1: %%
2: %% Beginning of file 'psr0656_v5.tex'
3: %%
4: %% Version of 7 October 2001
5: %%
6: %% This is a manuscript marked up using the
7: %% AASTeX v5.0 LaTeX 2e macros.
8:
9: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
10:
11: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
12:
13: \slugcomment{Submitted to Ap. J. Letters}
14: \shorttitle{X-ray Spectrum of PSR B0656+14}
15: \shortauthors{Marshall \& Schulz}
16:
17: \begin{document}
18:
19: \title{Using the High Resolution X-ray Spectrum of PSR B0656+14
20: to Constrain the Chemical Composition of the Neutron Star Atmosphere}
21:
22: \author{Herman L. Marshall and Norbert S. Schulz}
23: \affil{Center for Space Research, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139}
24: \email{hermanm@space.mit.edu, nss@space.mit.edu}
25:
26: \begin{abstract}
27:
28: Observations of PSR B0656+14 using the Chandra Low Energy Transmission
29: Grating Spectrometer are presented. The zeroth order events are pulsed
30: at an amplitude of 10 $\pm$ 2\% and the
31: image may be slightly extended. The extended
32: emission is modelled as a Gaussian with a FWHM of about 0.75\arcsec,
33: for a linear size (at a distance of 760 pc) of 8.5 $\times 10^{15}$ cm.
34: In the absence of systematic errors in the detector point spread function,
35: the extended emission comprises $\la 50$\% of the observed flux in the
36: 0.2-2.0 keV band, for a luminosity of $\la 3 \times 10^{32}$ erg s$^{-1}$.
37: The spectrum is well modelled by a dominant
38: blackbody with $T = 8.0 \pm 0.3 \times 10^5$ K and a
39: size of 22.5 $\pm$ 2.1 km in
40: addition to a harder component that is modelled as
41: a hotter and much smaller blackbody.
42: No significant absorption features are found in the spectrum that
43: might be expected from ionization edges of H or He
44: or bound-bound transitions of Fe in magnetized atmospheres.
45: Such features are expected to be deep but could
46: vary in position or strength with rotation phase.
47: There are no strong absorption features in the pulse-phased
48: spectra, however, so we conclude that the atmosphere is not dominated
49: by Fe or other heavy elements that would be partially ionized
50: at a temperature of $10^6$K.
51:
52: \end{abstract}
53:
54: \keywords{stars:neutron --- pulsars: individual (PSR~B0656+14)}
55:
56: \section{Introduction}
57:
58: The X-ray spectra of many ``middle-aged'' and isolated
59: neutron stars are dominated by a thermal component,
60: so, besides temperatures and radii, they can in
61: principle be used to measure the atmospheric
62: composition. See \citet{bt97} for a summary
63: of ROSAT observations of several neutron stars whose
64: X-ray emission could be fitted to blackbody spectra.
65: The composition can, in turn, affect the estimated temperature
66: and size of the emission region
67: \citep{rr96,rutledge99} but
68: ROSAT spectra were insufficient to determine if there were
69: spectral features that might be expected if cyclotron lines
70: or heavy elements dominate the atmosphere.
71: For example, \cite{rrm97} showed that
72: an iron-dominated atmosphere in a magnetic field
73: as strong as $10^{12}$ G would
74: show many narrow absorption features due to the distortion of
75: the energy levels.
76:
77: PSR B0656+14 is an isolated radio pulsar with a period of about 384 ms,
78: found in the {\em Einstein} ultrasoft X-ray survey
79: by \cite{cordova}.
80: ROSAT observations showed weak pulsations
81: with an amplitude of $\sim$ 14\% \citep{finley92} and that the
82: X-ray spectrum appeared to be well fit with a simple black body
83: model with $T = 9 \times 10^5$ K. From longer ROSAT
84: observations, \citet{possenti96} found that the spectrum appeared
85: slightly more complex and that the pulse shape changes with
86: energy. \cite{possenti96} fitted a two component model
87: to the pulse light curve and X-ray spectrum, suggesting that
88: the hotter component is emission from the poles and the cooler
89: part comes from the equator but the hotter component could
90: instead be modelled by a steep power law
91: component with $\alpha =
92: 3.5 \pm 0.4$ (where $f_{\nu} \propto \nu^{-\alpha}$).
93: \citet{edelstein} found a somewhat
94: lower temperature by combining {\em EUVE}, {\em ROSAT}, and
95: optical data. \citet{greiveldinger} required two black body
96: components as well as a hard power law ($\alpha =
97: 1.5 \pm 1.1$) to
98: describe the {\em ASCA} spectra extending to 5 keV.
99: The distance estimated from the pulsar's dispersion
100: measure is 760 pc \citep{tml93}.
101:
102: We observed
103: PSR B0656+14 using the Chandra Low Energy Grating
104: Spectrometer (LETGS)
105: in order to detect narrow X-ray lines in absorption
106: that might be observed if the atmosphere is dominated by iron.
107: The energies of these absorption features should depend on
108: the average magnetic field strength, so we used the High
109: Resolution Camera Spectroscopy (HRC-S) detector which provide
110: event timing to better than 10 $\mu$s in order to obtain
111: pulse phased spectra.
112: We find no strong spectral lines and show that the LETGS
113: data are consistent with the previous results; the continuum
114: is well fit by a model involving two black body components.
115: Pulse phased spectra are used to
116: search for spectral features that might be phase dependent.
117:
118: \section{Observations and Data Reduction}
119:
120: \subsection{Imaging}
121: \label{sec:imaging}
122:
123: PSR B0656+14 was observed with the LETGS on 28 November 1999
124: (JD - 2451000. = 510.99 - 511.43). The level 0
125: were processed with CIAO version 2.0b.\footnote{CIAO
126: is the Chandra Interactive Analysis of Observations, a software
127: system developed by the Chandra X-ray Center.}
128: The exposure time was 38167 s.
129: The count rate in zeroth order was consistent with 0.19 count/s
130: for the entire observation.
131: The bandpass for the zeroth order image is hard to define due
132: to the low energy resolution of the HRC-S, so we estimated the
133: energy range over which one may integrate the spectrum-weighted
134: effective area to obtain 90\% of the observed count rate:
135: 0.20 - 0.75 keV. To obtain 99\% of the total count rate, the
136: bandpass should be extended to 0.16-1.0 keV.
137: The resultant image was
138: azimuthally symmetric, as expected for a point source.
139:
140: We tested
141: the radial distribution of events against that of a comparable
142: LETG/HRC-S observation of a point source: Capella
143: (observation ID 1248). Due to the dispersion by the fine and
144: coarse support structure, the point response function of the
145: LETGS zeroth order image depends slightly on the spectrum of
146: the source. The zeroth order image yielded 180440 events
147: within 5\arcmin\ of the centroid in 85260 s.
148: The spectrum of Capella is soft but is
149: harder than that of the pulsar, so we divided the data
150: into two equal parts based on the pulse height distribution.
151: The average pulse height for the low half is quite similar
152: to that of PSR~B0656+14, but the radial profile differs
153: by no more than 1.5\% from the average profile using all events
154: so we used the average profile for comparison to the pulsar.
155: The encircled power was modelled as the sum of Gaussian and
156: exponential components, representing the Capella
157: data to better than 1.5\% over the 0-5\arcsec\ range:
158: \begin{equation}
159: \Phi(\theta) = (1-f) [ 1-e^{-\theta^2/\sigma_{PSF}^2/2} ] +
160: f [1-e^{\theta/\theta_0}] ,
161: \end{equation}
162:
163: \noindent
164: where $\theta$ is the angle from the centroid, $f = 0.31$ is
165: the fraction of the power in the exponential component, $\sigma_{PSF}$
166: is the Gaussian width parameter of the point spread function (PSF),
167: and $\theta_0$ is the scaling length of the exponential component.
168: Capella is very bright, so
169: the background has a negligible contribution ($<$ 1\%) to the radial
170: profile out to 5\arcsec\ from the source centroid.
171: For the pulsar, background was estimated from an
172: annulus 8-10\arcsec\ from the source centroid.
173:
174: The cumulative event radial profiles are given
175: in Fig.~\ref{fig:radialprofile}.
176: The profiles are normalized to unity at 5\arcsec.
177: The pulsar's radial distribution differs from Capella's by
178: $\sim$ 8.5\% at 0.5\arcsec, indicating that
179: the X-ray source may consist of a point source and some distributed
180: emission that is extended on a scale of order 0.5\arcsec.
181: A Smirnov test indicates that a 5\% difference between
182: the Capella and PSR~B0656+14
183: profiles would be significant at the $> 8\sigma$ level and
184: that differences of 1.6\% are significant at the 2$\sigma$ level.
185: We modelled the profile by combining a Gaussian model of the
186: extended emission with a PSF model.
187: The model of the extended emission was constructed
188: using the PSF model but increasing the Gaussian width
189: parameter by combining a second term in quadrature, $\sigma_{ext}$.
190: The model for the pulsar's radial distribution is matched to
191: about 2\% when $\sigma_{ext} = 0.32$\arcsec\ and the extended
192: component comprises 50\% of the total power. The uncertainties
193: are difficult to characterize and are probably dominated
194: by systematic uncertainties in the PSF. Given the
195: possible systematic uncertainties in these early HRC-S imaging data,
196: we estimate that an unresolved source accounts for $\ga$ 50\% of
197: the profile and that the FWHM of the extended emission is in the
198: range of 0.2-0.5\arcsec.
199:
200: \subsection{Timing}
201:
202: The zeroth order image was used to determine the phase and
203: period of the X-ray pulsations. After applying timing corrections
204: to the solar system barycenter and correcting for the satellite's
205: position in orbit, we determined that the pulse period was
206: 384.8990 ms with a 1 $\sigma$ uncertainty
207: of 0.0010 ms using a $\chi^2$ test on folded light curves.
208: This period is consistent with the predicted value, 384.89970 ms from
209: radio pulse monitoring (Andrew Lyne, 2001, priv. communication).
210: The pulse light curve shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pulse} was folded
211: using the radio ephemeris.
212: The pulse appears to be asymmetric, as previously found by
213: \cite{possenti96}. The modulation amplitude is 10 $\pm$ 2\%, defined
214: as $(R_{max} - R_{min}) / (R_{max} + R_{min})$, where $R_{max}$
215: and $R_{min}$ are the maximum and minimum of the pulse light
216: curve, respectively. This value is consistent with the pulse
217: fractions
218: obtained by \cite{finley92} (14 $\pm$ 2\%) and
219: \cite{possenti96} (9 $\pm$ 1\%).
220:
221: The radio phase is defined so that the peak of the radio pulse
222: occurs at a phase of zero. Fig.~\ref{fig:pulse} shows that
223: the X-ray peak is at about phase 0.85, which is about
224: 55\arcdeg\ out of phase with the radio phase.
225: The absolute timing HRC-S has been verified to an accuracy
226: of $<$ 0.001 s using the Crab pulsar
227: (Allyn Tennant, 2001, priv. comm.).
228:
229: \subsection{Spectroscopic Data Reduction}
230: \label{sec:spectra}
231:
232: The spectral data were reduced from standard event lists using
233: IDL using custom processing scripts; the method is quite similar to
234: standard processing using CIAO. The procedure was to:
235: 1) select data based on the criteria suggested by the Chandra X-ray Center
236: (CXC) LETGS calibration team\footnote{Chandra calibration information
237: is available at the CXC web site:{\tt http://cxc.harvard.edu/cal/}.
238: The HRC-S selection recommendation can be found at:
239: {\tt http://cxc.harvard.edu/cal/Links/Letg/\-User/Hrc\_bg/}.}
240: in order to reduce background,
241: 2) determine the location of zeroth
242: order using one dimensional profiles fitted to Gaussians,
243: 3) rotate events from sky coordinates to compensate for the telescope roll
244: and correct for a 0.54\arcsec\ offset between HRC-S plates 0 and 1,
245: 4) compute
246: the dispersed grating coordinates ($m\lambda$ and $\theta$)
247: using the grating dispersion angles and the dispersion relation,
248: 5) select ``source'' events
249: spatially within oppositely curving parabolas of the dispersion
250: line as suggested by the CXC LETG calibration team
251: \footnote{See {\tt http://cxc.harvard.edu/cal/Links/Letg/User/Hrc\_QE/EA/Wads}. },
252: 6) eliminate data affected by detector gaps,
253: and 7) bin events at $\Delta \lambda = $0.025\AA.
254:
255: The effective area (EA) of the LETGS has undergone a few revisions
256: since launch both due to a recalculation of the LETG efficiencies
257: and due to a long series of in-flight calibration observations designed
258: to probe the HRC-S quantum efficiency. We started with the
259: updated LETGS EA that was released by the CXC of 31 October 2000\footnote{
260: This effective area is available at
261: {\tt http://\-cxc.harvard.edu/\-cal/Links/Letg/User/Hrc\_QE/\-EA/\-correct\_ea/\-letgs\_NOGAP\_EA\_\-001031.mod}.}.
262: These LETG efficiencies were used, along with the transmission models
263: of the UV ion shield, to determine the effective areas for orders 2 through 5.
264: In a final step, an adjustment to the pre-flight calibration
265: was applied which was derived from an analysis of the spectrum of Mrk 478
266: \citep{mk478} and PKS 2155-304 (Marshall et al. 2002, in preparation).
267: The spectra of both targets are well fit by a simple power
268: law with Galactic absorption.
269: The adjustments affect primarily the spectrum at low energies
270: ($E < 0.2$ keV), where high order contributions are beginning
271: to be important.
272:
273: Directly totalling the observed fluxes over the 0.2-3.0 keV band
274: gives an observed flux of 1.01 $\pm 0.03 \times 10^{-11}$ erg
275: cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ for an absorbed luminosity of
276: 7.0 $\pm 0.2 \times 10^{32}$ erg
277: s$^{-1}$.
278: The data were rebinned adaptively to provide a signal/noise
279: ratio of 5 in each
280: bin over the 0.10 to 2.0 keV range. The spectrum, shown in
281: Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum}, was estimated using
282: the first order EA only. The contributions to the observed counts
283: due to high orders are estimated by folding a model for first order
284: through the high order EA and dividing by the first order EA. This
285: procedure has the disadvantage that all the spectral features in the
286: high order EAs
287: are apparent but the advantage is that the result will match the
288: intrinsic spectrum well if first order dominates. For this source,
289: high orders are negligible above 0.20 keV.
290:
291: \section{Modelling the Spectrum}
292:
293: \label{sec:models}
294:
295: Following previous analyses, we modelled the continuum with two
296: blackbody components. Our objective is primarily to define a
297: smooth continuum model to use as a baseline for line searches.
298: We did not include the hard power
299: law component found by \citet{greiveldinger} because its contribution
300: in the 0.2-1.0 keV band is negligible.
301: We exclude the data below 0.15 keV from
302: the fit where uncertainties in the high order
303: grating efficiencies can be important.
304: Gaussian statistics could be used for continuum modelling by rebinning
305: to obtain a signal/noise ratio of at least 5 in each bin, giving
306: reduced $\chi^2 = 1.13$,
307: acceptable at the 90\% level. The distribution of the residuals
308: is not consistent with a Gaussian, however; the Kolmogorov test
309: rejects at the 99.99\% confidence level due to systematic
310: skewing of the residuals to positive values. This may result
311: from systematic errors at the 5-10\% level
312: in the 0.45-0.55 keV portion of the spectrum.
313:
314: The best fit temperatures of the two blackbody components
315: were $8.0 \pm 0.3 \times 10^5$ and
316: $1.6 \pm 0.3 \times 10^6$ K and
317: the radii were 22.5 $\pm$ 2.1 and 1.7 $\pm$ 1.0 km, respectively.
318: The best-fit interstellar medium (ISM) column density, $N_H$,
319: was $1.73 \pm 0.18 \times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$.
320: These parameters are close to those found by \citet{greiveldinger}.
321: The best fit model is plotted against the fitted data in
322: Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum}.
323: The count spectrum (Fig.~\ref{fig:countspec}) was binned
324: at 0.125 \AA\ resolution in order to
325: search for narrow spectral features against the continuum model.
326: No significant absorption features were found.
327: A fit to a nonmagnetized H atmosphere \citep{zps96} gave
328: a much lower temperature, 230000 K, a very large radius,
329: 413 $\pm$ 53 km and a much larger $N_H$, $2.6 \pm 0.2 \times
330: 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$.
331:
332: The data were divided into pulse maximum and minimum
333: by phase: 0.05-0.55 and 0.55-1.05 (see Fig.~\ref{fig:pulse}).
334: The difference spectrum (Fig.~\ref{fig:specdiff})
335: shows a dip in the 45-50 \AA\ region.
336: The pulse amplitude spectrum was defined as the ratio
337: of the difference spectrum to the model of the pulse-averaged
338: spectrum and is also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:specdiff}. The result
339: is rather flat, consistent with being constant over this
340: wavelength band.
341:
342: \section{Discussion and Summary}
343:
344: Models of a neutron star atmosphere
345: dominated by Fe in a strong magnetic field, such as
346: computed by \citet{rrm97}, should show deep narrow features
347: which we do not observe. For a hydrogen atmosphere,
348: however, there are very few spectral features but
349: the radius of the fitted nonmagnetized H atmosphere is much too large.
350: In order to reduce the apparent radius to 13 km
351: (appropriate for a neutron star with
352: a mass of 1.4 $M_{\sun}$ and a radius of 10 km),
353: the distance would have to be absurdly small -- 24 pc --
354: given the large $N_H$ and the large distance from the dispersion measure.
355: For the blackbody model, however, the distance would have to be
356: about 440 pc, which is consistent with the estimate from
357: the pulsar's dispersion measure.
358: For a magnetized H atmosphere, results are similar to the
359: case with $B = 0$ but are not quite so extreme.
360: \citet{meyer94} found that the {\it ROSAT}
361: spectrum of Geminga fit a blackbody with $T = 7.6 \times 10^5$ K
362: while a magnetized H atmosphere gave $T = 5.0 \times 10^5$ K for
363: $B = 4.7 \times 10^{12}$ G. The magnetic field estimated for PSR~B0656+14
364: is the same \citep{tml93}, so one might expect a similar
365: reduction when fitting the PSR B0656+14 spectrum. In order
366: to generate the same observed flux, the radius of
367: the emission region would have to increase by a factor of 2.3 to
368: 52 $\pm$ 5 km so the distance would have to be reduced to 190 pc.
369: A distance to less than 200 pc can be definitely
370: ruled out using the dispersion measure and a more refined model
371: of the local ISM (J. Cordes, 2002, private communication).
372:
373: We find no significant absorption features in the
374: pulse-averaged or pulse-phased spectra over the 0.15-0.80 keV band.
375: Thus, we can rule out
376: electron and proton cyclotron resonance lines, which
377: should be rather deep and possibly broadened,
378: according to models by \cite{zane01} and \cite{holai01}.
379: The proton cyclotron line would be expected at an observed
380: energy $E_o = E_p / (1+z) = \hbar eB/(m_p c)/(1+z) = 0.0063 /
381: (1+z) B_{12}$ keV, where $B_{12} = B / (10^{12}$ G) and
382: $z = (1-2GM/Rc^2)^{-1/2} - 1$ is the surface redshift.
383: Substituting the electron mass for the proton mass, $m_p$,
384: gives the electron cyclotron line energy
385: $E_e / (1+z) = \hbar eB/(m_e c)/(1+z) = 1.16 /
386: (1+z) B_{12}$ keV.
387: Thus,
388: we eliminate the ranges $0.017 < B_{12} < 0.090$ and $30 < B_{12} < 165$
389: if $z = 0.30$ (for a neutron star of
390: 1.4 M$_{\sun}$ and a radius of 10 km).
391: These ranges do not exclude the magnetic field estimate
392: from the dipole braking model: $B_{12} = 4.7$
393: \citep{tml93}. The lower limits can be reduced if the bulk of the
394: emission comes from the equatorial zone where the magnetic field is
395: $\sim 50$\% of the polar value or if the absorbing plasma is far
396: off of the neutron surface.
397:
398: For this dipole field estimate, a
399: light element atmosphere should show H or He ionization edges
400: in the 0.15-0.80 keV bandpass. \cite{ls97} give an estimate for
401: the ionization edge energy and its dependence on the
402: atomic number $Z$:
403: \begin{equation}
404: E_Z = 4.4 Z^2 [ \ln ( \frac{B}{Z^2 B_0} ) ]^2 {\rm ~~eV}
405: \end{equation}
406:
407: \noindent
408: where $B_0 = 2.35 \times 10^{9}$ G.
409: A He {\sc i} edge would be expected in the 0.5-0.7 keV range.
410: We do not detect this edge, which may not be surprising, as helium
411: may have settled in the atmosphere to high optical depths.
412: For surface temperatures of 9-22 $\times 10^5$ K (allowing
413: for variation between the pole and the equator), He is almost
414: completely neutral while H is 7-22\% ionized.
415: So, we expect to find the H {\sc i} edge between 0.20 and 0.25 keV
416: (depending on the surface gravity) but it is not observed.
417: The spectrum is dominated by the
418: cooler thermal component, however, which is presumably emission from the
419: equatorial zone in which $B$ is $\sim 2\times$ weaker than at the pole.
420: Thus, the edge may be found in the 0.16-0.21 keV region, where
421: the signal/noise ratio is poor and
422: high order contributions to the LETGS spectrum become important.
423:
424: Most of a pulsar's spin-down luminosity is thought to be carried off
425: as a relativistic electron/positron wind. When this wind is confined
426: by external pressure, a shock forms and the relativistic particles
427: radiate synchrotron emission in the form of a pulsar
428: wind nebula (PWN). The Crab Nebula
429: (Hester et al. 1995, Weisskopf et al. 2000) is the best known example.
430: PWNe have been observed around at least 6 pulsars so far \citep{bt97,lu02}.
431: Claims from ASCA observations of vastly extended PWNe ($>$ 10-20\arcmin)
432: in this and other pulsars
433: with luminosities of the order of $10^{32}$ erg s$^{-1}$
434: have not been confirmed
435: by {\em ROSAT} and {\em BeppoSAX} \citep{becker99}.
436: We also do not detect such a large extended nebula around PSR B0656+14.
437: The image appears slightly extended, consistent with a point
438: source comprising $\ga 50$\% of the total 0.1-3 keV luminosity.
439: The remainder, with an unabsorbed luminosity of
440: $\la 3 \times 10^{32}$ erg s$^{-1}$
441: can be modelled with a Gaussian with a FWHM of 0.75\arcsec\
442: corresponding to a size of 8.5 $\times 10^{15}$ cm.
443: This extended emission is consistent with the result of \citet{becker99},
444: who found that a PWN around PSR B0656+14 must have an
445: extent of less than 10\arcsec. Based on its spin-down age, $\sim 10^5$ yr,
446: PSR B0656+14 is an order of magnitude older
447: than the Vela pulsar, the oldest pulsar around which a PWN has
448: been detected \citep{bt97}. If we assume a similar emission efficiency
449: for PSR B0656+14 as for the Vela pular ($\sim 0.04\%$),
450: we can set an upper limit to the expected luminosity of the PWN of
451: 1.5$\times 10^{33}$ erg s$^{-1}$, consistent
452: with the observed value.
453:
454: \acknowledgments
455:
456: We are extremely grateful to Prof. Claude R. Canizares,
457: the Principal Investigator of the {\em Chandra} High
458: Energy Transmission Grating Spectrometer, for
459: allocating part of his guaranteed time to this observation.
460: We thank the referee for comments that have
461: resulted in significant improvements to the paper.
462: This work has been supported in part under NASA contract
463: SAO SV1-61010.
464:
465: \begin{thebibliography}{}
466: \bibitem[Becker \& Tr\"umper(1997)]{bt97}
467: Becker, W., \& Trumper, J., 1997, \aap, 326, 682
468: \bibitem[Becker et al.(1999)]{becker99}
469: Becker, W., Kawai, N., Brinkmann, W., and Mignani, R.\ 1999, \aap,
470: 352, 532
471: \bibitem[Cordova et al.(1989)]{cordova}
472: Cordova, F.A., Hjellming,
473: R.M., Mason, K.O., and Middleditch, J., \ 1989, \apj, 345, 451
474: \bibitem[Edelstein et al.(2000)]{edelstein}
475: Edelstein, J., Seon, K.-I., Golden, A., and Min, K.-W.
476: 2000, \apj, 539, 902
477: \bibitem[Finley et al.(1992)]{finley92}
478: Finley, J., \"{O}gelman, H. \& Zizilo\u{g}lu, \"{U}. 1992,
479: \apjl, 394, L21
480: \bibitem[Greiveldinger et al.(1996)]{greiveldinger}
481: Greiveldinger, C., et al.\ 1996, \apj, 465, L35
482: \bibitem[Hester et al. (1995)]{hester95}
483: Hester, J.J., et al. 1995, \apj, 448, 240
484: \bibitem[Ho \& Lai(2001)]{holai01}
485: Ho, W., \& Lai, D.\ 2001, \mnras, 327, 108
486: \bibitem[Lai \& Salpeter(1997)]{ls97}
487: Lai, D., \& Salpeter, E.E.\ 1997, \apj, 491, 270
488: \bibitem[Lu et al.(1997)]{lu02}
489: Lu, F.J., Wang, Q.D., Aschenbach, B., Durouchoux, P.,
490: Song, L.M. 2002, \apjl, in press
491: \bibitem[Marshall et al.(2002)]{mk478}
492: Marshall, H.L., Edelson, R.A., Vaughan, S., Warwick, R.,
493: Malkan, M., and O'Brien, P. 2002, \apj, submitted
494: \bibitem[Meyer et al.(1994)]{meyer94}
495: Meyer, R.D., Pavlov, G.G., and Meszaros, P. 1994, \apj, 433, 265
496: \bibitem[Rutledge et al.(1999)]{rutledge99}
497: Rutledge, R. E., Bildsten, L., Brown, E. F., Pavlov, G. G., \&
498: Zavlin, V. E. 1999, \apj, 514, 945
499: \bibitem[Pavlov et al.(1997)]{pavlov97}
500: Pavlov, G.G., Welty, A.D., and Cordova, F.A. 1997, \apjl, 489, 75
501: %\bibitem[Pavlov et al.(2001)]{pavlov01}
502: % Pavlov, G.G., Zavlin, V.E., Sanwal, D., Burwitz, V., and
503: % Garmire, G.P., 2001, \apj, 552, 129
504: \bibitem[Possenti et al.(1996)]{possenti96}
505: Possenti, A., Mereghetti, S., and Colpi, M. 1996, \aap, 313, 565
506: \bibitem[Rajagopal \& Romani(1996)]{rr96}
507: Rajagopal, M., \& Romani, R.W., 1996, \apj, 461, 327
508: \bibitem[Rajagopal et al.(1997)]{rrm97}
509: Rajagopal, M., Romani, R.W., and Miller, M.C. 1997, \apj, 479, 347
510: \bibitem[Taylor, Manchester, \& Lyne(1993)]{tml93}
511: Taylor, J.~H., Manchester, R.~N., \& Lyne, A.~G.\ 1993, \apjs, 88, 529
512: \bibitem[Tsuruta(1998)]{tsuruta98}
513: Tsuruta, S., 1998, Phys. Rep., 292, 1.
514: \bibitem[Weisskopf et al.(2000)]{weisskopf00}
515: Weisskopf M.C., et al., 2000, \apjl, 536, L81
516: \bibitem[Zane et al.(2001)]{zane01}
517: Zane, S., Turolla, R., Stella, L. \& Treves, A. 2001
518: \apj, 560, 384
519: \bibitem[Zavlin, Pavlov, \& Shibanov(1996)]{zps96}
520: Zavlin, V.~E., Pavlov, G.~G., \& Shibanov, Y.~A.\ 1996
521: \aap, 315, 141
522: \end{thebibliography}
523:
524: \clearpage
525:
526: \begin{figure}
527: \plotone{f1.ps}
528: \caption{Enclosed fractional power for the pulsar, PSR~B0656+14
529: (solid line), and for Capella (dashed line).
530: The pulsar's profile is somewhat broader than that of Capella,
531: giving an indication that there is some extended emission around
532: the neutron star.
533: A model of the point spread function (PSF) was fitted
534: to the Capella data.
535: The model of the pulsar's power profile consists of a PSF
536: and an extended emission modelled by a Gaussian with
537: $\sigma_{ext} = 0.32$\arcsec\ convolved with the PSF.
538: All profiles (except the extended component)
539: are normalized to unity at an angle of 5\arcsec\ from
540: the image centroid.
541: Given the possible systematic uncertainties in
542: early HRC-S data, we estimate that a point source contributes
543: $\ga$ 50\% of the source flux.
544: \label{fig:radialprofile} }
545: \end{figure}
546:
547: \begin{figure}
548: \plotone{f2.ps}
549: \caption{The pulse profile of the zeroth order events.
550: {\em Bottom:} Hard bandpass (15-43 \AA, or 0.29-0.83 keV),
551: {\em middle:} soft bandpass (43-60 \AA\ or 0.21-0.29 keV),
552: {\em top:} total (15-60 \AA\ or 0.21-0.83 keV).
553: The data are replicated to the phase range 1-2 for presentation.
554: An unpulsed background level was subtracted from each profile.
555: The events are folded at the period given by an accurate
556: radio pulse ephemeris (Andrew Lyne, private communication):
557: 384.89970 ms. The pulse is asymmetric and the peak is centered
558: at phase 0.85 where zero phase is defined to be the peak of the
559: radio pulse. Thus, it appears that the X-ray
560: pulse somewhat leads the radio pulse by about 0.15 in phase.
561: The soft and hard pulse profiles are quite similar.
562: \label{fig:pulse} }
563: \end{figure}
564:
565: \begin{figure}
566: \epsscale{0.75}
567: \plotone{f3.ps}
568: \caption{The LETGS spectrum of PSR~B0656+14. The bin sizes have
569: been varied to provide good signal in each energy bin; the
570: uncertainties are about 20\% everywhere.
571: {\em solid line:} a model consisting of two blackbody
572: components. The lower panel shows the residuals as ratios
573: to the uncertainties. High orders do not
574: contribute significantly for $E > 0.20$ keV while the data at
575: low energies ($E < 0.15$ keV) are best
576: modelled as the result of the sum of high orders. The cooler
577: blackbody component dominates the total power while the hotter
578: component dominates the spectrum for $E > 0.8$ keV.
579: \label{fig:spectrum} }
580: \end{figure}
581:
582: \begin{figure}
583: \epsscale{1.0}
584: \plotone{f4.ps}
585: \caption{The count spectrum of PSR~B0656+14 obtained with the
586: LETGS. A binning of 0.125\AA\ was used to obtain sufficient
587: signal per bin to search for narrow features.
588: {\em Heavy dashed line:} expected count spectrum from
589: the model shown in figure~\ref{fig:spectrum}.
590: {\em Light dotted lines:} $\pm$ 1 $\sigma$ uncertainties about
591: the model. The residuals are consistent with statistical
592: fluctuations about the model. The sharp edges in the model
593: near 50 to 70\AA\ range are due to detector gaps.
594: \label{fig:countspec} }
595: \end{figure}
596:
597: \begin{figure}
598: \epsscale{0.8}
599: \plotone{f5.ps}
600: \caption{Difference spectra in
601: 0.775\AA\ bins. The spectrum from the phase range 0.55-1.05
602: (see Fig.~\ref{fig:pulse})
603: is subtracted from the remaining phase range.
604: In the bottom panel, the difference spectrum is divided
605: by the model of the total spectrum, giving a fractional residual.
606: In the 45-50\AA\ band, there is a dip in the minimum spectrum
607: relative to that of pulse maximum, which is clearly detected
608: in the count spectrum. The bottom panel shows that
609: the residuals are generally consistent with a
610: $\sim 8$\% difference between the two spectra that is independent
611: of wavelength.
612: \label{fig:specdiff} }
613: \end{figure}
614:
615: \end{document}
616: