1: %\documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}

2: \documentstyle[aaspp4]{article}

3: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

4: 

5: \received{}

6: \accepted{}

7: \journalid{VOL}{JOURNAL DATE}

8: \articleid{START PAGE}{END PAGE}

9: \paperid{MANUSCRIPT ID}

10: 

11: %\lefthead{Lee \& Yoshida}

12: %\righthead{The r-mode instability of neutron stars with the superfluid core}

13: 

14: \begin{document}

15: 

16: %\magnification=1200

17: %\def\pmb#1{\setbox0=\hbox{$#1$}

18: % \kern-.025em\copy0\kern-\wd0

19: % \kern-.05em\copy0\kern-\wd0

20: % \kern-.025em\raise.0433em\box0 }

21: \def\gtsim {>\kern-1.2em\lower1.1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}

22: \def\ltsim {<\kern-1.2em\lower1.1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}

23: \def\ref{\hangindent=1pc \hangafter=1 \noindent}

24: %

25: \def\pmb#1{\mbox{\boldmath$#1$}}

26: %

27: %\baselineskip=20pt

28: 

29: \title{\bf R-modes of neutron stars with the superfluid core}

30: 

31: \author{Umin Lee$^1$ \& Shijun Yoshida$^{1,2}$}

32: 

33: \affil{$^1$Astronomical Institute, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578, Japan

34: \\ lee@astr.tohoku.ac.jp, yoshida@astr.tohoku.ac.jp}

35: 

36: \affil{$^2$Centro Multidisciplinar de Astrof\'{\i}sica -- CENTRA,

37: Departamento de F\'{\i}sica, Instituto Superior T\'ecnico, Av. Rovisco 

38: Pais 1,

39: 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal}

40: 

41: \begin{abstract}

42: 

43: We investigate the modal properties of the $r$-modes 

44: of rotating neutron stars with the core filled with neutron and proton superfluids,

45: taking account of entrainment effects between the superfluids.

46: The stability of the $r$-modes against gravitational radiation reaction

47: is also examined considering

48: viscous dissipation due to shear and a damping mechanism called mutual 

49: friction between the superfluids in the core.

50: We find the $r$-modes in the superfluid core

51: are split into ordinary $r$-modes and

52: superfluid $r$-modes, which we call, respectively, $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes.

53: The two superfluids in the core flow together for the $r^o$-modes, while

54: they counter-move for the $r^s$-modes.

55: For the $r^o$-modes, the coefficient $\kappa_0\equiv\lim_{\Omega\rightarrow 0}\omega/\Omega$ 

56: is equal to $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$, almost independent of the parameter $\eta$ that

57: parameterizes the entrainment effects between the superfluids,

58: where $\Omega$ is the angular frequency of rotation, 

59: $\omega$ the oscillation frequency observed in the corotating frame of the star, and

60: $l^\prime$ and $m$ are the indices of

61: the spherical harmonic function representing the angular dependence of the $r$-modes.

62: For the $r^s$-modes, on the other hand, $\kappa_0$ is equal to $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$

63: at $\eta=0$ (no entrainment), and it almost linearly increases as $\eta$ is increased from $\eta=0$.

64: The $r^o$-modes, for which $\pmb{w}^\prime\equiv\pmb{v}^\prime_p-\pmb{v}^\prime_n\propto\Omega^3$,

65: correspond to the $r$-modes discussed by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000), where

66: $\pmb{v}^\prime_n$ and $\pmb{v}^\prime_p$ are the Eulerian velocity perturbations

67: of the neutron and proton superfluids, respectively.

68: The mutual friction in the superfluid core is found ineffective to stabilize the $r$-mode

69: instability caused by the $r^o$-mode except in a few narrow regions of $\eta$.

70: The $r$-mode instability caused by the $r^s$-modes, on the other hand, is extremely

71: weak and easily damped by dissipative processes in the star.

72: 

73: 

74: 

75: \end{abstract}

76: 

77: \keywords{instabilities --- stars: neutron --- stars: oscillations --- stars : rotation}

78: 

79: 

80: \section{Introduction}

81: 

82: 

83: One of the roles expected for the $r$-mode instability to play

84: (Andersson 1998, Friedman \& Morsink 1998) 

85: is deceleration of the spin of newly born hot neutron stars by emitting

86: gravitational waves that carry away the angular momentum of the star

87: (e.g., Lindblom et al 1998).

88: We know, however, that

89: among older and colder neutron stars as found in LMXB systems

90: there are many rapidly rotating neutron stars like a millisecond pulsar

91: (see, e.g, Phinney \& Kulkarni 1994).

92: This fact suggests the possibility that

93: the $r$-mode instability does not always work well

94: to spin down the rapid rotation of the stars.

95: For the $r$-modes in cold neutron stars with a solid crust, for example,

96: Bildsten \& Ushomirsky (2000) suggested a damping mechanism operating

97: in the viscous boundary layer at the interface between the solid crust and the

98: fluid core,

99: to explain the clustering of spin frequencies around the value of 300Hz 

100: for accreting neutron stars in LMXB systems (van der Klis 2000; see also

101: Andersson, Kokkotas, \& Stergioulas 1999).

102: For the modal properties of the $r$-modes in neutron stars

103: with a solid crust, see Yoshida \& Lee (2001), who

104: showed that the $r$-modes in the core are largely affected by resonance with

105: the toroidal sound modes propagating in the solid crust.

106: 

107: 

108: As neutron stars cool down below $T\sim 10^9{\rm K}$,  

109: neutrons and protons in the core are believed to

110: be in superfluid states (e.g., Shapiro \& Tuekolwsky 1983).

111: In a rotating system of superfluids, it is well known that scattering between 

112: vortices in the superfluids and normal fluid particles produces

113: dissipation called mutual friction (e.g., Khalatnikov 1965, Tilley \& Tilley 1990).

114: Therefore, for people who are interested in the $r$-modes instability, 

115: it was a serious concern whether the $r$-mode instability could survive the dissipation

116: due to mutual

117: friction in the superfluid core of cold neutron stars, e.g., in LMXBs.

118: It was Lindblom \& Mendell (2000) who first examined the damping effects of 

119: mutual friction in the core

120: on the $r$-mode instability, and concluded that the mutual friction could not be

121: strong enough to damp out the instability in most of the parameter domains 

122: which we are interested in.

123: In their analysis of the $r$-modes in neutron stars,

124: Lindblom \& Mendell (2000)

125: employed a perturbative method in which the spin angular frequency $\Omega$ is regarded

126: as the infinitesimal parameter to expand the eigenfrequencies and eigenfunctions

127: of the modes, and they looked for the $r$-modes with the scalings given by

128: $\beta^\prime\equiv\mu_p^\prime-\mu_n^\prime+m_e\mu_e^\prime/m_p\propto \Omega^4$ 

129: and $\pmb{w}^\prime\equiv\pmb{v}_p^\prime-\pmb{v}_n^\prime\propto\Omega^3$, where

130: $\mu_p$, $\mu_n$, and $\mu_e$ are

131: the chemical potentials of the proton, neutron,

132: and electron in the core, and $\pmb{v}_p$ and $\pmb{v}_n$ are the velocities of the

133: proton and neutron superfluids, and the prime $(^\prime)$ indicates the

134: Euler perturbation of the quantity.

135: 

136: Recently, Andersson \& Comer (2001) discussed the dynamics of superfluid neutron star cores, 

137: and confirmed an earlier result by Lee (1995)

138: that there are no $g$-modes propagating in the superfluid core.

139: They also applied their argument to the $r$-modes in the core 

140: filled with neutron and proton superfluids, and

141: suggested the existence of two distinct families of the $r$-modes in the core, i.e.,

142: $r$-modes for which

143: the neutrons and the protons flow together, and those

144: for which the neutrons and the protons are counter moving.

145: Lindblom \& Mendell (2000) considered the former family of the $r$-modes,

146: which are less strongly affected by the mutual friction than the latter.

147: 

148: 

149: In this paper, we employ a different method of calculation

150: to investigate the $r$-modes in rotating neutron stars, although

151: the basic equations describing the dynamics of superfluids in the core

152: are essentially the same as those given in Lindblom \& Mendell (1994).

153: Our method of solution is a variant of that used in Lee \& Saio (1986).

154: Because the separation of variables is not possible for perturbations in

155: rotating stars,

156: we expand the perturbations in terms of

157: spherical harmonic functions $Y_l^m(\theta,\phi)$ with different $l$'s for a given $m$.

158: We substitute the expansions into linearized basic equations to obtain a set of

159: simultaneous linear ordinary differential equations of the expansion coefficients, which is

160: to be solved as an eigenvalue problem of the oscillation frequency.

161: In this method, we do not have to assume apriori a form of solutions for the $r$-modes

162: in the lowest order of $\Omega$.

163: In \S 2 we present the basic equations employed in this paper

164: for the dynamics of superfluids in the core, and in \S 3

165: dissipation processes considered in this paper are described.

166: \S 4 gives numerical results, and \S 5 and \S 6 are for discussions and conclusions.

167: 

168: 

169: 

170: \section{Oscillation Equations in the Superfluid Core of Rotating Neutron Stars}

171: 

172: Microscopically, the superfluids in a rotating system

173: move irrotationally everywhere except within the core

174: of vortex lines.

175: Averaging over many vortices in the fluids, we may define the average superfluid velocities

176: $<\pmb{v}>$,

177: which can satisfy the usual relation for uniform rotation 

178: $\nabla\times <\pmb{v}>=2\pmb{\Omega}$ in the equilibrium state

179: (see, e.g., Feynman 1972).

180: In the following we simply use $\pmb{v}$, instead of $<\pmb{v}>$, to signify the 

181: superfluid velocities.

182: Hydrodynamic equations for a rotating superfluid based on the two-fluid model

183: with the normal fluid and superfluid components

184: are derived, for example, in Khalatnikov (1965).

185: 

186: 

187: We derive basic equations governing superfluid motions

188: in the neutron star core in the Newtonian dynamics, assuming uniform rotation of the star.

189: The core is assumed to be filled with neutron and proton superfluids and 

190: a normal fluid of electron.

191: We also assume perfect charge neutrality between the protons and electrons because

192: the plasma frequency is much higher than the oscillation frequencies considered in

193: this paper (see, e.g., Mendell 1991a).

194: Since the transition temperatures $T_c\sim 10^9$K to neutron and proton superfluids 

195: are much higher than the interior temperatures of old neutron stars (see, e.g., 

196: Epstein 1988), 

197: we assume that all the neutrons and protons in the core are in superfluid states and

198: the normal fluid components of the fluids can be ignored.

199: 

200: The basic hydrodynamic equations employed in this paper for the

201: neutron and proton superfluids in rotating neutron stars 

202: are essentially the same as those given in Mendell (1991a) and

203: Lindblom \& Mendell (1994).

204: In a fluid system in which two superfluids coexist, the entrainment between 

205: the two superfluid motions occurs because a Cooper pair of one

206: fluid particles is affected by the force field produced by the other fluid particles

207: (Andreev \& Bashkin 1975 for a system of $^3$He and $^4$He superfluids).

208: In the system of the neutron and proton superfluids in the core

209: the entrainment effects between them are mediated

210: by quantum mechanical nuclear force

211: between the neutrons and the protons (e.g., Alpar et al 1984).

212: Here, we introduce the entrainment effects in

213: mass conservation equations, which are given by

214: %

215: \begin{equation}

216: {\partial\rho_n\over\partial t}+\nabla\cdot\pmb{j}_n=0, 

217: \end{equation}

218: %

219: and

220: %

221: \begin{equation}

222: {\partial\rho_p\over\partial t}+\nabla\cdot\pmb{j}_p=0, 

223: \end{equation}

224: %

225: where $\rho_n$ and $\rho_p$ are the mass densities of the neutron and proton superfluids,

226: and the mass current vectors $\pmb{j}_n$ and $\pmb{j}_p$ are defined as

227: %

228: \begin{equation}

229: \pmb{j}_n=\rho_{nn}\pmb{v}_n+\rho_{np}\pmb{v}_p, 

230: \end{equation}

231: %

232: and

233: %

234: \begin{equation}

235: \pmb{j}_p=\rho_{pp}\pmb{v}_p+\rho_{pn}\pmb{v}_n, 

236: \end{equation}

237: %

238: where $\pmb{v}_n$ and $\pmb{v}_p$ denote the velocities of the neutron and the proton superfluids,

239: respectively, and the coefficients $\rho_{nn}$, $\rho_{np}$, $\rho_{pp}$, and $\rho_{pn}$

240: are defined to satisfy $\rho_n=\rho_{nn}+\rho_{np}$ and

241: $\rho_p=\rho_{pp}+\rho_{pn}$ and $\rho_{np}=\rho_{pn}$ under Galilean transformations.

242: The mass conservation equation for the electron fluid is given by

243: %

244: \begin{equation}

245: {\partial\rho_e\over\partial t}+\nabla\cdot\left(\rho_e\pmb{v}_e\right)=0,

246: \end{equation}

247: %

248: where $\rho_e$ and $\pmb{v}_e$ denote, respectively,

249: the mass density and the velocity of the electron fluid.

250: The velocity equation of the neutron superfluid is in an inertial frame given by

251: %

252: \begin{equation}

253: {\partial \pmb{v}_n\over\partial t}+\pmb{v}_n\cdot\nabla\pmb{v}_n=-\nabla(\mu_n+\Psi)

254: +{\rho_{np}\over\rho_n}\left(\pmb{v}_p-\pmb{v}_n\right)\times\left(\nabla\times\pmb{v}_n\right),

255: \end{equation}

256: %

257: where $\mu_n$ is the chemical potential of neutron per unit mass, and $\Psi$ is the 

258: gravitational potential.

259: The term proportional to $\rho_{np}$ on the right hand side of equation (6) represents

260: a drag force between neutrons and protons.

261: If we assume perfect charge neutrality of 

262: the proton and electron plasma, we may have

263: %

264: \begin{equation}

265: \pmb{j}_p/\rho_p=\pmb{v}_e, \quad {\rm and} \quad \rho_p/m_p=\rho_e/m_e,

266: \end{equation}

267: %

268: where $m_p$ and $m_e$ are the proton and the electron masses.

269: The velocity equation for the proton-electron fluid is then given by

270: %

271: \begin{equation}

272: {\partial\over\partial t}\left(\pmb{v}_p+{m_e\over m_p}\pmb{v}_e\right)

273: +\pmb{v}_p\cdot\nabla\pmb{v}_p

274: +{m_e\over m_p}{\pmb{v}_e}\cdot\nabla{\pmb{v}_e}

275: =-\nabla\left(\mu_p+{m_e\over m_p}\mu_e+\zeta\Psi\right)

276: -{\rho_{np}\over\rho_p}\left(\pmb{v}_p-\pmb{v}_n\right)\times\left(\nabla\times\pmb{v}_p\right), 

277: \end{equation}

278: %

279: where $\zeta=1+m_e/m_p$, and $\mu_p$ and $\mu_e$ are the chemical potentials

280: per unit mass for the proton and electron, respectively.

281: Note that we have neglected the entropy carried by the normal fluid of electron

282: for simplicity.

283: The Poisson equation is given by

284: %

285: \begin{equation}

286: \nabla^2\Psi=4\pi G\rho, 

287: \end{equation}

288: %

289: where $\rho=\rho_n+\rho_p+\rho_e$ and $G$ is the gravitational constant.

290: 

291: 

292: To linearise the hydrodynamic equations for the superfluids in

293: rotating neutron stars, we assume that

294: the neutron and proton superfluids and the electron normal fluid in an equilibrium state 

295: are in the same rotational motion

296: with the angular velocity $\Omega$ around the axis of rotation, which is along the z-axis.

297: In a perturbed state, however, the neutron and the proton superfluids move differently

298: from each other in the core, obeying their own governing equations.

299: The mass current vectors are linearized to be

300: %

301: \begin{equation}

302: \pmb{j}_n^\prime=\rho_n^\prime\pmb{v}_0+\tilde{\pmb{j}}_n^\prime,

303: \quad {\rm and} \quad

304: \pmb{j}_p^\prime=\rho_p^\prime\pmb{v}_0+\tilde{\pmb{j}}_p^\prime,

305: \end{equation}

306: %

307: where the prime $(^\prime)$ indicates the Eulerian perturbation of the quantity,

308: and $\pmb{v}_{n0}=\pmb{v}_{p0}=\pmb{v}_0=r\sin\theta\Omega\pmb{e}_\phi$

309: is the fluid velocity in the equilibrium state, and

310: %

311: \begin{equation}

312: \tilde{\pmb{j}}_n^\prime=\rho_{nn}\pmb{v}_n^\prime+\rho_{np}\pmb{v}_p^\prime,

313: \quad {\rm and} \quad

314: \tilde{\pmb{j}}_p^\prime=\rho_{pn}\pmb{v}_n^\prime+\rho_{pp}\pmb{v}_p^\prime

315: \end{equation}

316: %

317: are the perturbed mass current vectors in a corotating frame.

318: The perturbed superfluid velocities are then given in terms of $\tilde{\pmb{j}}_n^\prime$

319: and $\tilde{\pmb{j}}_p^\prime$ as

320: %

321: \begin{equation}

322: \pmb{v}_n^\prime={\rho_{11}\over\rho_n^2}\tilde{\pmb{j}}_n^\prime

323: +{\rho_{12}\over\rho_n\rho_p}\tilde{\pmb{j}}_p^\prime,

324: \quad {\rm and} \quad

325: \pmb{v}_p^\prime={\rho_{21}\over\rho_n\rho_p}\tilde{\pmb{j}}_n^\prime

326: +{\rho_{22}\over\rho_p^2}\tilde{\pmb{j}}_p^\prime,

327: \end{equation}

328: %

329: where

330: %

331: \begin{equation}

332: \rho_{11}={\rho_{pp}\rho_n^2\over\tilde{\rho}^2}, \quad

333: \rho_{22}={\rho_{nn}\rho_p^2\over\tilde\rho^2}, \quad 

334: \rho_{12}=\rho_{21}=-{\rho_{np}\rho_n\rho_p\over\tilde\rho^2},

335: \end{equation}

336: %

337: and

338: %

339: \begin{equation}

340: \tilde\rho^2=\rho_{nn}\rho_{pp}-\rho_{np}\rho_{pn}.

341: \end{equation}

342: %

343: Note that $\rho_{11}+\rho_{12}=\rho_n$ and $\rho_{22}+\rho_{21}=\rho_p$.

344: 

345: If the equilibrium structure is axisymmetric about the rotation axis, 

346: the time dependence and $\phi-$dependence of the perturbations can be given by

347: $\exp(i\sigma t+i m\phi)$ with $\sigma$ being the oscillation frequency observed 

348: in an inertial frame, and $m$ is an integer representing the azimuthal wavenumber.

349: Introducing the vectors $\pmb{\xi}^n$, $\pmb{\xi}^p$, and $\pmb{\xi}^e$

350: defined as

351: %

352: \begin{equation}

353: \pmb{\xi}^n\equiv{\tilde{\pmb{j}}_n^\prime\over i\omega\rho_n},

354: \quad

355: \pmb{\xi}^p\equiv{\tilde{\pmb{j}}_p^\prime\over i\omega\rho_p},

356: \quad {\rm and} \quad

357: \pmb{\xi}^e\equiv {\pmb{v}_e^\prime\over i\omega},

358: \end{equation}

359: %

360: where $\omega\equiv\sigma+m\Omega$ 

361: is the oscillation frequency observed in a

362: corotating frame of the star,

363: the mass conservation equations are linearised to be

364: %

365: \begin{equation}

366: \rho_n^\prime+\nabla\cdot\left(\rho_n\pmb{\xi}^n\right)=0,

367: \end{equation}

368: %

369: and

370: %

371: \begin{equation}

372: \rho_p^\prime+\nabla\cdot\left(\rho_p\pmb{\xi}^p\right)=0.

373: \end{equation}

374: %

375: Note that the mass conservation equation for the electron fluid becomes the same as that for

376: the proton fluid because of the assumption of perfect charge neutrality, that is, 

377: $\pmb{\xi}^p=\pmb{\xi}^e$, and $\rho_p^\prime/m_p=\rho_e^\prime/m_e$.

378: The velocity equations (6) and (8) are linearized as

379: %

380: \begin{equation}

381: {\rho_{11}\over\rho_n}\pmb{F}\left(\pmb{\xi}^n\right)+

382: {\rho_{12}\over\rho_n}\pmb{F}\left(\pmb{\xi}^p\right)=

383: -\nabla\left(\mu_n^\prime+\Psi^\prime\right)

384: +i\omega{\rho_{np}\rho_p\over\tilde\rho^2}\left(\pmb{\xi}^p-\pmb{\xi}^n\right)

385: \times\left(\nabla\times\pmb{v}_0\right),

386: \end{equation}

387: %

388: and

389: %

390: \begin{equation}

391: {\rho_{21}\over\rho_p}\pmb{F}\left(\pmb{\xi}^n\right)+

392: \left({\rho_{22}\over\rho_p}+{m_e\over m_p}\right)\pmb{F}\left(\pmb{\xi}^p\right)=

393: -\nabla\left(\tilde\mu^\prime+\zeta\Psi^\prime\right)

394: -i\omega{\rho_{np}\rho_n\over\tilde\rho^2}\left(\pmb{\xi}^p-\pmb{\xi}^n\right)

395: \times\left(\nabla\times\pmb{v}_0\right),

396: \end{equation}

397: %

398: where $\tilde\mu\equiv\mu_p+\mu_e{m_e}/m_p$, and 

399: %

400: \begin{equation}

401: \pmb{F}\left(\pmb{\xi}\right)\equiv-\omega\sigma\pmb{\xi}+i\omega\pmb{v}_0\cdot\nabla\pmb{\xi}

402: +i\omega\pmb{\xi}\cdot\nabla\pmb{v}_0.

403: \end{equation}

404: %

405: The Poisson equation is reduced to

406: %

407: \begin{equation}

408: \nabla^2\Psi^\prime=4\pi G\left(\rho_n^\prime+\zeta\rho_p^\prime\right).

409: \end{equation}

410: %

411: Using a variant of Gibbs-Duhem relation,

412: the pressure perturbation is given by

413: %

414: \begin{equation}

415: p^\prime=\rho_n\mu_n^\prime+\rho_p\tilde\mu^\prime, 

416: \end{equation}

417: %

418: where we have again ignored the entropy carried by the electron normal fluid.

419: Note also that the superfluids carry no entropy.

420: 

421: To obtain a relation between the densities $\rho_n$ and $\rho_p$ and the chemical potentials

422: $\mu_n$ and $\tilde\mu$, we begin with writing the energy density $e$ as

423: %

424: \begin{equation}

425: e=e\left(\rho_n,\rho_p\right), 

426: \end{equation}

427: %

428: with which the chemical potentials are defined as

429: %

430: \begin{equation}

431: \mu_n\left(\rho_n,\rho_p\right)=\left(\partial e/\partial \rho_n\right)_{\rho_p}, \quad

432: \mu_p\left(\rho_n,\rho_p\right)=\left(\partial e/\partial \rho_p\right)_{\rho_n}.

433: \end{equation}

434: %

435: If the chemical potential of the electron is given by

436: %

437: \begin{equation}

438: \mu_e(\rho_e)=c^2\sqrt{1+(3\pi^2\hbar^3\rho_e/m_e^4c^3)^{2/3}}, 

439: \end{equation}

440: %

441: we have, assuming $\rho_e=\rho_pm_e/m_p$,

442: %

443: \begin{equation}

444: \left(\matrix{\mu_n^\prime \cr \tilde\mu^\prime\cr}\right)

445: =\left(\matrix{{\cal P}_{11} & {\cal P}_{12}\cr {\cal P}_{21} & {\cal P}_{22}\cr}\right)

446: \left(\matrix{\rho_n^\prime \cr \rho_p^\prime \cr}\right),

447: \end{equation}

448: %

449: where

450: %

451: \begin{equation}

452: {\cal P}_{11}=\left({\partial\mu_n\over \partial\rho_n}\right)_{\rho_p}, \quad

453: {\cal P}_{12}=\left({\partial\mu_n\over\partial\rho_p}\right)_{\rho_n}

454: =\left({\partial\tilde\mu\over\partial\rho_n}\right)_{\rho_p}={\cal P}_{21}, \quad

455: {\cal P}_{22}=\left({\partial\tilde\mu\over\partial\rho_p}\right)_{\rho_n}.

456: \end{equation}

457: %

458: We write the inverse of equation (26) as

459: %

460: \begin{equation}

461: \left(\matrix{\rho_n^\prime \cr \rho_p^\prime \cr}\right)=

462: \left(\matrix{{\cal Q}_{11} & {\cal Q}_{12}\cr {\cal Q}_{21} & {\cal Q}_{22}\cr}\right)

463: \left(\matrix{\mu_n^\prime \cr \tilde\mu^\prime\cr}\right),

464: \end{equation}

465: %

466: where

467: %

468: \begin{equation}

469: \left(\matrix{{\cal Q}_{11} & {\cal Q}_{12}\cr {\cal Q}_{21} & {\cal Q}_{22}\cr}\right)

470: =\left(\matrix{{\cal P}_{11} & {\cal P}_{12}\cr {\cal P}_{21} & {\cal P}_{22}\cr}\right)^{-1}.

471: \end{equation}

472: %

473: 

474: To represent the rotationally deformed equipotential surfaces of a rotating star,

475: we employ a coordinate system $(a,\theta,\phi)$, the relation of which

476: to spherical polar coordinates $(r,\theta,\phi)$ is given by

477: $r=a[1+\epsilon(a,\theta)]$,

478: where $\epsilon$ is proportional to $\Omega^2$ and represents a small deviation of the

479: equipotential surface from the corresponding spherical equipotential surface of 

480: the non-rotating star.

481: We apply Chandrasekhar-Milne expansion (Chandrasekhar 1933a,b, 

482: Tassoul 1978) to the hydrostatic equations to determine the function $\epsilon$

483: in the form $\epsilon(a,\theta)=\alpha(a)+\beta(a)P_2(\cos\theta)$ 

484: with $P_2$ being the Legendre function.

485: See Lee (1993) for the definition of $\alpha(a)$ and $\beta(a)$.

486: Since for uniformly rotating stars

487: all the physical quantities in hydrostatic equilibrium 

488: are constant on the deformed equipotential surface,

489: labeled by the coordinate $a$, we write

490: the linearised basic equations using the coordinates $(a,\theta,\phi)$

491: (Saio 1981, Lee 1993).

492: In our formulation, the terms up to of order of $\Omega^3$ in the perturbed velocity 

493: equations are retained so that the eigenfrequencies of the $r$-modes are correctly

494: determined to the order of $\Omega^3$ (see Yoshida \& Lee 2000a).

495: 

496: 

497: The perturbations in a uniformly rotating star are expanded in terms of spherical harmonic

498: functions with different $l$'s for a given $m$ (e.g., Lee \& Saio 1986).

499: For example, the vector $\pmb{\xi}^n$ is given by

500: %

501: \begin{equation}

502: {\xi_a^n\over a}=\sum_{l\geq |m|} S_l^n(a)Y_l^m(\theta,\phi)e^{i\sigma t},

503: \end{equation}

504: %

505: \begin{equation}

506: {\xi_\theta^n\over a}=\sum_{l\geq|m|}\left[H_l^n(a){\partial\over\partial\theta}

507: Y_l^m(\theta,\phi)+T_{l^\prime}^n(a){1\over\sin\theta}{\partial\over\partial\phi}

508: Y_{l^\prime}^m(\theta,\phi)\right]e^{i\sigma t},

509: \end{equation}

510: %

511: \begin{equation}

512: {\xi_\phi^n\over a}=\sum_{l\geq|m|}\left[H_l^n(a){1\over\sin\theta}{\partial\over

513: \partial\phi}Y_l^m(\theta,\phi)-T_{l^\prime}^n(a){\partial\over\partial\theta}

514: Y_{l^\prime}^m(\theta,\phi)\right]e^{i\sigma t},

515: \end{equation}

516: %

517: and the Euler perturbation of the gravitational potential, $\Psi^\prime$ is given as

518: \begin{equation}

519: \Psi^\prime=\sum_{l\geq|m|}\Psi^\prime_l(a)Y_l^m(\theta,\phi)

520: e^{i\sigma t},

521: \end{equation}

522: %

523: where $l=|m|+2(k-1)$ and $l'=l+1$ for even modes, and $l=|m|+2k-1$ and $l'=l-1$

524: for odd modes, and $k=1,~2,~3,~\cdots$.

525: Substituting these expansions and the like

526: into the linearised basic equations (16) $\sim$ (19) and (21), 

527: we obtain oscillation equations given as a set of

528: simultaneous linear ordinary differential equations of the expansion coefficients

529: (see Appendix), which is to be integrated in the superfluid core.

530: The oscillation equations solved in the normal fluid envelope are the same as those

531: given in Yoshida \& Lee (2000a).

532: 

533: To obtain a complete solution of an oscillation mode, solutions in

534: the superfluid core and in the normal fluid envelope are matched at the interface between 

535: the two domains by imposing jump conditions given by

536: %

537: \begin{equation}

538: \xi_a=\xi_a^n, \quad \xi_a=\xi_a^p, \quad

539: [p^\prime]^+_-=0, \quad [\Psi^\prime]^+_-=0,

540: \quad {\rm and} \quad [d\Psi^\prime/da]^+_-=0, 

541: \end{equation}

542: %

543: where 

544: $[f(x)]^+_-\equiv\lim_{s\rightarrow 0}\{f(x+s)-f(x-s)\}$.

545: The boundary conditions at the stellar center is 

546: the regularity condition of the perturbations

547: $\xi_a^n$, $\xi_a^p$, $\mu_n^\prime/g$, $\tilde\mu^\prime /g$, and $\Psi^\prime/g$, 

548: where $g=GM_a/a^2$.

549: The boundary conditions at the stellar surface 

550: are $\delta p=0$ and $\Psi_l^\prime\propto a^{-(l+1)}$,

551: where $\delta p$ is the Lagrangian perturbation of the pressure.

552: 

553: 

554: For numerical computation, oscillation equations of a finite dimension are obtained

555: by disregarding the terms

556: with $l$ larger than $l_{max}=|m|+2k_{max}-1$ in the expansions of perturbations

557: such as given by (30) to (33).

558: For the $r$-modes with $l^\prime=|m|$ calculated in this paper,

559: we usually use $k_{max}=6$ so that we can get reasonable convergence of

560: the eigenfrequency and the eigenfunction.

561: We solve the oscillation equations of a finite dimension as an eigenvalue problem of the 

562: oscillation frequency $\omega$ using a Henyey type relaxation method

563: (see, e.g., Unno et al 1989).

564: 

565: 

566: 

567: \section{Dissipations}

568: 

569: The stability of an oscillation mode of a star is determined by summing up all contributions 

570: from various damping and excitation mechanisms.

571: If we consider the contributions from gravitational radiation reaction, 

572: viscous processes, and mutual friction in the superfluid core,

573: the energy loss (or gain) rate $dE/dt$ of a normal mode in a rotating neutron

574: star may be given by 

575: %

576: \begin{eqnarray}

577: {dE\over dt}=&&-\sigma\omega\sum_{l=2}^\infty N_l\sigma^{2l}

578: \left(\left|D_{lm}^\prime\right|^2+\left|J_{lm}^\prime\right|^2\right)

579: -\int d^3x \left(\sum_{ij}{\sigma^{\prime ij}

580: \sigma_{ij}^{\prime*}\over 2\zeta_S}+\zeta_B\left|\nabla\cdot\pmb{v}^\prime\right|^2\right) 

581: \nonumber \\

582: &&-2\Omega\int d^3x\rho_nB_n\left({\tilde\rho^2\over\rho_n\rho_p}\right)^2

583: \left(\pmb{w}^\prime\cdot\pmb{w}^{\prime *}-w_z^\prime w_z^{\prime *}\right) \nonumber\\

584: =&& \left({dE\over dt}\right)_{GD}+\left({dE\over dt}\right)_{GJ}+\left({dE\over dt}\right)_{S}

585: +\left({dE\over dt}\right)_{B}+\left({dE\over dt}\right)_{MF},

586: \end{eqnarray}

587: %

588: where the asterisk $(^*)$ indicates the complex conjugate of the quantity, and

589: the canonical energy $E$ of oscillation observed in the corotating frame of the star is

590: defined in the normal fluid envelope as (Friedman \& Schutz 1978)

591: %

592: \begin{equation}

593: E={1\over 2}\int d^3x \left(\rho\pmb{v}^\prime\cdot\pmb{v}^{\prime *}+

594: {p^\prime\over\rho}\rho^{\prime *}-{\nabla\Psi^\prime\cdot\nabla\Psi^{\prime *}\over 4\pi G}

595: \right),

596: \end{equation}

597: %

598: and in the superfluid core as (Mendell 1991b)

599: %

600: \begin{equation}

601: E={1\over 2}\int d^3x\left(\rho\pmb{v}^\prime\cdot\pmb{v}^{\prime *}+

602: {\tilde\rho^2\over\rho}\pmb{w}^\prime\cdot\pmb{w}^{\prime *}+

603: \sum_{ij}{\cal P}_{ij}\rho^\prime_i\rho^{\prime *}_j

604: -{\nabla\Psi^\prime\cdot\nabla\Psi^{\prime *}\over 4\pi G}\right),

605: \end{equation}

606: %

607: where 

608: $\pmb{v}^\prime=(\rho_n\pmb{v}_n^\prime+\rho_p\pmb{v}_p^\prime)/\rho$, 

609: $\pmb{w}^\prime=\pmb{v}_p^\prime-\pmb{v}_n^\prime$,   

610: $\rho^\prime_1=\rho^\prime_n$, and $\rho^\prime_2=\rho^\prime_p$ in the core.

611: 

612: The terms $(dE/dt)_{GD}$ and $(dE/dt)_{GJ}$ on the right hand side of equation (35)

613: denote the energy loss (or gain) rates due to gravitational

614: radiation reaction associated with the mass multipole moment $D_{lm}^\prime$ and

615: the mass current multipole moment $J_{lm}^\prime$, where

616: %

617: \begin{equation}

618: D_{lm}^\prime=\int d^3x\rho^\prime r^l Y_l^{m*}, 

619: \end{equation}

620: %

621: % 

622: \begin{equation}

623: J_{lm}^\prime={2\over c(l+1)}

624: \int d^3x r^l\left(\rho\pmb{v}^\prime+\rho^\prime\pmb{v}_0\right)\cdot

625: \left(\pmb{r}\times\nabla Y_l^{m*}\right),

626: \end{equation}

627: %

628: and

629: %

630: \begin{equation}

631: N_l={4\pi G\over c^{2l+1}}{(l+1)(l+2)\over l(l-1)[(2l+1)!!]^2}, 

632: \end{equation}

633: %

634: and $c$ is the velocity of light (Thorne 1980, Lindblom et al 1998).

635: 

636: The terms $(dE/dt)_{S}$ and $(dE/dt)_B$ are the energy dissipation rates 

637: due to shear and bulk viscosities, 

638: and $\zeta_S$ and $\zeta_B$ are the shear and the bulk viscosity coefficients, 

639: and $\sigma_{ij}^\prime$ is 

640: the traceless stress tensor for the perturbed velocity field

641: (e.g., Landau \& Lifshitz 1987).

642: In this paper, we ignore the contribution from the bulk viscosity, which is

643: important only for newly born hot neutron stars without superfluids in the core.

644: The shear viscosity coefficient we use in the superfluid core is

645: %

646: \begin{equation}

647: \zeta_S=6\times 10^{18}\left({\rho\over 10^{15}{\rm g/cm^3}}\right)^2

648: \left({10^9 K\over T}\right)^2 {\rm g/cm ~s}

649: \end{equation}

650: %

651: (Cutler \& Lindblom 1987, Sawyer 1989), and that in the normal fluid envelope is given by

652: %

653: \begin{equation}

654: \zeta_S=2\times 10^{18}\left({\rho\over 10^{15}{\rm g/cm^3}}\right)^{9/4}

655: \left({10^9 K\over T}\right)^2 {\rm g/cm ~s}

656: \end{equation}

657: %

658: (Cutler \& Lindblom 1987, Flowers \& Itoh 1979).

659: The stress tensor $\sigma_{ij}^\prime$ is evaluated by using $\pmb{v}_e^\prime$ 

660: in the superfluid core (Lindblom \& Mendell 2000).

661: 

662: The term $(dE/dt)_{MF}$ is the energy loss rate due to 

663: mutual friction in the superfluid core, 

664: and the dimensionless coefficient $B_n$ is given by (Mendell 1991b)

665: %

666: \begin{equation}

667: B_n=0.011\times {\rho_p\over\rho_n}

668: \left({\rho_{pp}\over\rho_{p}}\right)^{1/2}

669: \left({\rho_{pn}\over\rho_{pp}}\right)^2

670: \left({\rho_p\over 10^{14}{\rm gcm^{-3}}}\right)^{1/6}.

671: \end{equation}

672: %

673: Mutual friction is a dissipation mechanism inherent to a rotating system 

674: of superfluids, and it is caused by scattering of normal fluid particles off the vortices

675: in the superfluids.

676: Since we have assumed perfect charge neutrality between the electrons and protons, we consider

677: scattering between the normal electrons and vortices of the neutron superfluid

678: (Mendell 1991b, see also Alpar etal 1984).

679: 

680: As is indicated by the first two terms on the right hand side of equation (35), 

681: if a normal mode has an oscillation frequency that satisfies

682: $-\sigma\omega>0$, 

683: the oscillation energy $E$ in the corotating frame, in the absence of other damping mechanisms, 

684: increases as a result of

685: gravitational wave radiation, indicating instability of the mode (Friedman \& Schutz 1978).

686: It was Andersson (1998) and Friedman \& Morsink (1998) who realized that the $r$-modes have

687: oscillation frequencies that satisfy the instability condition.

688: 

689: 

690: 

691: 

692: The damping (or growth) time-scale $\tau$ of a normal mode may be given by

693: \begin{equation}

694: {1\over\tau}={1\over 2E}\left({dE\over dt}\right)={1\over\tau_{GD}}+{1\over\tau_{GJ}}+

695: {1\over\tau_S}+{1\over\tau_{MF}},

696: \end{equation}

697: %

698: where $\tau_i=2E/(dE/dt)_i$. For the $r$-modes of $l^\prime =|m|$, it is convenient to

699: derive an extrapolation formula of the time-scale $\tau$ given as a function of $\Omega$

700: and the interior temperature $T$ (e.g., Lindblom et al 1998, Lindblom \& Mendell 2000):

701: %

702: \begin{equation}

703: {1\over\tau (\Omega,T)}

704: ={1\over\tau^0_{GD}}\left({\Omega^2\over \pi G\bar\rho}\right)^{l+2}

705: +{1\over\tau^0_{GJ}}\left({\Omega^2\over \pi G\bar\rho}\right)^{l}

706: +{1\over\tau^0_S}\left({10^9 K\over T}\right)^2

707: +{1\over\tau^0_{MF}}\left({\Omega^2\over \pi G\bar\rho}\right)^\gamma,

708: \end{equation}

709: %

710: where $\bar\rho=M/(4\pi R^3/3)$, and 

711: only the dominant term in each of the dissipation processes with $l=|m|+1=3$

712: has been retained for the $r$-modes. 

713: The quantities $\tau^0_{GD}$, $\tau^0_{GJ}$, $\tau^0_S$, and $\tau^0_{MF}$

714: are assumed to be only weakly dependent on $\Omega$ and $T$. 

715: 

716: 

717: 

718: 

719: \section{Numerical Results}

720: 

721: 

722: Following Lindblom \& Mendell (2000), 

723: we employ a polytropic model of index $N=1$ with the mass $M=1.4M_\odot$ and the radius $R=12.57$km

724: as a background model for modal analysis.

725: The model is divided into a superfluid core and a normal fluid

726: envelope, the interface of which is set at $\rho=\rho_s=2.8\times 10^{14}$g/cm$^3$.

727: In the normal fluid envelope, we use the polytropic equation of state given by $p=K\rho^2$

728: both for the equilibrium structure and for the oscillation equations.

729: The core is assumed to be filled with neutron and proton superfluids and a normal fluid of electron,

730: for which an equation of state, labeled

731: A18+$\delta v$+UIX (Akmal, Pandharipande, and Ravenhall 1998), is used to

732: give the energy density (23) and the relation (26) used for the oscillation equations.

733: For the mass density coefficients $\rho_{nn}$, $\rho_{pp}$, and $\rho_{np}$ in the core,

734: we employ an empirical relation given by (see Lindblom \& Mendell 2000)

735: %

736: \begin{equation}

737: {\rho_p/\rho}\approx 0.031+8.8\times 10^{-17}\rho, 

738: \end{equation}

739: %

740: and a formula given by

741: %

742: \begin{equation}

743: \rho_{np}=-\eta\rho_n, 

744: \end{equation}

745: %

746: where $\eta$ is a parameter of order of $\sim 0.04$ that parametrizes the entrainment effects

747: between the two superfluids

748: (Borumand, Joynt, \& Klu\'zniak 1996).

749: 

750: We find that the $r$-modes of $l^\prime=m$ in the superfluid core are split into

751: ordinary $r$-modes and superfluid $r$-modes, which we call $r^o$-modes and $r^s$-modes.

752: The toroidal components $iT_{l^\prime}$ of the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes of $l^\prime=m=2$

753: are plotted versus $a/R$ for the case of $\eta=0.04$ and $\bar\Omega\equiv\Omega/\sqrt{GM/R^3}=0.01$ 

754: in Figure 1, where

755: the solid, dotted, dashed, and dash-dotted curves are used to indicate respectively

756: the toroidal components $iT_m^n$, $iT_{m+2}^n$, $iT_m^p$, and $iT_{m+2}^p$ 

757: in the superfluid core, and

758: the amplitude normalization is given by $\max(|iT_m|)=1$.

759: The figure shows that the two superfluids in the core flow together for the $r^o$-modes, while

760: they counter-move for the $r^s$-modes.

761: Note that the amplitudes of $iT_{m+2}^p$ for the $r^s$-mode

762: are not necessarily negligibly small compared with

763: those of $iT_m^p$ in the core.

764: This splitting of the $r$-modes in the superfluid core into two distinct families has been

765: suggested by Andersson \& Comer (2001).

766: For the $r^o$-mode, the radial dependence of the difference $iT_m^p-iT_m^n$ in the core

767: is given in Figure 2, which shows that the difference is quite small 

768: compared with the normalization $\max(|iT_m|)=1$.

769: It is important to note that

770: the $l^\prime=m$ $r$-modes having basically nodeless and dominant $iT_m$ are the 

771: only $r$-modes we can find, as in the case of

772: the $r$-modes in isentropic models (see Yoshida \& Lee 2000a,b).

773: 

774: 

775: 

776: In Table 1, the expansion coefficients $\kappa_0$ and $\kappa_2$, and the scaled

777: damping (or growth) timescales $\tau^0_i$ for the $l'=m=2$ $r$-modes are tabulated

778: for the cases of $\eta=0$, $0.02$, $0.04$, and $0.06$, 

779: where the coefficients $\kappa_0$ and $\kappa_2$ are defined in the expansion:

780: %

781: \begin{equation}

782: \omega/\Omega=\kappa_0(\eta)+\kappa_2(\eta)\bar\Omega^2+O(\bar\Omega^4).

783: \end{equation}

784: %

785: Note that the exponent $\gamma$ employed to define $\tau^0_{MF}$ in equation (45) is 

786: $\gamma=2.5$ for the $r^o$-modes 

787: and $\gamma=0.5$ for the $r^s$-modes for the non-zero $\eta$'s in the table.

788: This is because the velocity difference 

789: $\pmb{w}^\prime=\pmb{v}^\prime_p-\pmb{v}^\prime_n$ approximately

790: scales as $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega^3$ for

791: the $r^o$-modes and as $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega$ for the $r^s$-modes 

792: (see Lindblom \& Mendell 2000).

793: The coefficient $\kappa_0$ for the $r^o$-modes is numerically equal to 

794: $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$, 

795: and $\kappa_2$ is almost independent of the entrainment parameter $\eta$.

796: The value of $\kappa_0$ is the same as the value found by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000)

797: and the value of $\kappa_2$ differs only by 2.5\%, suggesting that the $r^o$-modes are

798: the same modes found by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000).

799: (Because of different normalization conventions the value of $\kappa_2$ reported by

800: Lindblom \& Mendell must be multiplied by a factor of $4/3$ before comparing

801: with our results.)

802: The coefficients $\kappa_0$ and $\kappa_2$ for the $r^s$-modes, on the other hand, 

803: appreciably depends on $\eta$, and $\kappa_0$ deviates from $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$ 

804: as $\eta$ is increased from $\eta=0$.

805: This kind of deviation of $\kappa_0$ from $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$ for the $l^\prime=m$ $r$-modes

806: has been found for relativistic neutron stars where

807: the relativistic factor $GM/c^2R$ is regarded as a parameter (Yoshida 2001; Yoshida \& Lee 2002a).

808: Computing the $r^s$-mode of $l^\prime=m=2$

809: as a function of $\eta$, we find that a linear formula given by

810: %

811: \begin{equation}

812: \kappa_0^s(\eta)\approx0.667+9.35\eta

813: \end{equation}

814: %

815: gives a good fit to the $r^s$-mode frequency except at avoided crossings with inertial modes

816: (see below).

817: At $\eta=0$, the coefficients $\kappa_0$ for the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes are both equal to 

818: $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$, which

819: suggests that in the lowest order of $\Omega$ the two $r$-modes are 

820: degenerate at $\eta=0$.

821: In Figure 3, the toroidal components $iT_m$ and $iT_{m+2}$ 

822: of the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes of $l^\prime=m=2$ at

823: $\bar\Omega=0.01$ are given versus $a/R$ for the case of $\eta=0$.

824: The amplitudes of $iT_{m+2}$ are much smaller than those of $iT_m$ 

825: both for the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes.

826: This figure also shows that $|iT_m^p-iT_m^n|\not\ll 1$ in the core

827: for the $r^o$-mode at $\eta=0$, for which we find that $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega$.

828: 

829: 

830: 

831: Inertial modes in the superfluid core are also split into 

832: ordinary and superfluid inertial modes, which we call $i^o$- and $i^s$-modes.

833: In Table 2, we have given $\kappa_0$ for $i^o$- and $i^s$-modes for $m=2$ and $\eta=0$, and

834: see, e.g., Lockitch \& Friedman (1999) and Yoshida \& Lee (2000a) for 

835: the classification scheme employed here for inertial modes.

836: For given $m$ and $l_0-|m|$,

837: we find at $\eta=0$ pairs of $i^o$- and $i^s$-modes that have close values of $\kappa_0$,

838: and the number of the pairs is equal to $l_0-|m|$.

839: As an example, 

840: for the case of $m=2$ and $\eta=0$, the eigenfunctions $iT_{l^\prime}$

841: are shown for the $i^o$- and $i^s$-modes 

842: of $\kappa_0=0.5180$ and $\kappa_0=0.5077$ in Figure 4, 

843: for those of $\kappa_0=0.4215$ and $\kappa_0=0.4060$ in Figure 5, and

844: for those of $\kappa_0=1.1046$ and $\kappa_0=1.1134$ in Figure 6.

845: The inertial modes in Figure 4 belong to $l_0-|m|=3$ and those in Figures 5 and 6 to

846: $l_0-|m|=5$.

847: Note that

848: the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes belong to $l_0-|m|=1$ (e.g., Yoshida \& Lee 2000a).

849: It is generally observed for inertial modes with long radial wavelengths

850: that the two superfluids co-move in the core

851: for the $i^o$-modes, and they counter-move for the $i^s$-modes.

852: The coefficient $\kappa_0$ for the $i^o$-modes only weakly

853: depends on the entrainment parameter $\eta$ (see Figure 7).

854: The coefficient $\kappa_0$ for the $i^s$-modes, on the other hand, 

855: increases approximately linearly as $\eta$ is increased from $\eta=0$ (see Figure 8).

856: See Yoshida \& Lee (2002b) for extended discussions on inertial modes in the superfluid core.

857: 

858: 

859: The $r^s$-modes ($r^o$-modes) experience mode crossings with $i^o$-modes ($i^s$-modes)

860: as the parameter $\eta$ is increased from $\eta=0$.

861: For the case of $m=2$ and $\bar\Omega=0.01$, Figure 7 illustrates an avoided crossing

862: between the $r^s$-mode of $l^\prime=m$ and the $i^o$-mode that tends to 

863: $\kappa_0=1.1046$ as $\eta\rightarrow0$.

864: In this figure, the dashed line is given by equation (49).

865: For mode crossings between the $r^o$-mode and $i^s$-modes, on the other hand,

866: it is quite difficult to numerically discern whether the mode crossings result in

867: avoided crossing or degeneracy of the mode frequencies at the crossing point.

868: Most prominent among such mode crossings of the $r^o$-mode of $l^\prime=m=2$

869: are those with the $i^s$-modes that tend to 

870: $\kappa_0=0.5077$ and $\kappa_0=0.4060$ as $\eta\rightarrow 0$.

871: For the case of $m=2$ and $\bar\Omega=0.01$,

872: the two mode crossings which occur at 

873: $\eta\approx0.0230$ and 0.0484 are shown in Figure 8, where the solid lines and the dashed line 

874: are for the $i^s$-modes and the $r^o$-mode, respectively.

875: We note that the ratio $\omega/\Omega\approx \kappa_0$ for the $r^o$-mode is almost constant, 

876: equal to $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]=0.6667$ for $l^\prime=m=2$, while the ratios

877: $\omega/\Omega$ for the $i^s$-modes increase approximately linearly with increasing $\eta$.

878: Figure 9 shows the differences $iT_m^p-iT_m^n$ versus $a/R$ for the $l^\prime=m=2$ $r^o$-modes

879: at $\eta=0.023$ (panel a) and 0.0484 (panel b), and Figure 10 the eigenfunctions $iT_{l^\prime}$

880: for the $i^s$-modes of $m=2$ at $\eta=0.023$ (panel a) and at $\eta=0.0484$ (panel b), 

881: where we have assumed $\bar\Omega=0.01$ and the normalization $\max(|iT_m|)=1$.

882: The amplitudes of the differences at the mode crossing points are much larger than 

883: amplitudes of the difference off the crossing points (see, e.g., Figure 2).

884: The resemblance between the $i^s$-modes of $l_0-|m|=3$ at $\eta=0$ (Figure 4b)

885: and at $\eta=0.023$ (Figure 10a) and between

886: the $i^s$-modes of $l_0-|m|=5$ at $\eta=0$ (Figure 5b) and $\eta=0.0484$ (Figure 10b)

887: is obvious.

888: 

889: 

890: 

891: 

892: >From Table 1, we find that

893: the growth timescales $\tau^0_{GJ}$ and $\tau^0_{GD}$ for

894: the $r^o$-modes of $l^\prime=m=2$ are almost the same as those for the $l^\prime=m=2$ $r$-modes 

895: of the $N=1$ polytropic model without superfluidity in the core 

896: (see, e.g., Yoshida \& Lee 2000a).

897: On the other hand, the growth timescales $\tau^0_{GJ}$ and $\tau^0_{GD}$ for the

898: $r^s$-modes are much longer than those of the $r^o$-modes, and

899: the instability caused by the $r^s$-modes

900: is much weaker than the instability by the $r^o$-modes.

901: This is because the amount of gravitational wave radiation 

902: emitted from the $r^s$-modes is much smaller than that from the $r^o$-modes

903: since $(\rho_piT_m^p+\rho_niT_m^n)/\rho\sim 0$ and 

904: $\rho^\prime\sim 0$ for the $r^s$-modes.

905: It is interesting to note that $\tau^0_{GJ}$ of the $r^s$-modes at $\eta\not=0$ is 

906: by several orders of magnitude longer than that at $\eta=0$.

907: Figure 11 shows, as a function of $a/R$, $\sqrt{|\omega\sigma^{2l+1}|N_l/2E}J_{mm}^\prime(a)$ for

908: the $r^s$-modes at $\eta=0$ (dashed line) and at $\eta=0.04$ (solid line), where

909: $J_{mm}^\prime(a)=\int_0^adadJ_{mm}^\prime/da$.

910: As found for the case of $\eta=0.04$, the negative contributions to

911: $J_{mm}^\prime(a=R)$ in the envelope almost completely cancel out the positive contributions 

912: in the core, which leads to extremely long growth timescales $\tau^0_{GJ}$

913: of the $r^s$-modes at $\eta\not=0$.

914: 

915: 

916: Figure 12 illustrates the dependence of $-\tau^0_{MF}$ on the entrainment parameter $\eta$ for

917: the $l^\prime=m=2$ $r^o$-mode, and we find that

918: $-\tau^0_{MF}$ has prominent and deep minimums at $\eta\approx0.230$ and $0.484$.,

919: which is consistent with the result by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000).

920: Note that we have assumed $\rho_s=2.8\times 10^{14}$g/cm$^3$ for the interface between the

921: core and the envelope.

922: These prominent minimums result from the mode crossings with the long radial wavelength

923: $i^s$-modes that tend to $\kappa_0=0.5077$ and $\kappa_0=0.4060$ as $\eta\rightarrow 0$ 

924: (Figure 8; see also Andersson \& Comer 20001).

925: Mode crossings of the $r^o$-mode with $i^s$-modes that have much shorter radial wavelengths result

926: in narrow and shallow minimums of $-\tau^0_{MF}$, as found for $\eta\gtsim 0.05$.

927: %

928: These minor dips were not found by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000).

929: We guess that the $r$-modes calculated by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000) 

930: are less strongly affected by inertial modes associated with large $l_0-|m|$ having

931: short radial wavelengths since they ignored terms higher than $\Omega^4$ in their 

932: perturbative method.

933: %

934: Comparing our results with those by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000), we find that

935: the damping timescale $-\tau^0_{MF}$ at a given $\eta$ is about by an order of magnitude

936: shorter than that they obtained, and that our values of $\eta\approx0.0230$ and 0.0484

937: for the local minimums of $-\tau^0_{MF}$ are slightly larger than their $critical$ values 

938: 0.02294 and 0.04817.

939: From Table 1 we also find that the value of $\kappa_2$ found here for the $r^o$-modes

940: is about by 2.5\% larger than the value they found.

941: We guess that these differences between the

942: two calculations partly come from the differences in the way of evaluating the

943: derivatives of the thermodynamical quantities that appear in the oscillation equations.

944: For example, Lindblom \& Mendell (2000) used

945: $\rho^\prime=(\partial \rho/\partial p)_\beta p^\prime+(\partial\rho/\partial\beta)_p\beta^\prime$,

946: for which they assumed $(\partial \rho/\partial p)_\beta=(\rho/2p)$ from

947: the polytropic relation $p=K\rho^2$ and employed

948: a fitting formula to $(\partial\rho/\partial\beta)_p$ obtained from

949: Akmal et al's equation of state (1998), where $\beta=\tilde{\mu}-\mu_n$.

950: In this paper, on the other hand, we used

951: $\rho^\prime=({\cal Q}_{11}+\zeta{\cal Q}_{21})\mu_n^\prime

952: +({\cal Q}_{12}+\zeta{\cal Q}_{22})\mu_p^\prime$,

953: and the coefficients ${\cal Q}_{ij}$ were all calculated by using equations (23) to (29)

954: with Akmal et al's equation of state (1998).

955: 

956: 

957: 

958: The eigenfunction $\delta\beta(r,\theta,\phi)=\delta\beta_0(r,\theta,\phi)

959: +(4/3)\delta\beta_2(r,\theta,\phi)\bar\Omega^2+O(\bar\Omega^4)$ in Lindblom \& Mendell (2000) may be

960: given in terms of the eigenfunctions $y^{p}_{2,k}$ and $y^{n}_{2,k}$ as

961: \begin{equation}

962: \delta \beta(r,\theta,\phi)=(M_a/M)(R/a)\bar\Omega^{-2}

963: \sum_{k\ge 1}\Delta y_{2,k}(a)Y_{l_km}(\theta,\phi),

964: \end{equation}

965: where $r=a[1+\epsilon(a,\theta)]$, and $\Delta y_{2,k}(a)=y_{2,k}^p(a)-y_{2,k}^n(a)$ 

966: and see Appendix for definition of the functions $y_{2,k}^{p(n)}(a)$.

967: Assuming $\delta\beta_0=0$, we obtain

968: \begin{equation}

969: \delta \beta_2(r,\theta,\phi)\approx 0.75\times(M_r/M)(R/r)\bar\Omega^{-4}

970: \sum_{k\ge 1}\Delta y_{2,k}(r)f_{l_km}P_{l_k}^m(\cos\theta)e^{im\phi}

971: \equiv\sum_{k\ge1}\delta\beta_{2,k}P_{l_k}^m(\cos\theta)e^{im\phi},

972: \end{equation}

973: where the mean radial distance $a$ have been replaced by the radial distance $r$, and

974: the factor $f_{lm}$ is defined by the relation 

975: $Y_l^m(\theta,\phi)=f_{lm}P^m_l(\cos\theta)e^{im\phi}$, and $l_k=|m|+2k-1$.

976: In Figure 13, we plot the functions $\delta\beta_{2,k}(r)$ 

977: for the $r^o$-mode of $l^\prime=m=2$ at $\eta=0.04$, applying amplitude normalization

978: given by $y_{2,k=1}(R)=f_{m+1,m}\bar\Omega^2$ at the surface, 

979: where the solid, dotted, and dashed lines

980: are for $\delta\beta_{2,1}$, $100\times\delta\beta_{2,2}$, and $100\times\delta\beta_{2,3}$, 

981: respectively.

982: Since $|\delta\beta_{2,1}(r)|>>|\delta\beta_{2,k}(r)|$ for $k\ge2$, the $\theta$ depenence 

983: of the function 

984: $\delta\beta_2(r,\theta,\phi)$ is well represented by a single associated Legendre function 

985: $P^m_{m+1}(\cos\theta)$, and 

986: is not necessarily the same $\theta$ dependence of the function $\delta\beta_2$ 

987: found by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000).

988: The amplitude of the function $\delta\beta_{2,1}(r)$ is about by a factor of $3$ larger than

989: the amplitude of $\delta\beta_2$ calculated by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000), which is

990: consistent with the result that $\tau_{MF}^0$ in this paper 

991: is about by an order of magnitude

992: shorter than $\tau_{MF}^0$ they obtained.

993: 

994: \section{Discussion}

995: 

996: 

997: If we employ a set of the dependent variables defined as (see Lindblom \& Mendell 2000)

998: %

999: \begin{equation}

1000: \pmb{\xi}={\rho_n\pmb{v}_n^\prime+\rho_p\pmb{v}_p^\prime\over i\omega\hat\rho}, \quad

1001: \pmb{\xi}^w={\pmb{w}^\prime\over i\omega}, \quad 

1002: U={p^\prime\over\hat\rho}+\Psi^\prime, \quad

1003: \beta^\prime=\tilde{\mu}^\prime-\mu^\prime_n,

1004: \end{equation}

1005: %

1006: %={\rho_n\pmb{\xi}^n+\rho_p\pmb{\xi}^p\over\hat\rho}

1007: %={\rho_n\rho_p\over\tilde\rho^2}(\pmb{\xi}^p-\pmb{\xi}^n)

1008: %

1009: where $\hat\rho=\rho_n+\rho_p$,

1010: the continuity equations (16) and (17) and the velocity equations (18) and (19)

1011: are rewritten as

1012: %

1013: \begin{equation}

1014: \rho_n^\prime+\rho_p^\prime+\nabla\cdot\left(\hat\rho\pmb{\xi}\right)=0,

1015: \end{equation}

1016: %

1017: \begin{equation}

1018: {\rho_p^\prime\over\rho_p}-{\rho_n^\prime\over\rho_n}

1019: +\pmb{\xi}\cdot\nabla\ln{\rho_p\over\rho_n}

1020: +{\tilde\rho^2\over\rho_n\rho_p}\left(

1021: \pmb{\xi}^w\cdot\nabla\ln{\tilde\rho^2\over\hat\rho}+\nabla\cdot\pmb{\xi}^w\right)=0,

1022: \end{equation}

1023: %

1024: \begin{equation}

1025: \pmb{F}\left(\pmb{\xi}\right)

1026: =-\nabla U

1027: +{\rho_n\rho_p\over\hat\rho^2}\left(\nabla\ln{\rho_p\over\rho_n}\right)\beta^\prime,

1028: \end{equation}

1029: %

1030: \begin{equation}

1031: \pmb{F}\left(\pmb{\xi}^w\right)+i\omega{\rho_{np}\hat\rho\over\rho_n\rho_p}

1032: \pmb{D}\left(\pmb{\xi}^w\right)=-\nabla\beta^\prime,

1033: \end{equation}

1034: %

1035: and the linearized Poisson equation remains the same:

1036: %

1037: \begin{equation}

1038: \nabla^2\Psi^\prime=4\pi G\left(\rho_n^\prime+\rho_p^\prime\right),

1039: \end{equation}

1040: %

1041: where $\pmb{D}(\pmb{\xi})=\pmb{\xi}\times(\nabla\times\pmb{v}_0)$, and

1042: the terms of order of $m_e/m_p$ have been ignored for simplicity.

1043: The term proportional to $\pmb{D}\left(\pmb{\xi}^w\right)$ in equation (56) 

1044: represents the drag force between the two superfluids.

1045: In a perturbative treatment of the $r$-modes,

1046: we may expand the eigenfunctions and eigenfrequencies in terms of $\Omega$ as

1047: %

1048: \begin{equation}

1049: \pmb{\xi}=\pmb{\xi}_0+\pmb{\xi}_2\Omega^2+O(\Omega^4), \quad

1050: \pmb{\xi}^w=\pmb{\xi}_0^w+\pmb{\xi}_2^w\Omega^2+O(\Omega^4), 

1051: \end{equation}

1052: %

1053: \begin{equation}

1054: U=U_2\Omega^2+U_4\Omega^4+O(\Omega^6), \quad

1055: \beta^\prime=\beta_2^\prime\Omega^2+\beta_4^\prime\Omega^4+O(\Omega^6), 

1056: \end{equation}

1057: %

1058: and

1059: %

1060: \begin{equation}

1061: \omega=\kappa_0\Omega+\kappa_2\Omega^3+O(\Omega^5), \quad

1062: \sigma=s_0\Omega+s_2\Omega^3+O(\Omega^5),

1063: \end{equation}

1064: %

1065: where $|\pmb{\xi}_0|\sim |iT_m|\sim O(1)$.

1066: Note that the quantities like $\nabla\cdot\pmb{\xi}$,

1067: $\pmb{\xi}\cdot\nabla\rho$, $\rho_n^\prime$, 

1068: $\rho_p^\prime$, and $\Psi^\prime$ are of order of $\Omega^2$ in the

1069: lowest order for the $r$-modes.

1070: For the expansions given above, we have

1071: %

1072: \begin{equation}

1073: \pmb{F}(\pmb{\xi})=\pmb{F}_2(\pmb{\xi}_0,\kappa_0,s_0)\Omega^2

1074: +\pmb{F}_4(\pmb{\xi}_0,\pmb{\xi}_2,\kappa_0,\kappa_2,s_0,s_2)\Omega^4

1075: +O(\Omega^6), 

1076: \end{equation}

1077: %

1078: and we may not need to give the full expressions of $\pmb{F}_2$ and $\pmb{F}_4$ here.

1079: Equations (55) and (56) suggest the existence of two families of $r$-modes, that is,

1080: $r$-modes, which are governed by equation (55) and have

1081: $\kappa_0=2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$, and $r$-modes, which are governed by equation (56)

1082: and have $\kappa_0\not=2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$.

1083: If we assume $\pmb{F}_2(\pmb{\xi}_0)=-\nabla U_2$ in equation (55), we obtain 

1084: the lowest order $r$-mode solution given by $iT_m\propto a^{|m|-1}$ and

1085: $\kappa_0=2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$, which leads to $\beta_2^\prime=0$ from equation (55),

1086: and to $\pmb{\xi}^w_0=0$ from equation (56).

1087: This suggests the existence of the $r$-mode solutions, for which 

1088: $\kappa_0=2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$, and $\pmb{\xi}_0\not=0$ and $U_2\not=0$, but

1089: $\pmb{\xi}^w_0=0$ and $\beta^\prime_2=0$.

1090: The solutions of this kind correspond to 

1091: the $r$-modes Lindblom \& Mendell (2000) obtained in their perturbative treatment, and

1092: to the $r^o$-modes found in this paper.

1093: On the other hand, because of the drag force, i.e.,

1094: the term proportional to $\pmb{D}(\pmb{\xi}^w)$,

1095: $\kappa_0$ of the $r$-modes governed by equation (56)

1096: is not necessarily equal to $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$.

1097: For these solutions we may expect 

1098: $\pmb{\xi}^w_0\not=0$ and $\beta_2^\prime\not=0$ from equation (56), and 

1099: $\pmb{\xi}_0\not=0$ and $U_2\not=0$ from equation (55).

1100: The solutions of this kind

1101: correspond to the $r^s$-modes found in this paper (see also Andersson \& Comer 2001).

1102: 

1103: 

1104: To show the importance of the drag force for the existence of the $r$-mode solutions

1105: with the scaling $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega^3$, we calculate

1106: the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes by ignoring the drag force terms proportional to $\pmb{D}(\pmb{\xi})$ 

1107: on the right hand side of the velocity equations (18) and (19).

1108: The results are summarized in Table 3, in which

1109: the coefficients $\kappa_0$, $\kappa_2$, and $\tau^0_i$'s are tabulated

1110: for the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes of $l^\prime=m=2$ for the case of $\eta=0.04$.

1111: When we ignore the drag force terms, we can not find the $r^o$-modes with the

1112: scaling of $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega^3$ and

1113: the $r$-modes with the scaling $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega$ are the only $r$-mode

1114: solutions we can find, and hence

1115: the exponent $\gamma$ to define $\tau^0_{MF}$ in the table

1116: is equal to $0.5$ for both the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes.

1117: In Figure 14, the toroidal components $iT_m$ and $iT_{m+2}$ of the two $r$-modes

1118: are given for $\eta=0.04$, where we have assumed $\bar\Omega=0.01$ and 

1119: the normalization $\max(|iT_m|)=1$.

1120: The amplitudes of $iT_{m+2}$ are completely negligible compared to those of $iT_m$.

1121: In the absence of the drag force,

1122: $\kappa_0$'s for the two $r$-modes are both equal to

1123: $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$, independent of $\eta$, which means that the frequencies of 

1124: the two $r$-modes are degenerate in the lowest order of $\Omega$.

1125: These results suggest that

1126: the $r$-mode solutions with $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega^3$ can be found

1127: only when the frequencies of the $r$-modes are not degenerate in the lowest order in $\Omega$.

1128: In this sense, it is reasonable to find $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega$ for the $r^o$-modes

1129: at $\eta=0$ since $\kappa_0$'s of the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes are equal to each other 

1130: at $\eta=0$, as shown by Table 1.

1131: 

1132: 

1133: 

1134: \section{Conclusion}

1135: 

1136: 

1137: 

1138: 

1139: In this paper we have discussed the modal properties of the $r$-modes of neutron stars with

1140: the core filled with neutron and proton superfluids.

1141: We numerically find that

1142: the $r$-modes of rotating neutron stars with the superfluid core are split into ordinary $r^o$-modes 

1143: and superfluid $r^s$-modes, and that

1144: the two superfluids in the core flow together for the $r^o$-modes and they counter move

1145: for the $r^s$-modes.

1146: These findings are consistent with earlier suggestions made analytically by Andersoon \& Comer (2001).

1147: We also find that,

1148: although $\kappa_0$ of the $r^o$-modes is numerically equal to $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$,

1149: almost independent of the entrainment parameter $\eta$,

1150: $\kappa_0$ of the $r^s$-modes approximately linearly increases from

1151: $2m/[l^\prime(l^\prime+1)]$ as $\eta$ is increased from $\eta=0$.

1152: The $r^o$-modes have the scaling 

1153: of $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega^3$ and

1154: are the same $r$-modes discussed by Lindblom \& Mendell (2000), while 

1155: the $r^s$-modes have the scaling of $\pmb{w}^\prime\propto\Omega$.

1156: The instability caused by the $r^s$-modes is found much weaker than the instability 

1157: by the $r^o$-mode and will be

1158: easily stabilized by various dissipation processes in the star.

1159: 

1160: 

1161: We have confirmed that,

1162: except in a few narrow regions of $\eta$ around the prominent local minimums of $\tau^0_{MF}$,  

1163: the dissipation due to mutual friction in the superfluid core is ineffective 

1164: to stabilize the instability by the $r^o$-modes, as first shown by

1165: Lindblom \& Mendell (2000).

1166: We have shown that these prominent local minimums of $-\tau^0_{MF}$ are caused by

1167: mode crossings between the $r^o$-mode and 

1168: the superfluid inertial $i^s$-modes

1169: with long radial wavelengths comparable to those of the $r^o$-mode 

1170: (see also Andersson \& Comer 2001).

1171: Since mutual friction is almost always very strong for the $r^s$-modes and the instability

1172: by the $r^s$-modes itself is quite weak,

1173: only the instability by the $r^o$-modes will be of direct observational importance, e.g., as 

1174: mechanisms that generate

1175: gravitational waves from normal modes of rotating neutron stars and/or

1176: cause the clustering of spin frequencies around 300Hz for neutron stars in

1177: LMXB's, unless there exist other strong damping mechanisms for the $r$-modes 

1178: (see Jones 2001a,b;

1179: Lindblom \& Owen 2002; Haensel, Levenfish \& Yakovlev 2002).

1180: 

1181: 

1182: In this paper, we have made a brief report on a numerical result of inertial modes in

1183: the superfluid core.

1184: We find that inertial modes in superfluid neutron stars are also split into ordinary 

1185: inertial $i^o$-modes and superfluid inertial $i^s$-modes.

1186: It is generally observed for inertial modes with long radial wavelengths

1187: that the two superfluids co-move in the core

1188: for the $i^o$-modes, and they counter-move for the $i^s$-modes

1189: (see Yoshida \& Lee 2002b for

1190: more complete discussions on inertial modes in the superfluid core).

1191: Inertial modes are expected to work as a mechanism limiting 

1192: the amplitude growth of the $r$-modes (Morsink 2002).

1193: 

1194: There are many interesting and challenging problems we have to deal with

1195: before we can conclude definitely about the neutron star oscillations.

1196: Confronting their cooling calculations of neutron stars

1197: with observational data for the surface temperature of several neutron

1198: stars, Kaminker, Haensel, \& Yakovlev (2001), and 

1199: Kaminker, Yakovlev, \& Gnedin (2002) suggested that neutron superfluidity

1200: in the core of middle-aged neutron stars should be weak in the sense that

1201: the critical temperature $T_c$ is less than $10^8$K. 

1202: If this is the case, there exist no neutron superfluids in the core of

1203: temperatures $T>10^8$K.

1204: If neutrons in the core are in normal state, modal properties of low frequency oscillations 

1205: propagating in the core will be different

1206: from those for the core filled with neutron and proton superfluids,

1207: since buoyant force in the core, produced by thermal and/or chemical stratification 

1208: (Reisenegger \& Goldreich 1992), comes into play.

1209: The normal neutron fluid core with stratification will support $g$-mode propagation, 

1210: and the buoyant force in it

1211: will affect inertial modes in slowly rotating neutron stars.

1212: The nodeless $r$-modes of $l^\prime=m$, however, will remain almost the same even 

1213: in the presence of buoyant force (see Yoshida \& Lee 2000b), and 

1214: damping due to mutual friction in the core will remain weak for the $r^o$-modes,

1215: for which neutron and proton fluids co-move.

1216: Let us point out a possibility of using neutron star binaries as a probe 

1217: to investigate existence or non-existence of neutron superfludity in the core,

1218: since tidally excited low frequency modes will be $g$-modes in the normal fluid core but

1219: inertial modes in the superfluid core, and the different tidal responses 

1220: will result in different binary evolutions.

1221: The presence of a solid crust and a magnetic field in neutron star interior 

1222: is another factor that makes complicated the problems of global oscillations of the stars.

1223: The solid crust is not a rigid body and supports its own normal modes 

1224: (see, e.g., McDermott et al 1988, Lee \& Strohmayer 1996).

1225: For example, there exist torsional modes propagating in the crust, which

1226: can be resonantly coupled with the $r$-modes in the normal fluid core

1227: (Yoshida \& Lee 2001; Levin \& Ushomirsky 2001).

1228: Quite recently, using a local analysis of perturbations, Kinney \& Mendell (2002) 

1229: have suggested that

1230: no $r$-mode solution to the magnetohydrodynamic equations (e.g., Mendell 1998)

1231: exists in the superfluid core when

1232: both the neutron and proton vortices are pinned to the solid crust.

1233: This may suggest that a careful formulation of boundary conditions at the core-crust interfaces

1234: will be necessary to obtain reliable solutions to global oscillations of neutron stars,

1235: particularly when a magnetic field is essential for the oscillations.

1236: 

1237: \appendix

1238: 

1239: \section{Oscillation Equations in the Superfluid Core}

1240: 

1241: 

1242: For the oscillation equations in the superfluid core,

1243: we employ vectors $\pmb{y}_1^n$, $\pmb{y}_2^n$, $\pmb{y}_1^p$, $\pmb{y}_2^p$,

1244: $\pmb{y}_3$, and $\pmb{y}_4$, whose components are given by

1245: %

1246: \begin{equation}

1247: y_{1,k}^n=S_l^n, \quad y_{2,k}^n={\mu_{n,l}^\prime+\Psi^\prime_l\over ga}, \quad

1248: y_{1,k}^p=S_l^p, \quad y_{2,k}^p={\tilde\mu_{l}^\prime+\zeta\Psi^\prime_l\over ga}, \quad

1249: y_{3,k}={\Psi^\prime_l\over ga}, \quad y_{4,k}={1\over g}{d\Psi^\prime_l\over da},

1250: \end{equation}

1251: %

1252: where $l=|m|+2(k-1)$ for even modes and $l=|m|+2k-1$ for odd modes, and

1253: $k=1,~2,~3, \cdots$.

1254: We also introduce vectors $\pmb{h}^n$, $\pmb{h}^p$, $i\pmb{t}^n$, and $i\pmb{t}^p$,

1255: the components of which are

1256: %

1257: \begin{equation}

1258: h_k^n=H_l^n, \quad it_k^n=iT_{l^\prime}^n, \quad 

1259: h_k^p=H_l^p, \quad it_k^p=iT_{l^\prime}^p, 

1260: \end{equation}

1261: %

1262: where $l^\prime=l+1$ for even modes and $l^\prime=l-1$ for odd modes.

1263: Using these vectors,

1264: the perturbed continuity equations (16) and (17) are written as

1265: %

1266: \begin{eqnarray}

1267: a{d\pmb{y}_1^n\over da}&=&\left(-{d\ln\rho_n\over d\ln a}-3-a{d\chi_3(\alpha)\over da}

1268: -a{d\chi_3(\beta)\over da}A_0\right)\pmb{y}_1^n-{ga\over\rho_n}{\cal Q}_{11}\pmb{y}_2^n

1269: -{ga\over\rho_n}{\cal Q}_{12}\pmb{y}_2^p

1270: +{ga\over\rho_n}\left({\cal Q}_{11}+\zeta {\cal Q}_{12}\right)\pmb{y}_3 \nonumber  \\

1271: &+& \left(\Lambda_0+3\chi_3(\beta)B_0\right)\pmb{h}^n

1272: +3m\chi_3(\beta)Q_0i\pmb{t}^n, 

1273: \end{eqnarray}

1274: %

1275: \begin{eqnarray}

1276: a{d\pmb{y}_1^p\over da}&=&\left(-{d\ln\rho_p\over d\ln a}-3-a{d\chi_3(\alpha)\over da}

1277: -a{d\chi_3(\beta)\over da}A_0\right)\pmb{y}_1^p-{ga\over\rho_p}{\cal Q}_{21}\pmb{y}_2^n

1278: -{ga\over\rho_p}{\cal Q}_{22}\pmb{y}_2^p

1279: +{ga\over\rho_p}\left({\cal Q}_{21}+\zeta {\cal Q}_{22}\right)\pmb{y}_3 \nonumber  \\

1280: &+& \left(\Lambda_0+3\chi_3(\beta)B_0\right)\pmb{h}^p

1281: +3m\chi_3(\beta)Q_0i\pmb{t}^p.

1282: \end{eqnarray}

1283: %

1284: The radial components of equations (18) and (19) are reduced to

1285: %

1286: \begin{eqnarray}

1287: a{d\pmb{y}_2^n\over da}&=&c_1\bar\omega^2{\rho_{11}\over\rho_n}E_0\pmb{y}_1^n+(1-U)\pmb{y}_2^n

1288: +c_1\bar\omega^2{\rho_{12}\over\rho_n}E_0\pmb{y}_1^p \nonumber \\

1289: &-&c_1\bar\omega^2\left({\rho_{11}\over\rho_n}3\beta B_0+m\nu E_1\right)\pmb{h}^n

1290: -c_1\bar\omega^2{\rho_{12}\over\rho_n}3\beta B_0\pmb{h}^p  \nonumber \\

1291: &-&c_1\bar\omega^2\left({\rho_{11}\over\rho_n}3m\beta Q_0+\nu E_1C_0\right)i\pmb{t}^n

1292: -c_1\bar\omega^2{\rho_{12}\over\rho_n}3m\beta Q_0i\pmb{t}^p, 

1293: \end{eqnarray}

1294: %

1295: \begin{eqnarray}

1296: a{d\pmb{y}_2^p\over da}&=&c_1\bar\omega^2\left({\rho_{22}\over\rho_p}+{m_e\over m_p}\right)

1297: E_0\pmb{y}_1^p+(1-U)\pmb{y}_2^p

1298: +c_1\bar\omega^2{\rho_{21}\over\rho_p}E_0\pmb{y}_1^n \nonumber \\

1299: &-&c_1\bar\omega^2\left[\left({\rho_{22}\over\rho_p}+{m_e\over m_p}\right)3\beta B_0

1300: +m\nu\zeta E_1\right]\pmb{h}^p

1301: -c_1\bar\omega^2{\rho_{21}\over\rho_p}3\beta B_0\pmb{h}^n \nonumber \\

1302: &-&c_1\bar\omega^2\left[\left({\rho_{22}\over\rho_p}+{m_e\over m_p}\right)3m\beta Q_0

1303: +\nu\zeta E_1C_0\right]i\pmb{t}^p

1304: -c_1\bar\omega^2{\rho_{21}\over\rho_p}3m\beta Q_0i\pmb{t}^n.

1305: \end{eqnarray}

1306: %

1307: The perturbed Poisson equation (21) is reduced to

1308: \begin{equation}

1309: a{d\pmb{y}_3\over da}=\left(1-U\right)\pmb{y}_3+\pmb{y}_4,

1310: \end{equation}

1311: %

1312: \begin{eqnarray}

1313: a{d\pmb{y}_4\over da}&= & 4\pi G a^2\left({\cal Q}_{11}+\zeta{\cal Q}_{21}\right)I^{-1}\pmb{y}_2^n

1314: +4\pi G a^2\left({\cal Q}_{12}+\zeta{\cal Q}_{22}\right)I^{-1}\pmb{y}_2^p \nonumber \\

1315: &+&I^{-1}\left[\Lambda_0-4\pi G a^2\left({\cal Q}_{11}

1316: +\zeta{\cal Q}_{21}+\zeta({\cal Q}_{12}+\zeta{\cal Q}_{22})\right)\pmb{1}

1317: -2\left(\alpha\pmb{1}+\beta A_0\right)\Lambda_0\right]\pmb{y}_3  \nonumber \\

1318: &+& I^{-1}\left[(-U+\chi_0(\alpha))I

1319: +\chi_0(\beta)A_0-6\beta (A_0+B_0)\right]\pmb{y}_4.

1320: \end{eqnarray}

1321: %

1322: Algebraic equations that determine the relations between the variables $\pmb{h}$, $i\pmb{t}$,

1323: $\pmb{y}_1$, and $\pmb{y}_2$ are derived by making use of the horizontal components of

1324: the velocity equations (18) and (19), and they are

1325: %

1326: \begin{equation}

1327: \tilde L_0\pmb{h}^n-\tilde M_1i\pmb{t}^n

1328: -f_nmF_0(\pmb{h}^p-\pmb{h}^n)-f_n\tilde M_1^+(i\pmb{t}^p-i\pmb{t}^n)

1329: = \tilde J\pmb{y}_1^n +f_n \tilde J^+(\pmb{y}_1^p-\pmb{y}_1^n)

1330: +b_{11}{\pmb{y}_2^n\over c_1\bar\omega^2}+b_{12}{\pmb{y}_2^p\over c_1\bar\omega^2},

1331: \end{equation}

1332: %

1333: \begin{equation}

1334: \tilde L_0\pmb{h}^p-\tilde M_1i\pmb{t}^p

1335: + f_pmF_0(\pmb{h}^p-\pmb{h}^n)+f_p\tilde M_1^+(i\pmb{t}^p-i\pmb{t}^n)

1336: = \tilde J\pmb{y}_1^p-f_p \tilde J^+(\pmb{y}_1^p-\pmb{y}_1^n)

1337: +b_{21}{\pmb{y}_2^n\over c_1\bar\omega^2}+b_{22}{\pmb{y}_2^p\over c_1\bar\omega^2},

1338: \end{equation}

1339: %

1340: \begin{equation}

1341: -\tilde M_0\pmb{h}^n+\tilde L_1i\pmb{t}^n

1342: -f_n\tilde M_0^+(\pmb{h}^p-\pmb{h}^n)

1343: -f_nmF_1(i\pmb{t}^p-i\pmb{t}^n)

1344: =-\tilde K\pmb{y}_1^n-f_n\tilde K^+(\pmb{y}_1^p-\pmb{y}_1^n),

1345: \end{equation}

1346: %

1347: \begin{equation}

1348: -\tilde M_0\pmb{h}^p+\tilde L_1i\pmb{t}^p

1349: +f_p\tilde M_0^+ (\pmb{h}^p-\pmb{h}^n)

1350: +f_pmF_1(i\pmb{t}^p-i\pmb{t}^n)

1351: =-\tilde K\pmb{y}_1^p+f_p\tilde K^+(\pmb{y}_1^p-\pmb{y}_1^n),

1352: \end{equation}

1353: %

1354: where

1355: \begin{equation}

1356: f_n={\rho_{np}\over\rho_n}{\zeta\over\tilde\zeta}, \quad

1357: f_p={\rho_{np}\over\rho_p}{1\over\tilde\zeta},

1358: \end{equation}

1359: %

1360: \begin{equation}

1361: \zeta=1+{m_e\over m_p}, \quad

1362: \tilde\zeta=1+{m_e\over m_p}{\rho_{pp}\over\rho_p},

1363: \end{equation}

1364: and

1365: \begin{equation}

1366: \left(\matrix{b_{11}&b_{12}\cr b_{21}&b_{22}\cr}\right)=

1367: \left(\matrix{\rho_{11}/\rho_n&\rho_{12}/\rho_n\cr

1368: \rho_{21}/\rho_p&(\rho_{22}/\rho_p)+(m_e/m_p)\cr}

1369: \right)^{-1}.

1370: \end{equation}

1371: The functions $\chi_1(\alpha)$, $\chi_2(\alpha)$, $\chi_3(\alpha)$, and $\chi_0(\alpha)$ 

1372: are defined as

1373: %

1374: \begin{equation}

1375: \chi_1(\alpha)=\alpha+a{d\alpha\over da}, \quad

1376: \chi_2(\alpha)=2\alpha+a{d\alpha\over da}, \quad

1377: \chi_3(\alpha)=3\alpha+a{d\alpha\over da},

1378: \end{equation}

1379: %

1380: and

1381: %

1382: \begin{equation}

1383: \chi_0(\alpha)=-a{d\alpha\over da}+a{d\over da}\left(a{d\alpha\over da}\right).

1384: \end{equation}

1385: %

1386: The matrices $E_0$, $E_1$, $F_0$, $F_1$, $I$, $\tilde J$, $\tilde J^+$, $\tilde K$, $\tilde K^+$,

1387: $\tilde L_0$, $\tilde L_0^+$, $\tilde L_1$, $\tilde L_1^+$, 

1388: $\tilde M_0$, $\tilde M_0^+$, $\tilde M_1$, and $\tilde M_1^+$ are defined as

1389: %

1390: \begin{equation}

1391: E_0=\left(1+2\chi_1(\alpha)\right)\pmb{1}+2\chi_1(\beta)A_0, \quad

1392: E_1=(1+\chi_2(\alpha))\pmb{1}+\chi_2(\beta)A_0,

1393: \end{equation}

1394: %

1395: \begin{equation}

1396: F_0=\nu\Lambda_0^{-1}\left[(1+2\alpha+2\beta)\pmb{1}+12\beta A_0\right], \quad

1397: F_1=\nu\Lambda_1^{-1}\left[(1+2\alpha+2\beta)\pmb{1}+12\beta A_1\right],

1398: \end{equation}

1399: %

1400: %

1401: \begin{equation}

1402: I=\pmb{1}-2\chi_1(\alpha)\pmb{1}-2\chi_1(\beta)A_0,

1403: \end{equation}

1404: %

1405: \begin{equation}

1406: \tilde J=\tilde J^+-3\beta\Lambda_0^{-1}(2A_0+B_0), 

1407: \end{equation}

1408: %

1409: \begin{equation}

1410: \tilde J^+=m\nu\Lambda_0^{-1}\left[(1+\chi_2(\alpha))\pmb{1}+\chi_2(\beta)A_0\right],

1411: \end{equation}

1412: %

1413: \begin{equation}

1414: \tilde K =\tilde K^+-3m\beta\Lambda_1^{-1}Q_1,

1415: \end{equation}

1416: %

1417: \begin{equation}

1418: \tilde K^+

1419: =\nu\Lambda_1^{-1}\left[((1+\chi_2(\alpha))\pmb{1}+\chi_2(\beta)A_1)C_1

1420: +2((1+\chi_2(\alpha)-\chi_2(\beta))\pmb{1}+2\chi_2(\beta)A_1)Q_1\right],

1421: \end{equation}

1422: %

1423: \begin{equation}

1424: \tilde L_0=(1+2\alpha)\pmb{1}-mF_0+\beta\Lambda_0^{-1}(2A_0\Lambda_0+6B_0), 

1425: \end{equation}

1426: %

1427: \begin{equation}

1428: \tilde L_1=(1+2\alpha)\pmb{1}-mF_1+\beta\Lambda_1^{-1}(2A_1\Lambda_1+6B_1), 

1429: \end{equation}

1430: %

1431: \begin{equation}

1432: \tilde M_0=\tilde M_0^+-6m\beta\Lambda_1^{-1}Q_1, 

1433: \end{equation}

1434: %

1435: \begin{equation}

1436: \tilde M_0^+=\nu\Lambda_1^{-1}

1437: [(1+2\alpha-2\beta)\pmb{1}+4\beta A_1]Q_1\Lambda_0+F_1C_1, \quad

1438: \end{equation}

1439: %

1440: \begin{equation}

1441: \tilde M_1=\tilde M_1^+-6m\beta\Lambda_0^{-1}Q_0, 

1442: \end{equation}

1443: %

1444: \begin{equation}

1445: \tilde M_1^+=\nu\Lambda_0^{-1}

1446: [(1+2\alpha-2\beta)\pmb{1}+4\beta A_0]Q_0\Lambda_1+F_0C_0,

1447: \end{equation}

1448: %

1449: where $\pmb{1}$ denotes the unit matrix,

1450: and the matrices $A_0$, $A_1$, $B_0$, $B_1$, $C_0$, $C_1$,

1451: $Q_0$, $Q_1$, $\Lambda_0$, and $\Lambda_1$ as well as the quantities $U$ and $c_1$

1452: are defined in Yoshida \& Lee (2000a).

1453: 

1454: The oscillation equations in the superfluid core are given as a set of linear ordinary

1455: differential equations for the variables $\pmb{y}_j$ with $j=1$ to 4, which

1456: are obtained by eliminating the vectors

1457: $\pmb{h}$ and $i\pmb{t}$ in equations (A3) to (A8) 

1458: using the algebraic equations (A9) to (A12).

1459: 

1460: 

1461: \newpage

1462: 

1463: 

1464: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccccc}

1465: \footnotesize

1466: \tablecaption{$\kappa_0$, $\kappa_2$, and 

1467: $\tau^0_i$'s for the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes of $l^\prime=m=2$.}

1468: \tablewidth{0pt}

1469: \tablehead{ \colhead{Modes}&\colhead{$\eta$}& \colhead{$\kappa_0$} & \colhead{$\kappa_2$}

1470: & \colhead{$\tau^0_{GJ}$(s)} & \colhead{$\tau^0_{GD}$(s)} &

1471: \colhead{$\tau^0_{S}$(s)} & \colhead{$\tau^0_{MF}$(s)} }

1472: \startdata

1473:  $r^o$& 0 & 0.6667 & 0.408 & $3.31$ & $3.83\times 10^2$ & $-7.55\times10^7$ &  $-\infty$ \\

1474: $r^s$&  & 0.6667 & 0.511 & $2.12\times10^4$ & $2.18\times 10^6$  & $-2.99 \times 10^6$ 

1475: & $-\infty$ \\

1476: $r^o$& 0.02 & 0.6667 & 0.408 & $3.31$ & $3.83\times 10^2$ & $-6.76\times10^7$ 

1477: &  $-2.52\times10^2$ \\

1478: $r^s$ & & 0.8532 & 0.652 & $4.76\times10^{8}$ & $1.21\times 10^6$  & $-1.99 \times 10^6$ 

1479: & $-2.94\times 10^{-1}$ \\

1480:  $r^o$&0.04 & 0.6667 & 0.408 & $3.31$ & $3.83\times 10^2$ & $-6.76\times10^7$ 

1481: &  $-1.70\times10^3$ \\

1482:  $r^s$& & 1.0408 & 0.787 & $7.89\times10^{8}$ & $2.55\times 10^6$  & $-1.14 \times 10^6$ 

1483: & $-7.99\times 10^{-2}$ \\

1484:  $r^o$&0.06 & 0.6667 & 0.408 & $3.31$ & $3.83\times 10^2$ & $-6.76\times10^7$ 

1485: &  $-2.62\times10^3$ \\

1486:  $r^s$ && 1.2296 & 0.821 & $3.64\times10^{9}$ & $1.03\times 10^7$  & $-4.67 \times 10^4$ 

1487: & $-5.20\times 10^{-2}$ \\

1488: \enddata

1489: \label{coefficients0}

1490: \end{deluxetable}

1491: 

1492: 

1493: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}

1494: \footnotesize

1495: \tablecaption{$\kappa_0$ for the $i^o$- and $i^s$-modes for $m=2$ and $\eta=0$.}

1496: \tablewidth{0pt}

1497: \tablehead{ \colhead{$l_0-|m|$}& \colhead{$i^o$} & \colhead{$i^s$}}

1498: \startdata

1499: 2 & 1.0978 & 1.1190 \\

1500:  & -0.5683 & -0.5109 \\

1501: 3 & 1.3564 & 1.3869 \\

1502:   & 0.5180 & 0.5077 \\

1503:   & -1.0293 & -0.9723 \\

1504: 4 & 1.5191 & 1.5526 \\

1505:  & 0.8639 & 0.8612 \\

1506:  & -0.2738 & -0.2417\\

1507:  & -1.2738 & -1.2238 \\

1508: 5 & 1.6273 & 1.6600 \\

1509:   & 1.1046 & 1.1134 \\

1510:   & 0.4215 & 0.4060 \\

1511:   & -0.7028 & -0.6524 \\

1512:  & -1.4340 & -1.3968 \\

1513: \enddata

1514: \label{coefficients0}

1515: \end{deluxetable}

1516: 

1517: 

1518: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccccc}

1519: \footnotesize

1520: \tablecaption{$\kappa_0$, $\kappa_2$, and 

1521: $\tau^0_i$'s for the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes of $l^\prime=m=2$ for $\eta=0.04$ without the drag force.}

1522: \tablewidth{0pt}

1523: \tablehead{ \colhead{Modes}& \colhead{$\kappa_0$} & \colhead{$\kappa_2$}

1524: & \colhead{$\tau^0_{GJ}$(s)} & \colhead{$\tau^0_{GD}$(s)} &

1525: \colhead{$\tau^0_{S}$(s)} & \colhead{$\tau^0_{MF}$(s)} }

1526: \startdata

1527: $r^o$ & 0.6667 & 0.408 & $3.31$ & $3.83\times 10^2$ & $-7.49\times10^7$ &  $-9.10\times10^2$ \\

1528: $r^s$ & 0.6667 & 0.529 & $4.33\times10^4$ & $2.63\times 10^6$  & $-1.13 \times 10^6$ & $-7.30\times10^{-2}$ \\

1529: \enddata

1530: \label{coefficients0}

1531: \end{deluxetable}

1532: 

1533: 

1534: 

1535: \newpage

1536: 

1537: 

1538: 

1539: \begin{thebibliography}{}

1540: 

1541: \bibitem[]{} Akmal, A., Pandharipande, V.R., \& Ravenhall, D.G., 1998, Phys. Rev. C., 58, 1804

1542: 

1543: \bibitem[]{} Alpar, M.A., Langer, S.A., \& Sauls, J.A., 1984, ApJ, 282, 533

1544: 

1545: \bibitem[]{} Andersson, N. 1998, ApJ, 502, 708

1546: 

1547: \bibitem[]{} Andersson, N., \& Comer, G.L. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 1129

1548: 

1549: \bibitem[]{} Andersson, N., Kokkotas, K.D., \& Stergioulas, N. 1999, ApJ, 516, 307

1550: 

1551: \bibitem[]{} Andreev, A.F., \& Bashkin, E.P. 1976, Sov. Phys.-JETP, 42, 164

1552: 

1553: \bibitem[]{} Bildsten, L., \& Ushomirsky, G. 2000, ApJ, 529, L33

1554: 

1555: \bibitem[]{} Borumand, M., Joynt, R., \& Klu\'zniak, W. 1996, Phys. Rev. C., 54, 2745

1556: 

1557: \bibitem[]{} Chandrasekhar, S. 1933a, MNRAS, 93, 390

1558: 

1559: \bibitem[]{} Chandrasekhar, S. 1933b, MNRAS, 93, 462

1560: 

1561: \bibitem[]{} Cutler, L., \& Lindblom, L. 1987, ApJ, 314, 234

1562: 

1563: \bibitem[]{} Epstein, R.I. 1988, ApJ, 333, 880

1564: 

1565: \bibitem[]{} Feynman, R.P. 1972, Statistical Mechanics, Addison Wesley, Reading

1566: 

1567: \bibitem[]{} Flowers, E., \& Itoh, N. 1979, ApJ, 230, 847

1568: 

1569: \bibitem[]{} Friedman, J.L., \& Morsink, S.M. 1998, ApJ, 502, 714

1570: 

1571: \bibitem[]{} Friedman, J.L., \& Schutz, B.F. 1978, ApJ, 222, 281

1572: 

1573: \bibitem[]{} Haensel, P., Levenfish, K.P., \& Yakovlev, D.G. 2002, A\&A, 381, 1080

1574: 

1575: \bibitem[]{} Jones, P.B. 2001a, Phys. Rev. Lett., 86, 1384

1576: 

1577: \bibitem[]{} Jones, P.B. 2001b, Phys. Rev. D, 64, 084003

1578: 

1579: \bibitem[]{} Kaminker, A.D., Haensel, P., \& Yakovlev, D.G. 2001, A\&A, 373, L17

1580: 

1581: \bibitem[]{} Kaminker, A.D., Yakovlev, D.G., \& Gnedin, O.Y. 2002, A\&A, 383, 1076

1582: 

1583: \bibitem[]{} Khalatnikov, I.M. 1965, An Introduction to the Theory of Superfluidity,

1584: Benjamin, New York

1585: 

1586: \bibitem[]{} Kinney, J.B., \& Mendell, G. 2002, gr-qc/0206001

1587: 

1588: \bibitem[]{} Landau, L.D., \& Lifshitz, E.M. 1987, Fluid Mechanics, 2nd edn, Pergamon Press, Oxford

1589: 

1590: \bibitem[]{} Lee, U. 1993, ApJ, 405, 359

1591: 

1592: \bibitem[]{} Lee, U. 1995, A\&A, 303, 515

1593: 

1594: \bibitem[]{} Lee, U., \& Saio, H. 1986, MNRAS, 221, 365

1595: 

1596: \bibitem[]{} Lee, U., \& Strohmayer, T.E. 1996, A\&A, 311, 155

1597: 

1598: \bibitem[]{} Levin, Y., \& Ushomirsky, G. 2001, MNRAS, 324, 917

1599: 

1600: \bibitem[]{} Lindblom, L., \& Mendell, G. 1994, ApJ, 421, 689

1601: 

1602: \bibitem[]{} Lindblom, L., \& Mendell, G. 2000, Phys. Rev. D., 61, 104003

1603: 

1604: \bibitem[]{} Lindblom, L., Owen, B.J., \& Morsink, S.M. 1998, Phys. Rev. Lett, 80, 4843

1605: 

1606: \bibitem[]{} Lindblom, L., \& Owen, B.J. 2002, Phys. Rev. D, 65, 084039 

1607: 

1608: \bibitem[]{} Lockitch, K.H., \& Friedman, J.L. 1999, ApJ, 521, 764

1609: 

1610: \bibitem[]{} McDermott, P.N., Van Horn, H.M., \& Hansen, C.J. 1988, ApJ, 325, 725

1611: 

1612: \bibitem[]{} Mendell, G. 1991a, ApJ, 380, 515

1613: 

1614: \bibitem[]{} Mendell, G. 1991b, ApJ, 380, 530

1615: 

1616: \bibitem[]{} Mendell, G. 1998, MNRAS, 296, 903

1617: 

1618: %\bibitem[]{} Mendell, G. 2001, Phys. Rev. D, 64, 44009

1619: 

1620: \bibitem[]{} Morsink, S.M. 2002, ApJ, 571, 435

1621: 

1622: \bibitem[]{} Phinney, E.S., \& Kulkarni, S.R. 1994, ARA\&A, 32, 591

1623: 

1624: \bibitem[]{} Reisenegger, A., \& Goldreich, P. 1992, ApJ, 395, 240

1625: 

1626: \bibitem[]{} Saio, H. 1981, ApJ, 244, 299

1627: 

1628: \bibitem[]{} Sawyer, R.F. 1989, Phys. Rev. D., 39, 3804

1629: 

1630: %\bibitem[]{} Serot, B.D. 1979, Phys. Lett. B., 86, 146

1631: 

1632: \bibitem[]{} Shapiro, S.L., \& Tuekolwsky, S.A. 1983, 

1633: Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars, 

1634: Wiley, New York

1635: 

1636: \bibitem[]{} Tassoul, J.L. 1978, Theory of Rotating Stars, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton

1637: 

1638: \bibitem[]{} Thorne, K. 1980, Rev. Mod. Phys., 52, 299

1639: 

1640: \bibitem[]{} Tilley, D.R., \& Tilley, J. 1990, Superfluidity and Superconductivity, 3rd edn, 

1641: IOP Publishing Ltd, Bristol

1642: 

1643: \bibitem[]{} Unno, W., Osaki, Y., Ando, H., Saio, H., \& Shibahashi, H. 1989, 

1644: Nonradial Oscillations of Stars, 2nd ed, University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo

1645: 

1646: \bibitem[]{} van der Klis, M. 2000, ARA\&A, 38, 717

1647: 

1648: \bibitem[]{} Yoshida, S. 2001, ApJ, 558, 263

1649: 

1650: \bibitem[]{} Yoshida, S., \& Lee, U. 2000a, ApJ, 529, 997

1651: 

1652: \bibitem[]{} Yoshida, S., \& Lee, U. 2000b, ApJS, 129, 353

1653: 

1654: \bibitem[]{} Yoshida, S., \& Lee, U. 2001, ApJ, 546, 1121

1655: 

1656: \bibitem[]{} Yoshida, S., \& Lee, U. 2002a, ApJ, 567, 1112

1657: 

1658: \bibitem[]{} Yoshida, S., \& Lee, U. 2002b, in preparation.

1659: 

1660: \end{thebibliography}

1661: 

1662: 

1663: \begin{figure}

1664: \epsscale{.5}

1665: %\plotone{f1.eps}

1666: 

1667: \caption{Toroidal components $iT_m$ and $iT_{m+2}$ of the $r$-modes of

1668: $l^\prime=m=2$ are plotted 

1669: as a function of $a/R$ for $\bar\Omega=0.01$ and $\eta=0.04$, 

1670: where the solid, dotted, dashed, and dash-dotted lines

1671: are used to indicate, respectively, $iT_m^n$, $iT_{m+2}^n$, $iT_m^p$, and $iT_{m+2}^p$

1672: in the superfluid core.

1673: The amplitudes are normalized by the maximum value.

1674: Panels (a) and (b) are for the $r^o$- and $r^s$-modes, respectively.}

1675: 

1676: \end{figure}

1677: 

1678: \begin{figure}

1679: \epsscale{.5}

1680: %\plotone{f2.eps}

1681: 

1682: \caption{Difference $iT_m^p-iT_m^n$ versus $a/R$ for the $l^\prime=m=2$ $r^o$-mode

1683: for $\bar\Omega=0.01$ and $\eta=0.04$, where 

1684: the amplitude normalization $\max(|iT_m|)=1$ have been used.}

1685: 

1686: \end{figure}

1687: 

1688: \begin{figure}

1689: \epsscale{.5}

1690: %\plotone{f3.eps}

1691: 

1692: \caption{Same as Figure 1 but for the case of $\eta=0$.}

1693: 

1694: \end{figure}

1695: 

1696: \begin{figure}

1697: \epsscale{.5}

1698: %\plotone{f4.eps}

1699: 

1700: \caption{Toroidal components $iT_m$ and $iT_{m+2}$ of inertial modes of

1701: $m=2$ and $l_0-|m|=3$ are plotted 

1702: as a function of $a/R$ for $\bar\Omega=0.01$ and $\eta=0$, 

1703: where the solid, dotted, dashed, and dash-dotted lines

1704: are used to indicate, respectively, $iT_m^n$, $iT_{m+2}^n$, $iT_m^p$, and $iT_{m+2}^p$

1705: in the superfluid core.

1706: The amplitudes are normalized by the maximum value.

1707: Panels (a) and (b) are for the $i^o$-mode of $\kappa_0=0.5180$ and the $i^s$-mode of

1708: $\kappa_0=0.5077$, respectively.}

1709: 

1710: \end{figure}

1711: 

1712: \begin{figure}

1713: \epsscale{.5}

1714: %\plotone{f5.eps}

1715: 

1716: \caption{Same as Figure 4 but for $l_0-|m|=5$.

1717: Panels (a) and (b) are for the $i^o$-mode of $\kappa_0=0.4215$ and the $i^s$-mode of

1718: $\kappa_0=0.4060$, respectively.}

1719: 

1720: \end{figure}

1721: 

1722: \begin{figure}

1723: \epsscale{.5}

1724: %\plotone{f6.eps}

1725: 

1726: \caption{Same as Figure 4 but for $l_0-|m|=5$.

1727: Panels (a) and (b) are for the $i^o$-mode of $\kappa_0=1.1046$ and 

1728: the $i^s$-mode of $\kappa_0=1.1134$, respectively.}

1729: 

1730: \end{figure}

1731: 

1732: \begin{figure}

1733: \epsscale{.5}

1734: %\plotone{f7.eps}

1735: 

1736: \caption{Avoided crossing as a function of $\eta$

1737: between the $l^\prime=m$ $r^s$-mode and the $i^o$-mode that tends to $\kappa_0=1.1046$ as

1738: $\eta\rightarrow0$, where $m=2$ and $\bar\Omega=0.01$ have been assumed.

1739: The dashed line indicates $\kappa_0$ given by equation (49) for the $r^s$-mode.}

1740: 

1741: \end{figure}

1742: 

1743: \begin{figure}

1744: \epsscale{.5}

1745: %\plotone{f8.eps}

1746: 

1747: \caption{Mode crossings as a function of $\eta$

1748: between the $l^\prime=m$ $r^o$-mode (dashed line) and the $i^s$-modes (solid lines)

1749: that tend to $\kappa_0=0.5077$ and $\kappa_0=0.4060$ as $\eta\rightarrow0$, 

1750: where $m=2$ and $\bar\Omega=0.01$ have been assumed.}

1751: 

1752: \end{figure}

1753: 

1754: 

1755: \begin{figure}

1756: \epsscale{.5}

1757: %\plotone{f9.eps}

1758: 

1759: \caption{Differences $iT_m^p-iT_m^n$ for the $l^\prime=m=2$ $r^o$-mode at $\bar\Omega=0.01$

1760: are plotted  as a function of $a/R$ for the cases of $\eta=0.023$ (panel a)

1761: and $\eta=0.0484$ (panel b).

1762: The amplitude normalization is given by $\max(|iT_m|)=1$.}

1763: 

1764: \end{figure}

1765: 

1766: \begin{figure}

1767: \epsscale{.5}

1768: %\plotone{f10.eps}

1769: 

1770: \caption{Toroidal components $iT_m$ and $iT_{m+2}$ of inertial modes of

1771: $m=2$ are plotted as a function of $a/R$ for $\bar\Omega=0.01$, 

1772: where the solid, dotted, dashed, and dash-dotted lines

1773: are used to indicate, respectively, $iT_m^n$, $iT_{m+2}^n$, $iT_m^p$, and $iT_{m+2}^p$

1774: in the superfluid core.

1775: The amplitudes are normalized by the maximum value.

1776: Panel (a) shows the $i^s$-mode of $l_0-|m|=3$ at

1777: $\eta=0.023$, and panel (b) the $i^s$-mode of $l_0-|m|=5$ at $\eta=0.0484$}

1778: 

1779: \end{figure}

1780: 

1781: 

1782: \begin{figure}

1783: \epsscale{.5}

1784: %\plotone{f11.eps}

1785: 

1786: \caption{ $NJ^\prime_{mm}(a)$ versus $a/R$ for the $l^\prime=m=2$ $r^s$-mode

1787: for the cases of $\eta=0.04$ (solid line)

1788: and $\eta=0$ (dashed line), where $N\equiv \sqrt{|\omega\sigma^{2l+1}|N_l/2E}$

1789: and $J^\prime_{mm}(a)=\int_0^adadJ^\prime_{mm}/da$.}

1790: 

1791: \end{figure}

1792: 

1793: \begin{figure}

1794: \epsscale{.5}

1795: %\plotone{f12.eps}

1796: 

1797: \caption{ $-\tau^0_{MF}$ versus $\eta$ for the $l^\prime=m=2$

1798: $r^o$-mode, where $\rho_s=2.8\times10^{14}$g/cm$^3$ has been used, and

1799: $-\tau^0_{MF}$ is given in second.}

1800: 

1801: \end{figure}

1802: 

1803: \begin{figure}

1804: \epsscale{.5}

1805: %\plotone{f13.eps}

1806: 

1807: \caption{ Eigenfunction $\delta\beta_{2,k}$ as a function of $r/R$ for the $r^o$-mode of

1808: $l^\prime=m=2$ for $\bar\Omega=0.01$ and $\eta=0.04$, where amplitude normalizaation has been given

1809: by $y_{2,k=1}(r=R)=f_{m+1,m}\bar\Omega^2$. See text for definition of the factor $f_{lm}$ and 

1810: the function $y_{2,k}$. The solid, dotted, and dashed lines are for

1811: $\delta\beta_{2,1}$, $100\times \delta\beta_{2,2}$, and $100\times \delta\beta_{2,3}$, respectively.}

1812: 

1813: \end{figure}

1814: 

1815: \begin{figure}

1816: \epsscale{.5}

1817: %\plotone{f14.eps}

1818: 

1819: \caption{Same as Figure 1 but for that

1820: we have ignored the drag force terms on the right hand side of the velocity equations

1821: (18) and (19) to calculate the $r$-modes.}

1822: 

1823: \end{figure}

1824: 

1825: 

1826: 

1827: \end{document}

1828: 

1829: