1: %%
2: %% Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
3: %%
4: %% Modified 2005 December 5
5: %%
6: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
7: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
8:
9: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
10: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
11: %% any data that comes before this command.
12:
13: %% The command below calls the preprint style
14: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
15: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
16: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
17: %%
18: %%\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
19:
20: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
21:
22: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
23:
24: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
25:
26: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
27:
28: %% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
29:
30: %%\documentclass{emulateapj}
31:
32: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
33: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
34: %% use the longabstract style option.
35:
36: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
37:
38: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
39: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
40: %% the \begin{document} command.
41: %%
42: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
43: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
44: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
45: %% for information.
46:
47: %\newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
48: %\newcommand{\myemail}{skywalker@galaxy.far.far.away}
49:
50: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
51:
52: %\slugcomment{Not to appear in Nonlearned J., 45.}
53:
54: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
55: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
56: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
57: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
58: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
59: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
60:
61: \shorttitle{The variable PWN of PSR B0540-69}
62: \shortauthors{A.De Luca et al.}
63:
64: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
65: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
66:
67: \begin{document}
68:
69: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
70: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
71: %% you desire.
72:
73: \title{HST multi-epoch imaging of the PSR B0540-69 system unveils
74: a highly dynamic synchrotron
75: nebula.\footnote{Based on observations with the NASA/ESA
76: Hubble Space Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science
77: Institute, which is operated by AURA, Inc. under contract No.
78: NAS 5-26555.}}
79:
80: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
81: %% author and affiliation information.
82: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
83: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
84: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
85: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
86:
87: \author{A. De Luca}
88: %\altaffilmark{1,2,3} and Ivan R. King\altaffilmark{1}}
89: \affil{INAF - Istituto di Astrofisica Spaziale e Fisica Cosmica,
90: Via Bassini 15, I-20133 Milano, Italy}
91: \email{deluca@iasf-milano.inaf.it}
92: \and
93: \author{R.P. Mignani}
94: \affil{University College London, Mullard Space Science Laboratory, Holmbury St. Mary, Dorking, Surrey, RH5 6NT United Kingdom}
95: %\email{rm2@mssl.ucl.ac.uk}
96: %\email{aastex-help@aas.org}
97: \and
98: \author{P.A. Caraveo}
99: \affil{INAF - Istituto di Astrofisica Spaziale e Fisica Cosmica,
100: Via Bassini 15, I-20133 Milano, Italy}
101: %\email{pat@iasf-milano.inaf.it}
102: \and
103: \author{G.F. Bignami\altaffilmark{1}}
104: \affil{Agenzia Spaziale Italiana, Via Liegi 26, I-00198 Roma, Italy}
105: %\email{gfb@iasf-milano.inaf.it}
106: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
107: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
108: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
109: %% affiliation.
110: \altaffiltext{1}{Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia, Via Luino 4, 27100
111: Pavia, Italy}
112: %\altaffiltext{2}{INAF - Istituto di
113: %Astrofisica Spaziale e Fisica Cosmica di Milano,
114: %Via Bassini 15, I-20133 Milano, Italy}
115: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
116: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
117: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
118: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
119: %% editorial office after submission.
120:
121: \begin{abstract}
122: PSR B0540-69 is the Crab twin in the Large Magellanic Cloud. Age,
123: energetic and overall behaviour of the two pulsars are very
124: similar. The same is true for the general appearance of their pulsar
125: wind nebulae (PWNe).
126: Analysis of Hubble Space Telescope images spanning 10 years
127: unveiled significant variability in the PWN surrounding PSR B0540-69,
128: with a hot spot moving at $\sim0.04$c. Such behaviour, reminiscent of the
129: variability observed in the Crab nebula along the counter-jet
130: direction, may suggest an alternative scenario for the geometry of the
131: system. The same data were used to assess the pulsar proper motion.
132: %tentatively reported at $\sim1200$ km s$^{-1}$. Our analysis does not confirm
133: %the earlier measurement. We set
134: The null displacement recorded over 10 y allowed us to set
135: a $3\sigma$ upper limit of 290 km s$^{-1}$ to the pulsar velocity.
136: %First detected in the optical, the PSR B0540-69
137: %PWN was imaged in X-rays by Chandra which yielded evidence for
138: %possible Crab-like structures, such as an equatorial torus and a
139: %jet-counterjet system. Recently, a tentative measurement
140: %with the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) hinted at a
141: %proper motion
142: %possibly aligned with the axis of the putative pulsar jet, as well as
143: %at a remarkably high pulsar velocity ($\sim1200$ km s$^{-1}$). We have
144: %used an extended HST dataset to assess the pulsar proper motion on a
145: %time span of $\gtrsim$ 10 years and to study the PWN evolution. We
146: %could not find evidence for a significant proper motion, setting a
147: %$3\sigma$ upper limit of 290 km s$^{-1}$ on the pulsar velocity.
148: %However, we found unambiguous evidence of a highly variable feature
149: %lying along the putative PWN torus.
150: \end{abstract}
151:
152: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
153: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
154: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
155: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
156:
157: \keywords{stars: neutron --- pulsars: individual (PSR B0540-69)}
158:
159: %% From the front matter, we move on to the body of the paper.
160: %% In the first two sections, notice the use of the natbib \citep
161: %% and \citet commands to identify citations. The citations are
162: %% tied to the reference list via symbolic KEYs. The KEY corresponds
163: %% to the KEY in the \bibitem in the reference list below. We have
164: %% chosen the first three characters of the first author's name plus
165: %% the last two numeral of the year of publication as our KEY for
166: %% each reference.
167:
168:
169: %% Authors who wish to have the most important objects in their paper
170: %% linked in the electronic edition to a data center may do so by tagging
171: %% their objects with \objectname{} or \object{}. Each macro takes the
172: %% object name as its required argument. The optional, square-bracket
173: %% argument should be used in cases where the data center identification
174: %% differs from what is to be printed in the paper. The text appearing
175: %% in curly braces is what will appear in print in the published paper.
176: %% If the object name is recognized by the data centers, it will be linked
177: %% in the electronic edition to the object data available at the data centers
178: %%
179: %% Note that for sources with brackets in their names, e.g. [WEG2004] 14h-090,
180: %% the brackets must be escaped with backslashes when used in the first
181: %% square-bracket argument, for instance, \object[\[WEG2004\] 14h-090]{90}).
182: %% Otherwise, LaTeX will issue an error.
183:
184: \section{Introduction}
185:
186: PSR B0540-69 in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) is one of the
187: youngest pulsars known to date\footnote{see
188: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/research/pulsar/psrcat/} (characteristic age
189: $\tau \sim 1600$ years) and one of the very few first observed at
190: wavelengths other than radio. It was discovered in X-rays by the {\it
191: Einstein Observatory} \citep{seward84}, soon detected to pulsate in
192: the optical \citep{middleditch85}, but detected in radio only 10 years
193: later \citep{manchester93}. PSR B0540-69 is a fast ($\sim50$ ms),
194: classical pulsar with a rotational energy loss very similar to that of
195: the Crab ($\sim1.5\times10^{38}$ erg s$^{-1}$). Thus, the detection
196: of a polarized plerion-like structure \citep{chanan90} came as no
197: surprise, making it the most Crab-like of the Crab-like remnants.
198: %However, at
199: %variance with the classical plerions, PSR 0540-69 could not
200: %rely on the power of radio astronomy, the pulsar itself being
201: %detected in radio only 10 years after the discovery
202: %\citep{manchester93}.
203:
204: %The distance to the LMC, together with the limitation of the
205: %southern emisphere radio interpherometry, gave way to optical
206: %astronomy as the only way to study the pulsar and its SNR.
207: With the first high resolution optical images of the field
208: \citep{caraveo92} it was possible to identify the pulsar
209: optical counterpart (V $\sim$ 22.6),
210: disentangling it from the surrounding structured plerion.
211: This picture was confirmed by a snapshot Hubble Space Telescope (HST)
212: observation \citep{caraveo98} which clearly resolved, within $\sim4''$
213: from the pulsar, the plerion, elongated in the northeast-southwest
214: direction.
215: %The Chandra X-ray Observatory observed the
216: %supernova remnant SNR0540-69 for 20 ksec on August $31^{th}$
217: %during the calibration phase of the High Resolution Camera (HRC;
218: %Murray et al. 1997). These data have been used by
219:
220: Using early Chandra data, \citet{gotthelf00} and \citet{kaaret01}
221: performed a morphological study of the plerion in the X-ray band and
222: found a noticeable
223: %As remarked by
224: %\citet{gotthelf00}, when the different distance factor is taken into
225: %account, PSR 0540-69 plerion is surprisingly similar to the one
226: similarity (accounting for different distance) with the Crab
227: pulsar-wind nebula (PWN).
228: %Subtracting the pulsar contribution to the overall plerion
229: %emission,
230: Furthermore, \citet{gotthelf00} unveiled the presence of a brighter
231: PWN region south-west of the pulsar. Somehow in analogy with the Crab
232: case, they suggested such region to belong to a torus around the
233: source, since it appears perpendicular to a much fainter structure
234: protruding from the pulsar and tentatively identified as a jet.
235: %While such structures stand out clearly in the Crab
236: %Chandra data, the case of PSR B0540-69 is less compelling since the
237: %quality of the image is not good enough to clearly recognize
238: %definite structures.
239:
240: \citet{caraveo00} performed a multiwavelength analysis of the PSR
241: B0540-69 PWN morphology by superimposing Chandra and HST images,
242: finding
243: % and ESO/VLT polarimetric images.
244: a good correlation between the optical and X-ray structures with the
245: PWN emission enhanced in both cases SW of the pulsar, i.e. along the
246: putative torus proposed by \citet{gotthelf00}.
247: %while a somewhat different morphology was apparent in the
248: %polarimetric ground-based, lower-resolution images, where
249: %a maximum was found close to the edges
250: %of the elongated plerion structure.
251:
252: More recently, detailed studies of the system, based on both narrow
253: and wide-band HST observations \citep{serafimovich04,morse06}, further
254: strenghtened the similarity with the Crab owing to the presence of
255: a cage of filamentary ejecta possibly originating, at least in part,
256: in a pre-supernova mass ejection phase \citep[][]{caraveo98}. The
257: complex interaction between the PWN and such envelope is dominating
258: the plerion multiwavelength morphology,
259: %\citet{serafimovich04} pointed out that also the asymmetry
260: %along the major axis of the possible PWN torus (which {\em is not}
261: %similar to the Crab case) is possibly linked to a large asymmetry
262: %of the surrounding ejecta.
263: %%Such a picture of the system was recently
264: as confirmed by \citet{petre07}, based on the analysis of a deep
265: Chandra observations.
266:
267: Interestingly, \citet{serafimovich04}, using two HST images taken
268: $\sim$ 4 years apart, reported a tentative pulsar proper motion
269: measurement of $4.9\pm2.3$ mas y$^{-1}$ (for a pulsar projected
270: velocity of $1190\pm560$ km s$^{-1}$), aligned with the putative
271: southern jet of the PWN. This would make PSR B0540-69 the third
272: pulsar, after the Crab \citep{caraveo99,ng06} and Vela \citep{caraveo01,dodson03} pulsars, with
273: a proper motion aligned with its PWN jet and, possibly, with the spin
274: axis, which would have important consequences for pulsar kick models
275: as well for the studies of the pulsar/PWN interactions.
276:
277: In this Letter, we report the results of our analysis of the extended
278: PSR B0540-69 HST archived dataset
279: %%, performed in 2005 and available
280: %%in the public HST archive. The new data
281: which allowed us to study possible morphological changes
282: in the PSR B0540-69 PWN
283: and to assess the pulsar proper motion over a longer time
284: baseline.
285: %%more than double with respect
286: %%to the one used by \citet{serafimovich04}
287:
288:
289: %Since the Crab (as well as other PWNe) is a highly dynamic system,
290: %we have also used HST multi-epoch data to
291: %study possible morphological changes in the PWN of PSR B0540-69.
292:
293: %\section{The proper motion of PSR B0540-69}
294: \section{HST data analysis and results}
295: \label{dataanalysis}
296:
297: Recent HST observations of PSR B0540-69 were performed on 2005, November
298: 15$^{th}$ with the Wide Field and Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2), using
299: the wide band F555W (480 s) and the medium band F547M (1040
300: s) filters. Such data add up to WFPC2 observations collected in
301: 1995 and in 1999 with several different filters \citep[see][for a log
302: of the observations]{morse06}.
303: In order to study the PWN variability as well as the
304: pulsar proper motion an accurate superposition of
305: multi-epoch data is required.
306: %with an accurate relative astrometric study,
307: We decided as a
308: first step to use only the observations performed using the F555W
309: filter, having a better signal to noise. Moreover,
310: %% for which
311: %%. Indeed, for such
312: %%filter
313: the significant WFPC2 geometric distortion, crucial for a correct
314: proper motion measurement, has been accurately mapped for the
315: F555W filter
316: \citep{anderson03}.
317: %%, which is
318: %%crucial for a correct proper motion measurement.
319: %Owing to the wavelength dependence of the WFPC2 geometric distortion,
320: %the use of different filters
321: %would likely introduce systematics, hampering
322: %the measurement of tiny angular displacements of the target.
323: The selected dataset, which also provides a time baseline of $\gtrsim$
324: 10 years, includes the recent 2005 observation, as well as the
325: original 1995, October 19$^{th}$ (600 s) one \citep[][]{caraveo98}.
326: %The time span between the two observations is of 10.1 y.
327: %The two selected images are separated by a time span of more
328: %than 10 y, more than doubling the time baseline used
329: %by \citet{serafimovich04}.
330:
331: The data were retrieved from the ST-ECF
332: %\footnote{www.stecf.org/archive/}
333: archive and reprocessed
334: on-the-fly using the most appropriate reference files. Data reduction
335: and analysis was performed using the IRAF/STSDAS, Midas and FTOOLS
336: packages. Individual frames collected during each visit were combined
337: to remove cosmic rays hits, and averaged.
338: %In order to superimpose the
339: %frames, we used the {\em association} information (relative shifts
340: %between different frames) provided by the ST-ECF archive group.
341: %We have also independently recomputed such shifts, using an approach
342: %similar to the one described below for the epoch-to-epoch image
343: %superposition, obtaining almost undistinguishable results.
344: Residual cosmic ray traces were removed using specific algorithms
345: within Midas.
346:
347: In order to
348: %compute the displacement of the pulsar optical
349: %counterpart,
350: register the frames,
351: we followed the procedure we already applied in several
352: previous astrometric works with HST \citep[see
353: e.g.][]{caraveo96,deluca00,mignani00,caraveo01}. A relative reference
354: frame was defined for each image, selecting a sample of good (well
355: resolved, not saturated, not extended, not too close to the CCD
356: border) reference sources. In the crowded field of PSR B0540-69, 85
357: good sources were identified. Their position was evaluated fitting a
358: 2-D gaussian function to their intensity profile, with a resulting
359: uncertainty of 0.02-0.06 pixel per coordinate. The position of the
360: pulsar optical counterpart was evaluated in the same way, with an
361: uncertainty of order 0.03-0.04 pixel per coordinate. The coordinates
362: of the reference stars and of the pulsar were then corrected for the
363: WFPC2 geometric distortion using the mapping of \citet{anderson03}, as
364: well as for the ``34$^{th}$ row'' defect \citep{anderson99}.
365:
366: Next, the 1995 reference grid was assumed as a reference and was
367: aligned along Right Ascension and Declination according to the
368: telescope roll angle. Then, we computed the best plate transformation
369: (accounting for independent shift and scale factor for each axis, as
370: well as for a rotation angle) between the two grids of reference
371: stars. We applied an iterative clipping routine, to discard reference
372: stars yielding larger residuals. After rejecting 15 stars, we
373: obtained a very good frame superposition, with rms uncertainties of
374: 0.06 pixel per coordinate.
375:
376: %\begin{figure}
377: %\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=\textwidth]{displacements.ps}}
378: %\caption{The displacement of the optical counterpart
379: %of PSR B0540-69 between 1995 and 2005 is plotted in red,
380: %together with its error bars.
381: %Residuals on the reference stars coordinates after the
382: %frame superposition are overplotted. Their r.m.s.
383: %represents the frame superposition uncertainty. \label{residuals}}
384: %\end{figure}
385:
386:
387:
388: %\section{Results}
389: \subsection{Proper motion of the pulsar}
390: %The epoch-to-epoch coordinate
391: %transformation
392: %calculated in Sect.~\ref{dataanalysis}
393: %was used
394: %in order to translate
395:
396: The 2005 pulsar position was translated to the 1995 reference
397: frame, to compute the pulsar displacement over the 10.1 year time
398: span. Such a displacement turned out to be of 0.01$\pm$0.09 pixel in
399: R.A. and of 0.02$\pm0.08$ pixel in Dec, i.e. statistically null.
400: %This is shown in
401: %Fig.~\ref{residuals}, where the pulsar displacement is compared to
402: %the residuals on the reference stars' positions after the
403: %coordinate transformation.
404: Using the well calibrated WFPC2 plate scale, we set a $3\sigma$ upper
405: limit to the source proper motion of $\sim1.7$ mas~yr$^{-1}$. At the
406: known pulsar distance (51 kpc), such a limit corresponds to an upper
407: limit to the total pulsar velocity (projected on the plane of the sky)
408: of $\sim410$ km s$^{-1}$.
409:
410: As a further check, we included in our astrometric analysis the WFPC2
411: observations performed through the F547M filter on 2005, November
412: 15$^{th}$ and on 1999, October 17$^{th}$ (800 s). Indeed, the F547M
413: filter (pivot wavelength 5483\AA, $\Delta \lambda=483$\AA \, FWHM) has
414: a narrower bandpass than the F555W one (pivot wavelength 5439\AA,
415: $\Delta \lambda=1228$\AA \, FWHM), but the pivot wavelength is
416: essentialy the same. Thus, the wavelength dependence of the geometric
417: distortion should not induce any bias when using the correction
418: optimized for the F555W filter. The analysis was performed as above,
419: using the same reference stars. The superposition accuracy to the 1995
420: reference grid turned out to be accurate within $\sim0.08$ pixels per
421: coordinate, (i.e. only slightly less accurate than for the
422: superposition of the F555W data),
423: %%Inspection of the residuals to the reference stars positions did not show
424: with no evidence for systematic effects. Also in this case, no
425: significant displacement was measured for the pulsar. Combining
426: F555W and F547M data yields
427: %%Using F555W and F547M data together, we may set a
428: a tighter $3\sigma$ proper motion upper limit of 1.2 mas y$^{-1}$,
429: corresponding to a projected velocity of $\sim$ 290 km s$^{-1}$.
430: Such a limit, computed using a well-tested, robust algorithm,
431: supersedes the result by \citet{serafimovich04}, based on a much
432: shorter time baseline.
433: %and possibly affected by systematic effects and by
434: %to the use of images collected with different filters, as well as
435: %the use of a smaller set of reference stars.
436:
437:
438:
439: \subsection{Variability of the PWN}
440:
441: The epoch-to-epoch coordinate transformation was then used to rebin
442: and superimpose the images, in order to search for possible variations
443: of the PWN morphology. The resulting images were not corrected for
444: the geometric distortion. However, we note that at the PWN position,
445: imaged at the center of the PC chip, the maximum distorsion correction
446: is $\sim0.05$ pixel per coordinate \citep{anderson03}, i.e. small
447: enough for our goals.
448: %In order to search for possible variations in the PWN morphology,
449: %we used the images collected through the filters F555W and F547M.
450: %A different approach was used with respect to Sect.~\ref{dataanalysis}.
451: %Individual frames collected at each epoch were coadded using the
452: %{\em Multidrizzle} software to produce cosmic-ray free images corrected
453: %for the geometric distortion.
454:
455: As a first step, we checked consistency of photometry between the
456: observations performed through the same filter at different epochs.
457: To this aim, we compared the count rates from 85 reference stars using
458: simple aperture photometry. The 2005 F555W observations yield
459: systematically lower count rates, with an average 2005--to--1995 ratio
460: of 0.86 (0.07 rms), while the 2005--to--1999 ratio for the F547M
461: observations is 0.90 (0.08 rms). Such values were used to
462: re-normalize the 2005 images.
463:
464: %\begin{figure}
465: %\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=\textwidth]{proj-2005-1995.ps}}
466: %\caption{Two-epoch surface brightness profile for the PWN
467: %computed along a 12 pixel wide strip
468: %oriented along the direction connecting the pulsar and the hot spot.
469: %The pulsar, the PWN as well as the hot spot are clearly seen.
470: %The displacement ($10.0\pm0.4$ pixels) of the hot spot between 1995 and 2005
471: %is apparent. \label{1995vs2005prof}}
472: %\end{figure}
473:
474: We started using the 1995 and 2005 F555W images, characterized by a better
475: signal-to-noise.
476: A striking change in the brightest portion of the PWN is immediately
477: apparent when comparing the two images. As noticed by
478: \citet{caraveo00}
479: %%after first HST imaging of the PSR B0540-69 system,
480: a definite surface brightness maximum is seen in the PWN, South-West
481: to the pulsar optical counterpart. Such a feature, which we will call
482: the ``hot spot'', is resolved (7.2 pixel FWHM, or
483: %$\sim2.5 \times 10^{17}$ cm
484: 0.081 pc
485: at the LMC distance) and lies $\sim1\farcs1$ away from the
486: pulsar
487: %($\sim8.5\times10^{17}$ cm)
488: (0.27 pc)
489: in the 1995 image. Inspection of
490: the 2005 image shows that the hot spot is displaced by $\sim0\farcs5$
491: in the SW direction with respect to its location in 1995. This is
492: apparent from Fig.~\ref{1995vs2005raw}, where the two images
493: %collected in 1995 and in 2005
494: are compared.
495: %This
496: %is even more clear in the PWN brightness
497: %profile computed on a strip aligned with the direction
498: %of the hot spot apparent displacement, shown in Fig~\ref{1995vs2005prof}.
499: %The hot spot, easily recognizable as a definite enhancement
500: %in both the 1995 and in the 2005 PWN profiles,
501: Fitting a gaussian function to the hot spot profile, we estimated that
502: the feature moved by $0\farcs46\pm0\farcs02$, or
503: %$\sim3.5\times10^{17}$ cm
504: 0.11 pc
505: at the LMC distance, corresponding to a
506: velocity of $\sim0.037$c assuming simple linear motion.
507:
508: The apparent displacement of the hot spot corresponds to a very large
509: local variation in the PWN surface brightness. Using a $8\times8$
510: pixel aperture ($\sim0\farcs36\times0\farcs36$) centered on the 1995
511: hot spot position, the count rate is seen to decrease by $25\pm2$\%
512: between 1995 and 2005 (the uncertainty does not account for systematic
513: errors in the image renormalization). We have computed the ratio of
514: the 2005 to the 1995 surface brightness using the same $8\times8$
515: pixel aperture, selecting 200 positions to cover the whole PWN (within
516: $\sim2\farcs5$ from the pulsar). Such an exercise proved that the
517: region of the hot spot is by far the most active part of the PWN. The
518: observed r.m.s. variability on the above 200 PWN regions is
519: $\sim8$\%, which reduces to $\sim4$\% when considering only the
520: brightest 100 regions.
521: %Such results are apparent in Fig.\ref{ratio},
522: %where the ratio of the 2005 to the 1995 smoothed images is shown.
523: Of
524: course, the possible systematics involved in the 2005 to 1995
525: renormalization do not affect such a conclusion.
526:
527: %\begin{figure}
528: %\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=0,width=\textwidth]{ratio-contours.eps}}
529: %\caption{Ratio of the 2005 F555W image to the
530: %1995 F555W one, after adaptive smoothing (see caption to
531: %Fig.~\ref{multiepoch}).
532: %Isophotal contours
533: %drawn from the 1995 image (corresponding to 99\%, 90\%, 80\%, 70\%,
534: %60\%, 55\%, 50\%, 45\% of the maximum surface brightness of the PWN)
535: %are overplotted, to show
536: %the structure of the PWN (the hot spot is seen as
537: %the maximum SW of the pulsar). Apart from residuals at the
538: %position of bright stars, the largest variations in the ratio are
539: %observed SW of the pulsar in the region of the hot spot. \label{ratio}}
540: %\end{figure}
541:
542:
543: %However, relying on the comparison
544: %of two observations separated by
545: %a 10 year time span, we cannot exclude that the
546: %temporal variation of the PWN be more complex.
547: %than the assumed pure outward motion.
548:
549: %\begin{figure}
550: %\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=\textwidth]{pro-555-547.ps}}
551: %\caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{1995vs2005prof}, to compare
552: %the PWN profile as observed in 2005
553: %in the F555W filter and in the F547M filter.
554: %Although at lower significance, the
555: %hot spot is clearly detected also in the F547M filter. \label{2005vs2005prof}}
556: %\end{figure}
557:
558: %Before using the 1999 F547M image to
559: %study the hot spot behaviour at an intermediate epoch,
560: %an investigation of its emission spectrum is required.
561: %In order to investigate the PWN variability in more detail,
562: %we retrieved from the public HST archive - and analysed
563: %following the same steps described in Sect.~\ref{dataanalysis} -
564: %other HST WFPC2 images collected in 1999
565: %(800 s exposure, 2 frames) and in 2005 (1040 s exposure, 4 frames)
566: %through the F547M filter
567: %\citep[see also][]{serafimovich04,morse06}.
568: %The F547M filter (pivot wavelength 5483\AA, $\Delta \lambda=483$\AA \, FWHM)
569: %has a narrower bandpass than the F555W one (pivot wavelength 5439\AA,
570: %$\Delta \lambda=1228$\AA \, FWHM),
571: %but the pivot wavelength is essentialy the same.
572: %we considered the two F547M images.
573: %As noted by \citet{serafimovich04}, the F555W filter is possibly
574: %background (and foreground) contaminated, since its
575: %bandpass includes
576: %the energies of several possibly bright emission lines
577: %from the SNR, as well as from the LMC, while
578: %the F547M filter should sample pure
579: %continuum emission from the PWN.
580: %Comparison of images collected in 2005
581: %through the two different filters
582: %shows an overall similarity in the PWN morphology.
583: The hot spot is clearly seen
584: in the image collected in 2005 with the F547M filter,
585: at a position consistent with
586: the one apparent in the F555W filter.
587: %This is apparent
588: %from the brightness profiles shown in Fig.~\ref{2005vs2005prof}.
589: %Thus, the filters F547M, F555W and F791W sample
590: %(in slightly different wavelength ranges)
591: %the same ``continuum'' emission from the PWN.
592: %Although the use of different bandpasses may introduce some bias,
593: The ratio of the 2005 F547M and F555W images does not show any
594: significant feature at the hot spot position, which suggests the hot
595: spot emission to be dominated by continuum. Indeed, considering a 4
596: pixel radius aperture centered at the hot spot, we estimated the ratio
597: of the observed background-subtracted count rates to be
598: $0.4\pm0.1$. This is fully consistent with an expected value of 0.45,
599: evaluated with the WFPC2
600: ETC\footnote{http://www.stsci.edu/hst/wfpc2/software/}, assuming
601: %pure continuum emission with
602: a power-law spectrum of spectral index
603: $\alpha=$1.6\footnote{\citet{serafimovich04} in their
604: spatially-resolved study of the PWN spectrum used a region (``area
605: 2'') encompassing the hot spot. Emission from such a region, largely
606: contributed by the hot spot, is consistent with a power law of
607: spectral index $1.6\pm0.4$.}.
608:
609: Thus, we can use the 1999 F547M image \citep[see Fig.1 of
610: ][]{serafimovich04} to constrain the position of the hot spot at a
611: third epoch.
612: %The PWN evolution in such region turns out
613: %to be rather complex.
614: %The results are rather complicated.
615: Results are shown in Fig.~\ref{multiepoch}.
616: %In such figure the 1995 image is shown after
617: %adaptive smoothing to highlight the brightest diffuse structures.
618: %Isophotal contours corresponding to 100\%, 95\% and 90\% of
619: %the maximum of the PWN surface brightness (such a maximum
620: %coincides with the hot spot) are plotted in green,
621: %clearly marking the hot spot peak as well as the field stars.
622: %Contours computed for the 1999 and 2005 images using the same criteria
623: %have been overplotted.
624: The hot spot peak in 1999 lies $\sim0\farcs38$ West of its 1995
625: position, while in 2005 it is seen $\sim0\farcs33$ South of its 1999
626: position. The hot spot morphology is also seen to vary, the feature
627: being more extended in 1999.
628: % (although the use of different bandpasses
629: %may introduce some bias).
630: Such results argue against a simple outward
631: motion of the feature and prove a dramatic variability of the PWN in
632: the SW region.
633:
634: %\section{Discussion}
635:
636: %Multi-epoch HST imaging unveiled dramatic changes in the morphology of
637: %the PWN powered by PSR B0540-69. PWNe are known to be highly dynamic
638: %systems. Large morphological changes have been observed in a very
639: %small sample of bright objects. The Crab Nebula shows a large
640: %variability in almost all of its complex features, from radio to
641: %X-rays \citep{hester95,hester02,bietenholz04}, on time scales as short
642: %as a few days. The PWNe of Vela \citep{pavlov01,pavlov03} as well as
643: %of PSR B1509-58 \citep{delaney05} have also been discovered to undergo
644: %large changes, associated to pulsar jet/counterjet structures, thanks
645: %to Chandra X-ray observations.
646: %Changes in the optical morphology of the very bright Crab Nebula have
647: %been discovered long time ago \citep{lampland21}; in recent years,
648: %the large variability in almost all of the complex features of
649: %the Crab has been detected and studied in detail from radio to X-rays
650: %\citep{hester95,hester02,bietenholz04}, on time scales as short as a few days.
651: %Variability, however, has been observed only in a few other cases.
652: %In soft X-rays, where PWNe are most easily observed,
653: %Chandra sharp angular resolution
654: %allowed to detect large changes (associated to pulsar jet/counterjet
655: %structures) in a couple of bright objects, such as
656: %Vela \citep{pavlov01,pavlov03} as well as PSR B1509-58 \citep{delaney05}.
657: %At optical wavelengths, where PWN are difficult targets (the Crab and
658: %PSR B0540-69 are still the only detected systems), PSR B0540-69 now
659: %joins the Crab as a variable PWN, and stands out as the first observed
660: %variable extra-galactic PWN at any wavelength.
661:
662: %The mechanisms powering the complex features in PWNe, as well as their
663: %variations, are not fully understood in their details. We will proceed
664: %here in a phenomenological comparison of the case of PSR B0540-69 with
665: %its twin, the Crab.
666: %Since the only two PWNe detected at optical wavelengths appear to be variable,
667: %it seems natural to compare in some detail their phenomenology.
668: The detection of large time variability in the PWN of PSR B0540-69
669: makes its similarity with the Crab Nebula even more compelling.
670: Thus, it seems natural to compare in some detail the optical phenomenology
671: of the two systems.
672: The hot spot in the PSR B0540-69 PWN is
673: definitely larger and more distant from the pulsar than the bright,
674: highly variable ``wisps'' seen in the Crab Nebula \citep{hester95,hester02}.
675: It is somewhat reminiscent (as for physical
676: dimensions, distance to the pulsar and temporal behaviour) of a large,
677: roughly arc-shaped structure in the outer Crab nebula, first noticed
678: in the optical by \citet{hester95} because of its outstanding
679: variability on a time scale of 6 years (see their Figure 12d).
680: %, comparing observations performed in 1988 and in 1994).
681: Such a feature is also prominent and highly variable at radio
682: wavelengths \citep[see Fig.2 of][]{bietenholz04}. While the nature of
683: such feature is not understood,
684: %- as well as the physical processes driving its evolution - are
685: %are still unknown,
686: %. The structure, in any case,
687: it is almost certainly related to energy outflows in the
688: counter-jet channel of the Crab PWN \citep{bietenholz04}. Complex
689: interactions between the PWN and the surrounding ejecta filaments are
690: also seen in such a region, roughly corresponding to the inner portion
691: of the Norteastern ``bay'' \citep{michel91,hester95}. We retrieved
692: and inspected HST/WFPC2 images of the Crab collected in 1994 and in
693: 2001 through the F547M filter. We found the outer feature to show a
694: variability consistent to the one reported by \citet{hester95},
695: corresponding to a local surface brightness variation of order 25\%,
696: very similar to the hot spot of PSR B0540-69. We also note that,
697: rescaled at the LMC distance, the variability in the inner nebula
698: (wisps and torus) would be difficult to detect, while the variability
699: of the outer structure would be outstanding.
700:
701: Coming back to PSR B0540-69, the hot spot lies in the region of the
702: PWN tentatively identified as an equatorial torus by
703: \citet{gotthelf00}. The large variability of the feature, coupled to
704: the PWN asymmetry with respect to the pulsar position, as well as the
705: comparison with the case of the Crab, may point to an alternative
706: scenario in which the northeast-southwest axis corresponds to the
707: direction of a pulsar jet/counterjet. This may also be supported by
708: the observation that other PWNe do show (in X-rays) the largest
709: variability along the jet direction, with apparent complex motion of
710: bright blobs, although on shorter time scales \citep[e.g. for PSR
711: B1509-58 and Vela,][]{delaney05,pavlov03} as well as on a smaller
712: physical scale \citep[in Vela,][]{pavlov03}. However, no firm
713: conclusions may be drawn based on current data.
714:
715: \section{Conclusions}
716: With the discovery of significant variations in its PWN emission,
717: PSR B0540-69 shares one more characteristic with the Crab pulsar.
718: Moreover, our multi-epoch study of PSR B0540-69 yielded
719: %, as a byproduct,
720: a new assessment of the pulsar proper motion, setting an upper limit of
721: 290 km s$^{-1}$.
722:
723: Upcoming WFPC2 observations of PSR B0540-69 will allow us to monitor the PWN
724: morphology, while lowering the measurable velocity to $\sim220$ km s$^{-1}$.
725: %Using multi-epoch HST imaging, we have revisited the proper motion of
726: %PSR B0540-69, setting an upper limit of 290 km s$^{-1}$ to the pulsar
727: %velocity, and we have detected a dramatic variability in its PWN. The
728: %large distance to the LMC will be a major problem in measuring the
729: %proper motion of the optical counterpart of PSR B0540-69. New WFPC2
730: %observations will be performed in 2007 (P.I. R. Mignani). With a
731: %simple simulation, we evaluated that such new data will allow us to
732: %achieve a $3\sigma$ sensitivity of $\sim220$ km s$^{-1}$ on the pulsar
733: %velocity. A velocity lower than 220 km s$^{-1}$ is far from unusual
734: %for a pulsar. Thus, we cannot expect to get in the near future a
735: %significant measurement of the proper motion of PSR B0540-69 using
736: %HST.
737: The new HST data will be very important
738: %in order to monitor the
739: %morphological evolution of the PWN and thus
740: to shed light on the geometry and dynamic of the system.
741: %Simultaneous, narrow-band observations could also unveil the interactions
742: %between the PWN and the surrounding filamentary cage of ejecta.
743: High-resolution HST polarimetric mode observations, to be collected in
744: the same program, will offer unvaluable clues in order to understand the
745: overall structure of the PWN and its complex interaction with the cage
746: of filamentary ejecta. PSR B0540-69 will possibly become a unique
747: extra-galactic laboratory to study and understand the variability and
748: evolution of young PWN systems.
749:
750: \acknowledgments
751: This work has been partially supported by the Italian Space Agency (ASI)
752: and INAF through contract ASI/INAF I/023/05/0. ADL acknowledges an ASI
753: fellowship.
754:
755: \begin{thebibliography}{}
756: \bibitem[Anderson \& King(2003)]{anderson03} Anderson, J., \& King, I.R.,
757: 2003, PASP 115, 113
758: \bibitem[Anderson \& King(1999)]{anderson99} Anderson, J., \& King, I.R.,
759: 1999, PASP 111, 1095
760: \bibitem[Bietenholz et al.(2004)]{bietenholz04} Bietenholz, M.F., Hester,
761: J.J., Frail, D.A., Bartel, N., 2004, ApJ 615, 794
762: \bibitem[Caraveo et al.(2001)]{caraveo01} Caraveo, P.A., De Luca, A., Mignani,
763: R.P., Bignami, G.F., 2001, ApJ 561, 930
764: \bibitem[Caraveo et al.(2000)]{caraveo00} Caraveo, P.A., Mignani, R.P., De
765: Luca, A., Wagner, S., Bignami, G.F., 2000, in ``A decade of HST science,
766: poster papers'', ed. by Livio M., Noll, K. and Stiavelli., M., Baltimore,
767: ND: Space Telescope Science Institute, p.9, astro-ph/0009035
768: \bibitem[Caraveo \& Mignani(1999)]{caraveo99} Caraveo, P.A., Mignani, R.P.,
769: 1999, A\&A 344, 367
770: \bibitem[Caraveo et al.(1998)]{caraveo98} Caraveo, P.A., Mignani, R.P.,
771: Bignami, G.F., 1998, MmSAI 69, 1061
772: \bibitem[Caraveo et al.(1996)]{caraveo96} Caraveo, P.A., Bignami, G.F.,
773: Mignani, R., Taff, L.G., 1996, ApJ 461, L91
774: \bibitem[Caraveo et al.(1992)]{caraveo92} Caraveo, P.A., Bignami, G.F.,
775: Mereghetti, S., Mombelli, M., 1992, ApJ 395, L103
776: \bibitem[Chanan \& Helfand(1990)]{chanan90} Chanan, G.A., \& Helfand, D.J.,
777: 1990, ApJ 352, 167
778: \bibitem[De Luca et al.(2000)]{deluca00} De Luca, A., Mignani, R.P., Caraveo,
779: P.A., 2000, A\&A 354, 1011
780: \bibitem[Delaney et al.(2006)]{delaney05} Delaney, T., Gaensler, B.M.,
781: Arons, J., Pivovaroff, M.J., 2006, ApJ 640, 929
782: \bibitem[Dodson et al.(2003)]{dodson03} Dodson, R., Legge, D., Reynolds, J.E.,
783: McCulloch, P.M., 2003, ApJ 596, 1137
784: \bibitem[Ebeling et al.(2006)]{ebeling06} Ebeling, H., White, D.A.,
785: Rangarajan, F.V.N., 2006, MNRAS 368, 65
786: \bibitem[Gotthelf \& Wang(2000)]{gotthelf00} Gotthelf, E.V., \& Wang, Q.D.,
787: 2000, ApJ 532, L117
788: \bibitem[Hester et al.(1995)]{hester95} Hester, J.J., Scowen, P.A., Sankrit,
789: R., et al., 1995, ApJ 448, 240
790: \bibitem[Hester et al.(2002)]{hester02} Hester, J.J., Mori, K., Burrows, D.,
791: et al., 2002, ApJ 577, L49
792: \bibitem[Kaaret et al.(2001)]{kaaret01} Kaaret, P., Marshall, H.L., Aldcroft,
793: T.L., et al., 2001, ApJ 546, 1159
794: %\bibitem[Lampland(1921)]{lampland21} Lampland, C.O., 1921, PASP 33, L79
795: \bibitem[Manchester et al.(1993)]{manchester93} Manchester, R.N., Mar, D.P.,
796: Lyne, A.G., Kaspi, V.M., Johnston, S., 1993, ApJ 403, L29
797: \bibitem[Michel et al.(1991)]{michel91} Michel, F.C., Scowen, P.A., Dufour,
798: R.J., 1991, ApJ 368, 463
799: \bibitem[Middleditch \& Pennypacker(1985)]{middleditch85} Middleditch, J., \&
800: Pennypacker, C., 1985, Nature 313, 659
801: \bibitem[Mignani et al.(2000)]{mignani00} Mignani, R.P., De Luca, A., Caraveo,
802: P.A., 2000, ApJ 543, 318
803: \bibitem[Morse et al.(2006)]{morse06} Morse, J.A., Smith, N., Blair,
804: W.P., et al., 2006, ApJ 644, 188
805: \bibitem[Ng \& Romani(2006)]{ng06} Ng, C-Y., Romani, R.W., 2006, ApJ 644, 445
806: %\bibitem[Pavlov et al.(2001)]{pavlov01} Pavlov, G.G., Kargaltsev, O.
807: % Y., Sanwal, D., Garmire, G.P., 2001, ApJ 554, L189
808: \bibitem[Pavlov et al.(2003)]{pavlov03} Pavlov, G.G., Teter, M.A.,
809: Kargaltsev, O., Sanwal, D., 2003, ApJ 591, 1157
810: \bibitem[Petre et al.(2007)]{petre07} Petre, R., Hwang, U., Holt, S.S.,
811: Safi-Harb, S., Williams, R.M., 2007, ApJ 662, 988
812: \bibitem[Serafimovich et al.(2004)]{serafimovich04} Serafimovich, N.I.,
813: Shibanov, Y.A., Lundqvist, P., Sollerman, J., 2004, A\&A 425, 1041
814: \bibitem[Seward et al.(1984)]{seward84} Seward, F.D., Harnden, F.R., Jr,
815: Helfand, D.J., 1984, ApJ 287, L19
816: \end{thebibliography}
817:
818: \clearpage
819:
820: \begin{figure}
821: %\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=0,width=7cm]{1995-raw-ok.ps}\includegraphics[angle=0,width=7cm]{2005-raw-ok.ps}}
822: %\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=0,width=7cm]{f1a.eps}\includegraphics[angle=0,width=7cm]{f1b.eps}}
823: \plottwo{f1a.eps}{f1b.eps}
824: \caption{The field of PSR B0540-69 as observed with
825: HST/WFPC2 through the F555W filter in 1995
826: (600 s) and in 2005 (480 s).
827: Pixel size is 0\farcs0455.
828: The pulsar optical counterpart, as well as the brightest feature
829: of the PWN (the ``Hot Spot'') are marked.
830: A grid (20 pixel spacing, corresponding to 0\farcs91)
831: is overplotted to better visualize the apparent
832: displacement of the ``Hot Spot''. \label{1995vs2005raw}}
833: \end{figure}
834:
835:
836: \clearpage
837:
838: \begin{figure}
839: %\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics[angle=0,width=\textwidth]{f2.eps}}
840: \epsscale{.70}
841: \plotone{f2.eps}
842: \caption{The inner field of PSR B0540-69 as observed
843: in 1995 through the F555W filter is shown, after adaptive
844: gaussian smoothing of the HST/WFPC2 image. The {\em asmooth}
845: algorithm by \citet{ebeling06} has been
846: used, setting the minimum S/N threshold to 10 and using a maximum
847: smoothing kernel of 10 pixels. Isophotal contours to mark
848: the hot spot peak (corresponding to 99\%, 95\% and 99\%
849: of the maximum of the PWN surface brightness) are plotted
850: in white. Contours generated using the same criteria for
851: the 1999 and 2005 images are overplotted. The displacement
852: of the hot spot is apparent. \label{multiepoch}}
853: \end{figure}
854:
855:
856: \end{document}
857:
858: %\bibitem[]{850}
859: %\bibitem[]{851}
860: %\bibitem[]{852}
861: %\bibitem[]{853}
862:
863: \clearpage
864:
865: \begin{figure}
866: \epsscale{.80}
867: \plotone{residuals.eps}
868: \caption{The displacement of the optical counterpart
869: of PSR B0540-69 between 1995 and 2005 is plotted in red,
870: together with its error bars.
871: Residuals on the reference stars coordinates after the
872: frame superposition are overplotted. Their r.m.s.
873: represents the frame superposition uncertainty. \label{residuals}}
874: \end{figure}
875:
876: \clearpage
877:
878: \begin{figure}
879: \epsscale{.80}
880: \plottwo{1995-raw-new-grid.eps}{2005-raw-new-grid.eps}
881: \caption{The field of PSR B0540-69 as observed with
882: HST/WFPC2 through the F555W filter in 1995
883: (600 s exposure) and in 2005 (480 s exposure).
884: Pixel size is 0.0455 arcsec.
885: The pulsar optical counterpart, as well as the brightest feature
886: of the PWN (the ``Hot Spot'') are marked.
887: A grid (20 pixel spacing, corresponding to 0.91 arcsec)
888: is overplotted to better visualize the apparent
889: displacement of the ``Hot Spot''. \label{1995vs2005raw}}
890: \end{figure}
891:
892: \clearpage
893:
894: \begin{figure}
895: \epsscale{.80}
896: \plotone{proj-2005-1995.ps}
897: \caption{Two-epoch surface brightness profile for the PWN
898: computed along a 12 pixel wide strip
899: oriented along the direction connecting the pulsar and the hot spot.
900: The pulsar, the PWN as well as the hot spot are clearly seen.
901: The displacement ($10.0\pm0.4$ pixels) of the hot spot between 1995 and 2005
902: is apparent.
903: \label{1995vs2005prof}}
904: \end{figure}
905:
906: \clearpage
907:
908: \begin{figure}
909: \epsscale{.80}
910: \plotone{pro-555-547.ps}
911: \caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{1995vs2005prof}, to compare
912: the PWN profile as observed in 2005
913: in the F555W filter and in the F547M filter.
914: Although at lower significance, the
915: hot spot is clearly detected also in the F547M filter. \label{2005vs2005prof}}
916: \end{figure}
917:
918: \clearpage
919:
920: \begin{figure}
921: \epsscale{.80}
922: \plotone{smoothed-map-contours.eps}
923: \caption{The inner field of PSR B0540-69 as observed
924: in 1995 through the F555W filter is shown, after adaptive
925: gaussian smoothing of the HST/WFPC2 image. The {\em asmooth}
926: algorithm by \citet{ebeling06} has been
927: used, setting the minimum S/N threshold to 10 and using a maximum
928: smoothing kernel of 10 pixels. Isophotal contours to mark
929: the hot spot peak (corresponding to 100\%, 95\% and 90\%
930: of the maximum of the PWN surface brightness) are plotted
931: in green. Contours generated using the same criteria for
932: the 1999 and 2005 images are overplotted. The displacement
933: of the hot spot is apparent. \label{multiepoch}}
934: \end{figure}
935:
936: %\clearpage
937:
938:
939:
940: \end{document}
941: