1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: % ATCA Crab GP paper: Version 0, RB 09 May 2007 Started TheDraft
3: % ATCA Crab GP paper: Version 1, RB 01 Jun 2007 To Steven/Haydon
4: % ATCA Crab GP paper: Version 2, RB 22 Jun 2007 Complete Version
5: % ATCA Crab GP paper: Version 3, RB 29 Aug 2007 SubmittedVersion
6: % ATCA Crab GP papar: Version 4, RB 25 Oct 2007 Referee Comments
7: % ATCA Crab GP papar: Version 5, RB 03 Dec 2007 Referee Comments
8: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
10: \documentclass[preprint2,a4paper]{aastex}
11: \input{crab.defs}
12: %\input{pb.sty}\begin{figure}[htbp]
13: %\input{psfig.sty}
14: %for the draft version
15: %\documentclass[preprint2,a4paper]{aastex}
16: \usepackage{epsf}
17: %\usepackage{emulateapj5,apjfonts}
18: \usepackage{emulateapj5}
19: \usepackage{onecolfloat5}
20: \shortauthors{Bhat et al.}
21: \shorttitle{Bright Giant Pulses}
22: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
23: % Additional new command definitions for this paper:
24: \def\DM{{\rm DM}}
25: \def\RM{{\rm RM}}
26: \def\SM{{\rm SM}}
27: \def\EM{{\rm EM}}
28: \def\SMxgal{{\rm SM}_{\theta,x}}
29: \def\SMgal{{\rm SM}_{\theta,g}}
30: \def\SMtau{{\rm SM}_{\tau}}
31: \newcommand{\delDM}{\mbox{${\rm \delta DM}$}}
32: \newcommand{\delSM}{\mbox{${\rm \delta SM}$}}
33: \newcommand{\nne}{{\mbox {$n_{\rm e}$}}}
34: \newcommand{\dne}{{\mbox {$\delta n_e$}}}
35: \newcommand{\linn}{{\mbox {$l_{100}$}}}
36: \newcommand{\taudlb}{{\mbox {$\tau_{d,1175}$} }}
37: \newcommand{\taudlbu}{{\mbox {$\tau_{d,1475}$} }}
38: \newcommand{\taudsb}{{\mbox {$\tau_{d,2380}$} }}
39: \newcommand{\taudold}{{\mbox {$\tau_{d,tc93}$}}}
40: \newcommand{\taudnew}{{\mbox {$\tau_{d,ne2001}$}}}
41: \newcommand{\taudmean}{{\mbox {$\langle \tau_{d}\rangle$} }}
42: \newcommand{\cnsq} {{\mbox {$C_n^2$}}}
43: \newcommand{\Wtau}{\mbox{$W_{\tau}$}}
44: \def\smun{{kpc \,\, m^{-20/3}}}
45: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}}
46: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}
47: \newcommand{\etal}{et al.}
48: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
49: \begin{document}
50: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
51: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
52: \twocolumn[%%% Begin front material
53: \title{Bright Giant Pulses from the Crab Nebula Pulsar: Statistical Properties,
54: Pulse Broadening and Scattering due to the Nebula}
55: \medskip
56: \author{N. D. Ramesh Bhat$^1$, Steven J. Tingay$^2$, and Haydon S. Knight$^1$}
57: \affil{$^1$Centre for Astrophysics \& Supercomputing, Swinburne University, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122, Australia \\
58: $^2$Department of Imaging and Applied Physics, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia
59: }
60: %\bigskip
61: %\centerline {DRAFT \today}
62: %\bigskip
63: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
64: \begin{abstract}
65: We report observations of Crab giant pulses made with the Australia Telescope Compact Array
66: and a baseband recorder system, made simultaneously at two frequencies, 1300 and 1470 MHz.
67: These observations were sensitive to pulses with amplitudes \ga 3 kJy and widths \ga 0.5 $\mu$s.
68: Our analysis led to the detection of more than 700 such bright giant pulses over 3 hours,
69: and using this large sample we investigate their amplitude, width, arrival time and
70: energy distributions.
71: The brightest pulse detected in our data has a peak amplitude of $\sim$ 45 kJy and a width
72: of $\sim$ 0.5 $\mu$s, and therefore an inferred brightness temperature of $\sim 10^{35}$ K.
73: The duration of giant-pulse emission is typically $\sim$1 $\mu$s, however it can
74: also be as long as 10 $\mu$s.
75: The pulse shape at a high time resolution (128 ns) shows rich diversity and complexity in
76: structure and is marked by an unusually low degree of scattering.
77: We discuss possible implications for scattering due to the nebula, and for underlying
78: structures and electron densities.
79: \end{abstract}
80: \keywords{pulsars: general -- pulsars: individual (Crab pulsar)
81: -- ISM: structure -- ISM: individual (Crab Nebula) -- scattering}
82: ]%%% End front material
83:
84: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
85:
86: \section{Introduction} \label{s:intro}
87:
88: The Crab Nebula pulsar B0531+21 is well known for its emission of giant radio pulses, and was
89: originally discovered through the detection of such pulses \citep{staelin1968}.
90: These sporadic, large-amplitude and short-duration bursts can be hundreds or thousands of times
91: more energetic than regular pulses \citep[e.g.][]{lundgrenetal1995}, and they remain one of the
92: most enigmatic aspects of pulsar radio emission.
93: While several other pulsars are now known to emit giant pulses
94: \citep[e.g.][]{cognardetal1996,johnstonetal2004,knightetal2006}, only 3 objects, {\it viz.}
95: the Crab and the millisecond pulsars B1937+21 and J1823--3021A, generate giant pulses numerous
96: enough to allow detailed studies of their characteristics.
97:
98: Observations so far have unravelled several fundamental properties of giant pulse emission.
99: It is now fairly well established that the fluctuations in their amplitudes are due to changes
100: in the coherence of the radio emission \citep{lundgrenetal1995}, and that they are
101: superpositions of extremely narrow nanosecond structures \citep{hankinsetal2003}.
102: Observations also suggest that the emission is broadband, extending over several hundreds
103: of MHz \citep{sallmenetal1999,popovetal2006}. Another important characteristic of giant pulses
104: is their tendency to originate in a very narrow phase window of regular radio emission; and
105: for the Crab, these windows even coincide with the phases of the high-energy (from infrared
106: to $\gamma$-ray) emission \citep{moffett-hankins1996}.
107: Finally, the distribution of giant pulse energies is known to follow a power-law form
108: \citep{argyle-gower1972,lundgrenetal1995}, much in contrast to the Gaussian or exponential
109: distribution typical of regular pulses \citep[e.g.][]{hesse-wielebinski1974}.
110:
111: Of all the giant-pulse--emitting pulsars, the Crab is the most well-studied. It is known to
112: emit pulses as energetic as $\sim 10^4$ times regular pulses \citep{cordesetal2004} and
113: shows structures persisting down to 2 ns, with inferred brightness temperatures as high
114: as $10^{37}$ K \citep{hankinsetal2003}.
115: Given such extreme
116: short durations, giant pulses are best studied using data from baseband observations. Such
117: data allow coherent dedispersion of voltage samples to remove the deleterious effect of
118: interstellar dispersion, thereby yielding more accurate descriptions of pulse structure,
119: shape and amplitude. However, the bulk of the observational studies of the Crab until the early
120: 2000s were carried out using traditional filterbank or spectrometer data, due to limitations
121: of data throughput and computing.
122: With the advent of wide-bandwidth recorders and affordable high-power computing,
123: these limitations are being gradually overcome. As a result, baseband observations are
124: increasingly employed in giant pulse studies \citep[e.g.][]{soglasnovetal2004,popov-stappers2007}.
125:
126: In this paper, we report our observations of Crab giant pulses made using the Australia Telescope
127: Compact Array (ATCA) and the baseband recorder recently developed for the Australian Long
128: Baseline Array.
129: %The observing set-up was designed also to meet certain technical goals in addition to pulsar
130: %observations, and offered a sensitivity equivalent to that of a single ATCA dish.
131: %Consequently our data are primarily sensitive to bright giant pulses.
132: We detected over 700 giant pulses with amplitudes \ga 3 kJy and
133: widths $\sim$0.5 to 10 $\mu$s, and using this large sample we investigate aspects such as
134: the pulse amplitude, width, arrival time and energy distributions, as well as details of
135: the pulse structure and shape. Our observations show a much lower degree of scattering
136: than reported before and we discuss possible implications for scattering due to the nebula.
137:
138: \section{Observations and Data Processing} \label{s:obsproc}
139:
140: \subsection{Observations with the ATCA} \label{s:obs}
141:
142: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
143: % figure 1
144: \begin{figure}[t]
145: \epsscale{1.0}
146: %\plotone{fig1a.eps}
147: %\epsscale{0.88}
148: %\plotone{fig1b.eps}
149: \plotone{f1.eps}
150: \caption{Example plots illustrating our giant pulse detection.
151: {\it Top}: Dedispersed time series of a short data segment around the giant pulse.
152: {\it Middle panels}: Diagnostic plots from the giant pulse search;
153: plots of signal-to-noise ratio vs trial dispersion measure and time resolution, and
154: dedispersed pulses over four 8-MHz sub-bands of the 32 MHz recorder bandwidth.
155: {\it Bottom}: The dedispersed pulse over a time window of 33 ms (i.e. one rotation
156: period).
157: }
158: \label{fig:gpsearch}
159: \end{figure}
160: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
161:
162: Observations of the Crab pulsar were made in January 2006.
163: Although the array offers maximal sensitivity for pulsar observations in its {\it tied-array}
164: mode, our observing set-up was designed also to meet certain technical goals in addition to
165: pulsar observations, and offered a sensitivity equivalent to that of a single ATCA antenna.
166: %aid some test observations of
167: %a development effort aimed at applications such as detection of fast radio transients.
168: %This limited the achievable sensitivity equivalent to that of a single ATCA dish.
169: In this set-up, the array was configured to record two independent IF (intermediate
170: frequency) signals, each 32 MHz in
171: bandwidth, from a single antenna.
172: At the antenna, two 64-MHz bands were Nyquist-sampled at 128 MHz, with four bits per voltage sample,
173: for two orthogonal linear polarisations.
174: These data were converted to circular polarisations by inserting a $90^{\circ}$ phase shifter in
175: the signal path.
176: The signals were then digitally filtered to provide two-bit sampled voltage time series for the
177: 32 MHz bandwidth.
178: This results in an aggregate data rate of 512 megabits per second.
179: The system provided flexibility to record either two separate frequency bands from a single
180: antenna, or two identical frequency bands from two different antennas.
181: The pulsar observations were made over a total duration of 3 hours; the first half of which used
182: two 32-MHz bands (dual polarisation) centred at frequencies 1300 and 1470 MHz, while the remaining
183: half used two identical
184: frequency bands centred at 1300 MHz from two different antennas.
185: This accumulated a total data volume of 5.5 terabytes, but split into a large number of
186: short blocks of 10 s duration each to facilitate further analysis and processing.
187: The data were stored onto disks for offline processing and all processing operations, such as
188: coherent dedispersion, detection and search for giant pulses, were performed at the Swinburne
189: University of Technology Supercomputing Facility.
190:
191: \subsection{Data Decoding and Dedispersion} \label{s:encod}
192:
193: Data samples from both the polarisation channels of the two IF bands were organised into a single
194: data stream while recording, and were subsequently decoded into separate IF data streams before
195: de-dispersion and further processing.
196: As our processing software is designed to handle a single data stream at a given time, this meant
197: two separate passes for processing each short block of data.
198: The unpacked data from this stage were then dedispersed using the coherent dispersion removal
199: technique originally developed by \citet{hankins1971}.
200: The procedures we have adopted are similar to those described in \citet{knightetal2006} and
201: \citet{bhatetal2007}.
202: Voltage samples are first Fourier transformed to the frequency domain and the spectra
203: are divided into a series of sub-bands.
204: Each sub-band is then multiplied by an inverse response filter (kernel) for the ISM
205: \citep[e.g.][]{hankins-rickett1975,vanstraten2003}, and then Fourier transformed back
206: to the time domain to construct a time series with a time resolution coarser than the
207: original data.
208: By splitting the input signal into several sub-bands (four in our case), the dispersive
209: smearing is essentially reduced to that of an individual sub-band.
210: This also means the procedure uses shorter transforms than single-channel coherent
211: dedispersion and is consequently a more computationally efficient method.
212: The coherent filterbank stream data obtained in this manner are then square-law detected,
213: corrected for dispersive delays between the sub-bands, and summed in polarisation
214: to construct a single coherently dedispersed time series for the entire band.
215:
216: \subsection{Search for Giant Pulses} \label{s:search}
217:
218: Following the procedures of decoding and dedispersion, we performed a rigorous
219: search for giant pulses within each 10 s block of data.
220: Our pulse detection procedure involved progressive smoothing of time series
221: with matched filters of widths ranging from 0.5 to 16 $\mu$s
222: in steps of 0.5 $\mu$s, and identifying the intensity samples that exceed a
223: set threshold (e.g. 12$\sigma$ for the 0.5 $\mu$s smoothing time).
224: In addition to performing dedispersion at the Crab's nominal DM of 56.75 \dmu,
225: we also performed this procedure over a large number of adjacent DM values
226: (typically over a DM range $\approx$ 0.5 \dmu, in steps of 0.001 \dmu).
227: For each DM and the matched filter width, we computed the signal-to-noise ratio
228: (S/N) of the pulse amplitude over a short stretch of data centred at the
229: pulse maximum.
230: From this analysis, diagnostic plots are generated for each candidate giant
231: pulse as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:gpsearch}.
232: These plots are subjected to a careful human scrutiny to
233: discriminate real giant pulses from spurious signals.
234:
235: \subsection{Summary of Detections} \label{s:det}
236:
237: %Given the sensitivity of a single ATCA dish (gain $\approx$ 0.1 \kpjy), a modest observing
238: %bandwidth (32 MHz), and a fairly high (12 $\sigma$) threshold used in the pulse detection,
239: %our search is sensitive only to strong giant pulses.
240: %In other words, our sample is selected against weaker giant pulses which tend to be larger
241: %in number, given a power-law distribution of giant-pulse energies.
242: We adopted a rather conservative threshold of 12$\sigma$ in order to account for possible
243: departures of noise statistics from those expected of pure white noise and also to limit
244: the number of candidate signals to a reasonable number.
245: With this threshold and the 0.5 $\mu$s final time resolution ($\Delta t $) employed in our
246: analysis, a pulse will need to be $\ga$3 kJy in amplitude to enable a clear detection (see
247: \S~\ref{s:sens}).
248: %For narrow giant pulses ($\sim$0.5 $\mu$s) of amplitudes $\sim$3 kJy, this would mean
249: %energies $\ga$1.5 kJy $\mu$s.
250: %This is roughly 3 times the mean pulse energy \Eav, as estimated from parameters
251: %listed in the ATNF pulsar
252: %catalogue\footnote{http://www.atnf.csiro.au/research/pulsar/psrcat} \citep{manchesteretal2005}.
253: %emission expected from the pulsar (mean pulse
254: %energy, \Eav= 0.6 and 0.4 kJy $\mu$s at 1300 and 1470 MHz respectively), based on parameters
255: %listed in the ATNF pulsar catalogue\footnote{http://www.atnf.csiro.au/research/pulsar/psrcat}
256: %\citep{manchesteretal2005}.
257: %As an estimate of the average emission is not obtainable from our data, we adopt the above
258: %values in this paper.
259: We detected 706 giant pulses from our 3-hr long observation, of which 413 are from
260: the first half of observations that were made simultaneously at 1300 and 1470 MHz.
261: However, only 70\% of these 413 were detected in both frequency bands.
262: This fraction is similar to that reported by \citet{sallmenetal1999} from their
263: observations at 600 and 1400 MHz, although quite different fractions have been
264: reported from observations at widely separated frequencies \citep{kostyuketal2003}
265: and at lower frequencies \citep{popovetal2006}.
266: This probably suggests that not all pulses are entirely broadband, a characteristic
267: presumably intrinsic to the giant-pulse emission phenomenon.
268: Our sample includes pulses with widths ranging from 0.5 to 10 $\mu$s.
269: Given $\Delta t $ = 0.5 $\mu$s, any shorter-duration pulses that may be present in our
270: data will be smoothed to
271: an effective resolution\footnote{In practice, pulses that are narrower than 0.5 $\mu$s
272: will be detected as either 0.5 $\mu$s wide (most flux in one sample) or 1 $\mu$s wide
273: (pulse comes in just on the border of two samples) in our analysis.} of 0.5 or 1 $\mu$s.
274: Moreover, pulses broader than 10 $\mu$s are likely to be weaker than our detection threshold.
275: The strongest pulse in our observations is 0.5 $\mu$s in duration and has a S/N of 217.
276: %which corresponds to a peak amplitude of about 45 kJy.
277:
278: \subsection{System Sensitivity and Flux Calibration} \label{s:sens}
279:
280: The Crab Nebula is a fairly bright and extended source in the radio sky, with a flux density of
281: $\sim$955$\,\nu^{-0.27}$ Jy (\citet{bietenholzetal1997}; where $\nu$ is the frequency in GHz)
282: and a characteristic diameter of $\sim$5$^{\prime}$.5.
283: Thus, in general, there will be a significant contribution from the nebula to the system
284: noise ($S$), depending on the frequency of observation and the coverage of the
285: nebula within the telescope beam.
286: However, in our case, the problem is much simplified as the nebula is unresolved by a single
287: antenna of the array (half-power beam width $\approx$ $33^{\prime}$ at our observing frequencies).
288: In fact, the entire nebular region occupies only a small fraction ($\approx$ 3\%) of the beam
289: solid
290: angle.
291: Measurements made in parallel with the observations yield system temperatures (\Tsys) of
292: $114 \, \pm \, 3$ and $103 \, \pm \, 2$ K respectively at 1300 and 1470 MHz.
293: Thus, assuming a nominal gain (G) of $\approx$ 0.1 \kpjy for a single ATCA antenna at L-band,
294: these measurements translate to system equivalent flux densities (\Ssys=\Tsys/G) of 1140
295: and 1030 Jy respectively at 1300 and 1470 MHz.
296: Scaling for our processing parameters and the recording bandwidth ($\Delta B$), and also
297: accounting for the loss of S/N due to our 2-bit digitisation,
298: these estimates will correspond to system noise of 250 and 227 Jy at the 1-$\sigma$
299: level\footnote{$ S=\eta N_{\sigma} \Tsys G^{-1} (n_{pol} \Delta B \Delta t)^{-1/2} $, where
300: $\eta$ is the loss of S/N due to digitisation, $ N _{\sigma} $ is the detection threshold in
301: units of $\sigma$, $ n_{pol} $ is the number of polarisations summed.}.
302: In other words, minimum detectable pulse amplitudes of 3 and 2.7 kJy respectively at 1300
303: and 1470 MHz for a 12-$\sigma$ threshold.
304:
305: \section{Statistical Properties of Giant Pulses} \label{s:stat}
306:
307: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
308: % figure 1
309: \begin{figure}[t]
310: \epsscale{0.8}
311: \plotone{f2.eps}
312: %\plotone{fig2-3.eps}
313: \caption{Histograms of giant-pulse amplitudes at 1300 and 1470 MHz (in red and green
314: respectively) constructed from our sample of giant pulses.
315: Estimates for the best fit slope ($\beta$) are $-2.33\pm0.14$ and $-2.20\pm0.18$ at
316: 1300 and 1470 MHz respectively, and are shown as short-dashed and long-dashed lines.
317: The brightest pulse detected in our data (at 1300 MHz) has a peak amplitude of
318: $\sim$45 kJy.
319: }
320: \label{fig:amp}
321: \end{figure}
322: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
323:
324: \subsection{Pulse Amplitudes and Energies} \label{s:energy}
325:
326: An important distinguishing characteristic of giant pulses (GPs) is their power-law
327: distribution of amplitudes and energies.
328: The amplitude determination can be potentially influenced by factors such as
329: smearing due to instrument and any residual dispersion, as well as external
330: effects such as scattering and scintillation due to the ISM.
331: As a result, oftentimes measurements tend to underestimate the true amplitudes.
332: Observations of \citet{lundgrenetal1995} and \citet{cordesetal2004} (at 430 MHz) were marked by
333: significant instrumental and dispersion smearing (315 and 152 $\mu$s respectively) and were
334: more prone to scintillation and scattering given their observing frequencies \la 1 GHz.
335: On the other hand, smearing due to instrument or residual dispersion is negligibly small for
336: baseband observations, and consequently our data enable a better and more accurate
337: characterisation of the pulse amplitudes.
338: Fig.~\ref{fig:amp} shows the distributions of pulse amplitudes for our data.
339:
340: The cumulative energy distribution provides a meaningful way of characterizing the frequency of
341: occurrence of GPs.
342: Following \citet{knightetal2006}, we define this distribution in terms of the probability of a
343: pulse having energy greater than \Eo, and can be expressed as
344: \be
345: P ( E > \Eo) = K \, E _0 ^{\alpha}
346: \ee
347: %where \Eo is in units of the mean pulse energy \Eav.
348: Figure~\ref{fig:cdp} shows such a distribution for our data.
349: The pulse energy is estimated by integrating the amplitude bins over the extent of emission.
350: %We however emphasize that energies in units of \Eav are not known accurately in our case,
351: %as our adopted values of \Eav are based on parameters from the literature \citep{manchesteretal2005}.
352: The uncertainties in the energy estimates depend on the pulse strength and width, and may
353: range from $\sim$0.5\% for strong and narrow pulses, to as much as $\sim$35\% for weak,
354: broad pulses.
355: Such large uncertainties at low energies, and possible modulations in pulse amplitudes due
356: to scintillation, may probably explain a gradual flattening seen at low energies.
357: In any case, much in agreement with the earlier work, no evidence is seen for a high-energy
358: cut-off, suggesting that exceedingly bright and energetic pulses are potentially observable
359: over longer durations of observation.
360:
361: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
362: % figure 1
363: \begin{figure}[t]
364: \epsscale{1.0}
365: \plotone{f5.eps}
366: \caption{Cumulative distribution of giant-pulse energies at 1300 MHz.
367: The slope estimates of the linear segments below and above an apparent break near
368: $\sim$10 kJy $\mu$s are --1.4 and --1.9 respectively, while the overall slope is
369: --1.6.}
370: %As described in the text, our estimate of the mean pulse energy \Eav is
371: %based on parameters from the published literature.}
372: \label{fig:cdp}
373: \end{figure}
374: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
375:
376: Excluding the segments near the low and high ends of the distribution where the behaviour
377: tends to depart from a power-law, we obtain a best-fit value of $-1.59 \, \pm \, 0.01$
378: for $\alpha$ (where the error is purely formal) and $K$ = 3.97.
379: Interestingly, this slope is comparable to the published values for other GP-emitters such
380: as PSRs J0218+4232 \citep{knightetal2006}, B0540--69 \citep{johnstonetal2004} and B1937+21
381: \citep{cognardetal1996,soglasnovetal2004}.
382: %Further, assuming that the integral of the probability for all energies above a certain
383: %cut-off is unity, these two parameters can be used to estimate the minimum energy \Emin
384: %expected for GPs\footnote{$\Emin=(\alpha(1+\alpha)/K)^{1/(1+\alpha)}$, assuming
385: %the integral of the probability $P(E)$ for all energies above \Emin is unity,
386: %where $P(E)$ is of the form $K_1 E^{\alpha _1}$.}.
387: %Our fitted values of $\alpha$ and $K$ imply \Emin = 10\Eav, compared to a
388: %value of 33\Eav obtained by \citet{lundgrenetal1995} for their data at 800 MHz.
389:
390: However, it is known from the work of \citet{moffett1997} that a single slope does not
391: accurately describe the energy distribution at 1400 MHz and that there occurs a break
392: around an energy of $\sim$2 kJy $\mu$s, where the slope $\alpha$ changes from $-3$ to $-1.8$.
393: Given that this energy corresponds to the detection threshold of our GP search (see \S~\ref{s:sens}),
394: our slope estimate of $-1.6$ is in general agreement with Moffett's work.
395: Recent work of \citet{popov-stappers2007} suggests that the slope estimate depends on the
396: pulse width, evolving from $-1.7$ to $-3.2$ when going from their shortest (4 $\mu$s) to
397: longest (65 $\mu$s) GPs.
398: Their analysis also shows a clear evidence for a break where the power-law tends to steepen
399: (their Fig. 2).
400: Such a break is also apparent in our data, as the slope tends to steepen near $\sim$10 kJy $\mu$s.
401: Adopting this as the break point, we obtain slope estimates of $-1.37 \, \pm \, 0.01$ and $-1.88 \, \pm \, 0.02$
402: for the segments below and above it (K = 3.72 and 4.42 respectively).
403:
404: The pulse energy distribution also serves as a useful guide for estimating the rates of
405: occurrence of giant pulses.
406: For instance, on the basis of our observations, a pulse that is about 50 times more
407: energetic than regular pulses\footnote{Assuming mean pulse energies estimated from
408: parameters in the published literature \citep{manchesteretal2005}.} can be expected
409: roughly once in 8500 pulse periods, i.e., approximately once every 5 minutes.
410: The most energetic pulse detected in our data has an estimated energy of 66 kJy $\mu$s;
411: i.e. an energy per $\mu$s that is almost $\sim 10^5$ times larger than that of regular
412: pulses.
413: %\footnote{Assuming a mean pulse energy based on parameters from the
414: %published literature \citep{manchesteretal2005}.}
415:
416: The brightest pulse detected in our data has an estimated peak flux density (\Snu) of $\sim$ 45 kJy
417: and an effective width of 0.5 $\mu$s.
418: The equivalent brightness temperature (\Tb) is given by (based on the light-travel size and ignoring
419: relativistic dilation),
420: \be
421: \Tb = \left( { \Snu \over 2 \, \kB } \right) \left( { D \over \nu \, \delt } \right)^2,
422: \ee
423: where $ \nu $ is the frequency of observation,
424: \delt~is the pulse width, \kB~is the Boltzmann constant and D is the Earth-pulsar distance.
425: The inferred brightness temperature for our strongest pulse is therefore $\sim10^{35}$ K.
426: This is almost $\sim$1000 times brighter than the brightest pulse detected in the Arecibo
427: observations of \citet{cordesetal2004}.
428: %We however emphasize that the estimate derived in this manner is a strong function of the measured
429: %pulse width and thus our value is most certainly an underestimate considering the possible degradation
430: %in pulse amplitude due to interstellar scattering.
431: To the best of our knowledge, this marks the brightest pulse ever recorded from the Crab pulsar
432: within the L-band frequency range (i.e. $\sim$1--2 GHz).
433: Detection of such excessively bright giant pulses offers a promising technique for finding pulsars
434: in external galaxies \citep{johnston-romani2003,cordesetal2004}.
435:
436:
437:
438:
439:
440:
441: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
442: % figure 1
443: \begin{figure}[b]
444: \epsscale{1.0}
445: \plotone{f3.eps}
446: \caption{{\it Left}:
447: Distributions of giant-pulse widths at 1300 and 1470 MHz (in red and green respectively).
448: {\it Right}: Plot of pulse amplitudes vs the effective pulse widths.
449: An apparent low cut-off at 0.5 $\mu$s and a discretization in pulse width are due to the
450: 0.5 $\mu$s final time resolution adopted for our processing.
451: }
452: \label{fig:wid}
453: \end{figure}
454: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
455:
456: \subsection{Pulse Widths} \label{s:wid}
457:
458: There have been very few attempts of characterising giant-pulse widths.
459: The first analysis by \citet{lundgrenetal1995} was limited by their coarse time sampling
460: (205 $\mu$s) and was further constrained by a severe dispersion smearing (70 $\mu$s).
461: More recent work of \citet{popov-stappers2007} had a much higher time resolution
462: (4.1 $\mu$s).
463: As our observations were made at a higher frequency than the above (hence the effect of
464: scattering is reduced) and a final time resolution (0.5 $\mu$s) that is eight-fold better than
465: \citet{popov-stappers2007}, our analysis allows a more accurate characterization
466: of giant-pulse widths.
467:
468: Our observations show that many giant pulses tend to have a significant structure
469: at 0.5 $\mu$s resolution, ranging from a simple narrow spike to several closely
470: spaced components within a few $\mu$s.
471: Following \citet{lundgrenetal1995} and \citet{popov-stappers2007}, we adopt
472: the notion of ``effective pulse width'' \we, which is essentially the averaging time that yields
473: the maximum S/N.
474: In most cases, it is a close representation of true pulse width, although it may be slightly
475: biased to stronger component(s) in the case of highly structured pulses.
476: The histogram of widths obtained in this manner is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:wid}.
477: The distribution is highly skewed, with measured widths ranging from 0.5 to 10 $\mu$s and
478: with a clear peak at 1 $\mu$s.
479: Giant pulses of widths larger than 10 $\mu$s are absent in our data; however, this may be a
480: selection effect as such pulses may very well be below our detection threshold.
481: Our analysis confirms a general tendency for stronger pulses to be narrower, an observation
482: also noted by \citet{popov-stappers2007}.
483:
484: Our distribution of giant-pulse widths can be compared with a similar plot obtained for
485: GPs from the millisecond pulsar PSR B1937+21 by \citet{soglasnovetal2004}.
486: %As our analysis is restricted to only stronger giants, the effect of noise in the distribution
487: %can be ignored.
488: Similarities in the two distributions are quite striking, despite the fact that GPs from PSR B1937+21
489: are intrinsically narrower (\we \la 15 ns) and show little structure.
490: Thus, it appears that exponential-tailed distributions are probably common characteristics of
491: giant-pulse widths. Studies of more pulsars are necessary to confirm such a conjecture.
492:
493: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
494: % figure 1
495: \begin{figure}[b]
496: \epsscale{1.0}
497: %\plotone{fig6new.eps}
498: \plotone{f4.eps}
499: \caption{Arrival times of giant pulses detected in the main pulse and interpulse
500: regions (the red and green symbols respectively) at 1300 MHz ({\it left}), along
501: with their statistics ({\it right, top}) and joint statistics with pulse amplitudes
502: ({\it right, bottom}).
503: }
504: \label{fig:toas}
505: \end{figure}
506: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
507:
508: \subsection{Arrival Times and Phases} \label{s:toas}
509:
510: One of the most striking properties of Crab GPs is their occurrence within well-defined,
511: relatively narrow longitude ranges of regular radio emission.
512: This is also true with the millisecond pulsars PSRs B1937+21 and
513: J0218+4232, except that in the case of the former, GPs tend to occur near the trailing edges
514: of the main pulse and interpulse \citep{soglasnovetal2004}, and in the latter case,
515: they occur near the two minima of the integrated pulse profile \citep{knightetal2006}.
516: In order to determine the pulse arrival times, we use the pulsar's spin-down model along
517: with the {\tt TEMPO} software package to obtain the anticipated pulse arrival phases.
518: As most pulses in our data are very narrow, our data allow precise determinations of
519: the arrival times and phases.
520: Pulse times-of-arrival (TOAs) obtained in this manner are plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:toas}.
521:
522: The total range of longitudes where GPs occur (in the main pulse region) is approximately
523: $\pm$ 200 $\mu$s, or $\pm 2^{\circ}.2$ in angular units, with an RMS of 84 $\mu$s ($0^{\circ}.9$).
524: Thus, a vast majority of GPs (75\%) occur within a narrower window of $\pm 100$ $\mu$s.
525: As contributions from the dispersive and instrumental smearing are negligible in our case,
526: this RMS corresponds essentially to the intrinsic pulse-phase jitter and can be
527: compared to a value of 90 $\mu$s estimated by \citet{lundgrenetal1995} for their data at 800 MHz.
528: %Further, the distribution of TOAs shows a double peak, which interestingly is similar to that
529: %obtained for the GPs from PSR B1937+21 by \citet{soglasnovetal2004} based on a similar-sized sample.
530: The plot of joint statistics of timing residuals and pulse amplitudes shows no obvious correlation
531: except for a general tendency for stronger pulses to originate within narrower phase windows.
532: A similar property was also noted by \citet{cordesetal2004} in their Arecibo observations at a
533: frequency of 430 MHz.
534: Finally, a vast majority of GPs tend to occur within the main pulse window $-$ 87\% at the main
535: pulse region and the remainder 13\% in the interpulse region.
536: This is in excellent agreement with the published values in the literature
537: (\citet{popov-stappers2007}: 84\% and 16\% respectively at 1200 MHz;
538: \citet{kostyuketal2003}: 86\% and 14\% respectively at 2228 MHz).
539: %We also note that the measured scatter in our GP arrival phases ($\pm 0.006$ cycles) is nearly
540: %half that measured for the 430-MHz GPs by \citet{cordesetal2004}, but this may be due to our
541: %sample comprising primarily strong pulses.
542:
543: \section{Pulse Broadening and Scattering due to the Nebular Plasma} \label{s:scatt}
544:
545: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
546: % figure 1
547: \begin{figure}[t]
548: \epsscale{1.0}
549: \plotone{f6.eps}
550: \caption{A bright giant pulse at 1300 and 1470 MHz, where the plotted time window corresponds
551: to $\approx$0.003 cycles of the pulsar's rotation period.
552: This pulse pair is displayed at a time resolution of 128 ns and illustrates significant
553: differences seen in pulse width and structural details between the two frequencies.
554: }
555: \label{fig:gps}
556: \end{figure}
557: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
558:
559: \subsection{Pulse Shape and Estimation of Scattering} \label{s:shape}
560:
561: Figure \ref{fig:gps} shows an example of a bright giant pulse from our data.
562: At a time resolution of 128 ns, the pulse is resolved into multiple narrow components,
563: and this readily confirms the basic picture of GPs comprising fine structure
564: on very short timescales.
565: Discerning such fine structure is however limited by time resolution and the
566: smearing due to multipath scattering.
567: This pulse pair also exemplifies the differences seen in pulse structure between 1300
568: and 1470 MHz, a detailed analysis of which is beyond the scope of the present work.
569: Our pulse shapes can be compared to observations of \citet{sallmenetal1999} $\sim$10 yr ago
570: (their Fig. 1), and it is striking that our observations are marked by a much lower degree of
571: scattering.
572:
573: In order to estimate the pulse broadening due to interstellar
574: scattering \citep[e.g.][]{williamson1972,cordes-lazio2001}, we
575: adopt the CLEAN-based deconvolution approach developed by \citet{bhatetal2003}.
576: Unlike the traditional frequency-extrapolation approach \citep[e.g.][]{lohmeretal2001,kuzminetal2002}, this
577: method makes no prior assumption of the intrinsic pulse shape, and thus offers a more robust
578: means of determining the underlying pulse broadening function (PBF).
579: %, and therefore can be applied to a wide variety of pulse shapes and degrees of scattering.
580: %Such an approach is especially justifiable for the Crab giant pulses, as our observations
581: %show fine structure on scales down to $\sim$100 ns (Fig.~\ref{fig:gps}).
582: The procedure involves deconvolving the measured pulse shape in a manner quite similar to
583: the CLEAN algorithm used in synthesis imaging, while searching for the best-fit PBF and
584: recovering the intrinsic pulse shape.
585: It relies on a set of figures of merit that are defined in terms of positivity and symmetry
586: of the resultant deconvolved pulse and some parameters characterizing the noise statistics
587: in order to determine the best-fit PBF.
588: For the purpose of our analysis, we assume the simplest and most commonly used form for the
589: PBF that corresponds to a thin-slab scattering screen geometry.
590: The functional form for such a PBF is a one-sided exponential \citep[e.g.][]{williamson1972}
591: and is given by
592: \be
593: G(t) = \left ( { 1 \over \tau _d } \right) \, \exp \left( { -t \over \taud } \right) \, U(t),
594: \ee
595: where $U(t)$ is the unit step function, $U(<0) = 0, U(\ge 0) = 1$.
596: Fig.~\ref{fig:clean} shows the best-fit PBF and the reconstructed pulse obtained in this manner.
597: The $ { \rm e^{-1} } $ point of this PBF is the scattering time \taud, for which our deconvolution
598: procedure yields an estimate of $0.8\pm0.4$ $\mu$s.
599:
600: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
601: % figure 1
602: \begin{figure}[t]
603: \epsscale{1.0}
604: %\plotone{fig4.eps}
605: \plotone{f7.eps}
606: \caption{A bright giant pulse from observations at 1300 MHz.
607: The time window corresponds to 0.002 cycles of the pulse period.
608: The reconstructed pulse (green) and the best-fit pulse-broadening function (inset)
609: from our deconvolution procedure are also shown.
610: The $e^{-1}$ point of this one-sided exponential gives an estimate of the
611: pulse-broadening time, for which our measured value is $0.8\pm0.4$ $\mu$s.
612: }
613: \label{fig:clean}
614: \end{figure}
615: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
616:
617: This measurement of a low scattering is further supported by the following observational facts.
618: First, a pulse broadening of $\sim$0.8 $\mu$s will imply rapid intensity decorrelations in
619: frequency on characteristic scales $ \sim 1/2 \pi \taud$ $\sim$ 0.1 to 0.3 MHz and this is
620: confirmed by our analysis.
621: %We have examined the frequency structure of several GPs, which confirms rapid changes in
622: %pulse intensity on scales $\la$0.5 MHz.
623: Second, as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:wid}, a large number of pulses detected in our data have widths
624: $\sim$1 $\mu$s, just about what we would expect given the $\sim$0.8 $\mu$s broadening
625: due to scattering and the 0.5 $\mu$s time resolution.
626:
627: \subsection{Scattering due to the Nebula} \label{s:nebula}
628:
629: Our measurement of \taud can be compared to that reported by \citet{sallmenetal1999} based on
630: their observations in 1996.
631: Their value of $95\pm5$ $\mu$s at 600 MHz would scale to 4.3 $\mu$s at 1300 MHz, assuming a
632: canonical $\nu^{-4}$ dependence expected from scattering due to a turbulent plasma screen.
633: This is five times larger than our measurement.
634: A somewhat smaller value is expected on the basis of observations of \citet{kuzminetal2002}
635: in the year 2000.
636: However, our measurement is consistent with that of \citet{bhatetal2007} at 200 MHz, if we
637: extrapolate their measurements using their revised frequency scaling of $\nu^{-3.5\pm0.2}$.
638:
639: As described in \S~\ref{s:search}, our GP detection procedure includes determination of the
640: best DM by performing dedispersion over many trial values around its nominal value.
641: As most pulses in our data are very narrow, this procedure allows a precise determination of the
642: Crab's true DM at our observing epoch.
643: An estimate of $56.751\pm0.001$ \dmu obtained in this manner is further confirmed by measuring the
644: time delay between the pulse arrival times at 1300 and 1470 MHz.
645: This value is in excellent agreement with that reported in the Jodrell Bank (JB) monthly
646: ephemeris
647: %\footnote{http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/$\sim$pulsar/crab.html} \citep{lyne1982}
648: \citep{lyne1982}
649: on the nearest date of our observing, but it is significantly lower than that
650: measured near the observing epochs of \citet{sallmenetal1999}.
651:
652: Thus, over a 10-yr time span between Sallmen et al's and our observations, the pulsar's
653: DM decreased by 0.09 \dmu while the pulse broadening decreased by a factor of 5.
654: Given the strong frequency dependence of pulse broadening ($ \taud \propto \nu^{-x}$) and the
655: observational evidence for the scaling index $x$ changing over the time \citep{kuzminetal2002,bhatetal2007},
656: it is more meaningful to adopt a
657: frequency independent parameter such as the scattering measure (SM) for comparison purposes.
658: This parameter quantifies the total scattering along the line of sight (LOS) and is defined
659: as the LOS integral of \cn, which is the spectral coefficient of the wavenumber spectrum of electron
660: density irregularities. It can be related to \taud via the relation
661: $\taud \approx 1.1\, \Wtau~\SM^{6/5}\nu^{-x}D$, where $\nu$ is in GHz, D is in kpc,
662: and $\Wtau$ is a geometric factor that depends on the LOS-distribution of scattering
663: material \citep{cordes-rickett1998}.
664: Assuming $\Wtau=1$, we can estimate the {\it effective} SM for a uniform medium, and
665: for the measurements of Sallmen et al's and ours, we obtain
666: values of $1.3 \times 10^{-2}$ and $3 \times 10^{-3}$ \smu respectively.
667: That is, the SM changed by 0.01 \smu when the DM changed by 0.09 \dmu, or a factor 4
668: decrease in the scattering strength associated with a DM change of only 0.16\%.
669:
670: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
671: % figure 1
672: \begin{figure}[t]
673: \epsscale{1.0}
674: %\plotone{smnew2.eps}
675: %\plotone{dm.eps}
676: \plotone{f8b.eps}
677: \plotone{f8a.eps}
678: \caption{Measurements of DM and SM of the Crab pulsar from observations over
679: the past 10 years (1996 to 2006).
680: The SM values ({\it upper panel}) are estimated from the published
681: pulse-broadening measurements and decorrelation bandwidths --
682: 1996.4: \citet{sallmenetal1999};
683: 2000.6: \citet{kostyuketal2003};
684: 2001.5: \citet{kuzminetal2002};
685: 2002.1, 2002.4: \citet{cordesetal2004};
686: 2003.9: \citet{popovetal2006};
687: 2005.6: \citet{bhatetal2007};
688: 2006.0: our observations.
689: The DM measurements are from the Jodrell Bank monthly ephemeris
690: ({\it lower panel}); the thick solid circles correspond to the
691: observing epochs of the SM measurements.
692: }
693: \label{fig:dmsm}
694: \end{figure}
695: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
696:
697: A closer look at the JB ephemeris reveals quite a systematic decrease in the
698: Crab's DM variations between 1996 and 2006, with the lowest DM recorded
699: near mid-2005 and a reversal of the trend in early 2006.
700: A plot of SM estimates for the available \taud measurements during this period is shown
701: in Fig.~\ref{fig:dmsm} along with the DM measurements at relevant epochs.
702: These plots illustrate a gradual reduction in the Crab's DM and scattering over this
703: 10-yr time span.
704: Such variations are too large and smooth to be caused by refractive scintillation effects
705: in the ISM, and are therefore indicative of a nebular origin.
706:
707: The material within the Crab Nebula, specifically the perturbed thermal plasma associated
708: with it, has often been advanced as the source of excessive scattering and anomalous DM
709: variations on several occasions.
710: The most remarkable observations in support of this are the anomalous scattering recorded in
711: 1974-1975 \citep{lyne-thorne75,isaac-rankin77} and the reflection event
712: in 1997 \citep{backeretal2000,lyneetal2001}.
713: The scattering event in 1974 was especially noted for its extreme activity, where the pulsar's
714: DM rose by 0.07 \dmu and the scattering increased by an order an magnitude over a time span of
715: several months.
716: \citet{isaac-rankin77} ascribed this to a two-component scattering-screen model where the
717: variable screen associated with the nebula gives rise to such rapid changes in both DM and
718: scattering.
719: The anomalous dispersion event in 1997 was seen as discrete moving echoes of the pulse, and was
720: interpreted as reflections from an ionized shell in the outer parts of the nebula
721: by \citet{lyneetal2001}, and in terms of variable optics of a triangular prism located
722: in the interface of the nebula and the supernova ejecta by \citet{backeretal2000}.
723:
724: Fig.~\ref{fig:dmsm} reveals a similar change in DM and a large but less dramatic change in scattering.
725: A direct interpretation of such observations can be made along the lines of a variable scattering
726: screen model, as we discuss in detail in the following section.
727: %whereby systematic changes in either the turbulent intensity (\cn) or in the distribution
728: %of structures lead to the observed changes in DM and SM as the observer's line of sight
729: %drifts through the nebular region.
730: %Over and above such a distribution, there may be large isolated structures of much higher densities,
731: %occasional intercepting through which gives rise to more dramatic scattering or reflection events on
732: %shorter time scales of months.
733:
734: \subsection{Implications for the Nebular Structure and Densities} \label{s:nebula}
735:
736: The observed changes in DM and SM can be used to constrain the combination of the electron density and the ``fluctuation parameter'' in the nebular region, denoted as \nec and \fc respectively.
737: Following \citet{cordes-lazio2003} and \citet{bhatetal2004}, the measured decrements in DM and SM can be expressed as
738: $\deldm = \nec \dels$ and $\delsm = \cnc \dels$, where \dels is the size of the nebular scattering region and \cnc is the equivalent turbulent intensity (assuming a uniform distribution of scattering material).
739: The parameters \fc and \cnc can be related as \citep{taylor-cordes1993,cordes-lazio2002}
740: $\cnc = \csm \fc \necsq $, where $\csm = [ 3 (2 \pi)^{1/3} ]^{-1} \, \ku $ for a Kolmogorov spectrum, and
741: $\ku$ =10.2 $\kuu$ to yield SM in units of $\smu $.
742: The above expressions can be combined to yield the ratio of \delsm and \deldm, and is given by
743: \be
744: { \delsm \over \deldm } = \csm \fc \nec
745: \ee
746: Thus our measurements of \delsm = 0.01 $\smu$ and \deldm = 0.09 \dmu yield \fc \nec = 55.
747: The fluctuation parameter is essentially a product of normalized variances (at small and large scales) and other terms such as the outer scale and filling factor.
748: The electron density \nec is unknown, but assuming a nominal value of 1 \neu, we get \fc = 55, which is much larger than that typical of the Galactic spiral arms ($F \sim 10$).
749:
750: The large values of \delsm and \fc indeed confirm the material within the nebula as the source of
751: excessively strong scattering.
752: While the scattering and dispersion events of 1974 and 1997 were interpreted in terms of a single
753: large structure with electron density $\sim$1,500 \neu, the long-term systematic variations in
754: dispersion and scattering as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:dmsm} can be interpreted in terms of a scenario
755: whereby the nebular segment of the LOS is populated by many smaller structures of much lower densities.
756: A variation in the number density of such structures may then account for the observed changes in DM and SM.
757: As the nebula is thought to comprise fine structure on many length scales, perhaps even on scales much finer than the filamentary structure suggested by optical observations \citep[e.g.][]{hesteretal1995}, such a picture seems quite plausible.
758:
759: For the sake of simplicity, if we model the measured changes in scattering and dispersion to
760: arise from N such structures of size \delsc and density \nesc, the resultant contributions to
761: SM and DM are given by
762: \be
763: \delsm \equiv \sum _{i=1} ^{i=N} \smsci = N \, \csm \fcs \nessq \delsc
764: \ee
765: \be
766: \deldm \equiv \sum _{i=1} ^{i=N} \dmsci = N \, \nesc \delsc
767: \ee
768: Following equations (4)--(6) and the constraint $\fc \nec = 55$, the electron density of such a structure
769: can be estimated as
770: \be
771: \nesc = \left( { \delsm \over 55 \, \csm } \right) \left( { 1 \over N \, \delsc } \right)
772: \ee
773: Thus, with just two direct measurements alone (\deldm and \delsm), it is hard to constrain
774: all 3 free parameters of the model.
775: However, assuming a reasonable value for \delsc $\sim$ $10^{-5}$ pc (i.e. an order of magnitude smaller
776: than that implied by the 1997 reflection event), we estimate \nesc $\sim$ 100 \neu for N$\sim$100.
777: This is almost an order of magnitude smaller than the densities required to produce the reflection
778: event.
779: Indeed, several different combinations of size and density are possible; nonetheless, the underlying
780: picture is the presence of many moderately-dense structures in the nebular region, with a
781: filling factor $\sim$ $10^{-3}$.
782: %Variations in their number density (say, on transverse scales of the order $\sim$1000 AU) can then
783: %potentially lead to long-term variations of the pulsar's dispersion and scattering.
784:
785:
786: We note that the electron density estimated above, estimates of the electron temperature
787: in the Crab nebula \citep{temimetal2006,hesteretal1995,davidson1979} that yield values
788: between 6000 and 16000 K, and the size of the Crab nebula
789: (approximately $6^{\prime}$ = 3 pc, for a distance of 2 kpc),
790: imply that the nebula should produce a minimal optical depth to free-free
791: absorption at GHz frequencies and a significant optical depth at lower
792: frequencies. We estimate, based on these parameters, that a free-free
793: optical depth ($\tau _{ff}$) of 0.007 at 1 GHz may be possible, along
794: lines of sight that include the scattering structures discussed above.
795: For radio sources behind the Crab nebula, this would give a decrease
796: in the observed flux density, compared to the intrinsic flux density,
797: of 0.7\% due to free-free absorption at this frequency. At lower
798: frequencies this decrease would be more significant: 3\% at 500 MHz,
799: 12\% at 250 MHz, and 60\% at 100 MHz.
800:
801: If a radio interferometer operating at these frequencies could achieve
802: an angular resolution high enough to resolve the Crab nebula and
803: detect compact sources of emission behind the nebula, it may be
804: possible to survey the free-free absorption due to the nebula along
805: many lines of sight, probing the structures that are producing the
806: scattering of the pulsar emission. The upcoming future instruments
807: such as the extended LOFAR telescope in The Netherlands and Europe,
808: or the Murchison Wide-field Array (MWA) in Western Australia may be
809: able to undertake such a survey.
810:
811: \section{Summary and Conclusions} \label{s:conc}
812:
813: Using the ATCA and a baseband recording system, we detected more than 700 giant pulses
814: from the Crab pulsar from our continuous and uniform recording at 1300 and 1470 MHz
815: over 3 hours.
816: This large sample is used for investigating statistical properties of giant pulses,
817: such as their amplitude, width, arrival time and energy distributions.
818: The amplitude distribution follows roughly a power-law with a slope of $-2.33\pm0.15$,
819: which is shallower compared to those from previous observations at lower frequencies.
820: The pulse widths show an exponential-tailed distribution and there is a tendency for
821: stronger pulses to be narrower.
822: A majority of pulses (87\%) tend to occur within a narrow phase window ($\pm 200$ $\mu$s)
823: of the main-pulse region.
824: Finally, the distribution of pulse energies follows a power-law with a slope of $-1.6$, and
825: there is evidence for a break near $\sim$10 kJy $\mu$s.
826:
827: The brightest pulse detected in our data has a peak amplitude of 45 kJy and a width of
828: 0.5 $\mu$s, implying a brightness temperature of $ 10^{35}$ K, which makes it the
829: brightest pulse recorded from the Crab pulsar at the L-band frequencies (1--2 GHz).
830:
831: Our observations show that many giant pulses comprise multiple narrow components at a
832: time resolution $\sim$128 ns, which confirms the fundamental picture of giant pulses being
833: superpositions of extremely narrow bursts.
834: Further, the measured pulse shape is marked by an unusually low degree of scattering,
835: with a pulse-broadening time of $ 0.8 \pm 0.4 $ $\mu$s that is the lowest estimated yet
836: towards the Crab from observations so far.
837: Further, the pulsar's DM is determined to be $ 56.751 \pm 0.001 $ \dmu, which is significantly
838: lower than those measured near the epochs of previous scattering measurements.
839:
840: Our measurements of DM and scattering, together with published data and the Jodrell Bank
841: monthly ephemeris, unveil a systematic and slow decrease in the Crab's DM and scattering
842: over the past 10 yr.
843: These variations are too large and smooth to be caused by the intervening ISM but can be
844: attributed to the material within the nebula.
845: Our analysis hints at there being large-scale inhomogeneities in the distribution of small-scale
846: density structures in the nebular region, with a plausible interpretation involving many ($\sim$
847: 100) dense ($\sim$100 \neu) structures.
848: A variation in their number density or size can potentially lead to the observed
849: changes in DM and scattering.
850: Such a possibility can be further investigated by obtaining independent constraints on the nebular
851: electron densities (e.g. via free-free absorptions at low radio frequencies) and through
852: future observations to monitor the pulsar's DM and scattering.
853:
854: \medskip
855: \noindent
856: {\it Acknowledgements:} The ATCA is part of the Australia Telescope, which is funded
857: by CSIRO for operation as a National Facility by ATNF. Data processing was carried
858: out at Swinburne University's Supercomputing Facility. We thank Matthew Bailes and
859: Simon Johnston for fruitful discussions, and Willem van Straten and Joris Verbiest
860: for a critical reading of the manuscript.
861: We also thank the referee for a critical review and several inspiring comments and
862: suggestions that helped improve the presentation and clarity of the paper.
863: This work is supported by the MNRF research grant to Swinburne University of Technology.
864:
865: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
866: % Bibliography
867: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
868: \begin{thebibliography}{}
869: %\bigskip
870: \bibitem[Argyle \& Gower(1972)]{argyle-gower1972} Argyle, E., \& Gower,
871: J.~F.~R.\ 1972, \apjl, 175, L89
872: \bibitem[Backer et al.(2000)]{backeretal2000} Backer, D.~C., Wong, T.,
873: \& Valanju, J.\ 2000, \apj, 543, 740
874: \bibitem[Bietenholz et al.(1997)]{bietenholzetal1997}
875: Bietenholz, M.~F., Kassim, N., Frail, D.~A., Perley, R.~A., Erickson, W.~C., \& Hajian,
876: A.~R. 1997, \apj, 490, 2991
877: \bibitem[Bhat et al.(2003)]{bhatetal2003} Bhat, N. D. R.,
878: Cordes, J. M. \& Chatterjee, S. \ 2003, \apj, 584, 782
879: \bibitem[Bhat et al.(2004)]{bhatetal2004} Bhat, N.~D.~R., Cordes, J.~M.,
880: Camilo, F., Nice, D.~J., \& Lorimer, D.~R.\ 2004, \apj, 605, 759
881: \bibitem[Bhat et al.(2007)]{bhatetal2007} Bhat, N.~D.~R., et al.\
882: 2007, \apj, 665, 618
883: \bibitem[Cognard et al.(1996)]{cognardetal1996} Cognard, I., Shrauner,
884: J.~A., Taylor, J.~H., \& Thorsett, S.~E.\ 1996, \apjl, 457, L81
885: \bibitem[Cordes et al.(2004)]{cordesetal2004} Cordes, J.~M., Bhat, N.~D.~R., Hankins, T.~H., McLaughlin, M.~A., \& Kern, J.\ 2004, \apj, 612, 375
886: \bibitem[Cordes \& Lazio(2001)]{cordes-lazio2001} Cordes, J.~M., \&
887: Lazio, T.~J.~W.\ 2001, \apj, 549, 997
888: \bibitem[Cordes \& Lazio(2002)]{cordes-lazio2002} Cordes, J.~M., \&
889: Lazio, T.~J.~W.\ 2002,
890: %ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0207156
891: arXiv:astro-ph/0207156
892: \bibitem[Cordes \& Lazio(2003)]{cordes-lazio2003} Cordes, J.~M., \&
893: Lazio, T.~J.~W.\ 2003,
894: %ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0301598
895: %ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints,
896: arXiv:astro-ph/0301598
897: \bibitem[Cordes \& Rickett(1998)]{cordes-rickett1998} Cordes,
898: J.~M., \& Rickett, B.~J.\ 1998, \apj, 507, 846
899: \bibitem[Davidson(1979)]{davidson1979} Davidson, K.\ 1979, \apj,
900: 228, 179
901: \bibitem[Hankins(1971)]{hankins1971} Hankins, T.~H.\ 1971, \apj,
902: 169, 487
903: \bibitem[Hankins \& Rickett(1975)]{hankins-rickett1975}
904: Hankins, T.~H., \& Rickett, B.~J.\ 1975, Methods in Computational Physics.~Volume
905: 14 - Radio astronomy, 14, 55
906: \bibitem[Hankins et al.(2003)]{hankinsetal2003} Hankins, T.~H.,
907: Kern, J.~S., Weatherall, J.~C., \& Eilek, J.~A.\ 2003, \nat, 422, 141
908: \bibitem[Hesse \& Wielebinski(1974)]{hesse-wielebinski1974} Hesse, K.~H., \&
909: Wielebinski, R.\ 1974, \aap, 31, 409
910: \bibitem[Hester et al.(1995)]{hesteretal1995} Hester, J.~J., et al.\
911: 1995, \apj, 448, 240
912: %\bibitem[Hudgins et al.(1990)]{hudgins-herter1990} Hudgins, D., Herter,
913: %T., \& Joyce, R.~J.\ 1990, \apjl, 354, L57
914: %\bibitem[Sankrit \& Hester(1997)]{sankrit-hester1997} Sankrit, R., \&
915: %Hester, J.~J.\ 1997, \apj, 491, 796
916: \bibitem[Isaacman \& Rankin(1977)]{isaac-rankin77} Isaacman,
917: R., \& Rankin, J.~M.\ 1977, \apj, 214, 214
918: \bibitem[Johnston \& Romani(2003)]{johnston-romani2003} Johnston, S., \&
919: Romani, R.~W.\ 2003, \apjl, 590, L95
920: \bibitem[Johnston et al.(2004)]{johnstonetal2004} Johnston, S., Romani,
921: R.~W., Marshall, F.~E., \& Zhang, W.\ 2004, \mnras, 355, 31
922: \bibitem[Hester et al.(1995)]{hesteretal1995} Hester, J.~J., et al.\
923: 1995, \apj, 448, 240
924: \bibitem[Knight et al.(2006)]{knightetal2006} Knight, H.~S.,
925: Bailes, M., Manchester, R.~N., Ord, S.~M., \& Jacoby, B.~A.\ 2006,
926: \apj, 640, 941
927: \bibitem[Kostyuk et al.(2003)]{kostyuketal2003} Kostyuk, S.~V.,
928: Kondratiev, V.~I., Kuzmin, A.~D., Popov, M.~V., \& Soglasnov, V.~A.\ 2003,
929: Astronomy Letters, 29, 387
930: \bibitem[Kuzmin et al.(2002)]{kuzminetal2002} Kuzmin, A.~D.,
931: Kondrat'ev, V.~I., Kostyuk, S.~V., Losovsky, B.~Y., Popov, M.~V.,
932: Soglasnov, V.~A., D'Amico, N., \& Montebugnoli, S.\ 2002, Astronomy
933: Letters, 28, 251
934: \bibitem[L{\"o}hmer et al.(2001)]{lohmeretal2001} L{\"o}hmer, O.,
935: Kramer, M., Mitra, D., Lorimer, D.~R., \& Lyne, A.~G.\ 2001, \apjl, 562, L157
936: \bibitem[Lundgren et al.(1995)]{lundgrenetal1995} Lundgren,
937: S.~C., Cordes, J.~M., Ulmer, M., Matz, S.~M., Lomatch, S., Foster, R.~S., \&
938: Hankins, T.\ 1995, \apj, 453, 433
939: \bibitem[Lyne \& Thorne(1975)]{lyne-thorne75} Lyne, A.~G., \&
940: Thorne,
941: D.~J.\ 1975, \mnras, 172, 97
942: \bibitem[Lyne(1982)]{lyne1982} Lyne, A.~G., Jodrell Bank Crab Pulsar Monthly Ephemeris
943: ({\tt http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/$\sim$pulsar/crab.html})
944: \bibitem[Lyne et al.(2001)]{lyneetal2001} Lyne, A.~G., Pritchard,
945: R.~S., \& Graham-Smith, F.\ 2001, \mnras, 321, 67
946: \bibitem[Manchester et al.(2005)]{manchesteretal2005} Manchester, R.~N.,
947: Hobbs, G.~B., Teoh, A., \& Hobbs, M.\ 2005, \aj, 129, 1993
948: \bibitem[Moffett(1997)]{moffett1997} Moffett, D.~A.\ 1997,
949: Ph.D.~Thesis
950: \bibitem[Moffett \& Hankins(1996)]{moffett-hankins1996}
951: Moffett, D.~A., \&
952: Hankins, T.~H.\ 1996, \apj, 468, 779
953: \bibitem[Popov et al.(2006)]{popovetal2006} Popov, M.~V., et al. 2006,
954: Astronomy Reports, 50, 562
955: \bibitem[Popov \& Stappers(2007)]{popov-stappers2007} Popov, M.~V., \&
956: Stappers, B.\ 2007, \aap, 470, 1003
957: \bibitem[Rankin \& Counselman(1973)]{rankin-counselman1973} Rankin, J.~M., \&
958: Counselman, C.~C., III 1973, \apj, 181, 875
959: \bibitem[Sallmen et al.(1999)]{sallmenetal1999} Sallmen, S.,
960: Backer, D.~C., Hankins, T.~H. et al. 1999,
961: \apj, 517, 460
962: \bibitem[Soglasnov et al.(2004)]{soglasnovetal2004} Soglasnov, V.~A.,
963: Popov, M.~V., Bartel, N. et al. 2004, \apj, 616, 439
964: \bibitem[Staelin \& Reifenstein(1968)]{staelin1968} Staelin,
965: D.~H., \& Reifenstein, E.~C.\ 1968, Science, 162, 1481
966: \bibitem[Taylor \& Cordes(1993)]{taylor-cordes1993} Taylor, J.~H., \&
967: Cordes, J.~M.\ 1993, \apj, 411, 674
968: \bibitem[Temim et al.(2006)]{temimetal2006} Temim, T., et al.\ 2006,
969: \aj, 132, 1610
970: \bibitem[van Straten(2003)]{vanstraten2003} van Straten, W. 2003,
971: PhD thesis, Swinburne Univ. of Technology
972: \bibitem[Williamson(1972)]{williamson1972} Williamson, I.~P.\
973: 1972, \mnras, 157, 55
974: \end{thebibliography}
975: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
976: % Tables
977: %\include{tabs}
978: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
979: % Figures
980: %\include{figs}
981: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
982: \end{document}
983: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
984: