License: CC BY 4.0
arXiv:2312.01892v1 [astro-ph.HE] 04 Dec 2023
11institutetext: ASTRON, Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy, Oude Hoogeveensedijk 4, 7991 PD Dwingeloo, The Netherlands 22institutetext: Department of Astrophysics/IMAPP, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9010, 6500 GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands 33institutetext: Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, E-38205 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain 44institutetext: Departamento de Astrofísica, Universidad de La Laguna, E-38206 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain 55institutetext: Institute of Astronomy, KU Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200D, 3001 Leuven, Belgium 66institutetext: SRON, Netherlands Institute for Space Research, Niels Bohrweg 4, 2333 CA Leiden, The Netherlands 77institutetext: Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK 88institutetext: Department of Physics, McGill University, 3600 rue University, Montréal, QC H3A 2T8, Canada 99institutetext: The Trottier Space Institute at McGill, 3550 rue University, Montréal, QC H3A 2A7, Canada 1010institutetext: International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, Curtin University, Bentley, WA 6102, Australia

We report on radio timing observations of PSR J0210+5845 which reveal large deviations from typical pulsar spin-down behaviour. We interpret these deviations as being due to binary motion around the V=13.5𝑉13.5V=13.5italic_V = 13.5 star 2MASS J02105640+++5845176, which is coincident in celestial position and distance with the pulsar. Archival observations and new optical spectroscopy identify this star as a B6 V star with a temperature of Teff14 000subscript𝑇eff14000T_{\mathrm{eff}}\approx 14\,000italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 14 000 K and a mass of Mc=3.5subscript𝑀c3.5M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.5italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.5 to 3.83.83.83.8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, making it the lowest mass main-sequence star known orbiting a non-recycled pulsar. We found that the timing observations constrain the binary orbit to be wide and moderately eccentric, with an orbital period of Pb=4714+40subscript𝑃bsubscriptsuperscript474014P_{\mathrm{b}}=47^{+40}_{-14}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 47 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 40 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 14 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT yr and eccentricity e=0.460.07+0.10𝑒subscriptsuperscript0.460.100.07e=0.46^{+0.10}_{-0.07}italic_e = 0.46 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.10 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.07 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. We predict that the next periastron passage will occur between 2030 and 2034. Due to the low companion mass, we find that the probability for a system with the properties of PSR J0210+5845 and its binary companion to survive the supernova is low. We show that a low velocity and fortuitously directed natal kick is required for the binary to remain bound during the supernova explosion, and argue that an electron-capture supernova is a plausible formation scenario for the pulsar.

PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion

E. van der Wateren PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion    C. G. Bassa PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion    G. H. Janssen PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion    I. V. Yanes-Rizo PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion    J. Casares PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion   
G. Nelemans
PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion
   B. W. Stappers PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion    C. M. Tan PSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companionPSR J0210+5845; An ultra wide binary pulsar with a B6 V main-sequence star companion
(Received December 4, 2023; accepted December 4, 2023)
Key Words.:
stars: neutron – stars: binaries – pulsars: individual: PSR J0210+5845

1 Introduction

Within the population of about 3300 radio pulsars presently known (Manchester et al., 2005), there exists a distinct sub-population of six binary systems where a normal (non-recycled) pulsar, orbits a massive stellar companion. These binary systems have eccentric orbits with orbital periods on the order of months or years (Kaspi et al., 1996; Lorimer et al., 2006; Shannon et al., 2014) or even decades (Lyne et al., 2015). The secondary stars are O or B stars with masses exceeding 8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (Bell et al., 1995; Lyne et al., 2015), and for those systems located in our Galaxy, they have low Galactic latitudes. Table 1 summarises the main properties of the six pulsar/massive star binaries known to date.

Most of the systems exhibit significant interaction between the pulsar and the stellar wind or disc of the massive stellar companion (Andersen et al., 2023), leading to variations in scattering and dispersion (Madsen et al., 2012), eclipses of the pulsar emission (Wang et al., 2004), and/or X-ray or gamma-ray emission (Aharonian et al., 2005). As a result, these systems serve as exceptional laboratories for investigating binary interactions in stellar disks and winds. They are thought to be possible progenitors of double neutron star systems (Johnston et al., 1994).

The progenitors of these pulsar/massive star binaries are systems composed of two massive main-sequence stars. In such systems, no stellar interaction is necessarily required, although it is possible that mass transfer has occurred in systems with small orbital periods. When the primary star undergoes supernova to form the neutron star, it sheds a large portion of its envelope (Matzner & McKee, 1999). If a binary system loses more than half of its mass, the system is usually disrupted, because the orbital energy surpasses the binding energy (Hills, 1983). Furthermore, asymmetries in the supernova explosion can impart a natal kick to the newborn neutron star, and depending on the velocity (speed and direction) of the kick with respect to the orbital velocity, the binary binding energy can be further altered, possibly counteracting the disruption of the binary or vice versa. In those cases where the binary remains bound, the neutron star will orbit the unaltered massive main-sequence star in a wide orbit with high eccentricity (e.g. Brandt & Podsiadlowski, 1995).

In 2017, PSR J0210+5845 was discovered as part of the LOFAR Tied-Array All-Sky Survey (LOTAAS), the LOFAR pulsar survey of the northern hemisphere (Sanidas et al., 2019). Tan et al. (2020) showed that initial timing observations revealed significant timing residuals that they argue could be caused by timing noise intrinsic to the pulsar. In this study, we show that the timing residuals are the result of binary motion with an Mc=3.5subscript𝑀c3.5M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.5italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.5 to 3.83.83.83.8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT companion in a moderately eccentric, long period orbit. The PSR J0210+5845 system has the lowest-mass binary companion among known pulsar/massive star binaries, posing a challenge for its survival of the supernova explosion that formed the neutron star.

We present continued timing observations in Section 2 that show that the spindown of PSR J0210+5845 can be modelled by several higher-order spin-frequency derivatives. We find that a V13.5similar-to𝑉13.5V\sim 13.5italic_V ∼ 13.5 star is coincident with the pulsar timing position, discuss its properties as the optical counterpart to PSR J0210+5854, and identify it as the binary companion of the pulsar in Section 3. In Section 4, we use the spin frequency derivatives to obtain orbital constraints and investigate formation scenarios in Section 5. We discuss and conclude in Section 6.

PSR name P𝑃Pitalic_P Pbsubscript𝑃bP_{\mathrm{b}}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT e𝑒eitalic_e Mcsubscript𝑀cM_{\mathrm{c}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT l𝑙litalic_l b𝑏bitalic_b Ref.
(s) (d) (Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT)
J0045--7319 0.926 51 0.81 8.8 303.51superscriptitalic-.30351303\aas@@fstack{\circ}51303 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 51 43.80superscriptitalic-.43superscript80-43\aas@@fstack{\circ}80^{\star}- 43 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 80 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [1, 2]
B1259--63 0.048 1237 0.87 20 304.18superscriptitalic-.30418304\aas@@fstack{\circ}18304 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 18 0.99superscriptitalic-.099-0\aas@@fstack{\circ}99- 0 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 99 [3, 4]
J1638--4725 0.764 1941 0.96 8superscript88^{\dagger}8 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 337.36superscriptitalic-.33736337\aas@@fstack{\circ}36337 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 36 0.30superscriptitalic-.030-0\aas@@fstack{\circ}30- 0 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 30 [5]
J1740--3052 0.570 231 0.58 20 357.81superscriptitalic-.35781357\aas@@fstack{\circ}81357 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 81 0.13superscriptitalic-.013-0\aas@@fstack{\circ}13- 0 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 13 [6, 7]
J2032+4127 0.143 16835 0.96 15 80.22superscriptitalic-.802280\aas@@fstack{\circ}2280 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 22 +1.03superscriptitalic-.103+1\aas@@fstack{\circ}03+ 1 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 03 [8]
J2108+4516 0.577 269 0.09 17.5 – 23 87.34superscriptitalic-.873487\aas@@fstack{\circ}3487 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 34 1.63superscriptitalic-.163-1\aas@@fstack{\circ}63- 1 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 63 [9]
Table 1: The six currently known pulsar/massive star binaries and their spin period (P𝑃Pitalic_P), orbital period (Pbsubscript𝑃bP_{\mathrm{b}}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT), eccentricity (e𝑒eitalic_e), companion mass (Mcsubscript𝑀cM_{\mathrm{c}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT), Galactic longitude (l𝑙litalic_l) and latitude (b𝑏bitalic_b). The references used are: [1] Kaspi et al. (1996), [2] Bell et al. (1995), [3] Shannon et al. (2014), [4] Johnston et al. (1994), [5] Lorimer et al. (2006), [6] Bassa et al. (2011), [7] Madsen et al. (2012), [8] Lyne et al. (2015), and [9] Andersen et al. (2023). {}^{\star}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT PSR J0045--7319 is located in the Small Magellanic Cloud, hence the large Galactic latitude. {}^{\dagger}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT † end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT The companion of J1638--4725 has not been identified. The mass estimate is the median mass calculated from the orbital period and projected-semi major axis, assuming an inclination of 60superscript6060^{\circ}60 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

2 Radio timing

The timing ephemeris of PSR J0210+5845 obtained by Tan et al. (2020), modelling the position, the spin period and its derivative, and the dispersion measure (DM), uses LOFAR observations obtained between December 2017 and December 2018. We extended that timing ephemeris with observations from 2019 to June 2022. All observations of PSR J0210+5845 were obtained with the same observational setup. We used the high-band antennas (HBAs) of the LOFAR core stations, recording dual-polarisation Nyquist sampled complex voltages for 400 subbands of 0.195 MHz bandwidth between 110 to 188 MHz. We followed the analysis procedure outlined in van der Wateren et al. (2023), where we used the LOFAR pulsar pipeline (Kondratiev et al., 2016) to coherently dedisperse and fold the observations with dspsr (van Straten & Bailes, 2011) to create pulse profiles in the psrfits111https://psrchive.sourceforge.net format with 0.195 MHz channels and 5-s subintegrations. The majority of radio frequency interference (RFI) was automatically removed using clfd222https://github.com/v-morello/clfd (Morello et al., 2019), followed by a manual inspection and RFI removal with the psrzap tool from the psrchive software suite (Hotan et al., 2004) where needed.

We used the timing model from Tan et al. (2020) to fold and dedisperse all observations, which were then fully averaged in time. To obtain a better constraint on the DM, the observations were split into two subbands with centre frequencies 129 and 167 MHz and both subbands were fully averaged in frequency. We combined the observations to one high signal-to-noise profile of the full bandwidth, to which we modelled an analytical template profile as the sum of three von Mises functions using paas. The averaged observations were cross-correlated with the template to obtain times-of-arrival (TOAs) with pat.

With pintk, the interactive module of the pulsar timing package PINT333https://nanograv-pint.readthedocs.io/en/latest (Luo et al., 2021) (v0.9.3), a new timing ephemeris was constructed modelling the celestial position (αJ2000subscript𝛼J2000\alpha_{\mathrm{J2000}}italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT J2000 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, δJ2000subscript𝛿J2000\delta_{\mathrm{J2000}}italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT J2000 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT), spin frequency f𝑓fitalic_f, spin frequency derivative f˙˙𝑓\dot{f}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG, and the DM. As indicative in Fig. 1, higher-order spin frequency derivatives were required to properly model the spindown behaviour of PSR J0210+5854. We sequentially added spin frequency derivatives beyond f˙˙𝑓\dot{f}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG to improve the timing ephemeris and obtained significant measurements for the second, third, and fourth spin frequency derivatives f¨¨𝑓\ddot{f}over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG, f¨˙˙¨𝑓\dot{\ddot{f}}over˙ start_ARG over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_ARG, and f¨¨¨¨𝑓\ddot{\ddot{f}}over¨ start_ARG over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_ARG. Fitting a timing ephemeris that also included a fifth spin frequency derivative in the fit resulted in a value that was not significant (less than 3σ3𝜎3\sigma3 italic_σ significance). To assess the timing noise using the method from Arzoumanian et al. (1994), we fitted f𝑓fitalic_f, f˙˙𝑓\dot{f}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG, and f¨¨𝑓\ddot{f}over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG, keeping higher-order frequency derivatives at zero, over a 108superscript10810^{8}10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 8 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT-s segment of the data to calculate Δ8=log10((6f)1|f¨|t3)subscriptΔ8subscript10superscript6𝑓1¨𝑓superscript𝑡3\Delta_{8}=\log_{10}\Big{(}(6f)^{-1}|\ddot{f}|t^{3}\Big{)}roman_Δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 8 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_log start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 10 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( ( 6 italic_f ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG | italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), with t=108𝑡superscript108t=10^{8}\,italic_t = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 8 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPTs. The obtained value of Δ8=1.54subscriptΔ81.54\Delta_{8}=1.54roman_Δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 8 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.54 significantly exceeds the expected value for intrinsic timing noise of Δ8=1.3subscriptΔ81.3\Delta_{8}=-1.3roman_Δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 8 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 1.3 based on the relation from Hobbs et al. (2010), which suggests that the higher-order frequency derivatives are not primarily produced by intrinsic timing noise.

The higher-order spin frequency derivatives up to and including the fifth spin frequency derivative were included in the timing ephemeris. Even though the fifth spin frequency derivative was not significant, it was included due to the informative nature of its uncertainty, particularly in terms of the scale for this parameter, which was used in Section 4. The timing model was subsequently refitted for all parameters, resulting in the timing ephemeris shown in Table 2 and the timing residuals in Fig. 1.

To check that there are no unexpected covariances between the parameters in the timing ephemeris, we performed a Bayesian analysis using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) fitter from PINT. The standard PINT approach was used by taking normally distributed priors based on the standard PINT fitting results and refitting all parameters in the timing ephemeris using the MCMC fitter. The parameters and their uncertainties are consistent between fitting methods, and covariances are generally low except for pairs of odd and even spin frequency derivatives, as expected for a Taylor series.

To investigate for variations in dispersion, we divided the TOAs into segments, each spanning 200 days, which we independently refitted for DM. This analysis revealed a maximum variation of 0.38(49) pc cm33{}^{-3}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, with the uncertainty denoting the average error associated with the separately fitted DMs. Refitting the full data set for a time derivative of the DM resulted in DM˙=0.0006(15)˙DM0.000615\dot{\mathrm{DM}}=-0.0006(15)over˙ start_ARG roman_DM end_ARG = - 0.0006 ( 15 ) pc cm33{}^{-3}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT yr11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT. Hence, we conclude that PSR J0210+5845 exhibits no significant DM variations in our dataset.

Coincident with the timing position of PSR J0210+5845 is an optical star for which the position and proper motions are documented in the Gaia DR3 catalogue (Gaia Collaboration et al., 2023) and which, in Section 3, we identify as the binary companion of the pulsar. We refitted the spin frequency, higher-order derivatives of the spin frequency and the DM, incorporating the position and proper motions from the optical counterpart of PSR J0210+5845 as documented in the Gaia DR3 catalogue (Gaia Collaboration et al., 2023). The resulting timing model remained consistent with the model in which the position was fitted and no proper motion was assumed. See Section 3 for more information on the optical counterpart.

Table 2: The timing parameters for PSR J0210+5845. Two timing ephemerides are fitted, one where the celestial position is fitted together with five spin frequency derivatives and the dispersion measure, and one where the celestial position and proper motions are fixed to those of Gaia DR3. The Gaia positions are consistent with the positions from radio timing at the same epoch of position measurement. The higher-order frequency derivatives and DMs are consistent at the epoch of frequency determination. The figures in parentheses are the nominal 1σ1𝜎1\sigma1 italic_σ uncertainties in the least significant digits quoted, which have been multiplied by the square root of the reduced χ2superscript𝜒2\chi^{2}italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.
Data set and assumptions
MJD range 58118–59704
Data span (yr) 4.34
Number of TOAs 110
Clock correction procedure TT(TAI)
Solar system ephemeris model DE436
Units TDB
Measured quantities
Fitting for astrometry Gaia DR3 astrometry
Epoch of position measurement (MJD) 58910.0 57388.5
Right ascension, αJ2000subscript𝛼J2000\alpha_{\mathrm{J2000}}italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT J2000 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 02h10m56.s416(9)superscript02hsuperscript10msuperscriptitalic-.𝑠56416902^{\mathrm{h}}10^{\mathrm{m}}56\aas@@fstack{s}416(9)02 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 56 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. italic_s end_POSTFIX 416 ( 9 ) 02h10m56.s409999superscript02hsuperscript10msuperscriptitalic-.𝑠5640999902^{\mathrm{h}}10^{\mathrm{m}}56\aas@@fstack{s}40999902 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 56 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. italic_s end_POSTFIX 409999
Declination, δJ2000subscript𝛿J2000\delta_{\mathrm{J2000}}italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT J2000 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT +58°4517.74(8)+58\degr 45\arcmin 17\aas@@fstack{\prime\prime}74(8)+ 58 ° 45 ′ 17 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ′ ′ end_POSTFIX 74 ( 8 ) +58°4517.718237+58\degr 45\arcmin 17\aas@@fstack{\prime\prime}718237+ 58 ° 45 ′ 17 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ′ ′ end_POSTFIX 718237
Proper motion in RA, μαcosδsubscript𝜇𝛼𝛿\mu_{\alpha}\cos\deltaitalic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cos italic_δ (mas yr11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) \ldots --1.116
Proper motion in Dec., μδsubscript𝜇𝛿\mu_{\delta}italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_δ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (mas yr11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) \ldots --0.495
Epoch of frequency determination (MJD) 58910.0 58910.0
Spin frequency, f𝑓fitalic_f (s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) 0.566181225686(6) 0.566181225686(6)
First derivative of spin frequency, f˙˙𝑓\dot{f}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG (s22{}^{-2}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) --4.86224(6)×1014absentsuperscript1014\times 10^{-14}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 14 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT --4.86223(6)×1014absentsuperscript1014\times 10^{-14}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 14 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
Second derivative of spin frequency, f¨¨𝑓\ddot{f}over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG (s33{}^{-3}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) --1.1628(3)×1022absentsuperscript1022\times 10^{-22}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 22 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT --1.1628(3)×1022absentsuperscript1022\times 10^{-22}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 22 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
Third derivative of spin frequency, f¨˙˙¨𝑓\dot{\ddot{f}}over˙ start_ARG over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_ARG (s44{}^{-4}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) --4.96(4)×1031absentsuperscript1031\times 10^{-31}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 31 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT --4.96(4)×1031absentsuperscript1031\times 10^{-31}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 31 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
Fourth derivative of spin frequency, f¨¨¨¨𝑓\ddot{\ddot{f}}over¨ start_ARG over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_ARG (s55{}^{-5}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) --2.47(13)×1039absentsuperscript1039\times 10^{-39}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 39 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT --2.47(12)×1039absentsuperscript1039\times 10^{-39}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 39 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
Fifth derivative of spin frequency, f¨¨˙˙¨¨𝑓\dot{\ddot{\ddot{f}}}over˙ start_ARG over¨ start_ARG over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_ARG end_ARG (s66{}^{-6}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) --1.9(2.0)×1047absentsuperscript1047\times 10^{-47}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 47 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT --1.5(1.9)×1047absentsuperscript1047\times 10^{-47}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 47 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
Dispersion measure, DM (pc cm33{}^{-3}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT) 76.7895(18) 76.7894(18)
Weighted rms timing residual (μμ\upmuroman_μs) 860.7 864.5
Reduced χ2superscript𝜒2\chi^{2}italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT value 0.89 0.90
Refer to caption
Figure 1: The residuals from timing with one (a), two (b) three (c), and four (d) spin frequency derivatives. The residuals from fitting the model in Table 2 fitting up to and including five spin frequency derivatives are very similar to the residuals shown here.
d𝑑ditalic_d Mcsubscript𝑀cM_{\mathrm{c}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Teffsubscript𝑇effT_{\mathrm{eff}}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Ref.
(kpc) (Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT) (K)
2.5(5)*2.5superscript52.5(5)^{*}2.5 ( 5 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT * end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - - Cordes & Lazio (2002)
2.0(4)*2.0superscript42.0(4)^{*}2.0 ( 4 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT * end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - - Yao et al. (2017)
2.310.20+0.27subscriptsuperscript2.310.270.202.31^{+0.27}_{-0.20}2.31 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.27 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.20 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2.780.83+0.48subscriptsuperscript2.780.480.832.78^{+0.48}_{-0.83}2.78 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.48 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.83 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 11 4574298+972subscriptsuperscript11457972429811\,457^{+972}_{-4298}11 457 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 972 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 4298 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Anders et al. (2019)
- - 7840(253) Xiang et al. (2019)
1.950.07+0.04subscriptsuperscript1.950.040.071.95^{+0.04}_{-0.07}1.95 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.04 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.07 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1.690.04+0.10subscriptsuperscript1.690.100.041.69^{+0.10}_{-0.04}1.69 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.10 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.04 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 826194+285subscriptsuperscript8261285948261^{+285}_{-94}8261 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 285 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 94 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Queiroz et al. (2020)
2.600.10+0.11subscriptsuperscript2.600.110.102.60^{+0.11}_{-0.10}2.60 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.11 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.10 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - - Bailer-Jones et al. (2021)
2.510.14+0.05subscriptsuperscript2.510.050.142.51^{+0.05}_{-0.14}2.51 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.05 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.14 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3.220.62+0.40subscriptsuperscript3.220.400.623.22^{+0.40}_{-0.62}3.22 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.40 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.62 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 12 2601311+1408subscriptsuperscript122601408131112\,260^{+1408}_{-1311}12 260 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 1408 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1311 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Anders et al. (2022)
2.20700.0011+0.0042subscriptsuperscript2.20700.00420.00112.2070^{+0.0042}_{-0.0011}2.2070 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.0042 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.0011 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3.100.05+0.07subscriptsuperscript3.100.070.053.10^{+0.07}_{-0.05}3.10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.07 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.05 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 10 93028+5subscriptsuperscript1093052810\,930^{+5}_{-28}10 930 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 28 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Gaia Collaboration et al. (2023)
- - 14 279(603) Xiang et al. (2022)
- 3.53.53.53.5 to 3.83.83.83.8 14275(133) This paper
Table 3: The distance d𝑑ditalic_d, mass Mcsubscript𝑀cM_{\mathrm{c}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and effective temperature Teffsubscript𝑇effT_{\mathrm{eff}}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of 2MASS J02105640+584517 as documented in different catalogues. The uncertainties are 68% confidence intervals as upper and lower bounds or 1σ1𝜎1\sigma1 italic_σ uncertainties in parentheses. Distances denoted with *{}^{*}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT * end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT are derived from the location and DM of the pulsar using the NE2001 (Cordes & Lazio, 2002) and YMW16 (Yao et al., 2017) Galactic electron density models.

3 Optical counterpart

A star (V=13.5𝑉13.5V=13.5italic_V = 13.5, BV=0.47𝐵𝑉0.47B-V=0.47italic_B - italic_V = 0.47; Henden et al. 2015) is located near the radio timing position of PSR J0210+5845. This star is present in many catalogues – for the remainder of the paper, we will refer to it as 2MASS J02105640+5845176 (Skrutskie et al., 2006). The Gaia DR3 (Gaia Collaboration et al., 2023) astrometric solution provides a proper motion of μαcosδ=1.116(12)subscript𝜇𝛼𝛿1.11612\mu_{\alpha}\cos{\delta}=-1.116(12)italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cos italic_δ = - 1.116 ( 12 ) mas yr11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT and μδ=0.495(15)subscript𝜇𝛿0.49515\mu_{\delta}=-0.495(15)italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_δ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 0.495 ( 15 ) mas yr11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT. At the epoch of the pulsar timing ephemeris, the position of this star is αICRS=02h10m56s.4094subscript𝛼ICRSsuperscript02hsuperscript10msuperscript56s.4094\alpha_{\mathrm{ICRS}}=02^{\mathrm{h}}10^{\mathrm{m}}56^{\mathrm{s}}.4094italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ICRS end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 02 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 56 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_s end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .4094, ΔδICRS=+58°4517.716\Delta\delta_{\mathrm{ICRS}}=+58\degree 45\arcmin 17\aas@@fstack{\prime\prime}% 716roman_Δ italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ICRS end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = + 58 ° 45 ′ 17 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ′ ′ end_POSTFIX 716. This position is offset from the pulsar timing position by Δα=0.06(7)\Delta\alpha=0\aas@@fstack{\prime\prime}06(7)roman_Δ italic_α = 0 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ′ ′ end_POSTFIX 06 ( 7 ) in right ascension and Δδ=0.02(8)\Delta\delta=0\aas@@fstack{\prime\prime}02(8)roman_Δ italic_δ = 0 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ′ ′ end_POSTFIX 02 ( 8 ) in declination and hence coincident with the pulsar position as measured through timing.

The parallax of this star has been measured at ϖ=0.354(15)italic-ϖ0.35415\varpi=0.354(15)italic_ϖ = 0.354 ( 15 ) mas in Gaia DR3. The Gaia GSP-Phot and FLAME modelling combine this parallax with GAIA photometry and stellar models to estimate a distance of d=2.21𝑑2.21d=2.21italic_d = 2.21 kpc, a nominal effective temperature of Teff=10930subscript𝑇eff10930T_{\mathrm{eff}}=10930italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 10930 K, and a mass of Mc=3.10subscript𝑀c3.10M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.10italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.10 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (Gaia Collaboration et al., 2023). Similar stellar properties were obtained with the StarHorse Bayesian isochrone-fitting software (Queiroz et al., 2018) by combining the GAIA astrometric and photometric measurements with photometry from Pan-STARRS1, 2MASS, and AllWISE. Results based on Gaia DR2 are presented in Anders et al. (2019) and updated using Gaia EDR3 in Anders et al. (2022). These results are shown in Table 3.

Low-resolution spectroscopy of 2MASS J02105640+5845176 has been obtained as part of the LAMOST survey, which initially classified the star as an A1 V star and estimates a radial velocity of 7.6(5)7.65-7.6(5)- 7.6 ( 5 ) km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT (Xiang et al., 2022). Stellar parameters derived from this spectrum vary between analysis methods, with Teff=7840(253)subscript𝑇eff7840253T_{\mathrm{eff}}=7840(253)italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 7840 ( 253 ) K obtained by Xiang et al. (2019) from LAMOST DR5 and Teff=14279(603)subscript𝑇eff14279603T_{\mathrm{eff}}=14279(603)italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 14279 ( 603 ) K by Xiang et al. (2022) from LAMOST DR6. Queiroz et al. (2020) used the LAMOST DR5 stellar parameters for the lower effective temperature solution from Xiang et al. (2019) with the StarHorse software to obtain lower mass and distance estimates of 2MASS J02105640+5845176 (d=1.95𝑑1.95d=1.95italic_d = 1.95 kpc, Mc=1.69subscript𝑀c1.69M_{\mathrm{c}}=1.69italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.69 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT) compared to the photometric results (see Table  3). The higher effective temperature obtained in Xiang et al. (2022) is consistent with the mass and temperature estimates derived from astrometry and photometry.

To resolve this discrepancy in the effective temperature of 2MASS J02105640+++5845176, we obtained four spectroscopic observations of 2MASS J02105640+++5845176 during morning twilight on August 16 and 17, 2022 with the Intermediate Dispersion Spectrograph (IDS) at the 2.5 m Isaac Newton Telescope on La Palma. The R900V grating was used with 600-s exposures on the RED+2 detector. The seeing varied between 1.31\aas@@fstack{\prime\prime}31 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ′ ′ end_POSTFIX 3 and 2.12\aas@@fstack{\prime\prime}12 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ′ ′ end_POSTFIX 1. We used the 0.9740\aas@@fstack{\prime\prime}9740 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ′ ′ end_POSTFIX 974 slit, covering the wavelength range of 3800 to 5400 Å at 0.70 Å pix11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, providing a resolution of R3000similar-to𝑅3000R\sim 3000italic_R ∼ 3000. The observations were bias subtracted and spectra were extracted using the method described by Hynes (2002). Arc-lamp exposures taken prior to each observation of 2MASS J02105640+++5845176 were used for the wavelength calibration. Radial velocities and spectral properties were determined by fitting the observed spectra against normalised model spectra from Munari et al. (2005). The model spectra were convolved with a truncated Gaussian to decrease their resolution of R=20 000𝑅20000R=20\,000italic_R = 20 000 to that of the observations.

We found that the barycentred radial velocities are consistent with a mean velocity of v=9(3)𝑣93v=-9(3)italic_v = - 9 ( 3 ) km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT (3.23.23.23.2 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT rms around the mean). The observed spectrum is best represented by the models with Solar metallicity ([M/H]=0delimited-[]MH0[\mathrm{M}/\mathrm{H}]=0[ roman_M / roman_H ] = 0) with an effective temperature Teff=14 275(133)subscript𝑇eff14275133T_{\mathrm{eff}}=14\,275(133)italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 14 275 ( 133 ) K, surface gravity log(g/cgs)>4.13𝑔𝑐𝑔𝑠4.13\log(g/cgs)>4.13roman_log ( italic_g / italic_c italic_g italic_s ) > 4.13 (2σ2𝜎2\sigma2 italic_σ) and rotationally broadened by vrotsini=73(12)subscript𝑣rot𝑖7312v_{\mathrm{rot}}\sin i=73(12)italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_rot end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sin italic_i = 73 ( 12 ) km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT. At this effective temperature and surface gravity, 2MASS J02105640+++5845176 can be classified as a B6 V star (Pecaut & Mamajek, 2013).

The PARSEC stellar evolution models by Bressan et al. (2012); Tang et al. (2014) and Chen et al. (2014, 2015) predict a mass of Mc=3.59(5)subscript𝑀c3.595M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.59(5)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.59 ( 5 ) Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and absolute V-band magnitude of MV=0.28(4)subscript𝑀𝑉0.284M_{V}=0.28(4)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.28 ( 4 ) for an [M/H]=0delimited-[]MH0[\mathrm{M}/\mathrm{H}]=0[ roman_M / roman_H ] = 0 main-sequence star with Teff=14 275(133)subscript𝑇eff14275133T_{\mathrm{eff}}=14\,275(133)italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 14 275 ( 133 ) K at an age of 10 Myr. At 40 Myr, the mass and absolute V-band magnitude are Mc=3.72(6)subscript𝑀c3.726M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.72(6)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.72 ( 6 ) Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and MV=0.06(4)subscript𝑀𝑉0.064M_{V}=0.06(4)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.06 ( 4 ). The Green et al. (2019) Galactic extinction map predicts Egr=0.38(2)subscript𝐸𝑔𝑟0.382E_{g-r}=0.38(2)italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g - italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.38 ( 2 ) to 0.40(2)0.4020.40(2)0.40 ( 2 ) mag for distances from 1.9 to 3.0 kpc. For these reddening values, the RV=3.1subscript𝑅𝑉3.1R_{V}=3.1italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.1 extinction coefficients from Schlafly & Finkbeiner (2011) yield AV=1.15subscript𝐴𝑉1.15A_{V}=1.15italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.15 to 1.21 mag. Combined with the observed magnitude of V=13.507𝑉13.507V=13.507italic_V = 13.507 (Henden et al., 2015) this yields distances of d=2.54𝑑2.54d=2.54italic_d = 2.54 kpc to 2.80 kpc. From these observations, we conclude that the A1 V stellar classification and the Teff=7840subscript𝑇eff7840T_{\mathrm{eff}}=7840italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 7840 K estimate by Xiang et al. (2019) is in error and that 2MASS J02105640+++5845176 is a Mc=3.5subscript𝑀c3.5M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.5italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.5 to 3.83.83.83.8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, Teff14 000similar-tosubscript𝑇eff14000T_{\mathrm{eff}}\sim 14\,000italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ 14 000 K B6 V star at a distance of d=2.5𝑑2.5d=2.5italic_d = 2.5 to 2.8 kpc.

At the location and DMDM\mathrm{DM}roman_DM of PSR J0210+5845, the NE2001 (Cordes & Lazio, 2002) and YMW16 (Yao et al., 2017) Galactic electron density models predict distances of 2.52 and 1.95 kpc, respectively. Given the typically 20% uncertainties on DM-derived distances, these distances are consistent with the distances derived from the Gaia parallax measurement and the photometric and spectroscopic constraints.

The uncertainty in the tie between the pulsar position and the Gaia astrometry is dominated by the uncertainty in the former. The 99% confidence error ellipse on the pulsar timing position has an area of 0.053 sq. arcsec, while the Gaia DR3 object density towards PSR J0210+5854 is only 18.4 stars per sq. arcmin. Hence, the probability of finding an unrelated star from the Gaia DR3 catalogue in the error ellipse of PSR J0210+5854 is low p=2.6×104𝑝2.6superscript104p=2.6\times 10^{-4}italic_p = 2.6 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Given this low chance coincidence, and the consistent distance estimates, we will consider the optical counterpart 2MASS J02105640+5845176 as the binary companion to PSR J0210+5854 for the remainder of the paper.

Finally, we note that based on light curves from ZTF Bellm et al. (2019), Chen et al. (2020) identified 2MASS J02105640+5845176 as a periodic variable, with 0.042 mag variations in r𝑟ritalic_r-band on a 1.1248 d period, and classified it as a variable of the RS CVn type. This classification is inconsistent with the spectral type obtained from spectroscopy and the mass and temperature estimates from astrometry and photometry. Additionally, our optical spectroscopy rules out radial velocity variations larger than 3 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT over a 24 h period, ruling out the RS CVn classification. We consider it more likely that 2MASS J02105640+5845176 is a slowly pulsating B-star, a variable type that produces photometric variability of similar periodicity and amplitude in stars of spectral types ranging from B2 to B9 (Waelkens, 1991; Fedurco et al., 2020).

Refer to caption
Figure 2: The normalised optical spectrum of 2MASS J02105640+5845176 (black) as observed with the Intermediate Dispersion Spectrograph at the Isaac Newton Telescope. The best fitting model spectrum from Munari et al. (2005) is plotted in blue (shifted by +0.4 units vertically) and has Teff=14 000subscript𝑇eff14000T_{\mathrm{eff}}=14\,000italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 14 000 K, logg=4.5𝑔4.5\log g=4.5roman_log italic_g = 4.5 cgs, [M/H=0[\mathrm{M}/\mathrm{H}=0[ roman_M / roman_H = 0 and vrotsini=75subscript𝑣rot𝑖75v_{\mathrm{rot}}\sin i=75italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_rot end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sin italic_i = 75 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT. The model spectrum has been convolved with the response of the slit to match the resolution of the observed spectrum. The LAMOST DR7 spectrum from Xiang et al. (2022) is shown in orange (shifted by +0.8 units vertically). Prominent absorption lines are indicated.

4 Orbital constraints

To investigate if binary motion between PSR J0210+5845 and 2MASS J02105640+5845176 can explain the observed higher-order spin frequency derivatives in the timing of PSR J0210+5845, we used the method from Bassa et al. (2016). This method is based on the derivations of Joshi & Rasio (1997) and uses a Keplerian orbit to compute time derivatives of the line-of-sight position of the pulsar to predict spin frequency derivatives. We consider it unlikely that PSR J0210+5845 and 2MASS J02105640+5845176 are in an unbound, hyperbolic, orbit, as the time scale for gravitational interaction will be extremely short compared to the lifetime of the pulsar. Hence, we modelled the observed spin frequency derivatives with a bound Keplerian orbit described by the orbital period Pbsubscript𝑃bP_{\mathrm{b}}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, projected semi-major axis x𝑥xitalic_x, eccentricity e𝑒eitalic_e, argument of perigee ω𝜔\omegaitalic_ω, and true anomaly ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν.

For comparison of the observed spin frequency derivatives with predicted values from the Keplerian model, we used the first to fifth spin frequency derivatives. We implicitly assumed that the second and higher-order spin frequency derivatives are entirely dominated by orbital motion, but need to correct the observed first-order spin frequency derivative f˙obssubscript˙𝑓obs\dot{f}_{\mathrm{obs}}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for the unknown intrinsic spin frequency derivative f˙intsubscript˙𝑓int\dot{f}_{\mathrm{int}}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_int end_POSTSUBSCRIPT due to spin down. The contributions to f˙obssubscript˙𝑓obs\dot{f}_{\mathrm{obs}}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT from the Shklovskii (Shklovskii, 1970) effect and the differential and Galactic acceleration (e.g. Nice & Taylor, 1995) are at least six orders of magnitude smaller than f˙obssubscript˙𝑓obs\dot{f}_{\mathrm{obs}}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and are therefore neglected. From the ATNF Pulsar Catalogue 444http://www.atnf.csiro.au/research/pulsar/psrcat (version 1.67, Manchester et al. 2005), we found that the intrinsic spin frequency derivative distribution of normal, non-recycled pulsars (those with spin period P>0.02𝑃0.02P>0.02italic_P > 0.02 s) can be described by a log-normal distribution of the form log10f˙int=14.3(1.3)subscript10subscript˙𝑓int14.31.3\log_{10}{-\dot{f}_{\mathrm{int}}}=-14.3(1.3)roman_log start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 10 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_int end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 14.3 ( 1.3 ) (for f˙intsubscript˙𝑓int\dot{f}_{\mathrm{int}}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_int end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in units of s22{}^{-2}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT).

We performed a Monte Carlo simulation to predict spin frequency derivatives for 100 000 randomly sampled Keplerian orbits. Samples of e𝑒eitalic_e, ω𝜔\omegaitalic_ω, and ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν were drawn from uniform distributions between 0e<10𝑒10\leq e<10 ≤ italic_e < 1, 0°ω<360°0°𝜔360°0\degree\leq\omega<360\degree0 ° ≤ italic_ω < 360 °, and 0°ν<360°0°𝜈360°0\degree\leq\nu<360\degree0 ° ≤ italic_ν < 360 °, respectively. Using the drawn samples, we used the equations from Bassa et al. (2016) and solved for Pbsubscript𝑃bP_{\mathrm{b}}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and x𝑥xitalic_x. Random values for the intrinsic spin frequency derivative f˙intsubscript˙𝑓int\dot{f}_{\mathrm{int}}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_int end_POSTSUBSCRIPT were drawn from the log-normal distribution to correct the observed spin frequency derivative and obtain the contribution due to orbital motion on f˙˙𝑓\dot{f}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG. For each set of parameters, we calculated the spin frequency derivatives, which we compared to the observed values from the timing analysis in Section 2. We only retained parameter sets for which the predicted spin frequency derivatives were within 3σ3𝜎3\sigma3 italic_σ of the observed values and for which the orbital inclination i𝑖iitalic_i was consistent with sini<1𝑖1\sin i<1roman_sin italic_i < 1 for a 1.4 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT pulsar and a Mc=3.6subscript𝑀c3.6M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.6italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.6 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT binary companion.

The results of the Monte Carlo simulation are presented in Fig. 3 and they indicate that the observed spin frequency derivatives can be explained by a wide and moderately eccentric orbit with Pb=4714+40subscript𝑃bsubscriptsuperscript474014P_{\mathrm{b}}=47^{+40}_{-14}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 47 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 40 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 14 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT yr, x=12.95.2+7.5𝑥subscriptsuperscript12.97.55.2x=12.9^{+7.5}_{-5.2}italic_x = 12.9 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 7.5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 5.2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT AU and e=0.460.07+0.10𝑒subscriptsuperscript0.460.100.07e=0.46^{+0.10}_{-0.07}italic_e = 0.46 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.10 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.07 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (68% confidence intervals). The orbital inclination is constrained to i=52(18)°𝑖5218°i=52(18)\degritalic_i = 52 ( 18 ) ° and with a true anomaly of ν221°similar-to𝜈221°\nu\sim 221\degritalic_ν ∼ 221 °, the binary system had its previous apastron passage between 1988 and 2016 (Tap=200920+7subscript𝑇apsubscriptsuperscript2009720T_{\mathrm{ap}}=2009^{+7}_{-20}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ap end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2009 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 7 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 20 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) while the next periastron passage is predicted to occur between 2030 and 2034 (Tper=2032.11.3+1.7subscript𝑇persubscriptsuperscript2032.11.71.3T_{\mathrm{per}}=2032.1^{+1.7}_{-1.3}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_per end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2032.1 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 1.7 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1.3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT). At periastron, the distance between the binary components will be q=11.71.5+5.0𝑞subscriptsuperscript11.75.01.5q=11.7^{+5.0}_{-1.5}italic_q = 11.7 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 5.0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1.5 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT AU. By correcting for the orbital motion of PSR J0210+5845, we obtained an intrinsic spin-down f˙int=0.60.5+1.7×1014subscript˙𝑓intsubscriptsuperscript0.61.70.5superscript1014\dot{f}_{\mathrm{int}}=-0.6^{+1.7}_{-0.5}\times 10^{-14}\,over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_int end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 0.6 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 1.7 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.5 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 14 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPTs22{}^{-2}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, constraining the characteristic age to τc=1.61.1+13subscript𝜏csubscriptsuperscript1.6131.1\tau_{\mathrm{c}}=1.6^{+13}_{-1.1}italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.6 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 13 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1.1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Myr.

If we assume a lower companion mass of 1.7 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, we obtain a very similar estimate for ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν and slightly lower estimates for Pbsubscript𝑃bP_{\mathrm{b}}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, x𝑥xitalic_x, e𝑒eitalic_e, ω𝜔\omegaitalic_ω, and f˙intsubscript˙𝑓int\dot{f}_{\mathrm{int}}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_int end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, but the values are consistent with those from Mc=3.6subscript𝑀c3.6M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.6\,italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.6Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: The parameter distributions of the orbital period (Pbsubscript𝑃bP_{\mathrm{b}}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT), the projected semi-major axis (x𝑥xitalic_x), the eccentricity (e𝑒eitalic_e), the argument of perigee (ω𝜔\omegaitalic_ω), the true anomaly (ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν), and the intrinsic spin frequency derivative (f˙intsubscript˙𝑓int\dot{f}_{\mathrm{int}}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_int end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) resulting from the Monte Carlo simulation assuming Mc=3.6subscript𝑀c3.6M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.6\,italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.6Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. The median values and the 68% confidence intervals for each parameter are displayed on top of the columns.

5 Formation scenarios

The formation of high-mass binary pulsars follows that of high-mass X-ray binaries and the first-born neutron star in double neutron star systems, where the more massive primary of a binary consisting of O and/or B stars undergoes a supernova explosion to form the neutron star (e.g. Brandt & Podsiadlowski, 1995; Tauris et al., 2017, and references therein). Alternatively, an episode of mass transfer from the primary to the secondary can lead the primary to expel most of its envelope, leaving a Helium star that can explode as a Type Ib/c supernova (Eldridge et al., 2008).

PSR J0210+5845 poses a challenge for these formation scenarios as, compared to other high-mass binary pulsars, it has a relatively low companion mass of 3.6similar-toabsent3.6\sim 3.6∼ 3.6 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. Since, in the absence of mass transfer, the progenitor of the pulsar in PSR J0210+5845 must have had a mass larger than 8greater-than-or-similar-toabsent8\ga 8≳ 8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT to form a 1.4similar-toabsent1.4\sim 1.4∼ 1.4 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT neutron star (Woosley et al., 2002), at least 56% of the mass in the binary system would have been lost in a direct supernova explosion. As this exceeds the 50% limit above which the binary is disrupted (Hills, 1983), a natal kick imparted on the neutron star during the supernova explosion would be required to keep the binary system bound.

To investigate the kick velocities required for the system to survive the mass loss in the supernova explosion, we used the formalism by Brandt & Podsiadlowski (1995) to calculate post-supernova orbits. As input for the direct supernova channel, we assumed as initial conditions a Mp=8subscript𝑀p8M_{\mathrm{p}}=8italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 8 to 12 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT neutron star progenitor and a Mc=3.6subscript𝑀c3.6M_{\mathrm{c}}=3.6italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3.6 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT secondary in a wide orbit (initial orbital periods larger than Pb,ini>1500subscript𝑃bini1500P_{\mathrm{b,ini}}>1500italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b , roman_ini end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 1500 d) to ensure it does not fill its Roche lobe before the star explodes (Klencki et al., 2022). We assumed that the initial orbit is circularised due to tides from the neutron star progenitor. For these parameters, the Brandt & Podsiadlowski (1995) equations predict a maximum kick velocity of vkick<96subscript𝑣kick96v_{\mathrm{kick}}<96italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_kick end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 96 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, above which the system will not remain bound. Hence, random kick velocities were chosen with magnitudes up to this limit and we used the standard assumption that the distribution in kick directions is isotropic.

We found that the orbit only remains bound for kicks with magnitudes below vkick<96subscript𝑣kick96v_{\mathrm{kick}}<96italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_kick end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 96 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT and only if the kick direction is retrograde, i.e. opposite to the orbital velocity at the time of the supernova explosion. The kick velocity limit for which the system remains bound decreases as the initial orbit is wider, and has vkick<37subscript𝑣kick37v_{\mathrm{kick}}<37italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_kick end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 37 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT for Pb,ini=16 000subscript𝑃bini16000P_{\mathrm{b,ini}}=16\,000italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b , roman_ini end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 16 000 d, see Fig. 4. The fraction of cases that remain bound (assuming isotropic kicks) is relatively low and decreases for higher progenitor masses. Similarly, the probability for the system to remain bound improves for the alternative scenario where mass is lost from the system to form a Helium star. Repeating the calculations with a Mp=2.4subscript𝑀p2.4M_{\mathrm{p}}=2.4italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2.4 to 4 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT Helium star progenitor for the neutron star in a Pb,ini>1000subscript𝑃bini1000P_{\mathrm{b,ini}}>1000italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b , roman_ini end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 1000 d pre-explosion orbit, the calculations show that the binary system remains bound for retrograde kicks with velocities below vkick<90subscript𝑣kick90v_{\mathrm{kick}}<90italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_kick end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 90 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, but the probability increases to 100% for velocities below vkick<11subscript𝑣kick11v_{\mathrm{kick}}<11italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_kick end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 11 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, where also prograde orbits are possible.

If we consider a scenario with a less massive companion, the likelihood of the binary system surviving the supernova diminishes even further. Lower initial natal kicks to the neutron star are necessary to prevent disruption of the binary system.

The post-supernova orbits have a large range in possible orbital periods and eccentricities. Orbits that are initially wide are able to reproduce the observed orbital parameters determined with the spin frequency derivatives (Pb=4714+40subscript𝑃bsubscriptsuperscript474014P_{\mathrm{b}}=47^{+40}_{-14}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 47 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 40 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 14 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT yr, e=0.460.07+0.10𝑒subscriptsuperscript0.460.100.07e=0.46^{+0.10}_{-0.07}italic_e = 0.46 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.10 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.07 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT). The post-supernova orbital period does not strongly depend on the progenitor mass or the eccentricity, as shown in Fig. 4. We found that for the 8 to 12 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT progenitor, the pre-supernova orbit would require orbital periods in the range of Pb,ini=2000subscript𝑃bini2000P_{\mathrm{b,ini}}=2000italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b , roman_ini end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2000 to 40 000 d, while the Helium-star scenario with Mp=2.4subscript𝑀p2.4M_{\mathrm{p}}=2.4italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2.4 to 4.0 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT has compatible post-supernova orbits for Pb,ini=3000subscript𝑃bini3000P_{\mathrm{b,ini}}=3000italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b , roman_ini end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 3000 to 56 000 d.

As a result of the low natal kick velocities, the velocity imparted on the post-supernova binary centre-of-mass is also low. The formalism by Brandt & Podsiadlowski (1995) predicts system velocities of vsys=25subscript𝑣sys25v_{\mathrm{sys}}=25italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sys end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 25 to 45 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT for a 10 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT neutron star progenitor in a 1500 d pre-supernova orbit for the range of kick velocities in which the binary remains bound. These velocities decrease for lower mass neutron star progenitors and wider pre-supernova orbits.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: Results from supernova kick simulations. The left-hand panel shows the probability that the post-supernova binary remains bound as a function of kick velocity. These probabilities were computed with isotropic kicks for a range of pre-supernova primary masses for a Helium-star progenitor of 2.4 and 4 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and direct supernova explosions of 8, 10, and 12 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT progenitors as well as pre-supernova orbital periods of 1000, 4000, and 16 000 d. The right-hand panel shows the resulting post-supernova orbital period Pb,finsubscript𝑃bfinP_{\mathrm{b,fin}}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b , roman_fin end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and eccentricity for a range of pre-supernova masses and orbital periods. The dash-dotted vertical lines indicate the pre-supernova orbital periods with the wedges the resulting post-supernova parameters. The orbital constraints for PSR J0210+5845 are shown in black with error bars.

6 Discussion and conclusions

The LOFAR timing observations of PSR J0210+5845 reveal large deviations from typical spin-down behaviour of isolated pulsars that can be modelled by a spin frequency and a spin frequency derivative. We argue that these deviations are caused by binary motion of the pulsar in a wide, as yet unresolved, orbit around the B6 V star 2MASS J02105640+5845176. This identification of 2MASS J02105640+5845176 as the binary companion of PSR J0210+5845 is based on the coincidence in celestial position, as well as the distance between the star and the pulsar, and the low probability for this coincidence to be due to random chance.

The properties of PSR J0210+5845, its B6 V binary companion, the orbital properties of this system and its location near the Galactic plane (l=133.10𝑙superscriptitalic-.13310l=133\aas@@fstack{\circ}10italic_l = 133 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 10, b=2.54𝑏superscriptitalic-.254b=-2\aas@@fstack{\circ}54italic_b = - 2 start_POSTFIX SUPERSCRIPTOP italic_. ∘ end_POSTFIX 54) are consistent to those of high-mass binary pulsars. With this identification, PSR J0210+5845 becomes the seventh system with this classification, i.e. non-recycled pulsars (P>0.01𝑃0.01P>0.01italic_P > 0.01 s) with main-sequence star binary companions with masses in excess of Mc>1subscript𝑀c1M_{\mathrm{c}}>1italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 1 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (Manchester et al., 2005). Compared to the other systems, PSR J0210+5845 stands out primarily due to the low mass of its binary companion. For those systems where companion masses have been reliably measured, the lowest mass is around 8similar-toabsent8\sim 8∼ 8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (Table 1), while for the companion of PSR J0210+5845, we determined a mass of 3.53.53.53.5 to 3.83.83.83.8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. Similarly, among the high-mass X-ray binaries with measured masses, the lowest masses are around 8similar-toabsent8\sim 8∼ 8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (from the HMXB catalogue by Fortin et al., 2023). The spin frequency derivatives determined from the timing of PSR J0210+5845 constrain the orbit to be wide (Pb=34subscript𝑃b34P_{\mathrm{b}}=34italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 34 to 88 yr) with a moderate eccentricity of e=0.39𝑒0.39e=0.39italic_e = 0.39 to 0.56. Of the high-mass binary pulsars, only PSR J2032+4127 is in a wide orbit of 46 yr, though with a higher eccentricity of e=0.96𝑒0.96e=0.96italic_e = 0.96 (Lyne et al., 2015). All other systems have orbital periods below 2000 d.

Due to the low mass of the companion, we found that for the binary to remain bound after the supernova explosion that formed PSR J0210+5845, a low velocity, retrograde natal kick is required (vkick<96subscript𝑣kick96v_{\mathrm{kick}}<96italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_kick end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 96 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT). This is true for both the direct collapse of a >8absent8>8> 8 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT neutron star progenitor as well as the collapse of a Helium star.

Low natal kicks of a few tens of km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT are commonly attributed to electron-capture supernovae, where the rapid explosion does not allow for asymmetries to develop (e.g. Podsiadlowski et al., 2004; Gessner & Janka, 2018). The progenitor mass range in which electron-capture supernovae occur is uncertain but estimated between 8 and 10 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. Recently, Stevenson et al. (2022) have postulated that electron-capture supernovae would create non-recycled pulsars in wide (Pb104greater-than-or-similar-tosubscript𝑃bsuperscript104P_{\mathrm{b}}\ga 10^{4}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≳ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT d) and moderately eccentric (e0.7similar-to𝑒0.7e\sim 0.7italic_e ∼ 0.7) orbits. Their population synthesis predicts a distribution of post-supernova orbital periods and eccentricities matching the observed properties of PSR J0210+5845. Therefore, PSR J0210+5845 is a possible candidate for this formation scenario.

Although in traditional Fe core-collapse supernovae, large natal kicks of hundreds of km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT are predicted to be more common (Janka, 2017, and references therein), observations show that lower natal kicks below 60 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT are still possible (Verbunt et al., 2017). Due to the broader range of progenitor masses leading to a core-collapse supernova that produces a neutron star (Smartt, 2009), this scenario is not to be disregarded.

The wide post-supernova orbit places constraints on the pre-supernova orbit, which we found requires to also be wide, with orbital periods ranging from 2000 to 56 000 d. This would argue against the formation scenario in which an episode of mass transfer between the neutron star progenitor and the binary companion removes the envelope of the progenitor, allowing it to explode as a Helium star. First, the current low mass of the companion does not allow the neutron star progenitor to have accreted much matter, and second, the wide pre-supernova orbit is not expected in this scenario where mass-transfer is required. However, through calculations of angular momentum pre- and post-interaction and assuming no accretion by the companion, we found that under the ideal assumption of isotropic mass loss (e.g. see Pols & Marinus 1994), orbital periods exceeding 4000 days are achievable for a Helium star.

The orbital parameters indicate that the upcoming periastron passage is between 2030 and 2034. Continued timing observations around that time will significantly improve the orbital constraints. During periastron passage, the distance between the binary components is predicted to be 11.71.5+5.0subscriptsuperscript11.75.01.511.7^{+5.0}_{-1.5}11.7 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 5.0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1.5 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT AU, which, using the approximation from Eggleton (1983) and assuming a mass ratio of 1.4/3.6, gives a Roche lobe radius of RL=756101+325subscript𝑅Lsuperscriptsubscript756101325R_{\mathrm{L}}=756_{-101}^{+325}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 756 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 101 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 325 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Rdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (Eggleton, 1983). Comparatively, a 3.6 Mdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT star has an approximate radius of 2.6 Rdirect-product{}_{\odot}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (Demircan & Kahraman, 1991), which indicates that there will be no Roche-lobe overflow.

At the nominal distance of 2.5 kpc, the observed proper motion of 2MASS J02105640+5845176 corresponds to a transverse velocity of 14.5 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT. This velocity is the sum of the projected orbital velocity of the star around the binary centre-of-mass, the projected post-supernova system velocity of the binary centre-of-mass imparted on the system due to the supernova kick, and the projected component of any pre-supernova system velocity of the binary system. From the orbital constraints, we obtained a projected orbital velocity of the pulsar companion around the binary centre-of-mass of 3.10.6+0.5subscriptsuperscript3.10.50.63.1^{+0.5}_{-0.6}3.1 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 0.5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.6 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT. Assuming a random direction of the post-supernova system velocity, the projected component will be less than 22 km s11{}^{-1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, indicating that the majority of the observed proper motion is due to the system velocity of the binary.

It remains to be seen if the orbital motion of the B6 V star around the centre-of-mass of the binary system can be detected by Gaia. The orbital constraints based on the observed spin frequency derivatives of PSR J0210+5845 indicate that the projected acceleration due to orbital motion is small, of order 0.02 mas yr22{}^{-2}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT at a distance of 2.5 kpc, and the Gaia DR3 astrometric solution for position, proper motion and parallax reports no astrometric excess noise (Gaia Collaboration et al., 2023).

It has been proposed that numerous radio pulsars that are considered to be isolated, might in fact belong to exceptionally wide binary systems. Jones et al. (2023) estimate that approximately 30% of seemingly isolated pulsars with a measured f¨¨𝑓\ddot{f}over¨ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG could hide a binary with orbital period <1000absent1000<1000< 1000 years. In this paper, we have demonstrated that even in these highly separated systems, the orbital motion of the pulsar can be measured through higher-order frequency derivatives.

Acknowledgements.
This paper is based (in part) on data obtained with the International LOFAR Telescope (ILT) under project codes LC9_023, LC9_041, LT10_015 and LT14_005. LOFAR (van Haarlem et al., 2013) is the Low Frequency Array designed and constructed by ASTRON. It has observing, data processing, and data storage facilities in several countries, that are owned by various parties (each with their own funding sources), and that are collectively operated by the ILT foundation under a joint scientific policy. The ILT resources have benefitted from the following recent major funding sources: CNRS-INSU, Observatoire de Paris and Université d’Orléans, France; BMBF, MIWF-NRW, MPG, Germany; Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation (DBEI), Ireland; NWO, The Netherlands; The Science and Technology Facilities Council, UK; Ministry of Science and Higher Education, Poland. This research was made possible by support from the Dutch National Science Agenda, NWA Startimpuls – 400.17.608. IVY and JC acknowledge support by the Spanish Ministry of Science under grant PID2020-120323GB-I00.The INT is operated on the island of La Palma by the Isaac Newton Group of Telescopes in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias.

References

  • Aharonian et al. (2005) Aharonian, F., Akhperjanian, A. G., Aye, K. M., et al. 2005, A&A, 442, 1
  • Anders et al. (2019) Anders, F., Khalatyan, A., Chiappini, C., et al. 2019, A&A, 628, A94
  • Anders et al. (2022) Anders, F., Khalatyan, A., Queiroz, A. B. A., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A91
  • Andersen et al. (2023) Andersen, B. C., Fonseca, E., McKee, J. W., et al. 2023, ApJ, 943, 57
  • Arzoumanian et al. (1994) Arzoumanian, Z., Nice, D. J., Taylor, J. H., & Thorsett, S. E. 1994, ApJ, 422, 671
  • Bailer-Jones et al. (2021) Bailer-Jones, C. A. L., Rybizki, J., Fouesneau, M., Demleitner, M., & Andrae, R. 2021, AJ, 161, 147
  • Bassa et al. (2011) Bassa, C. G., Brisken, W. F., Nelemans, G., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 412, L63
  • Bassa et al. (2016) Bassa, C. G., Janssen, G. H., Karuppusamy, R., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 2196
  • Bell et al. (1995) Bell, J. F., Bessell, M. S., Stappers, B. W., Bailes, M., & Kaspi, V. M. 1995, ApJ, 447, L117
  • Bellm et al. (2019) Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002
  • Brandt & Podsiadlowski (1995) Brandt, N. & Podsiadlowski, P. 1995, MNRAS, 274, 461
  • Bressan et al. (2012) Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127
  • Chen et al. (2020) Chen, X., Wang, S., Deng, L., et al. 2020, ApJS, 249, 18
  • Chen et al. (2015) Chen, Y., Bressan, A., Girardi, L., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068
  • Chen et al. (2014) Chen, Y., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525
  • Cordes & Lazio (2002) Cordes, J. M. & Lazio, T. J. W. 2002, astro-ph/0207156
  • Demircan & Kahraman (1991) Demircan, O. & Kahraman, G. 1991, Ap&SS, 181, 313
  • Eggleton (1983) Eggleton, P. P. 1983, ApJ, 268, 368
  • Eldridge et al. (2008) Eldridge, J. J., Izzard, R. G., & Tout, C. A. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 1109
  • Fedurco et al. (2020) Fedurco, M., Paunzen, E., Hümmerich, S., Bernhard, K., & Parimucha, Š. 2020, A&A, 633, A122
  • Fortin et al. (2023) Fortin, F., García, F., Simaz Bunzel, A., & Chaty, S. 2023, A&A, 671, A149
  • Gaia Collaboration et al. (2023) Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1
  • Gessner & Janka (2018) Gessner, A. & Janka, H.-T. 2018, ApJ, 865, 61
  • Green et al. (2019) Green, G. M., Schlafly, E., Zucker, C., Speagle, J. S., & Finkbeiner, D. 2019, ApJ, 887, 93
  • Henden et al. (2015) Henden, A. A., Levine, S., Terrell, D., & Welch, D. L. 2015, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 225, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #225, 336.16
  • Hills (1983) Hills, J. G. 1983, ApJ, 267, 322
  • Hobbs et al. (2010) Hobbs, G., Lyne, A. G., & Kramer, M. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 1027
  • Hotan et al. (2004) Hotan, A. W., van Straten, W., & Manchester, R. N. 2004, PASA, 21, 302
  • Hynes (2002) Hynes, R. I. 2002, A&A, 382, 752
  • Janka (2017) Janka, H.-T. 2017, ApJ, 837, 84
  • Johnston et al. (1994) Johnston, S., Manchester, R. N., Lyne, A. G., Nicastro, L., & Spyromilio, J. 1994, MNRAS, 268, 430
  • Jones et al. (2023) Jones, M. L., Kaplan, D. L., McLaughlin, M. A., & Lorimer, D. R. 2023, ApJ, 951, 20
  • Joshi & Rasio (1997) Joshi, K. J. & Rasio, F. A. 1997, ApJ, 479, 948
  • Kaspi et al. (1996) Kaspi, V. M., Bailes, M., Manchester, R. N., Stappers, B. W., & Bell, J. F. 1996, Nature, 381, 584
  • Klencki et al. (2022) Klencki, J., Istrate, A., Nelemans, G., & Pols, O. 2022, A&A, 662, A56
  • Kondratiev et al. (2016) Kondratiev, V. I., Verbiest, J. P. W., Hessels, J. W. T., et al. 2016, A&A, 585, A128
  • Lorimer et al. (2006) Lorimer, D. R., Faulkner, A. J., Lyne, A. G., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 372, 777
  • Luo et al. (2021) Luo, J., Ransom, S., Demorest, P., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 45
  • Lyne et al. (2015) Lyne, A. G., Stappers, B. W., Keith, M. J., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 581
  • Madsen et al. (2012) Madsen, E. C., Stairs, I. H., Kramer, M., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 2378
  • Manchester et al. (2005) Manchester, R. N., Hobbs, G. B., Teoh, A., & Hobbs, M. 2005, AJ, 129, 1993
  • Matzner & McKee (1999) Matzner, C. D. & McKee, C. F. 1999, ApJ, 510, 379
  • Morello et al. (2019) Morello, V., Barr, E. D., Cooper, S., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 3673
  • Munari et al. (2005) Munari, U., Sordo, R., Castelli, F., & Zwitter, T. 2005, A&A, 442, 1127
  • Nice & Taylor (1995) Nice, D. J. & Taylor, J. H. 1995, ApJ, 441, 429
  • Pecaut & Mamajek (2013) Pecaut, M. J. & Mamajek, E. E. 2013, ApJS, 208, 9
  • Podsiadlowski et al. (2004) Podsiadlowski, P., Langer, N., Poelarends, A. J. T., et al. 2004, ApJ, 612, 1044
  • Pols & Marinus (1994) Pols, O. R. & Marinus, M. 1994, A&A, 288, 475
  • Queiroz et al. (2020) Queiroz, A. B. A., Anders, F., Chiappini, C., et al. 2020, A&A, 638, A76
  • Queiroz et al. (2018) Queiroz, A. B. A., Anders, F., Santiago, B. X., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 2556
  • Sanidas et al. (2019) Sanidas, S., Cooper, S., Bassa, C. G., et al. 2019, A&A, 626, A104
  • Schlafly & Finkbeiner (2011) Schlafly, E. F. & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103
  • Shannon et al. (2014) Shannon, R. M., Johnston, S., & Manchester, R. N. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 3255
  • Shklovskii (1970) Shklovskii, I. S. 1970, Sov. Ast., 13, 562
  • Skrutskie et al. (2006) Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163
  • Smartt (2009) Smartt, S. J. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 63
  • Stevenson et al. (2022) Stevenson, S., Willcox, R., Vigna-Gómez, A., & Broekgaarden, F. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 6105
  • Tan et al. (2020) Tan, C. M., Bassa, C. G., Cooper, S., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 5878
  • Tang et al. (2014) Tang, J., Bressan, A., Rosenfield, P., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 4287
  • Tauris et al. (2017) Tauris, T. M., Kramer, M., Freire, P. C. C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 170
  • van der Wateren et al. (2023) van der Wateren, E., Bassa, C. G., Cooper, S., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A160
  • van Haarlem et al. (2013) van Haarlem, M. P., Wise, M. W., Gunst, A. W., et al. 2013, A&A, 556, A2
  • van Straten & Bailes (2011) van Straten, W. & Bailes, M. 2011, PASA, 28, 1
  • Verbunt et al. (2017) Verbunt, F., Igoshev, A., & Cator, E. 2017, A&A, 608, A57
  • Waelkens (1991) Waelkens, C. 1991, A&A, 246, 453
  • Wang et al. (2004) Wang, N., Johnston, S., & Manchester, R. N. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 599
  • Woosley et al. (2002) Woosley, S. E., Heger, A., & Weaver, T. A. 2002, Reviews of Modern Physics, 74, 1015
  • Xiang et al. (2022) Xiang, M., Rix, H.-W., Ting, Y.-S., et al. 2022, A&A, 662, A66
  • Xiang et al. (2019) Xiang, M., Ting, Y.-S., Rix, H.-W., et al. 2019, ApJS, 245, 34
  • Yao et al. (2017) Yao, J. M., Manchester, R. N., & Wang, N. 2017, ApJ, 835, 29