2,950 research outputs found

    Higher-order symmetry energy and neutron star core-crust transition with Gogny forces

    Get PDF
    We study the symmetry energy and the core-crust transition in neutron stars using the finite-range Gogny nuclear interaction and examine the deduced crustal thickness and crustal moment of inertia. We start by analyzing the second-, fourth- and sixth-order coefficients of the Taylor expansion of the energy per particle in powers of the isospin asymmetry for Gogny forces. These coefficients provide information about the departure of the symmetry energy from the widely used parabolic law. The neutron star core-crust transition is evaluated by looking at the onset of thermodynamical instability of the liquid core. The calculation is performed with the exact (i.e., without Taylor expansion) Gogny EoS for the core, and also with its Taylor expansion in order to assess the influence of isospin expansions on locating the inner edge of neutron star crusts. It is found that the properties of the core-crust transition derived from the exact EoS differ from the predictions of the Taylor expansion even when the expansion is carried through sixth order in the isospin asymmetry. Gogny forces, using the exact EoS, predict the ranges 0.094 fm3ρt0.118 fm30.094 \text{ fm}^{-3} \lesssim \rho_t \lesssim 0.118\text{ fm}^{-3} for the transition density and 0.339 MeV fm3Pt0.665 MeV fm30.339 \text{ MeV fm}^{-3} \lesssim P_t \lesssim 0.665 \text{ MeV fm}^{-3} for the transition pressure. The transition densities show an anticorrelation with the slope parameter LL of the symmetry energy. The transition pressures are not found to correlate with LL. Neutron stars obtained with Gogny forces have maximum masses below 1.74M1.74M_\odot and relatively small moments of inertia. The crustal mass and moment of inertia are evaluated and comparisons are made with the constraints from observed glitches in pulsars.Comment: 24 pages, 15 figures, discussions and bibliography updated, to appear in Physical Review

    An assessment of the Atlantic and Arctic sea–air CO2 fluxes, 1990–2009

    Get PDF
    © The Author(s), 2013. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Biogeosciences 10 (2013): 607-627, doi:10.5194/bg-10-607-2013.The Atlantic and Arctic Oceans are critical components of the global carbon cycle. Here we quantify the net sea–air CO2 flux, for the first time, across different methodologies for consistent time and space scales for the Atlantic and Arctic basins. We present the long-term mean, seasonal cycle, interannual variability and trends in sea–air CO2 flux for the period 1990 to 2009, and assign an uncertainty to each. We use regional cuts from global observations and modeling products, specifically a pCO2-based CO2 flux climatology, flux estimates from the inversion of oceanic and atmospheric data, and results from six ocean biogeochemical models. Additionally, we use basin-wide flux estimates from surface ocean pCO2 observations based on two distinct methodologies. Our estimate of the contemporary sea–air flux of CO2 (sum of anthropogenic and natural components) by the Atlantic between 40° S and 79° N is −0.49 ± 0.05 Pg C yr−1, and by the Arctic it is −0.12 ± 0.06 Pg C yr−1, leading to a combined sea–air flux of −0.61 ± 0.06 Pg C yr−1 for the two decades (negative reflects ocean uptake). We do find broad agreement amongst methodologies with respect to the seasonal cycle in the subtropics of both hemispheres, but not elsewhere. Agreement with respect to detailed signals of interannual variability is poor, and correlations to the North Atlantic Oscillation are weaker in the North Atlantic and Arctic than in the equatorial region and southern subtropics. Linear trends for 1995 to 2009 indicate increased uptake and generally correspond between methodologies in the North Atlantic, but there is disagreement amongst methodologies in the equatorial region and southern subtropics.U. Schuster has been supported by EU grants IP 511176-2 (CARBOOCEAN), 212196 (COCOS), and 264879 (CARBOCHANGE), and UK NERC grant NE/H017046/1 (UKOARP). G. A. McKinley and A. Fay thank NASA for support (NNX08AR68G, NNX11AF53G). P. Landsch¨utzer has been supported by EU grant 238366 (GREENCYCLESII). N. Metzl acknowledges the French national funding program LEFE/INSU. Support for N. Gruber has been provided by EU grants 264879 (CARBOCHANGE) and 283080 (GEO-CARBON) S. Doney acknowledges support from NOAA (NOAA-NA07OAR4310098). T. Takahashi is supported by NOAA (NAO80AR4320754)
    corecore