text:
# KiloHertz QPO and Gravitational Wave Emission as the Signature of the Rotation and Precession of a LMXB Neutron Star Near Breakup

## 1 Introduction

KiloHertz (kHz) oscillations in low-mass X-ray binaries (LMXB) were first discovered (van der Klis et al. (1996); Strohmayer et al. (1996)) in observations with the Proportional Counter Array (PCA) onboard the Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (Bradt, Rothschild, & Swank (1993); Swank (1998)). The kHz Quasi-Periodic Oscillations (QPO) have now been observed in the persistent flux of well over a dozen sources (van der Klis (2000); and references therein). These kHz QPO sometimes occur in pairs whose difference frequency is not constant (van der Klis et al. (1997); Mendez, van der Klis, & van Paradijs (1998); Ford et al. (1998)) and show properties that are remarkably uniform over a wide range of accretion rates (Psaltis et al. (1998)). Some of these sources also show oscillations in the $`300600\mathrm{Hz}`$ range that occur during Type I (thermonuclear) bursts (Strohmayer, Zhang, Swank, & Lapidus (1998)). Current models for kHz QPOs have explanations related to the inner portions of the accretion disk and the transition flow of matter onto the NS surface (Miller, Lamb, & Psaltis (1998); Cui (2000)). Other alternatives focus on the motions of blobs of matter near the last stable orbit of a NS (Zhang, Strohmayer, & Swank (1997)) and propose evidence for Lense-Thirring precession of orbiting matter (Stella, & Vietri (1998)). The unique millisecond X-ray pulsar, SAX J1808.4-3658, shows high Q millisecond pulsations ($`401\mathrm{Hz}`$) and a lack of kHz QPOs (Wijnands, & van der Klis 1998b ). Also, pairs of kHz QPO are not observed in sources with black holes (van der Klis (2000)) indicating that the generation of kHz QPO is likely related to a mechanism near the surface of the NS.

In this paper, we present the torque free precession (TFP) model for kHz QPO observed in LMXB sources which relates the properties of the observed X-ray emissions from the surface of the NS over a wide range of accretion rates to the intrinsic properties of neutron star (NS) structure. This model is in strong contrast to existing models which primarily relate the kHz QPO phenomenon to the physics of gas dynamics external to the NS surface.

## 2 Torque Free Precession Model

KiloHertz oscillations are explained as a natural consequence of the spinup of a neutron star to near breakup due to sustained high rates of accretion. In this model, the fluid core of the NS spins up due to accretion torques ($`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$). Further transfer of angular momentum to the NS causes the “crust” of the NS to partially decouple from the core and rotate at a higher rate (up to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$) than the fluid core. The crust of the NS both rotates and undergoes torque free precession (TFP) as a rigid body: this causes a modulation of the X-ray emission from this observable outer region at a pair of frequencies in the kHz band. We designate these frequencies as $`\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\nu _u`$, the lower and upper kHz QPO. These oscillations are quasi-periodic because of fluctuations in the moments of inertia of the outer region of the NS and possible exchange of angular momentum between the rigid crust and the fluid core. Although the kHz QPOs observed in X-rays are the most well studied predictions of this model, most of the energy released is likely in the form of kHz gravitational waves (GW).

### 2.1 Theoretical Overview

The crust of the NS will undergo classical TFP in the absence of any accretion. Torques due to the accretion flow or changes in the internal structure of the NS will modify the precession and rotation of the NS on a timescale which is slow compared to either the spin of the crust at frequency $`\nu _{cs}`$, the precession of the crust at frequency $`\nu _{cp}`$, or the spin of the fluid core at a frequency $`\nu _{fs}`$. For the purposes of the model proposed here, we identify the “rigid” crust as that portion of the outer part of the NS which undergoes rotation and precession independently of the fluid core of the NS. The structure of the outer layers of a NS is divided into a surface layer at low density ($`<10^6\mathrm{gm}\mathrm{cm}^3`$), an outer crust ($`10^{11}\mathrm{gm}\mathrm{cm}^3`$), and an inner crust ($`10^{14}\mathrm{gm}\mathrm{cm}^3`$). These layers are outside of an neutron fluid core at nuclear density ($`10^{15}\mathrm{gm}\mathrm{cm}^3`$). There may be an interior core region that is solid or some other form of matter distinct from a neutron liquid at even higher densities (Shapiro, & Teukolsky (1983)). The exact details of the NS structure are not important for the simple application of the TFP model.

Simplifying these constructs, we refer to only two components, the “crust” and the “core” of the NS. In a latter section, we identify the outer crust as the portion of the NS that undergoes TFP because the inner crust is likely melted in an accreting LMXB NS. We further assume that the crust is rigid and undergoes rotation and precession while the core is a fluid and only undergoes rotation. Clearly there is a complex interface between the crust and core as well as time dependent deformations of the crust and core, and perhaps non-rotational differential flows in the fluid interior. All of these details are ignored in modeling the basic response of the NS to increasing angular momentum and approach to breakup conditions.

Let $`I_c`$ and $`I_c`$ be the parallel and perpendicular components of the moment of inertia of the crust of the NS as related to the rotational axis of the NS. We approximate the response of the crust of the NS to a variation in rotation rate by the following pair of equations where $`\nu _{cs}`$ is the NS crust spin frequency and $`I_{c0}`$ is the moment of inertia of the non-rotating crust. Clearly, $`I_c`$ must equal $`I_c`$ in the limit of no rotation:

$$I_c=I_{c0}\left[1+\frac{\nu _{cs}}{\nu _c}\right]$$
(1)
$$I_c=I_{c0}\left[1+\frac{\nu _{cs}}{\nu _c}\right]$$
(2)
where $`\nu _c`$ and $`\nu _c`$ are constants that characterize the response of the crust to rotation, in the directions parallel and perpendicular to the NS spin axis.

We also define a dimensionless ratio ellipticity $`ϵ_c`$:

$$ϵ_c=\frac{\left[I_cI_c\right]}{I_c}$$
(3)
The ellipticity $`ϵ_c`$ is related to the eccentricity $`e_c`$ by

$$ϵ_c=\frac{\nu _{cp}}{\nu _{cs}}=\frac{e_c^2}{2e_c^2}=\frac{\nu _{\mathrm{}}}{\nu _u}$$
(4)
where the eccentricity $`e_c`$ is defined as

$$e_c^2=1\left(\frac{r_p}{r_e}\right)^2$$
(5)
Here $`r_e`$ indicates the equatorial radius of the NS and $`r_p`$ indicates the polar radius. The NS is assumed to have the shape of a oblate spheroid which is induced by rotation of the crust at frequency $`\nu _{cs}`$. Note that in equation 4 we have made the interpretation that the observed lower kHz QPO frequency is the crust’s precession frequency ($`\nu _{cp}=\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$) while the upper kHz QPO frequency is the crust’s spin frequency ($`\nu _{cs}=\nu _u`$). Equations 3 and 4 are consistent with TFP of a rigid body (Goldstein (1950)).

From the Maclaurin sequence of the equilibrium figures of uniform rotation and density (Chandrasekhar (1969)) critical values of the ellipticity $`ϵ`$ are determined as purely geometrical functions of the ratios of moments of inertia. In the following discussion $`ϵ`$ and $`e`$ (no subscripts) refer to the ellipticity and eccentricity respectively of a MacLaurin spheroid defined analogously as the equations 3, 4 and 5 for the crust. Generalizations (Ostriker, & Bodenheimer (1973)) of the Maclaurin sequence indicate that the critical values of $`ϵ_c`$ are approximately the same as those for $`ϵ`$, even in cases of non-uniform rotation and density. Even if the surface shape of the NS does not match an ideal oblate spheroid, $`ϵ_c`$ is still well defined as a function of the ratios of the moments of inertia. The critical values of ellipticity ($`ϵ`$) and also the eccentricity ($`e`$) are often expressed as corresponding critical values of the ratio of kinetic energy ($`T`$) to the absolute value of the potential energy ($`\left|W\right|`$) designated $`\frac{T}{\left|W\right|}`$.

Considering a MacLaurin sequence of increasing angular momentum, we first encounter a secular instability at $`ϵ=0.4930;e=0.8127;\frac{T}{\left|W\right|}=0.1375`$. This first instability determines the maximum rotation of a NS for an assumed equation of state (EOS) and mass. Note that the values of eccentricity (and also $`\frac{T}{\left|W\right|}`$) are slightly less than the critical value for the “normal” sequence of maximally rotating NS computed by Cook (see table 7 of Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994b ). This result is robust for all EOS for which Cook computed models. The next important critical value ($`ϵ=0.7618;e=0.9300;\frac{T}{\left|W\right|}=0.2379`$) occurs at the state with the maximum possible rotation rate. Beyond this point, increasing the angular momentum will not increase the rotation rate. This state does not indicate the onset of any instability, but rather reflects the fact that the system has reached its maximum possible spin for a rigid internal structure. The next critical value ($`ϵ=0.8315;e=0.9529;\frac{T}{\left|W\right|}=0.2738`$) occurs when the rotating rigid body becomes dynamically unstable because of the rapid growth of nonradial toroidal modes. Any rotating system, including a rigid body, is unlikely to maintain a value of eccentricity greater than 0.9529.

Recall that we have previously associated the precession frequency of the NS crust ($`\nu _{cp}`$) with the observed lower kHz QPO frequency ($`\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$), and the spin frequency of the crust ($`\nu _{cs}`$) with the upper kHz QPO frequency ($`\nu _u`$). For the conditions considered here the accretion is likely higher onto a large equatorial region of the crust. The polar regions of the crust likely rotate with interior fluid which is observed in Type I bursts from LMXB NSs (see a later section for more discussion of this possibility). At low angular momentum, the fluid and crust rotate together as a single rigid body at the spin frequency $`\nu _{fs}(=\nu _{cs})`$. As the angular momentum is increased, the NS reaches the critical internal state which results in the partial decoupling of an equatorial portion of the crust from the interior of the NS. The details of this internal change in the NS structure are likely due to heating of the inner crust due to nuclear burning associated with the accretion of matter onto the NS surface and subsequent migration to deeper layers of the NS. This catastrophic event will occur at a unique spin for a particular NS among an uncertain range of spin frequencies depending on the details of the history of accretion. Since we have no quantitative theoretical model we identify a plausible range as $`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$ for consistency with observations of NCO in Type I bursts and the possibility that Z-sources have spins as high as $`800\mathrm{Hz}`$. The details of this event are discussed in a later section. For the discussion here, we only need assume that a portion of the crust has been reduced in mass ($`10^4\text{M}\text{}`$) and is less coupled to the NS fluid interior. We will show later that the EOS of the NS is such that at the time just prior to the catastrophic event, the shape of the NS has an eccentricity $`e0.2`$ and is a stable. Subsequent to the decoupling of the outer crust from the interior of the NS, this part of the crust begins to rotate at a spin frequency different and higher than the fluid core. In this context, the descriptive term decouple means that the interaction of the crust (reduced in mass) with the NS interior is sufficiently weak that an equatorial portion of the crust can rotate and precess independently from the NS fluid core. Clearly there is still a significant interaction between the crust and core. The crust will experience torques due to both accretion and internal changes in the NS. Since the crust is reduced in mass, its spin can more easily be changed. The torques due to accretion are not large enough to change the spin of the crust by a large amount ($`300`$ to $`1200\mathrm{Hz}`$). However, internal changes in the NS will produce torques on the crust that can significantly spin the crust up or down. The crust will always spin faster than the fluid core. Therefore the spin frequency of the fluid core ($`\nu _{fs}`$) is less than the minimum value of the frequency of the upper kHz QPO ($`\nu _u`$) in each particular source. As the crust spins up its shape will change due to a continuous elastic response. As the crust reaches a spin frequency of $`500\mathrm{Hz}`$ and an eccentricity $`e0.8127`$ it approaches the onset of a secular instability. The response of the crust to this secular instability is the likely initiation of TFP. This transition near $`500\mathrm{Hz}`$ is supported by observations of 4U1728-34 and 4U1608-52 that show both kHz QPO for $`\nu _u>500\mathrm{Hz}`$ but only the upper kHz QPO for $`\nu _u<500\mathrm{Hz}`$ (see figure 1 of Mendez, van der Klis, & Ford (2000)). The crust now both spins and precesses over a range of spin frequencies $`\nu _{cs}5001100\mathrm{Hz}`$ ($`e_c0.80.93`$), while the fluid core continues to rotate near the same rate that it had just prior to decoupling of the equatorial crust.

The NS does not “break up” as a single body but rather breaks into two separate bodies. The core is a fluid which rotates but does not precess, while the “rigid” crust rotates and precesses. This motion of the crust leads to the appearance of the pair of kHz QPO at the rotation frequency of the crust $`\nu _{cs}(=\nu _u)`$ and the precession frequency of the crust $`\nu _{cp}(=\nu _{\mathrm{}})`$. As $`\nu _{cs}`$ increases to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$, the crust reaches the next critical value of eccentricity $`e0.9300`$ which corresponds to the maximum rotation rate of the rigid crust that will allow both rotation and precession to occur. As the rotation rate increases higher than $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$ toward slightly greater values ($`1200\mathrm{Hz}`$ which corresponds to $`e0.9529`$), the crust approaches dynamical instability which quenches its precession. An alternative and perhaps more likely scenario is that for spins above $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$ the equatorial crustal material and the plasma atmosphere above the crust are moving very close to escape velocity of the NS and may merge with orbiting material at the inner edge of the accretion disk. The upper kHz QPO in the frequency range $`11001200\mathrm{Hz}`$ may be caused by orbital motion hence the lack of TFP and a missing lower kHz QPO. When this spin/orbital frequency reaches $`1200\mathrm{Hz}`$ the accretion disk and crust come into contact which results in the cessation of the upper kHz QPO.

At this state of maximum angular momentum, the fluid core is still rotating at frequency $`\nu _{fs}`$ (some value in the range $`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$) while the crust is rotating at $`\nu _{cs}`$ ($`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$). For greater angular momenta, the entire NS system (crust and core) can no longer rotate as two bodies. Also the surface of the crust is moving at a speed near the escape velocity. Further increases in angular momentum are likely to lead to mass ejection or the real “breakup” of the NS. The decoupling of the crust from the core at spin frequencies $`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$ stalls the further spinup of the NS while the equatorial crust spins up to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$. At this point the NS (crust and core) has reached the breakup state.

### 2.2 TFP Model Calculation

The successful quantification of the TFP model is confirmed by fitting the observed frequencies of the kHz QPO from Sco X-1. We can approximately model the moments of inertia of the crust ($`I_c`$ and $`I_c`$) as a response to rotation at frequency $`\nu _{cs}`$ as a linear increase from an initial value at zero rotation ($`I_{c0}`$) as shown in equations 1 and 2. The fixed free parameters in this model are $`\nu _c`$, $`\nu _c`$ and $`I_{c0}`$. The value of $`ϵ_c`$ defined by equation 3 is independent of the value of $`I_{c0}`$ since it only depends on ratios of moments of inertia. Equation 4 relates the moments of inertia to the ratio of the lower and upper frequencies of the kHz QPO with the interpretation that the upper frequency is the spin frequency of the crust ($`\nu _u=\nu _{cs}`$) and the lower frequency is the precession frequency of the crust ($`\nu _{\mathrm{}}=\nu _{cp}`$). We use this model to fit the data for ScoX-1 and thereby empirically determine the values for $`\nu _c=1009.4\pm 1.0\mathrm{Hz}`$ and $`\nu _c=6435\pm 22\mathrm{Hz}`$. These values are computed by a $`\chi ^2`$ fit to the 38 pairs of measurements of $`\nu _l`$ and $`\nu _u`$ for Sco X-1 with two free parameters and $`50\%`$ error bars ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=2.37`$) derived according to Lampton, Margon, & Bowyer (1976). The minimum value of $`\chi ^2`$ is 92.4 for 34 degrees of freedom. This fit is of similar quality to that from Psaltis et al. (1998) and implies systematic errors $`2`$ times larger than the statistical errors. The value of $`I_{c0}`$ is not determined by the fit.

This fit is shown in figure 1 (a) and (b). Panel (a) shows the fit to the data by the TFP model (solid line) as well as the phenomenological equation of Psaltis et al. (1998) (dashed line). The fits are similar; however for the TFP model we are fitting a dynamical model rather than a phenomenological function. In panel (a), the data point near the abscissa value of $`500\mathrm{Hz}`$ is obtained from observations of GX 5-1 (Wijnands, & van der Klis 1998b ). It has not been included in the fit for $`\nu _c`$ and $`\nu _c`$, but is included in the figure to demonstrate that the TFP model appears to fit the data over the full observed range of $`\nu _u`$ ($`5001100\mathrm{Hz}`$) with $`\nu _l`$ present. In panel (b) we show an expanded view of the Sco X-1 data and the models. Panels (a) and (b) show the ordinate as the difference frequency of the kHz QPO as usually shown in prior work (Psaltis et al. (1998) and references therein).

In panels (c) and (d) we show the same data and the TFP model fit with the ordinate as the ratio $`\nu _{\mathrm{}}/\nu _u`$ which is equal to the ellipticity of the crust $`ϵ_c`$. Again the TFP model is the solid curve which is shown to match the Sco X-1 data and the single point from GX5-1. Panel (d) is the same as panel (c) at an expanded scale showing a better view of the Sco X-1 data. Panel (c) also shows horizontal dotted lines for the critical values of the eccentricity of the crust. Also shown in panel (c) is one curve that correspond to a particular model of a rotating NS. The model uses the specific EOS FPS (Lorenz, Ravenhill, & Pethick (1993)) for a NS of mass $`1.4\text{M}\text{}`$ taken from a computation in Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994b . Given the interpretation of the model proposed here, the curve for the real EOS lies below the solid curve for all values of $`\nu _u`$. By inspection of table 15 from Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994b , it can be shown that the ratio of the radius of a NS at maximum spin is close to $`\sqrt{2}`$ times the radius at zero spin. Similarly the decoupled crust also increases its equatorial radius by $`\sqrt{2}`$ as it approachs maximum spin. This result is consistent with the condition $`\nu _u\nu _c`$ which from equation 1 means that the moment of inertia of the crust has doubled corresponding to an increase in the equatorial radius by a $`\sqrt{2}`$. In other words, the radius of the decoupled crust at maximum spin is nearly the same as the radius that the NS would have at maximum spin if the crust did not decouple. The condition that the rotating and precessing crust must be outside the radius of the fluid core mean that the EOS of the NS must have a maximum spin greater than $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$. Since observations support the contact on the inner edge of the accretion disk with the equatorial crust at maximum spin of the crust $`11001200\mathrm{Hz}`$ therefore the EOS of the NS must have a maximum spin less than $`1200\mathrm{Hz}`$ and likely close to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$. Of all the EOS considered by Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994b , EOS FPS is closest to matching this requirement. Of the polytropes considered in Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994a  only the index $`n1.0`$ matches this requirement. If the TFP model is correct, then the EOS of a NS is tightly constrained within a range that is comparable to the systematic errors in the computation of the structure of a rotating NS. The best fit polytrope for the interior of a NS has an index $`n`$ likely within $`\pm 0.1`$ of $`1.0`$. The empirical relationship in equation 6 relates the value of the polytropic index $`n`$ to the maximum spin frequency $`\nu _{max}`$ of a NS with a mass $`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{ns}}`$. This equation is derived from equation 31 and the data in table 3 from Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994a . For a $`1.4\text{M}\text{}`$ NS and assumimg $`\nu _{max}`$ is equal to the maximum value of $`\nu _u1100\mathrm{Hz}`$ with a simultaneous measurement of $`\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ yields a value $`n0.94`$. If the masses of the NS in an LMXB are as high as $`2\text{M}\text{}`$ then $`n1.16`$. The basic conclusion of a tightly constrained EOS with $`n1`$ still holds.

$$n=1.0+1.4\left[log_{10}\left(\frac{\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{ns}}}{1.4\text{M}\text{}}\right)log_{10}\left(\frac{\nu _{max}}{1004\mathrm{Hz}}\right)\right]$$
(6)
In panel (d) we show an expanded view of the Sco X-1 data. Note that the maximum value of $`\nu _u`$ at $`1070\mathrm{Hz}`$ corresponds to the critical value of $`e0.9300`$. The dashed curve in panels (c) and (d) shows the locus for a Maclaurin spheroid that just passes through these points at maximum spin with precession. The mass ($`1.4\text{M}\text{}`$) and radius ($`17`$km) of the spheroid is approximately correct for nominal values of a NS. The upper kHz QPO from Sco X-1 has been observed at values greater than $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$ but without the presence of the lower kHz QPO. The model suggests that the maximum spin rate without precession present (missing lower kHz QPO) would occur at a frequency $`1180\mathrm{Hz}`$ which is determined by the intersection of the $`e=0.9529`$ line with the solid curve. This point marks an upper limit for the breakup frequency of the NS in the context of the TFP model. An alternative, and more likely interpretation, is that the true breakup frequency of full NS (core and crust) is closer to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$. The observed upper kHz QPO in the frequency range $`11001200\mathrm{Hz}`$ (without the lower kHz QPO) marks a transition region in which the outer crust and the NS plasma atmosphere are moving near escape velocity and are merging with the inner edge of the accretion which has a matching Keplerian velocity. Full merger of the outer crust with the inner edge of the accretion disk marks the cessation of the upper kHz QPO.

In panel (c) a vertical dot-dash line is plotted at a frequency $`\nu _u=401\mathrm{Hz}`$, which is the spin frequency of SAX J1808.4-3658, the millisecond X-ray pulsar discovered by Wijnands et al. 1998a . The locus for EOS FPS intersects the line for this pulsar near $`ϵ_c0.03`$. For the EOS FPS the radius of the NS varies from $`10.8515.45`$ km (see table 12 in Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994b ). For a $`1.4\text{M}\text{}`$ NS with $`ϵ_c=0.03`$ (or $`e=0.17`$) the radius as set by EOS FPS is $`11`$km in agreement with the upper limit $`16`$km suggested by Burderi, & King (1998). A high Q pulsar such as SAX J1808.4-3658 has not reached the condition for melting the inner crust. In the context of the TFP model such a high Q pulsar would never show kHz QPO. Also the millisecond radio pulsar PSR 1937+214 discovered by Backer et al. (1982) has a spin frequency of $`640\mathrm{Hz}`$. The high Q of this pulsar is consistent with the lack of accretion and a solid inner crust. Perhaps this radio pulsar once had a melted inner crust and significant accretion rate and has since reformed a solid inner crust after cooling subsequent to a cessation of accretion.

## 3 Scenario for Initiation and Maintenance of TFP

The correctness of the TFP model is strongly supported by the the consistent prediction of the sequence of kHz QPO observed in LMXB sources. The angular momentum transfer via accretion is too small to drive a large variation in the spin of the outer crust ($`3001200\mathrm{Hz}`$) over a short period ($`day`$). Any realistic and complete TFP model requires a mechanism that taps a small fraction of the large reservoir of both rotational energy and angular momentum of a rapidly spinning NS that drives the outer crust to vary in spin frequency. We suggest that the controlling mechanism is related to giant glitches observed in radio pulsars (Alpar et al. (1981)).

Initially the NS is spinning up due to the accretion of material onto the surface of the outer crust. Over a long accretion timescale the outer and inner crust are repeatedly replenished. Brown, E. F. (2000) has calculated detailed models for the equilibrium structure of the crust in such a accreting source. For a sufficiently high accretion rates ($`10^9\text{M}\text{}yr^1`$), Brown’s model predicts that the temperature in the inner crust is independent of the surface temperature of the NS. Just below the layer beginning at onset of neutron drip, the boundary between the outer and inner crust, the nuclear reactions heat the interior of the inner crust. Most of this heat is conducted into the core of the NS. Brown’s model suggests that the inner crust will melt for a sufficiently high accretion rate. The fall of the average value of Z in the inner crust also lowers the melting temperature of this layer as well. Also the presence of any r-mode driven by the rapid spin of the NS will heat the boundary-layer between the fluid core and inner crust (Bildsten, & Ushomirsky (2000)) and further raise the temperature of the inner crust. This scenario leads to the possibility of melting the inner crust. However for rates as high as 5 times Eddington the outer crust may not melt (see figure 10 of Brown, E. F. (2000)). The conductivity of the outer crust is low compared to that for the inner crust (see figure 5 of Brown, E. F. (2000)). We suggest that the onset of TFP occurs when the inner crust melts leaving the outer crust as a solid. The spin of the NS star at the time when the inner crust melts will vary depending on the history of the accretion rate, the detailed structure of the inner and outer crust, and the presence of any additional non-nuclear heating sources (for example an r-mode). The onset of melting of the inner crust is consistent with a range of spin rates of the fluid core seen in Type I bursts ($`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$). In the TFP model only the equatorial portion of the outer crust of the NS spins up and down ($`3001200\mathrm{Hz}`$). Large polar regions of the NS outer crust continue to spin with the interior fluid core. A later section contains a more detailed discussion of the implications of the TFP model for observations of Type I bursts in LMXB sources.

Once the inner crust melts then the outer crust can undergo TFP driven by a mechanism that taps internal NS rotational energy. We suggest that a likely candidate for this mechanism is similar to that proposed to explain giant glitches in radio pulsars (Alpar et al. (1981)). These giant glitches are observed to cause discrete jumps in the spin period of the outer crust that correspond to a changes in angular momentum of the a large portion of the NS. The size of the giant glitch in Vela is $`10^6`$ expressed as the fractional change in the spin frequency before and after the glitch. The energy source for the giant glitches is likely a internal superfluid component which has a moment of inertia, $`10^2I_f`$, as measured by the fractional change of the spin’s first derivative before and after the giant glitch, where $`I_f`$ is nearly the total moment of inertia of the NS. Both of these parameters are determined by radio observations of giant glitches in the spin of a NS and are not based on any theoretical models of NS interiors (Alpar et al. (1981)). The energetics of this ”glitch” in the spin rate of an LMXB NS is somewhat larger than a giant glitch in a radio pulsar. This possibility is not that extreme since a LMXB NS is spinning $`50`$ times faster than the radio pulsars (Vela) for which the giant glitches are measured. We suggest that the ”glitch” in an LMXB likely scales as the period of rotation yielding an estimate of the fractional change in the total angular momentum $`10^4`$. If the superfluid transfers a large fraction of this stored angular momentum to the solid outer crust ($`I_c10^4I_f`$) then a small differential in the spin of the superfluid ($`5\mathrm{Hz}`$) compared to the spin of the core of the NS ($`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$) would cause a large change in the spin of the outer crust (from $`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$ to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$) since the ratio of the moment of inertia of the outer crust to that of the superfuild layer is $`10^2`$. Also the timescale for recovery from a giant glitch in radio pulsars is order $`100\mathrm{days}`$. This long timescale is likely due to low viscosity in the superfuild layer. Theoretical estimates for this timescale are uncertain but may also scale with the period of rotation (see equation 36 in Sauls, J. A. (1988)). Therefore in an LMXB NS spinning $`50`$ times faster than the Vela pulsar, the glitch recovery time would become $`1\mathrm{day}`$. We suggest that the outer crust spins up and down rapidly ($`3001100\mathrm{Hz}`$) on a timescale of $`\mathrm{days}`$ due to the pinning and unpinning of vortices in a superfluid layer within the NS. This superfluid layer (which includes the melted inner crust) likely has an interface at the base of the outer crust where it interacts via slow viscous effects. This allows the outer crust to undergo TFP on a fast timescale ($`1\mathrm{ms}`$) while exchanging angular momentum with the superfluid reservoir on a slow timescale ($``$hours). This exchange of angular momentum proceeds in a limit-cycle that is observed in the spin and precession of outer crust. This process results in a rapid changes in the spin and shape of the outer crust and is consistent with the observed Qs of the kHz QPO. The random meander of this limit-cycle (see figure 2 in Zhang et al. (1996)) is associated with the pinning and unpinning of vortices in the superfluid with resulting discrete interaction with the outer crust. These interactions induce changes in the both the parallel and perpendicular components of the moments of inertia of the outer crust and excite TFP. Some of the unpinned superfluid likely rotates with the outer crust up to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$. This superfluid then repins with the pinned superfuild causing the spin down of the outer crust. Since the outer crust in an LXMB NS is weakly coupled to the interior of the NS as compared to the crust of a NS in a radio pulsar, the manifestation of the observed ”glitch” is slow both going up and down in an LMXB NS.

In addition the accretion onto the surface of the outer crust also causes torques which excite TFP. The outer crust is also continuously elastically responding to the changes in the internal strain. These internal adjustments also contribute to fluctuations in the components of the moments of inertia and the excitation of TFP. Simultaneous with all of these effects, GWs are emitted due to TFP. Using equation 2.13 from Cutler, C., & Jones, D. I. (2000) in an entirely different context, we estimate the exponential timescale for GW damping of the TFP ($`500s`$). Equation 7 is a recasting of this equation assuming that ($`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }I}{I}`$) is of order unity rather that $`10^7`$. In the context of the TFP model the outer crust responds elastically to changes in spin rate completely independent of the shape of the fluid core of the NS which is spinning slower than the outer crust.

$$\tau _{\theta _p}=5.4\times 10^2\left[\frac{1\mathrm{kHz}}{\nu _{cs}}\right]^4\left[\frac{10^{41}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^2}{I_c}\right]s$$
(7)
The slower positive and negative variations ($`100s`$) in the spin of the outer crust seen in figure 2 of Zhang et al. (1996) may be due to the varying back reaction of the emission of GWs due to TFP.

## 4 Implications of the Torque Free Precession Model

In the following sections, we discuss a few of the implications of the TFP model including GW emission, LT precession of material orbiting a NS, periodicities in the X-ray emission from Type I bursts, magnetic dipole radiation emitted at the spin frequency of the crust, and possible models for GRB based on accretion driven conversion of a LMXB NS to a BH.

### 4.1 Generation of Gravitational Waves

The accretion in the brighter LMXB sources may exceed the Eddington rate. Examples of mass transfer in LMXB that result in accretion rates as high as $`10^5\text{M}\text{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ have been modeled by Harpaz, & Rappaport (1994) and Iben, Tutukov, & Fedorova (1997). Companion stars with masses greater than the NS ($`3\text{M}\text{}`$) have stable accretion rates due to Roche lobe overflow on a thermal time scale that can reach super Eddington levels (Pylyser and Savonije (1988); Rappaport (2000)). The full range of conditions of possible donor stars in accreting binary systems allows a wide variation in the accretion rate. As the rate approaches or exceeds the Eddington limit for a portion of the lifetime of the X-ray source, the X-ray emitting NS may decrease the accretion onto the NS surface by radiatively ejecting material from the system. Even though such complex radiative driven processes may occur, we suggest that in some cases higher accretion rates are sustained in a steady state.

In particular, we propose that in systems with high accretion rates, the NS spins up to near breakup and emits most of the accretion derived energy in GWs produced by the TFP of the NS crust. The validity of the concept of classical TFP in general relativity (GR) has been demonstrated by Thorne (1983). TFP implies the possibility that the unmeasured emission of GWs may exceed the X-ray emission. Therefore in the subsequent discussion we consider that some LMXB NSs may have extreme super Eddington accretion rates only limited by realistic models for flow of material from donar stars. GWs emitted due to TFP of sufficient amplitude may cool the accretion flow allowing a significant fraction of the accreting material to reach the surface of the NS. Also the rapid rotation of the outer crust as it approaches contact with the inner edge of the accretion disk at a matching velocity reduces the conversion of kinetic energy at the surface of the NS. The X-ray emission from LMXB may be poor indicator of the accretion rate if significant TFP is present. However, it may be true that on average the LMXBs with lower X-ray emission (atoll sources) and those with higher X-ray emission (Z-sources) still have a range of accretion rates both below and above the Eddington limit. Even sources with current low accretion rates may undergo large amplitude TFP driven by stored internal NS energy. We have little evidence concerning the relationship between the long term average accretion rate and current observed X-ray emission. The likelihood of an unmeasured emission of GWs from LMXB should caution any firm interpretations about the total accretion onto the surface of the NS.

The following estimation of the emission of GWs via NS precession is derived entirely from the work of Zimmermann, & Szedenits (1979) and Zimmermann (1980). The power at the inertial precession frequency $`\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}`$ emitted by the precessing crust of the NS in the form of gravitational waves $`L_{GW}(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp})`$ is given by equation 8 derived from Zimmermann, & Szedenits (1979). We assume that the precession angle $`\theta _{cp}`$ is small and neglect emission at the second harmonic of the inertial precession frequency.

$$L_{GW}(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp})=\frac{64\pi ^6}{5}\frac{G}{c^5}ϵ_c^2I_{c}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}\right){}_{}{}^{6}\theta _{cp}^{2}$$
(8)
We define $`\alpha `$ in equation 9 where $`I_c`$ is the moment of inertia of part of the crust that is precessing, and $`I_f`$ is the moment of inertia of the fluid interior that spins without precessing (as discussed in the previous section). For estimation of GW emission, we ignore the frequency dependence of $`\alpha `$ implied by equation 1. The parameter $`\theta _{cp}`$ is the angular amplitude of the precession in radians.

$$\alpha =\frac{I_c}{I_f}$$
(9)
Assuming $`\alpha `$ and $`\theta _{cp}<<1`$, we then estimate $`L_{GW}(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp})`$ with selected values of variables in equation 10. The value of $`I_f`$ is from a NS model with an EOS FPS. The value of $`\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}`$ is set for the condition of maximal rotation of the crust near NS breakup. The values of $`\alpha `$ and $`\theta _{cp}`$ are not well determined and would be best constrained by future direct observation of the GWs. Note that the modest values of these two parameters imply that crust TFP is a very efficient emitter of GWs. Theoretical NS models for the outer crust suggest that $`\alpha 10^4`$ (Mochizuki, Oyamatsu, & Izuyama (1997); Shapiro, & Teukolsky (1983)). We assume that the inner crust has melted as discussed previously. The values for $`\alpha `$ and $`\theta _{cp}`$ are uncertain but are estimated based on the specific scenario of TFP of the outer crust. Alternative variations of the scenario would still alllow TFP with different values for $`\alpha `$ and $`\theta _{cp}`$. For TFP in an LMXB NS we select a value of $`\theta _{cp}0.020.1`$ based on the observations of the amplitude of the lower kHz QPO (RMS of the mean X-ray flux; van der Klis et al. (1996)). The ease of detection of the kHz QPO in LMXB suggests significant amplitudes for $`\alpha `$ and $`\theta _{cp}`$. The lower values of $`\theta _{cp}`$ are likely associated with higher values of $`\nu _u`$ because of the increasing GW emission at higher spin rates.

The modulation of the X-ray emission at the precession frequency $`\nu _{cp}`$ ($`=\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$) could be caused either by geometrical effects similar to those for X-ray pulsations from a spinning NS or because the velocity and acceleration vary at the surface of the NS modulated by TFP with an amplitude proportional to $`\theta _{cp}`$. These variations on the surface of the NS would modulate the accretion energy and thereby be tracked by modulation in the X-ray emission on timescales of order $`1\mathrm{ms}`$. Justification for the rapid tracking of these modulations is implied by the radiation dominated conditions on the surface on the NS (Arons (1992); Klein et al. (1996); Jernigan, Klein, & Arons (2000)).

The energy emitted in GW at the inertial crust precession frequency seen by a distant observer is given by 10.

$$L_{GW}(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp})=2.3\times 10^{42}\left[\frac{ϵ_c}{0.7}\right]^2\left[\frac{I_f}{1.2\times 10^{45}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^2}\right]^2\left[\frac{\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}}{1700\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^6\left[\frac{\alpha }{10^4}\right]^2\left[\frac{\theta _{cp}}{0.02\mathrm{radians}}\right]^2\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{s}^1$$
(10)
Equation 11 (derived from the first term of equation 14 in Zimmermann (1980)) is an estimate of the gravitational power emitted at the second harmonic of the spin frequency of the crust due to fluctuations in the components of the moments of inertia of the NS. Here we estimate the fluctuations of $`I_c`$ as $`I_c/Q`$ where Q is a typical quality factor of the upper kHz QPO. Previously we simplified the TFP model by assuming that both components of $`I_c`$ were equal. Here we must assume that the two orthogonal components of $`I_c`$ can fluctuate independently.

$$L_{GW}(2\nu _{cs})=1.6\times 10^{42}\left[\frac{I_f}{1.2\times 10^{45}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^2}\right]^2\left[\frac{\nu _{cs}}{1000\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^6\left[\frac{Q}{100}\right]^2\left[\frac{\alpha }{10^4}\right]^2\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{s}^1$$
(11)
For Sco X-1 at a distance of 2.8 kpc (Bradshaw, Geldzahler, & Fomalont (1999)) and with the selected values for $`\theta _p`$ and $`\alpha `$, the amplitude of the GWs emitted at frequency $`\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}`$ is given in equation 12 and numerically estimated in 13.

$$h_{GW}(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp})=4\pi ^2\frac{G}{c^4}\frac{I_c(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp})^2}{d}\alpha \theta _{cp}$$
(12)
$$h_{GW}(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp})=7.5\times 10^{24}\left[\frac{d}{2.8\mathrm{kpc}}\right]^1\left[\frac{\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}}{1700\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^2\left[\frac{\alpha }{10^4}\right]\left[\frac{\theta _{cp}}{0.02}\right]$$
(13)
Such an amplitude would indicate that the advanced LIGO system ( $`h_{3/yr}10^{26}`$ at $`1700\mathrm{Hz}`$, Brady et al. (1998)) could detect this GW emission within a single day of integration. Such an attempt would require simultaneous tracking of the kHz QPO in X-rays so that power density spectra of the GW emission could be coherently coadded with appropriate frequency shifts. Equation 14 is an estimate of the amplitude of the GW emission at the sensitivity threshold for an observation with the advanced LIGO of duration $`T_{obs}`$ where Q is the quality factor of the lower kHz QPO.

$$h_{eff}(\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp})=3.4\times 10^{24}\left[\frac{h_{3/yr}}{10^{26}}\right]\left[\frac{Q}{100}\right]^{\frac{1}{4}}\left[\frac{\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}}{1000\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^{\frac{1}{4}}\left[\frac{T_{obs}}{1\mathrm{day}}\right]^{\frac{1}{4}}$$
(14)
Equation 14 shows the weak dependence on $`T_{obs}`$ expected for the addition of many power density spectra for periodic GW emission with a finite Q. X-ray detectors with apertures much larger than the PCA onboard RXTE (Bradt, Rothschild, & Swank (1993); Swank (1998)) could track individual kHz oscillations. Such X-ray data could be combined with LIGO data to achieve much better sensitivity. Even without such detailed X-ray data, the prospects for LIGO detection of GWs from LMXB sources and Sco X-1 in particular are possible though uncertain.

### 4.2 Gravitational Waves at Other Frequencies

The dominant frequencies of expected GWs ($`\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}=\nu _u+\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`2\nu _{cs}=2\nu _u`$) are generated from precession and rotation of the outer crust respectively. Measurements of GWs at these frequencies would determine the magnitude of $`\alpha `$ and $`\theta _{cp}`$ and confirm the estimates for these parameters based on the X-ray emission and thereby constrain the details of the precessional motion.

This motion will likely excite distinct modes corresponding to spherical harmonics of the NS (Ostriker, & Bodenheimer (1973)). Some of these modes can induce a triaxial form of either the crust or fluid interior of the NS. This would cause the emission of GWs at frequency $`2\nu _u`$ from the outer crust (see equation 11) and at frequency $`2\nu _{fs}`$ from the fluid interior (nearly constant value for a particular LMXB NS in the range $`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$). These motions could also drive the g-mode ocean waves on the surface of the crust (Bildsten, Ushomirsky, & Cutler (1996)) or modify r-mode oscillations present in the fluid interior (Owen et al. (1998); Bildsten, & Ushomirsky (2000)). In both of these cases the influence of near breakup rotation and the precession of the NS may significantly alter predictions from previous work. Since the precession and spin frequencies vary over a wide range in a single LMXB, there is the possibility that some of these modes will resonantly match the precession or spin frequencies or their harmonics. Future observations of a full GW spectrum with many frequencies present, including the effects of temporal evolution of these modes in response to changes in the precession frequency, will constrain many details of NS structure beyond just the EOS, including fluid properties, vortex pinning, viscosity, internal flows and crust and core structure.

### 4.3 Lense-Thirring Precession

Following the work of Stella, & Vietri (1998), we revise the possibility of the presence of Lense-Thirring (LT) and classical precession of material orbiting near the NS in the context of the TFP model. The total precession frequency can be evaluated as a sum of two terms $`\nu _{LT}`$, the LT precession, and $`\nu _{cl}`$, the classical precession. These two terms have contributions from the rotating fluid core and the decoupled crust which are each spinning at different rates. The total LT effect of the rotating crust is small since the moment of inertia $`I_c`$ ($`=\alpha I_f`$) is small ($`\alpha <<1`$). We estimate $`I_f=1.3\times 10^{45}`$ g cm<sup>2</sup> at rotation rate $`\nu _{fs}740\mathrm{Hz}`$ using the NS model based on EOS FPS from Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994b . The LT term for the NS fluid core is given by equation 15 and numerically estimated by equation 16.

$$\nu _{LT}=\frac{8\pi ^2I_f\nu _{k}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\nu _{fs}}{c^2M}$$
(15)
$$\nu _{LT}=45\left[\frac{I_f}{1.3\times 10^{45}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^2}\right]\left[\frac{M}{1.4\text{M}\text{}}\right]^1\left[\frac{\nu _k}{1200\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^2\left[\frac{\nu _{fs}}{740\mathrm{Hz}}\right]\mathrm{Hz}$$
(16)
where $`M`$ is the mass of the NS and $`\nu _k`$ is the Keplerian orbital frequency of the material that is precessing.

The classical precession effect is given by equation 17 and numerically estimated by equation 18.

$$\nu _{cl}=\frac{3}{8\pi ^2}\frac{G\mathrm{cos}\beta }{r^5\nu _k}\left(I_fI_f\right)=\frac{3}{16\pi ^2}\frac{G\mathrm{cos}\beta }{r^5\nu _k}\frac{e_f^2}{1e_f^2}I_f$$
(17)
$$\nu _{cl}=2\times 10^2\left[\frac{I_f}{1.3\times 10^{45}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^2}\right]\left[\frac{M}{1.4\text{M}\text{}}\right]^{\frac{5}{3}}\left[\frac{\nu _k}{1000\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^{\frac{7}{3}}\mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{Hz}$$
(18)
In the above equation for $`\nu _{cl}`$ we set the value of $`e_f=0.4`$ from model FPS for a spin rate $`\nu _{fs}740\mathrm{Hz}`$ (see table 15 in Cook, Shapiro, & Teukolsky 1994b ). The ellipticity $`ϵ_f`$ and eccentricity $`e_f`$ are defined for the fluid core in analogy to equation 3 for the crust, where $`I_f`$ and $`I_f`$ are the moments of inertia of the fluid core of the NS.

$$ϵ_f=\frac{e_f^2}{2e_f^2}=\frac{\left[I_fI_f\right]}{I_f}$$
(19)
Equation 18 shows that classical precession negligible compared to LT precession.

These estimates are consistent with the basic LT conjecture of Stella, & Vietri (1998) except that their assumption that $`\nu _k=\nu _u`$ must be based on a indirect correlation. We suggest that both $`\nu _k`$ and $`\nu _u(=\nu _{cs})`$ are independently proportional to the accretion rate, $`\dot{M}`$. Another possibility is that the precession of the crust at frequency $`\nu _{cp}`$ ($`=\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$) induces a tilt in the accretion disk at the location where material orbits the NS at the TFP frequency (not to be confused with the precession of orbiting material). This in turn leads to a modulation of the accretion rate by material in orbit at the frequency $`\nu _k=\nu _{cp}`$. This would provide a reason for identifying $`\nu _k`$ with $`\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ yielding a similar result to that in Stella, & Vietri (1998) with a somewhat different interpretation.

The prior difficulty in Stella, & Vietri (1998) of a factor of $`4`$ discrepancy for the $`\frac{I}{M}`$ for a NS may be removed if NS spin frequency $`\nu _{fs}`$ is as high as $`800\mathrm{Hz}`$. In the context of the TFP model, the spin of the fluid core $`\nu _{fs}`$ is not related to the difference frequency of the kHz QPO. For example in the source Sco X-1, $`\nu _{fs}`$ may be as high as the minimum observed value of $`\nu _u`$ ($`845\mathrm{Hz}`$;van der Klis (2000)). Setting the value of $`\nu _{fs}740\mathrm{Hz}`$ in the equation 16 yields a $`\nu _{LT}45\mathrm{Hz}`$ in agreement with observations. We are not proposing a specific detailed version of the effects of LT precession but only caution that both $`\nu _{fs}`$ and $`\nu _k`$ are uncertain.

### 4.4 Periodicity Observed in Type I Bursts

Observations indicate a near coincidence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu `$ ($`=\nu _u\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$) with $`\nu _{burst}`$ or $`\nu _{burst}/2`$. The conclusion that $`\nu _{burst}`$ is near the actual spin rate of the surface of the NS is inconsistent with the simple version of the TFP model since $`\nu _{cs}`$, the spin frequency of the NS surface, is significantly larger than $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu `$. The TFP model is consistent with an rapidly rotating outer crust (up to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$ with eccentricity $`0.93`$) which is flatten in form compared to the nearly spherical rotating fluid core ($`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$ with eccentricity $`0.2`$). The NS in Sco X-1 may possibly be rotating as fast as $`800\mathrm{Hz}`$. In such a configuration the accretion rate onto the equatorial region may be significantly higher than onto the polar regions. This possibility is consistent with the lack of any detection of oscillations at the frequency $`\nu _{fs}`$ in the X-ray emission due to steady accretion. We suggest the following possibility that the outer crust is rotating with the fluid core in the polar regions ($`300800\mathrm{Hz}`$) and is rotating independently and more rapidly in the equatorial region (up to $`1100\mathrm{Hz}`$). Further in the mid-latitude regions there is the possibility that the outer crust rotates with an internal superfluid layer at a rate $`5\mathrm{Hz}`$ faster than the fluid core. Unstable thermonuclear burning would occur for each latitude region depending on the level of the local accretion rate. The progression of observed frequencies in a Type I burst would depend on the particular pattern of the burning front. The scenario is consistent with the frequencies observed in Type I bursts (see Strohmayer, Zhang, Swank, & Lapidus (1998)). The fractional variation in the spin rate of the fluid core $`\nu _{fs}`$ as the crust spins up and down is $`10^4`$ assuming full transfer of the angular momentum between the outer crust and the fluid core of the NS. This result is consistent with the repeatability of the asymptotic NCO frequency observed in several independent Type I bursts from 4U1728-34 and 4U1636-53 ($`1.5\times 10^4`$ and $`2.3\times 10^4`$ respectively; Strohmayer, Zhang, Swank, & Lapidus (1998)). In SAX J1808.4-3658, we expect higher Q NCO at the spin frequency ($`401\mathrm{Hz}`$) which is the same for both the crust and core of the NS.

Recently Wijnands, Strohmayer, & Franco (2000) discovered nearly coherent oscillations (NCO) in Type I bursts from X1658-298. These NCO occurred at frequencies $`567\mathrm{Hz}`$ during the main part of the burst and at frequency $`572\mathrm{Hz}`$ during the tail of the burst. This pattern of frequencies is consistent with a burning front which migrates from a polar region to a mid-latitude regions. The discrete jump in frequency matches that expected for the superfluid layer that spins differentially from the NS core as discussed previously. The burning front may continue into the equatorial region which might produce a feature in the power density spectrum similar to the upper kHz QPO. The higher frequency of such a peak and its finite Q may decrease the likelihood of detection. Alternately, higher acccretion rates in the equatorial region may suppress unstable thermonuclear burning.

### 4.5 Magnetic Dipole Radiation

The maximum spin rate of the surface of a NS is the maximum observed value of the upper kHz QPO. Such high spin rates suggest that LMXB NSs are candidates for the direct detection of magnetic dipole radiation since the power emitted is strongly dependent on spin rate. The following equation is an estimate of the power emitted from Sco X-1 where $`B_0`$ is the surface magnetic field, $`r_e`$ is the equatorial radius of the NS, and $`\theta _d`$ is the viewing angle of a distant observer relative to the spin axis. The numerical estimate of the power emitted given by equation 20 assumes a viewing angle normal to the rotation axis ($`\theta _d=\frac{\pi }{2}`$)

$$P_{dipole}=\frac{r_{e}^{}{}_{}{}^{6}B_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _d}{6c^3}=6.2\times 10^{38}\left[\frac{r_e}{2\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}}\right]^6\left[\frac{B_0}{10^9\mathrm{Gauss}}\right]^2\left[\frac{\nu _{cs}}{1000\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^4\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{s}^1$$
(20)
This radiation, if present, is energetically of the order of the X-ray portion of the accretion energy but likely less than the energy emitted in GWs. The plasma near the NS might convert much of this energy into local plasma modes; however the wavelength of the radiation ($`10^7`$ cm) exceeds the size of the NS by a large factor, therefore some of this power may leave the system.

The plasma dynamics near the NS and interaction with the interstellar medium along the line of sight will likely decrease the chances of detection of this radiation. However since Sco X-1 is nearby on a galactic scale (2.8 kpc), perhaps detection is possible by spacecraft such as the Voyagers (Gurnett, & Kurth (1996)), now located in the outer solar system where the plasma frequency is sufficiently low. The plasma frequency $`\nu _{pl}`$ is related to the local electron density by:

$$\nu _{pl}=\left[\frac{e^2N_e}{\pi m_e}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}=8.97\times 10^3N_{e}^{}{}_{}{}^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Hz}$$
(21)
If at any point along the line of sight the electron density rises above $`10^2`$ cm<sup>-3</sup> then such plasma will damp out the direct dipole radiation at frequency $`\nu _u`$ ($`1000\mathrm{Hz}`$). The solar wind drops below this density in the outer regions of the solar system. Also the Voyagers are within about a decade of reaching the heliopause (see figure 7 of Gurnett, & Kurth (1996)). There is also the possibility of electromagnetic radiation at somewhat higher frequency due to TFP ($`\nu _{cs}+\nu _{cp}1700\mathrm{Hz}`$).

### 4.6 Progenitors of Gamma Ray Burst Sources

Neutron stars in LMXB spinning near breakup speed with high accretion rates would likely emit most of their energy in the form of GWs while the X-ray emission is maintained at levels influenced by the Eddington limit. The LMXB sources with low mass donor stars may be the progenitors of millisecond radio pulsars (Radhakrishnan, & Srinivasan (1982); Alpar et al. (1982)). If the donor companion star is massive enough (few M) to provide $`0.5\text{M}\text{}`$ of material, then the NS might approach the maximum stable mass while rotating near the breakup rate. The GW cooling of the accretion flow near the surface of a NS may allow a large fraction of the material that leaves the companion star to reach the surface of the NS. The X-ray emission is still restricted by the Eddington limit but at much higher mass accretion rates onto the NS surface. The fluid core would collapse into a maximally rotating Kerr black hole ($`2\text{M}\text{}`$) and perhaps release energy of a fraction of $`10^{54}`$ ergs in the form of jets of material, GWs, neutrinos, and gamma-rays. An LMXB NS could be a progenitor of a GRB which leaves behind a maximally spinning black hole (Cui, Zhang, & Chen (1998)). Subsequent continued accretion from the donar companion star would increase the BH mass. To explain the observed properties of the brighter GRBs would likely require conversion of not just the kinetic energy of the NS material as it forms the black hole (BH) but conversion of some of the rest mass of the NS into gamma-rays.

Ruffini (1999) has suggested that temperatures in the dyadosphere of the BH at the time of formation may rise enough to cause copious $`e^\pm `$ pair creation and subsequent annihilation with conversion to gamma-rays. As much as $`50\%`$ of the mass-energy of the NS might be released at the time of formation of a maximally spinning Kerr BH (Ruffini (1999)). After the BH forms, the crust of the NS ($`10^4\text{M}\text{}`$) may still be present and spinning at frequency $`\nu _{cs}1000\mathrm{Hz}`$. The remnant crust will no longer have pressure support and will likely transform to a triaxial form which will quickly form two blobs of rotating hot plasma around the BH at a radius of the former NS. This material ($`10^4\text{M}\text{}`$) will fall onto the BH releasing its kinetic energy in the form of GWs, neutrinos, electromagnetic waves and jets of material. We crudely estimate the time for this remnant NS crust to accrete onto the BH due to emission of GWs as the ratio of the sum of kinetic ($`E_k`$) and potential ($`E_p`$) energies to the luminosity emitted in GWs ($`L_{GW}`$). This ratio is $`\left(\frac{E_{ke}+E_{pe}}{L_{GW}}\right)1`$s from equations 22, 23 and 24. This estimate is likely too fast since $`L_{GW}`$ is probably an upper limit and release of other forms of energy will likely retard the flow towards the BH event horizon. This model for a GRB might have a unique signature of nuclear composition since the accreting material is from the breakup of the remnant crust of a NS (Lattimer et al. (1977)). The spectrum of the gamma-ray emission could in principal reveal the details of the nuclear composition (Hailey, Harrison, & Mori (1999)).

$$L_{GW}=\frac{512\pi ^6G}{5c^4}I_c\nu _{cs}^{}{}_{}{}^{6}=5.2\times 10^{49}\left[\frac{I_c}{2.4\times 10^{14}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^2}\right]\left[\frac{\nu _{cs}}{1000\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^6\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{s}^1$$
(22)
$$E_k=2\pi ^2I_c\nu _{cs}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=4.7\times 10^{49}\left[\frac{I_c}{2.4\times 10^{41}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^2}\right]\left[\frac{\nu _{cs}}{1000\mathrm{Hz}}\right]^2\mathrm{ergs}$$
(23)
$$E_p=\frac{GMM_c}{r_e}=3.3\times 10^{49}\left[\frac{M}{1.4\text{M}\text{}}\right]\left[\frac{M_c}{10^4\text{M}\text{}}\right]\left[\frac{r_e}{10\mathrm{km}}\right]^1\mathrm{ergs}$$
(24)
In rough numbers we can estimate the rate of GRBs that would be produced by accreting $`0.5\text{M}\text{}`$ of matter onto the NS in an LMXB and thereby initiating its conversion to a BH. Assuming a long term average accretion rate of $`10^7\text{M}\text{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ yields a rough lifetime for each LMXB, $`t_{LMXB}10^7`$ yr. If the universe contains $`10^{11}`$ galaxies equivalent to the Milky Way, and each galaxy contains a few LMXB ($`N_{LMXB}`$) at any time which are accreting at high rates from donor companion stars of a few solar masses, and the radiation is beamed by a fraction $`f_b`$ then the total rate of observed GRB ($`R_{GRB}`$) is estimated in equation 25.

$$R_{GRB}1\left[\frac{f_b}{10^2}\right]\left[\frac{N_{gal}}{10^{11}}\right]\left[\frac{N_{LMXB}}{3}\right]\left[\frac{t_{LMXB}}{10^7\mathrm{yr}}\right]^1\mathrm{day}^1$$
(25)
## 5 Conclusions

The basic theory of TFP of a NS as the signature of the approach to NS breakup is a viable explanation of the kHz QPO observed in X-rays emitted by LMXB sources. A simple version of the theory relates the intrinsic properties of NS structure with the observed kHz frequences. The range of kHz frequencies observed is also explained by this simple dynamical model. Furthermore, the TFP theory provides a simple explanation for the high Q of the millisecond pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658 including the reason why it does not exhibit kHz QPO. Since the theory relates the ratio of the observed kHz frequencies to the ratios of the moments of inertia of the NS, it is not surprising that the EOS of NS matter is so tightly constrained by this interpretation.

The primary issue not fully addressed by the TFP model is the complex interaction of the crust and core of the NS. On a short timescale ($``$seconds) the fluctuations in the kHz QPO frequencies are explained by likely fluctuations in the moments of inertia of the NS crust. On a longer timescale ($``$hours) internal torques drive the system into a limit-cycle with a range of crust spin frequencies. Angular momentum may be conserved since the three dominant and independent reservoirs of angular momentum are the rotation of the fluid core, the rotation of the crust, and precession of the crust. These components can exchange angular momentum and vary their moments of inertia. The simple TFP model constrains the locus of the ratios of the kHz QPO frequencies but does not explain all the details of the dynamics. We have also outlined a plausible mechanism for a limit-cycle of exchange of angular momentum between the outer crust and a superfluid layer internal to the NS that is analogous to giant glitches in radio pulsars. The TFP theory predicts strong kHz GW emission and magnetic dipole radiation as very low frequency radio waves ($`1000\mathrm{Hz}`$).

A LIGO detection of GWs from an LMXB NS source due to TFP would be the definitive confirmation of the TFP theory. The high sustained accretion rates that such GW emission would require suggests that some LMXB NSs will collapse into BHs. This possibility suggests that NSs in LMXB are progenitors of some GRBs and leave behind maximally rotating Kerr BHs as the final successors to these GRBs.

## 6 Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges Lynn Cominsky for helpful conversations and a careful reading of the manuscript. The author also thanks Michiel van der Klis for providing the previously published Sco X-1 data on kHz QPO in numerical form. Walter Lewin, Saul Rappaport, Wei Cui and Ben Owen are acknowledged for their generous efforts reading and commenting on the manuscript. NASA provided the primary support for the author who is a Co-I on the MIT portion of the RXTE project (PI: Hale Bradt) under a subcontract to the University of California, Berkeley (NAG 5-30612). The author thanks Hale Bradt for his sustained support of this subcontract. The author also thanks Bill Mayer and George Clark, the project scientist and principal investigator for SAS-3 respectively, and the APL engineers that build the spacecraft for SAS-3 for providing the opportunity to study torque free precession of coupled rigid bodies. In particular, the nutation damper crisis that occurred just after the launch of SAS-3 seeded the concept for this paper. Additional support was also provided by Eureka Scientific (President: John Vallerga). The work was carried out at the Space Sciences Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley, and at the Little H-Bar Ranch located in Petaluma, California.


format: text

text:
# HEAT TRANSFER AND FOURIER’S LAW IN OFF-EQUILIBRIUM SYSTEMS

## I INTRODUCTION

In the last decades there has been an increasing interest in trying to extend the thermodynamics ideas to systems which are far out of equilibrium. The general problem is to quantify non-equilibrium fluctuations within a thermodynamic approach. Recent studies suggest that the slow dynamics of glassy systems allows us to do such kind of generalizations. In this direction, it has been proposed a definition of a non-equilibrium temperature (also called effective temperature) based on the violation of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem (FDT). This temperature verifies the relation:

$$T_{\mathrm{eff}}(t^{},t)R(t^{},t)=\frac{C(t^{},t)}{t^{}}t>t^{},$$
(1)
where $`C(t^{},t)`$ is the autocorrelation function and $`R(t^{},t)`$ is the corresponding response function. It has been suggested that for a large class of glassy systems in the long-time regime ($`t^{}\mathrm{}`$) the effective temperature is only a function of the smallest time, i.e $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}(t^{},t)T_{\mathrm{eff}}(t^{})`$ and also that is a good quantity in the thermodynamic sense . This knowledge is mainly theoretical and comes from the analysis of mean-field glassy systems. There is also good numerical support to these assumptions for structural glass models, although from the experimental point of view, the question is still far from settled (see, for example, recent experimental results on glycerol and laponite). Note that in the general framework of thermodynamics, the concept of temperature is associated with local equilibrium, i.e the fact that local regions in space admit a thermodynamic description in terms of space-dependent intensive variables such as the temperature.

In this paper we try to understand the most adequate procedure to measure the effective temperature. This question has been recently addressed by Cugliandolo, Kurchan and Peliti and Exartier and Peliti who have discussed possible procedures to measure the effective temperature.

In a previous paper we have used the concept of the effective temperature in order to investigate the validity of the zero-thermodynamic law in off-equilibrium systems. We have seen that in absence of coupling via the dynamics two coupled systems far from equilibrium never thermalize. This poses the question: why different degrees of freedom in structural glasses can stay at different effective temperatures forever?. In this paper we shall show that the answer comes from the smallness of the conductivity between the two systems in the aging state.

The paper is organized as follows. In section II we define the heat transfer between two generic coupled systems. In section III we analyze the heat transfer between an off-equilibrium system and a thermometer in the framework of Linear Response Theory (LRT). In section IV we show an explicit example. In section V we extend Fourier’s law to the off-equilibrium regime. In section VI there are the conclusions.

## II DEFINITION OF THE HEAT TRANSFER

In systems which are in equilibrium, the concept of a thermometer is related to the zeroth law of thermodynamics. If we want to measure the temperature of a system in equilibrium with a thermal bath at temperature $`T`$, we take another macroscopic system (called thermometer) in contact with its own thermal bath. Then we put the thermometer in contact with the system in such a way that the system is weakly perturbed. If the temperature of the thermometer’s bath is different from $`T`$ , the whole system (thermometer + system) is off-equilibrium, as a consequence there is a heat transfer from the hot system to the cold one. In fact, in order to measure $`T`$ we change the temperature of the thermometer’s thermal bath until we cannot measure any heat transfer between the system and the thermometer; then, the whole system is in equilibrium and the temperature of thermometer’s bath is just $`T`$ .
For the non-equilibrium case we shall follow the same steps. We couple the off-equilibrium system with a thermometer which is in equilibrium with a thermal bath at a certain temperature. If perturbed, this thermometer relaxes to equilibrium with a characteristic time-scale (in this case the perturbation is the coupling with the off-equilibrium system). In order to have some kind of “off-equilibrium zeroth law” we have to define the heat transfer between the two systems. Let us suppose that we have two generic systems, $`X`$ and $`Y`$ with $`N`$ internal degrees of freedom $`x_i`$ and $`y_i`$ respectively and we couple them. Assuming that the coupling between the systems is small, we may write for the total energy:

$$HHϵ\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}x_iy_i.$$
(2)
We consider the two-time correlation and overlap functions defined in the following way:

$`C_X(t,t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}x_i(t)x_i(t^{});C_Y(t,t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}y_i(t)y_i(t^{})`$ (3)
$`Q_1(t,t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}y_i(t)x_i(t^{});Q_2(t,t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}x_i(t)y_i(t^{}).`$ (4)
Following  we define the heat transfer between them as the net balance of the power supplied by one system to the other. In terms of the overlap functions the heat transfer $`J(t,t^{})`$ reads:

$$J(t,t^{})=ϵ\frac{}{t}(Q_2(t,t^{})Q_1(t^{},t))=ϵ\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\left(\dot{x}_i(t)y_i(t^{})x_i(t^{})\dot{y}_i(t)\right).$$
(5)
The heat transfer vanishes in equilibrium because of the time-reversal symmetry property of correlation functions, i.e $`Q_1(t,t^{})=Q_2(t,t^{})=Q(|tt^{}|)`$. If there is a system which is out of equilibrium this quantity is, in general, non-zero. From now on we shall assume that the system $`X`$ is the thermometer, while $`Y`$ will be the off-equilibrium system which is relaxing towards its equilibrium state. Depending on the ratio between the characteristic time-scale of the thermometer and the relaxation time-scale of the off-equilibrium system we can identify the different contributions of each term in the right hand side (r.h.s.) of (5):

* If the relaxation time of the thermometer is fast enough, only the second term in the r.h.s. of (5) contributes. The contribution of the first term is negligible due to the fact that the net force made by the fast degrees of freedom of the thermometer upon the system is zero on average. Note that in the definition of heat transfer contains only the second term in the r.h.s of (5); although not explicitly stated there, in this definition it is implicitly assumed the fact that the characteristic time-scale of the thermometer is much smaller than the relaxing time-scale of the off-equilibrium system.
* If the thermometer has a relaxation time larger than the characteristic time of the system, the main contribution to $`J(t,t^{})`$ comes from the first term in the r.h.s of (5). We will see that in this case we don’t have a good thermometer for measuring effective temperatures. Obviously, when the typical time of the thermometer is of the order of the relaxation time of the system, the two terms in the r.h.s of (5) are of the same order, and we must to take into account both of them.

It is believed that for measuring the effective temperature the characteristic time-scale of the thermometer should be of the same order as the relaxation time-scale of the system. This is not clear at all because the power supplied by the thermometer to the system must be negligible in order to measure correctly the effective temperature, so the term $`\dot{x}(t)y(t^{})`$ should be smaller enough in comparison to the term $`x(t^{})\dot{y}(t).`$ This condition can be fulfilled only in the case of faster thermometers. Moreover, if the time-scale of the thermometer is longer than the relaxation time-scale of the system, the two systems are off-equilibrium during the measurement due to the fact that the perturbed thermometer has not time enough to relax to its equilibrium state. In fact, the temperature of the thermometer is only well defined when it is in equilibrium.

## III LINEAR RESPONSE THEORY

Now suppose that $`ϵ`$ is small enough so that we can consider the $`ϵ`$-coupling term in (2) as a perturbation. Thus the effective temperature will be slightly perturbed. Hence, using linear response theory (hereafter referred to as LRT), we have:

$$x_i^ϵ(t)=x_i^{ϵ=0}(t)+ϵ_s^t𝑑uR_X(t,u)y_i(u);y_i^ϵ(t^{})=y_i^{ϵ=0}(t^{})+ϵ_s^t^{}𝑑uR_Y(t^{},u)x_i(u).$$
(6)
Here we have considered that the two systems are coupled at a time $`t=s`$ (the “coupling time”); so, we must integrate the responses of the system and the thermometer between two times: the coupling time $`s`$ and the time we want to measure. For the general non-equilibrium case, if we assume that $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}(t^{},t)`$ only depends on the smallest time, we obtain in the limit when the two times involved are much bigger than the coupling time $`s`$:

$`\underset{t^{}t}{lim}J=ϵ^2\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{C_Y(t,u)}{u}}\right)_{u=t}C_X(t,t)(\beta _X\beta _Y(t))\right]+ϵ^2\left[{\displaystyle _s^t}𝑑uR_X(t,u)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _Y(u)}{\beta _X}}{\displaystyle \frac{C_Y(t,u)}{u}}{\displaystyle \frac{C_Y(t,u)}{t}}\right]\right]`$ (7)
$`ϵ^2\left[{\displaystyle _s^t}𝑑uC_X(t,u)\left[\beta _X{\displaystyle \frac{^2C_Y(t,u)}{u^2}}+\beta _Y(u){\displaystyle \frac{^2C_Y(t,u)}{ut}}\right]\right],`$ (8)
where we have used (6) and the generalization of FDT (1), being $`\beta _Y(u)=1/T_{\mathrm{eff}}(u)`$ and $`\beta _X=1/T_X`$. Is easy to verify that the expression for the current in the equilibrium case reduces to (8) with $`\beta _Y(u)=\beta _Y`$, yielding:

$$\underset{tt^{}}{lim}J(t,t^{})=2ϵ^2(\beta _X\beta _Y)_s^t𝑑u\frac{C_X(tu)}{t}\frac{C_Y(tu)}{t},$$
(9)
which is some kind of Green-Kubo relation . From this expression we realize immediately that in the equilibrium case the heat transfer is zero only when the two systems are at the same temperature, and it remains equal to zero for all times. At this point we have to explain better the measurement procedure. As the off-equilibrium system is relaxing towards its equilibrium state, we cannot find a single temperature thermometer that cancels the heat transfer during all the time. This is due to the assumption that the thermometer is a system in equilibrium while the effective temperature of the off-equilibrium system depends on time. In order to measure the effective temperature at a time $`t`$ we have to couple the thermometer at a time $`s`$. We shall see later that we can take $`s=tn\tau `$ where $`\tau `$ is the characteristic time-scale of the thermometer and $`n`$ a large integer number. Physically the result is independent of $`n`$ provided that $`n>>1`$ . Obviously, for every time $`t`$ we are interested in, the measured temperature will be different as we expect. It is easy to prove that only when the characteristic time of the thermometer $`\tau `$ is much less than the relaxing time of the system, i.e $`\tau <<t`$ , we have:

$$\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{(\beta _X\beta _Y(t))}{\beta _Y(t)}0,$$
(10)
otherwise, for the limit $`\tau >>t`$, we have:

$$\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{(\beta _X\beta _Y(t))}{\beta _Y(t)}0,$$
(11)
and the thermometer cannot properly measure the effective temperature.

## IV an example

As an instructive example we consider a model of uncoupled harmonic oscillators with parallel Monte Carlo dynamics introduced in  and recently revisited in . This is a simple model which contains the essential features of glasses such as aging in the correlation and response functions. This model is defined by the Hamiltonian:

$$H=\frac{1}{2}K\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}x_i^2.$$
(12)
The Monte Carlo dynamics is implemented by small movements: $`x_ix_i+r_i/\sqrt{N}`$ where $`r_i`$ are random variables Gaussian distributed with zero average and variance $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2.`$ The move is accepted according to the Metropolis algorithm with probability $`W(\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$ which satisfies detailed balance: $`W(\mathrm{\Delta }E)=W(\mathrm{\Delta }E)\mathrm{exp}(\beta \mathrm{\Delta }E),`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ is the change in the Hamiltonian.
Here we will concentrate our attention on the dynamics at zero temperature which is known to be glassy. The interest of the zero-temperature dynamics relies on the extremely slow decay of the energy which decays like $`1/\mathrm{log}(t)`$ due to the entropic barriers generated by the low acceptance rate. For our purpose, we need the correlation function defined as $`C_Y(t,t^{})=\frac{1}{N}_i^Ny_i(t)y_i(t^{})`$ and the response function: $`R_Y(t,t^{})=\left(\frac{\delta M(t)}{\delta h(t^{})}\right)_{h=0}`$ with $`t>t^{}`$, where the magnetization for this model is $`M(t)=\frac{1}{N}_i^Ny_i(t).`$

The results are :

$$C_Y(t,t^{})=\frac{2E_Y(t^{})}{K}\mathrm{exp}\left(_t^{}^tf_Y(x)𝑑x\right);R_Y(t,t^{})=\frac{f_Y(t^{})}{K}\mathrm{exp}\left(_t^{}^tf_Y(x)𝑑x\right)\mathrm{\Theta }(tt^{}),$$
(13)
where $`f_Y(t)`$ is a function that contains the whole dynamics and decays like $`1/t`$ at zero temperature. The effective temperature (1) can be exactly computed for this model:

$$T_{\mathrm{eff}}(t^{})=2E_Y(t^{})+\frac{2}{f_Y(t^{})}\frac{E_Y(t^{})}{t^{}}.$$
(14)
Note that for this particular case, the effective temperature is only a function of the smallest time. This is a characteristic feature of this particular model that is believed to hold for structural glass models in the asymptotic limit $`t^{}\mathrm{}.`$ In this limit (14) verifies $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}(t^{})2E_Y(t^{})`$ at zero temperature.

To measure this effective temperature we have to define a general thermometer (i.e a system in equilibrium which verifies FDT). In general we can write for the correlation and the response functions of the thermometer:

$$C_X(tt^{})=C_X(0)e^{(tt^{})/\tau };R_X(tt^{})=\frac{\beta _X}{\tau }C_X(tt^{}).$$
(15)
Notice that if the characteristic time of the thermometer $`\tau `$ is very small (a fast thermometer) the correlation function $`C_X(tu)`$ only contributes if $`ut`$ ; in this case we can write $`\frac{C_Y(t,u)}{t}=\frac{C_Y(t,u)}{u}.`$ This result is valid in the $`t\mathrm{}`$ limit and comes from the fact that, at very short time-scales, the aging system can be considered as if it were in equilibrium (at the corresponding effective temperature) and the partial derivatives of the correlation functions can be interchanged in the usual way. This can be checked by explicit derivation of eq.(13). Then, the heat transfer will vanish if the condition $`\beta _Y(t)=\beta _X`$ is satisfied. Therefore, if we have a very fast thermometer we can measure exactly the effective temperature. By numerical evaluation of the integrals (8) we compute the temperature $`T_m`$ of the thermometer which makes the heat transfer vanish. The results for different thermometers are shown in the left panel of Fig.1 where one can clearly see that for $`t>>\tau `$ the measured temperature $`T_m=1/\beta _m`$ is always higher than the effective one and converges to it logarithmically. On the contrary, for $`t<<\tau `$ the thermometer does not measure (for a given time $`t`$) the right effective temperature. We should say that for $`t<<\tau `$ the integrals in (8) were evaluated taking $`s=0`$. In the right panel of Fig.1 we can also see the behavior of the measured temperature that shows some qualitative agreement with experimental results .

Now, as we know the asymptotic behavior of the correlation and response, we can compute explicitly the large time evolution of the difference between the effective temperature and the measured one. A saddle-point calculation of (8) shows that for $`t\mathrm{}`$:

$$\frac{\beta _m\beta _Y(t)}{\beta _Y(t)}=\frac{\frac{E_Y(t)}{t}}{2E_Y(t)f_Y(t)}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{2t}{\sqrt{\pi }}\right)}\left(1\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{2t}{\sqrt{\pi }}\right))}{\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{2t}{\sqrt{\pi }}\right)}\right).$$
(16)
In this calculation we made the assumption that due to the smallness of the relaxation time of the thermometer, the main contribution in the integral term of (8) is just when $`u=t.`$ An important remark is that in this limit the difference does not depend on $`\tau `$ provided that it is small enough ($`\tau /t<<1)`$. This is clearly seen in the inset of the left panel in Fig.1. If we consider only the second term in the r.h.s. of (5) (as proposed in ) we also find that the measured temperature converges to the effective one but the logarithmic asymptotic behavior in (16) is different. In fact the result for this case is $`\frac{\beta _m\beta _Y(t)}{\beta _Y(t)}=\frac{\frac{E_Y(t)}{t}}{E_Y(t)f_Y(t)}.`$ So, in order to obtain the correct logarithmic corrections to the asymptotic long-time behavior ( $`\frac{\beta _m\beta _Y(t)}{\beta _Y(t)}0)`$ we must consider the two terms in the expression for the current (5).

## V FOURIER’S LAW

We have seen that the off-equilibrium current we have defined is a quantity which can be used to measure the effective temperature for systems which are off-equilibrium. Now we can think about the heat transfer itself. In standard non-equilibrium thermodynamics there is a linear relationship between the temperature gradient and the subsequent current established. This is the well-known Fourier’s law:

$$J=L_{QQ}(\frac{1}{T})=\kappa T,$$
(17)
where $`L_{QQ}`$ is the Onsager coefficient and $`\kappa `$ is the thermal conductivity. For the equilibrium case we can compute the heat transfer (9) using (13):

$$\underset{t^{}t}{lim}J(t,t^{})=4ϵ^2\frac{C_X(0)f_YE_Y}{K_Y}(\beta _X\beta _Y),$$
(18)
Using the asymptotic expansions for $`f_Y(t)`$ and $`E_Y(t)`$ (for a recent review see ) one can see that in the long-time limit, the non-equilibrium case satisfies Fourier’s law:

$$\underset{t^{}t}{lim}J(t,t^{})ϵ^2\frac{1}{\left(\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{2t}{\sqrt{\pi }}\right)+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{2t}{\sqrt{\pi }}\right))\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}}\frac{1}{t\mathrm{log}^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\frac{2t}{\sqrt{\pi }}\right)}(\beta _X\beta _Y(t)).$$
(19)
So the Onsager coefficient decays as $`L_{QQ}1/(t\mathrm{log}(t)).`$ As in the long-time limit the effective temperature ($`\beta _Y(t))`$ decays like the energy, the thermal conductivity decays as $`\kappa \mathrm{log}(t)/t.`$ This simple example extends the Fourier’s law to aging systems. So this is an extension of the linear relations between fluxes and forces obtained in the framework of the non-equilibrium thermodynamics , but with time-dependent Onsager coefficients.

Now, we can consider that system $`X`$ is also a system of Monte Carlo harmonic oscillators. In this case the Fourier’s law reads (in the framework of LRT):

$$\underset{t^{}t}{lim}J(t,t^{})=8ϵ^2\frac{E_XE_Y}{K_XK_Y}\frac{f_Xf_Y}{f_X+f_Y}(\beta _X\beta _Y).$$
(20)
In a recent paper  we have shown that the effective temperatures and energies of two oscillator systems coupled like in (2) and evolving under a sequential dynamics never equalize. So the heat transfer is extremely small and clearly insufficient to thermalize degrees of freedom at different effective temperatures. The expression (20) justifies the results found in . Using the asymptotic expansions for $`f_Y(t)`$ and $`E_Y(t)`$ we can see that the Onsager coefficient decays as $`L_{QQ}1/(t\mathrm{log}^2(t)),`$ and the conductivity as $`\kappa 1/t.`$ Following  suppose that we couple the two oscillator systems at time $`t`$. If they are in the aging state evolving at zero temperature, then they have different effective temperatures given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\beta =\beta _X\beta _Y\alpha \mathrm{log}(t)`$ with $`\alpha `$ a constant. The heat $`𝒬`$ transferred between $`t`$ and $`t+T`$ is given by,

$$𝒬=_t^{t+T}𝑑xJ(x)=\alpha _t^{t+T}\frac{dx}{x\mathrm{log}(x)}=\alpha \mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\mathrm{log}(t+T)}{\mathrm{log}(t)}\right).$$
(21)
For the two systems to equalize their temperatures the net heat transfer between $`t`$ and $`t+T`$ must be of the order $`𝒬\lambda /\mathrm{log}(t)`$ with $`\lambda `$ a finite constant. It can be shown that there are two regimes for $`𝒬`$ depending whether $`T/t1`$ or $`T/t1`$. If $`T/t1`$ then $`𝒬\alpha T/(t\mathrm{log}(t))`$ and the total heat transferred cannot equalize the effective temperatures. In the other regime the heat transfer can equalize the two temperatures only if $`Tt`$. This implies that the time needed (in the aging regime) for compensate the difference between the two effective temperatures is of the order of the age of the system, then the heat transfer is unable to equalize the energies of the two systems in a finite time-scale so the zero-th law is not valid in the aging regime.

## VI conclusions

We can now summarize our main results. We have established the proper way to measure the effective temperature of a glass. It is well known that the effective temperature based on the violation of FDT is a good quantity in the thermodynamic sense, so in the aging regime we can consider that the glass is in quasi-equilibrium at this effective temperature. We have found that the correct procedure is to couple the thermometer weakly and measure the temperature of the thermometer which makes the heat transfer to vanish at a certain time $`t`$ . In general, the measurement must be done with thermometers which have small characteristic time-scales compared to the decorrelation time of the aging system (in most cases this corresponds to the waiting time).
To illustrate this, we have used a simple solvable model for a glass and we have computed the heat transfer established when we couple it with a generic thermometer. In this case the equations (10) and (11) were confirmed and also we have computed how the measured temperature converges to the effective one. Note that the model we have used is purely relaxational and only implies one large time-scale. Now, we know that for measuring the effective temperature we need a thermometer with a very short time-scale in comparison with the relaxational time-scale of the system. For the case of structural glasses is more complicated because in these systems there are two time-scales involved. The autocorrelation function reveals a secondary relaxation ($`\beta `$-relaxation) and a primary one ($`\alpha `$-relaxation). For the secondary relaxation the system behaves as a system which is in equilibrium and FDT holds, whereas for the primary one, the relaxation of the system is extremely slow and FDT does not hold. Therefore, the effective temperature we have defined describes the violation of FDT in the long-time sector. If we are interested in the measurement of this temperature, our results suggest that we have to choose a thermometer with a time-scale shorter than the $`\alpha `$-timescale but larger than the $`\beta `$-timescale in order to avoid the effects of the initial $`\beta `$-relaxation which is associated with a different temperature from the effective one. Otherwise, we would have a measurement where the two temperatures involved in the relaxation could mix. Along these lines it could be very instructive to investigate other models with two different time-scales (for instance the Backgammon model ).
Employing our knowledge of the model of harmonic oscillators we have been able to extend Fourier’s law to this glassy model by considering a time-dependent Onsager’s coefficient; and we have seen how the thermal conductivity decays. It is important to note that the decay of the conductivity (in the case of two glasses coupled) is faster than the decay of the energy (i.e the decay of the effective temperature). Physically this means that, as time goes on, although the effective temperatures of the systems are different the conductivity is not high enough and they cannot thermalize. This seems to be the reason for the existence of different temperatures in real glasses, in which there are fast degrees of freedom and slow ones at different effective temperatures which never equalize due to the smallness of the conductivity .
It would be very interesting to address some other non-equilibrium features such as the long-range spatial correlation functions for stationary non-equilibrium liquids  for the model we have considered here and glassy systems in general.
Acknowledgements. We acknowledge stimulating discussions with S. Ciliberto and M. Mezard. We are grateful to I.Pagonabarraga and M.Rubí for a careful reading of the manuscript. A. G. is supported by a grant from the University of Barcelona. F. R is supported by the Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia in Spain (PB97-0971).