Issue |
A&A
Volume 638, June 2020
|
|
---|---|---|
Article Number | C6 | |
Number of page(s) | 1 | |
Section | Numerical methods and codes | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201935064e | |
Published online | 24 June 2020 |
Characterizing maser polarization: effects of saturation, anisotropic pumping, and hyperfine structure (Corrigendum)
Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, Onsala Space Observatory, 439 92 Onsala, Sweden
e-mail: boy.lankhaar@chalmers.se
Key words: methods: numerical / masers / polarization / stars: magnetic fields / errata, addenda
The polarization angles that are reported in Lankhaar & Vlemmings (2019) have to be revisited. It has been pointed out to us that a bug in our code lead to the wrong sign of the Stokes parameters
This error has no influence on the total maser brightness, the total polarization fraction, or the circular polarization, but it leads to an erroneous polarization angle. The polarization angle that we report in Lankhaar & Vlemmings (2019), χ, is related to the correct polarization angle, χ′, by
The error has lead to erroneous statements in our discussion in the paragraph beginning with “90o flip of the polarization angle.” We state that when gΩ ≳ 100R and propagation angles θ < θm, the polarization is oriented perpendicular to the projected magnetic field direction and for θ > θm the polarization is oriented parallel to the projected magnetic field. Using Eq. (1), this statement should be the other way around: When gΩ ≳ 100R and propagation angles θ > θm, the polarization is oriented perpendicular to the projected magnetic field direction and for θ < θm the polarization is oriented parallel to the projected magnetic field. The polarization flip we discuss is still present. We also state in this paragraph that in the case R ≫ gΩ, the polarization is oriented parallel to the projected magnetic field direction. This should be corrected according to Eq. (1): For R ≫ gΩ, the polarization is oriented perpendicular to the projected magnetic field direction.
In Figures (1c), (2b), (3), (4b,d), (7b), (8b), and (9), the polarization angles that we plotted have to be transformed according to Eq. (1). The same goes for the appended figures (A1b,e), (A2b,e,h), (A3b,e,h), (A4b,e), (A5b,e,h), (A6b,e,h), (A7b,e), (A8b,e,h), (A9b,e,h), (A10b,e), (A11b,e,h), (A12b,e), (A13b,e), (A14b,e), (A15b,e), (A16b,e), (A17b,e), (A18b,e), (A19b,e,h), (A20b,e,h), (A21b,e,h), and (A22b,e,h).
Acknowledgments
We thank Gabriele Surcis for pointing out the wrongly predicted polarization angles to us.
References
- Lankhaar, B., & Vlemmings, W. 2019, A&A, 628, A14 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
© ESO 2020
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.