Pulsar Timing
For a detailed look at pulsar
timing and other pulsar observing techniques, see the Handbook of Pulsar
Astronomy by
Duncan Lorimer and
Michael Kramer.
Pulsars are intrinsically
interesting
and exotic objects, but much of the
best science based on pulsar observations has come
from their use as tools via
pulsar timing. Pulsar timing is the regular monitoring of the
rotation of the neutron star by tracking (nearly exactly) the times of
arrival of the radio pulses. The key point to remember is that
pulsar
timing unambiguously accounts
for every single rotation of the neutron star over long periods (years
to decades) of time. This unambiguous and very precise
tracking
of rotational phase allows pulsar astronomers to probe the interior
physics of neutron stars, make extremely accurate astrometric
measurements, and test gravitational theories in the strong-field
regime in unique ways.
For pulsar timing, astronomers "fold" radio data modulo the
instantaneous pulse period $P$ or pulse frequency $f = 1 / P = d\phi / dt$.
Averaging over many pulses yields a high signal-to-noise average pulse
profile. Although individual pulse shapes vary considerably, the shape
of the average profile is quite stable. Typically, the average
profile is correlated with a template or model profile so that a phase
offset can be determined. When multiplied by the instantaneous
pulse
period, that phase yields a time offset that can be added to a
high-precision reference point on the profile (for example, the left
edge of
the profile based on the recorded time of the first sample of the
observation) to create the time-of-arrival or TOA.
The precision with which a TOA can be determined is approximately equal
to the duration of a sharp pulse feature (e.g., the leading edge)
divided by the signal-to-noise ratio of the average profile. It
is usually expressed in terms of the width of the pulse features $W_f$
in units of the period $P$, the pulse period $P$, and the
signal-to-noise ratio $SNR$ such that $\sigma_{\rm TOA} \propto W_fP /
SNR$. Therefore strong, fast pulsars with narrow pulse profiles
provide the best arrival times.
In the nearly inertial frame of the Solar-system barycenter, the
rotational period of a pulsar is nearly constant, so the time-dependent
phase $\phi(t)$ of a
pulsar can be approximated by a Taylor expansion
$$\phi(t) = \phi_0 + f(t-t_0) + \frac{1}{2}\dot f(t-t_0)^2 +
\dots,$$ where $\phi_0$ and $t_0$ are arbitrary reference phases and
times for each pulsar. The important thing about pulsar timing, though,
is that the observed rotational phase difference between each of the
TOAs must contain
an integer number of rotations. Since each TOA corresponds to
a different time $t$, the parameters that we are fitting for, such as
$f$ and $\dot f$, must result in a phase change between each pair of
TOAs $i$ and $j$ that is an integer number of turns, or $\Delta\phi_{\rm ij} = n$ turns (1 turn
= $2 \pi$ radians). Since all
measurements are made with regard to the integrated pulse phase rather than the instantaneous
pulse period, the
precision with which astronomers can make long-term timing measurements
can be
quite extraordinary.
Example: With what precision can we
determine the spin frequency $f$ of a pulsar using pulsar timing?
Since $f = d\phi / dt$ when
$\phi$ is measured in turns, the
precision is based on how precisely we can measure a change in phase
$\Delta\phi$ over some time interval $\Delta T$. Typically,
$\Delta T$ is a long period of time (up to several tens of years for
many pulsars now) over which a pulsar's phase has been tracked through
regular monitoring. $\Delta\phi$ is determined principally by the
individual TOA precisions, although for some types of measurments a
statistical component is important as well since precision improves as
the number of measurements $N^{-1/2}$ if the random
errors are larger than the systematic errors.
For the original millisecond
pulsar B1937+21, the TOA precision is approximately 1 $\mu$s (which is
a fractional error in phase of about $6\times10^{-4}$ turns, and it has
been
timed for over 25 years: $$\Delta f \sim \frac{\sigma_{\rm TOA}}{\Delta
T} = \frac{6\times10^{-4}}{25\,{\rm yrs} \times 3.15\times10^7 {\rm
s\,yr}^{-1}} = 8\times10^{-13}\,{\rm Hz}.$$
In order to measure
$\phi(t)$ in this form, though, many
corrections have to be applied to the observed TOAs first. If we measure a pulse at our
observatory on Earth at topocentric
(topocentric
means measured from a fixed point on the Earth's surface) time $t_{\rm
t}$, we can correct this time to the time $t$ in the nearly
inertial Solar-system center of mass or barycentric
frame,
which we assume to be the nearly the same as the time in the frame
comoving with
the pulsar. Note that the measured pulse rates will
differ from the actual pulse rates in the pulsar frame by the unknown
Doppler
factor resulting from the unknown line-of-sight pulsar velocity.
$$t = t_{\rm t} - t_{t_0} +
\Delta_{\rm clock} - \Delta_{\rm DM} + \Delta_{{\rm R\odot}} +
\Delta_{{\rm E\odot}} +
\Delta_{{\rm S\odot}} + \Delta_{\rm R} + \Delta_{\rm E} + \Delta_{\rm
S} .$$ As before,
$t_{t_0}$ is a reference epoch, $\Delta_{\rm clock}$ represents
clock
correction that accounts for differences between the observatory
clocks and terrestrial time standards, $\Delta_{\rm DM}$ is the
dispersion delay caused by the ISM, and the other $\Delta$ terms are
delays from within the Solar System and, if the pulsar is in a binary,
from within its orbit. The Roemer
delay $\Delta_{\rm R\odot}$ is
the classical light
travel time across the Earth's orbit, with a magnitude of
$\sim500\cos\beta$ s, where $\beta$ is the ecliptic latitude of the
pulsar, and $\Delta_{\rm R}$ is the corresponding delay across the
orbit of a pulsar in a binary or multiple system. The Einstein
delay $\Delta_{\rm E}$ accounts
for the time dilation from the moving pulsar (and observatory) and the
gravitational redshift caused by the Sun and planets or the binary
companion, and the Shapiro
delay $\Delta_{\rm S}$ is the extra
time
required by the pulses to travel through the curved space-time
containing
the
Sun/planets/companions. Errors in any of these parameters, as
well as other parameters such as $f$, $\dot f$, and proper motion, give
very specific systematic signatures in plots of the timing
residuals, which are simply the phase differences between the
observed TOAs and the predicted TOA times based on the current model
parameters.
Example: How (and how
accurately) can we measure positions using pulsar timing?
Pulsar positions on the sky are
determined by timing a pulsar over the course of a year as the Earth
orbits the Sun and tracking the changing time delays (i.e. the Roemer
delay) of pulses as the Earth moves.
The Roemer delay $\tau$ across
the Solar System from a pulsar at ecliptic coordinates $\lambda$
(longitude) and $\beta$ (latitude) is: $$\tau \simeq 500\,{\rm s}\
\cos(\beta)\cos\left(\theta(t) + \lambda\right),$$ where $\theta(t)$ is
the orbital phase of the Earth with respect to the vernal
equinox. This is an approximate time delay since we are assuming
that the Earth's orbit is circular.
If there is an error in our position estimate, the individual position
errors components $\Delta\lambda$ and $\Delta\beta$ cause a
differential time delay $\Delta\tau$ to be present in the timing
residuals with respect to the correct Roemer delay:
$$\Delta\tau \simeq 500\,{\rm s}\ \left[\cos(\beta+\Delta\beta)
\cos\left(\theta(t) + \lambda + \Delta\lambda\right) -
\cos(\beta)\cos(\theta(t) + \lambda)\right].$$
If the positional errors are
small, such that we can use $\sin x\sim x$, $\cos x\sim 1$, and
$\Delta\beta\,\Delta\lambda\sim0$, we can use trigonometric angle-sum
identities and then simplify to get:
$$\Delta\tau \simeq -500\,{\rm s}\
\left[\Delta\lambda\cos(\beta)\sin(\theta(t) + \lambda) +
\Delta\beta\sin(\beta)\cos\left(\theta(t) + \lambda\right)\right].$$
Comparing the trig identity
$A\sin\left(\theta(t)+\phi\right) = A\cos\phi\sin\theta(t) +
A\sin\phi\cos\theta(t)$ to the equation for $\Delta\tau$, we see that:
$$A\cos\phi = -500\,{\rm s}\ \Delta\lambda\cos\beta$$ $$A\sin\phi =
-500\,{\rm s}\ \Delta\beta\sin\beta,$$
and therefore: $$\Delta\lambda
= -\frac{A\cos\phi}{500\,{\rm s}\ \cos\beta}$$ $$\Delta\beta =
-\frac{A\sin\phi}{500\,{\rm s}\ \sin\beta},$$ where $A$ and $\phi$ are
the amplitude and phase of the error sinusoid in the timing residuals.
When the pulsar is located near the ecliptic plane (with $\beta \sim
0$), $\cos\beta \sim 1$ and there is maximum timing leverage (and
therefore minimum error) to determine $\lambda$. However, $\sin\beta
\sim 0$ and so the errors on $\beta$ are huge. If astrometric
accuracy for pulsars near the ecliptic is necessary, VLBI positions are
the best way to go.
For the timing fits themselves, the amplitude of the sinusoid $A$ is in
time units (i.e. light travel time) and a timing fit will determine $A$
to an absolute precision $\Delta A$ approximately equal to the TOA
uncertainty. If that uncertainty is small, say 2 $\mu$s for a
millisecond pulsar, and there are a large number of measurements (say
$N = 16$) over the course of a year, the averaged phase errors (and
therefore the errors on $A$) will be approximately $\sim 2\,\mu s /
\sqrt{16} \sim 5\times10^{-7}$ sec. The overall position errors
for an MSP 30$^\circ$ off the ecliptic plane are approximately
$$\Delta\lambda \sim \frac{5\times10^{-7}}{500\,\cos\beta} =
1\times10^{-9}\,{\rm radians}$$ and
$$\Delta\beta \sim \frac{5\times10^{-7}}{500\,\sin\beta} =
2\times10^{-9}\,{\rm radians}.$$ These correspond to errors in both
directions of only a few hundred micro-arcsec! Even normal
pulsars with slow spin periods provide astrometric precisions typically
of 0.1 arcsec or better.

Figure 1:
Establishing a timing solution for an isolated
pulsar. In panel (e), you identify closely spaced days with
unambiguous phase connection and fit for spin frequency. In panel
(f), you extend that phase connection until either RA or Dec
errors dominate and then fit for it. In panel (g), you fit
for the other position component. Finally, in panel (h), you
fit for frequency derivative, which completes the timing solution.

Figure 2: Pulsar timing
examples. Panel (a) shows a
"good" timing solution with no unmodeled effects. The sinusoidal
ripple in Panel (c) indicates
an error in position. Panel (b) shows an error
in the frequency derivative ($f = d\phi/dt$ so $\dot f =
d^2\phi/dt^2$). Panel (d) shows unmodeled pulsar proper
motion. From Lorimer and Kramer, 2005.
For binary pulsars, the pulsar
Roemer delays comprise up to five
Keplerian parameters: the projected semi-major axis $x\equiv a_1\sin
i/c$, the longitude of periastron $\omega$, the time of periastron
passage $T_0$, the orbital period $P_b$, and the orbital eccentricity
$e$. Relativistic binaries may allow the measurement of up to 5
post-Keplerian
(PK) parameters: the rate of periastron advance
$\dot{\omega}$, the orbital period decay $\dot{P_b}$, the so-called
relativistic $\gamma$ (i.e. the Einstein term corresponding to time
dilation and gravitational redshift), and the Shapiro delay terms $r$
(range) and $s$ (shape).

Table 1:
Millisecond pulsar timing example. A timing
ephemeris for the nearby MSP J0437$-$4715 by van Straten et al.
2001. This is one of the best "timing" pulsars known (post-fit
RMS timing residuals of $\sim$100 ns), and this measurement is one of
the most accurate astrometric measurements ever made. In
addition,
the timing accuracy allowed a fundamentally new test of general
relativity.
In any theory of gravity, the five PK parameters are functions only
of the pulsar mass $m_1$, the companion mass $m_2$, and the
standard five
Keplerian orbital parameters. For general relativity, the formulas
are: $$\dot\omega = 3 \left(\frac{P_b}{2\pi}\right)^{-5/3} (T_\odot
M)^{2/3}\,(1-e^2)^{-1}$$
$$\gamma = e \left(\frac{P_b}{2\pi}\right)^{1/3}
T_\odot^{2/3}\,M^{-4/3}\,m_2\,(m_1+2m_2)$$
$$\dot P_b = -\,\frac{192\pi}{5} \left(\frac{P_b}{2\pi}\right)^{-5/3}
\left(1 + \frac{73}{24} e^2 + \frac{37}{96} e^4 \right)
(1-e^2)^{-7/2}\,T_\odot^{5/3}\, m_1\, m_2\, M^{-1/3}$$
$$r = T_\odot\, m_2$$
$$s = x \left(\frac{P_b}{2\pi}\right)^{-2/3}
T_\odot^{-1/3}\,M^{2/3}\,m_2^{-1}.$$
In these equations, $T_\odot\equiv GM_\odot/c^3 = 4.925490947\,\mu$s
is the solar mass in time units, $m_1$, $m_2$, and $M\equiv m_1+m_2$
are in solar masses, and $s\equiv\sin i$ (where $i$ is the orbital
inclination). If any two of these PK parameters are measured, the
masses
of the pulsar and its companion can be determined. If more than two are
measured, each additional PK parameter yields a different test of a
gravitational theory.
For the famous case of the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar B1913+16,
high-precision measurements of $\dot\omega$ and $\gamma$ were first
made to determine the masses of the two neutron stars accurately. The
Nobel-prize-winning measurement came with the eventual
detection of $\dot P_b$, which implied that the orbit was decaying in
accordance with general relativity's predictions for the the
emission of gravitational radiation. The recently
discovered double-pulsar system J0737$-$3039 is in a more compact orbit
(2.4 hrs compared to 7.7 hrs for PSR B1913+16), which allows the
measurement of all five PK parameters as well as the mass ratio $R$,
giving a total of four tests of general relativity. Kramer et al.
(2006) showed that GR is correct at the 0.05% level and measured the
masses of the two neutron stars to better than 1
part in $10^4$.


Figure 3.
Timing results for the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar B1913+16. The
left panel shows the mass vs. mass plot for the pulsar and its
companion neutron star. The three lines correspond to the three
measured post-Keplerian
parameters. The right panel shows the periastron shift caused by
the decay of the orbit via emission of gravitational radiation.
The detection of gravitational radiation resulted in a Nobel prize for
Hulse and Taylor. (Figure
provided by J. Weisberg).

Figure 4:
PSR J0737$-$3039 mass vs. mass diagram. As in
Figure 3, the diagram shows lines corresponding to the post-Keplerian
parameters measured for the system. In this case, though, six
parameters were measured, including the mass ratio R since both neutron
stars are pulsar clocks. These measurements have tested GR to
~0.05%
(Kramer et al. 2006).