II are roughly equal. It is now generally accepted that the
formation of neutron star is indeed the origin of type II supernovae. Yet
there are considerable number of doubts cast upon the authenticity of
many of these associations. This is largely due to the age discrepancies
between the pulsar and supernova remnant

Notable cases of associations

Soon after pulsars were discovered and when it was suspected that
they had to be spinning neutron stars, it was predicted that they should be
found in SNRs and in particular there should be one in the Crab nebula.
The discovery of a pulsar in Vela SNR and one in the Crab soon after
seemed at that time to have answered all questions at once. It is known
from various arguments that the neutron star in the Crab nebula must
have been functioning as a pulsar from day one!

8
Figure 1. The Crab Nebula at different frequencies

Figure 2. The Vela Pulsar

9
 The standard age of Vela SNR agrees very well with the
characteristic age of the pulsar, implying once again that the neutron star
must have been born with the present magnetic fields. The pulsar PSR
1509-58 in MSH 15-52 is interesting. The characteristic age of the pulsar
is only 1600 years, but the standard age of the remnant is ~104 years.
Blandford et al have suggested that this discrepancy could be resolved if
the neutron star turned on as a pulsar long after the supernova explosion.
But 104 years is an uncomfortably short time to build up a field of 1.5 x
1013 G. Faced with this difficulty Blandford et al have suggested that the
timescale for building up the field may be much shorter if the neutron star
is a rapid rotator at birth. In most of the field build up mechanisms, the
heat flux is the main source. The idea is that in a rapidly rotating neutron
star one may be able to tap rotational energy to generate additional heat
flux, for example by, by internal friction.(Srinivasan.G 1985)

The other associations are

N157B: Marshall et al. (1998) have discovered a 16 ms X-ray pulsar in

the Crab-like supernova remnant N157B in the Large Magellanic Cloud
using the Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer. The surprisingly short period
makes it the most rapidly rotating neutron star known that has not been
spun up. The measured pulsar characteristic age is ~5 kyr old, making it
the fourth youngest pulsar known, and suggesting that neutron stars can
be born spinning significantly faster than previously thought, possibly as
fast as a few milliseconds.

RCW 103: 69 ms X-ray pulsations from a source 7′ north of the center of

the well-studied, young shell supernova remnant RCW 103, confirming.
The spin-down rate implied by the difference in periods indicates that the

10
pulsar is very young, having age ~8 kyr. The existence of so young a
pulsar near RCW 103 suggests the two might be related, casting doubt on
the famous central point source being the stellar remnant. An association
requires a transverse velocity of ~800 km s−1 for a distance of 3.3 kpc,
deduced from HI absorption. The radio-pulsar counterpart has been
discovered at the Parkes observatory. The dispersion measure suggests a
distance to the pulsar of ~4.5–7 kpc. Thus the association can be
considered only tentative, and the nature of the central object remains
uncertain.

PSR J1105−6107: The 63 ms radio pulsar PSR J1105–6107 lies almost

three remnant radii from the approximate center of the supernova remnant
G290.1−0.8, also called MSH 11−61A For an association, under standard
assumptions, the pulsar transverse velocity must be ~650 km s−1. The
detection of the pulsar at X-ray energies is best explained as arising from
a pulsar wind nebula confined by ram-pressure.

G11.2−0.3: The supernova remnant G11.2−0.3 is the possible counterpart

of the event recorded by the Chinese in AD 386 The detection of
evidence for 65 ms X-ray pulsations is exciting, as after the Crab, this is
the only pulsar associated with an historic event. From observations,
P۬ < 8 × 10−13. If the pulsar was born in AD 386, and assuming a short
birth spin period, the implied ˙P = 6.4 × 10−13, consistent with the upper
limit. This implies a spin-down luminosity E < 9 × 1037 erg s−1, and
surface magnetic field B < 1×1013 G, reasonable for a young pulsar.
(Kaspi 1998)

CTB80: In this supernova remnant the pulsar PSR B195+32 is located (in
projection) just inside the outer edge of the remnant. The spectral index

11
of the synchrotron emission in the vicinity of the pulsar system indicates
that there is a plerionic nebula around the pulsar.

G5.4-1.2: in this case the pulsar is located well outside the supernova
remnant. At radio frequencies an emission bridge appears to connect the
pulsar B1757-24 and the associated pulsar wind nebula (PWN) with the
supernova remnant, suggesting a physical association between the
supernova remnant and the pulsar. But there is a discrepancy in the
characteristic pulsar age obtained from the spin period derivative (P/2P
~16kyr), and the dynamical age obtained from the offset distance Rpsr
from the center of G5.4-1.2 (Rpsr/Vpsr ≥ 39 kyr). (van der Swaluv et al.
2003)

Crab-The Famous Nebula

One of the most remarkable aspects of Crab nebula is its low

expansion velocity compared to the expansion velocities of ejecta in a
typical supernova. It has been well established that the kinetic energy of
expansion of the filamentary shell as well as the acceleration experienced
by it in the past can be understood in terms of the energy being derived
from the stored rotational energy of the newly born pulsar the pressure of
the relativistic wind from the pulsar pushed out the remaining mass and
accelerated it to its present velocity. (Srinivasan 1984)

Crab nebula, one of the best studied SNRs, has a different

morphology than most others. It has a filled center morphology with no
limb-brightening. For a long time, the Crab was unique in this respect,
but later many other filled center remnants were found which have come

12
to be known as ‘plerions’. It doesn’t have a rapidly expanding shell of
radio emission.

More Light on the Associations

The Crab pulsar, with an age of 947 years, was until recently the
youngest known pulsar. A newly discovered pulsar in the remnant Kes 75
has a characteristic age of only 723 years and so may be younger.
However, the search for very young pulsars (age < 100 years) continues.
The discovery of such objects is important for understanding the early
evolution of pulsars. In their early phases, pulsars are expected to interact
with their surrounding supernovae. This occurs both through the
dynamical interaction of the pulsar bubble with the supernova and the
interaction of the radiation with the surrounding supernova gas.
(Chevalier 2002)

As stated before, one of the most interesting anomalies is that of

the discrepancies in the age of the pulsar and the associated supernova.
For isolated pulsars, it is usually assumed that the spin-down torque is
due to magnetic dipole radiation (MDR). But Marsden et al (2001) have
suggested that exploration of a more complete spin down model is
warranted and have considered a hybrid spin-down model consisting of
MDR torques plus the addition of spin-down torque due to the “propeller
effect” from material at the pulsar magnetosphere. Marsden et al have
concluded that the discrepancies between the MDR timing ages and
supernova remnant ages for pulsars B1757-24 and J1846-0258 can be
resolved by using a more complete spin-down model consisting of both
MDR and propeller torques.

13
Other Pulsar/SNR like Associations

There is now significant evidence that young neutron stars do not

all manifest themselves as radio pulsars. Independent evidence is
mounting that a significant fraction of young neutron stars have
properties very different from Crab-like radio pulsars; just how large that
fraction has yet to be determined, as is the cause of the diversity. There
are three classes of unusual high energy sources have been argued to be
young, isolated neutron stars namely AXPs, SGRs and Quiescent Neutron
Stars. Two of them have been summarized here.

Anomalous X-Ray Pulsars (AXPs): The properties of AXPs can be

summarized as follows: they exhibit X-ray pulsations in the range ~5–12
s; they have pulsed X-ray luminosities in the range ~ 1034-1035 erg/s; they
spin down regularly within the limited timing observations available;
their X-ray luminosities are much greater than their ˙E’s; their X-ray
spectra are characterized by thermal emission with kT ~ 0.4 keV, with
evidence for a hard component; and they are in the Galactic Plane.
Currently there are 5 confirmed AXPs and one strong AXP candidate (see
Table). Of these 6 sources, 3 lie at the apparent centers of SNRs:
1E2259+586 in CTB 109, 1E 1841−045 in Kes 73 (), and
AXJ1845−0258 in G29.6+0.1. The association of these objects with
SNRs is arguably the most compelling reason to believe they are isolated
neutron stars. The leading models explaining their large X-ray luminosity
invoke the large stellar magnetic field as inferred from the spin down
(hence the name “magnetars”), either using field decay enhanced thermal
emission.

14
Soft Gamma Repeaters (SGRs): SGRs, of which 4 are known, are
sources that occasionally and suddenly emit bursts of soft γ-rays having
super-Eddington luminosities. That 3 of them lie in the Galactic Plane,
and the 4th is in the LMC, argues that they are a young population. The
detection of AXP-like X-ray pulsations from two of these sources, with
evidence for pulses from the other two, also argues strongly that they are
isolated neutron stars. Their burst properties and observed spin-down are
well explained in the magnetar model .The association between SGR
0526−66 and the SNR N49 in the LMC first suggested the SGRs might
be young neutron stars; however since then, the SGR/SNR association
picture has grown a bit murky. First, SGR 0526−66 is located near the
edge of the N49 shell; this is problematic as it requires a very high
transverse velocity (vt > 1000 km/s) for the SGR. SGR 1806−20 has been
suggested to be associated with the plerionic radio nebula G10.0−0.3,
although a recent relocalization of the γ-ray source calls the association
into question. SGR 1900+14 has been associated with SNR G42.8+0.6,
however the γ -ray source lies well outside the shell, demanding a
distressing vt > 3000 km/s. Smith et al. (1999) suggest that the newly

15
discovered SGR 1627−41 may be associated with the shell SNR
G337.0−0.1; the large SGR positional uncertainty precludes a firm
conclusion.

The Crab Nebula has always been considered the prototype of the
plerionic class. The discovery of its twin 0540-69 in the LMC seemed to
confirm this. However in the mean time a rather numerous class of
plerionic objects have been identified which have no observable pulsars,
radio spectra generally flatter still than the Crab, frequently breaks at
relatively low frequencies, and rather steep mean spectra between radio
and X-ray wavelengths. They would presumably be powered by short
lived pulsars with either very small braking indices or they would
undergo some “phase change” following which the acceleration of
relativistic particles is drastically reduced.

Summary

Reviewing, the pulsar/SNR associations are one of the most

intriguing parts of astrophysics with many mysteries still remaining
unsolved. The Crab nebula must be very rare even among pulsar-driven
plerions because only in rare cases when the initial period of pulsar is
~20ms and its magnetic field ~1012 G will the plerion be as bright and as
long lived as the Crab nebula. (Srinivasan.G 1984) the lack of pulsar
detections in shell SNRs makes it very unlikely that they contain young
fast pulsars. However the possibility of them having a class of young
pulsars with low magnetic fields and slow spin rates (P≥ 0.7s) cannot be
ruled out. (Narayan, Schaudt 1988)
Although a large number of pulsars and SNRs have been detected,
the small number of association between pulsars and supernovae as

16
against a much higher number predicted by theory is striking. As for the
case of age discrepancies in link-ups, more elaborate models like the one
by Marsden et al (2001) may resolve the prevailing differences up to
some extent
.
References
1. Chevalier.R.A: astro-ph/0201295 v1 17 Jan 2002

2. Gaensler.B.M and Jhonston.S, 275, L73-L75 (1995)

3. Lyne.A.G, Anderson.B, Salter.M.J MNRAS (1982)201,503-520

4. Kaspi.V.M astro-ph/9803026 v1 3 Mar 1998

5. Kaspi.V.M astro-ph/9912284 v1 14 Dec 1999
6. Marsden.D, Lingenfelter..R.E, Rothschild.R.E, astro-ph/0102049

v1 2 Feb 2001
7. Narayan.R, Schaudt.K.J The Astrophysical Journal, 325:L43-L46,
1988 Feb 15
8. Pacini.F: (1985) Supernovae, their progenitors and Remnants Eds

G.Srinivasan & V.Radhakrishnan, pp. 75-83

9. Srinivasan.G, Bhattacharya.D & Dwarakanath.K.S J.Astrophys.

Astr. (1984)5,403-423
10.Srinivasan.G: (1985) Supernovae, their progenitors and Remnants
Eds G.Srinivasan & V.Radhakrishnan, pp. 105-117
11.van der Swaluw.E, Achterberg.A, Gallant.Y.A, Downes.T.P &
Keppens.R Astronomy & Astrophysics manuscript no. aah3465
12. Woltjer.L, Salvati.M, Pacini.F and Bandiera.R Astron. Astrophys.,

325, 295-299 (1997)

17