GRO J1744-28 VS the Rapid Burster

Details GRO J1744-28 VS the Rapid Burster GRO J1744-28 VS the Rapid Burster

May 1997

adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1997aas...190.4802l&link_type=abstract

American Astronomical Society, 190th AAS Meeting, #48.02; Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 29, p.844

Astronomy and Astrophysics

Astronomy

Scientific paper

The bursts from GRO J1744-28 are due to accretion instabilities as is the case for type II bursts in the Rapid Burster. Both sources are transient Low-Mass X-ray Binaries, and they both exhibit an unusual oscillation (QPO) in their persistent X-ray flux following several (not all) of the type II bursts. There are differences too. The pattern of bursts and the burst peak luminosities are very different for the two sources, and the QPO centroid frequencies (see above) differ by an order of magnitude. The difference in behavior probably lies in the difference in the magnetic dipole field strength of the accreting neutron stars. It remains puzzling, why GRO J1744-28 and the Rapid Burster are the only known sources which exhibit rapidly repetitive type II bursts (time intervals between bursts in the Rapid Burster can be as little as 10 sec, in 1744-28 the shortest repetitive burst intervals are approximately 200 sec).

Affiliated with

Also associated with

No associations

Rating

GRO J1744-28 VS the Rapid Burster does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with GRO J1744-28 VS the Rapid Burster, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and GRO J1744-28 VS the Rapid Burster will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-831843