arxiv: 2603.04112 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-04 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

A new wideband radio polarization observation of the Supernova Remnant G315.4-2.3

X. Chen , X. Sun , J. F. Kaczmarek , B. M. Gaensler , P. Slane , J. L. West

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 16:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA

keywords supernova remnantradio polarizationrotation measuremagnetic fieldturbulent fieldG315.4-2.3RCW 86ATCA observations

0 comments

The pith

New polarization data show similar radio spectra and turbulent magnetic fields in the northeast and southwest of SNR G315.4-2.3 despite different evolutionary paths.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper reports wideband radio observations of the supernova remnant G315.4-2.3 using the Australia Telescope Compact Array. These observations map the polarized emission and rotation measures across the remnant to characterize its magnetic field. The results indicate that the radio spectrum is nearly the same in different regions, with the turbulent component of the magnetic field dominating and the fractional polarization staying roughly constant across wavelengths. This uniformity between areas thought to have distinct evolutionary histories points to a need to adjust current models of how the remnant expands and interacts with its surroundings.

Core claim

The radio spectra are very similar for different areas of the SNR. The foreground RM was estimated to be 55 rad m^{-2}, and the internal RM of most SNR areas is less than about 50 rad m^{-2}. The regular magnetic field along the line of sight was estimated to be about 1.4 μG in the southwest, much smaller than the total magnetic field. For most parts of the southwest and northeast, the fractional polarization is less than 8% and is nearly constant with λ². We estimated the ratio of turbulent to regular magnetic field to be larger than about 3. The radio characteristics, including spectrum and turbulent magnetic field, are very similar in the northeast and southwest, even though the evolution

What carries the argument

Wideband rotation measure synthesis on Stokes Q and U data cubes, using the near-constant fractional polarization versus wavelength squared to estimate the turbulent-to-regular magnetic field ratio.

If this is right

The internal rotation measure across most of the remnant is below 50 rad m^{-2}.
The line-of-sight regular magnetic field in the southwest is about 1.4 microGauss, much weaker than the total field.
The turbulent magnetic field is at least three times stronger than the regular component in most regions.
Future models of SNR evolution must incorporate the observed similarity in radio properties between the northeast and southwest despite their differing dynamical histories.
The turbulent magnetic field scale in parts of the northwest may be smaller than 0.4 parsecs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Uniform radio characteristics may mean that magnetic field amplification processes operate similarly regardless of local shock conditions.
Particle acceleration mechanisms could be comparable across these regions, affecting predictions for high-energy emission.
Additional observations at different frequencies could test whether the polarization constancy persists or breaks down due to unresolved structures.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that the observed near-constant fractional polarization with wavelength squared directly measures a turbulent magnetic field with ratio greater than three, without major contributions from beam depolarization or complex internal Faraday rotation.

What would settle it

Detection of significant variation in fractional polarization with wavelength squared at higher resolution, or mapping of internal rotation measures exceeding 50 rad m^{-2} in the northeast and southwest regions, would challenge the turbulent field dominance interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.04112 by B. M. Gaensler, J. F. Kaczmarek, J. L. West, P. Slane, X. Chen, X. Sun.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: , where the minimum uv distance is about 0.2 kλ, corresponding to a maximum angular scale of approximately 17′ . We obtained 80 images of I, Q, and U using 16-MHz bandwidth each, ranging from 1.319 GHz to 3.023 GHz. We smoothed the resultant images to a common resolution of 62′′ × 33′′. For I, we averaged all the channels to obtain the image cenArticle number, page 2 of 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_f… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Total intensity (I) image and contours of G315.4−2.3 at 2.2 GHz from averaging all the frequency channels. The contour levels are at 2 0.5n × 5σI , n = 0, 1, 2, . . ., and σI = 0.6 mJy beam−1 is the rms noise. The resolution is 62′′ ×33′′ . The red dashed lines mark the four regions, for which the spectral indices were derived and shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Integrated flux density versus frequency for SNR G315.4−2.3. Blue points were measured from the 80 I images and red points were from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: RM (ϕpeak) image of G315.4−2.3. For the pixels marked with a-f, the Faraday spectra were extracted from the cube and shown in Fig. A.1. ization, and hence a lower fractional polarization. Therefore, a much smaller foreground RM is not favored. There is depolarization caused by the internal RM only in areas with large RMs around 100 rad m−2 . The internal RM contributed by the SNR can reach about 50 rad m−2… view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: RM and DM versus distance for pulsars within 5◦ of G315.4−2.3 center. The green dashed line indicates the distance of 2.5 kpc. served values toward the northwest ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Fractional polarization (p) versus wavelength squared (λ 2 ) for selected regions of southwest (upper panel) and northeast (lower panel). The regions are outlined in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The supernova remnant (SNR) G315.4$-$2.3 (MSH 14$-$63 or RCW 86) exhibits strong emission across the electromagnetic spectrum. Radio polarization observations probe magnetic fields and will help to understand the evolution of the SNR. We aim to investigate the radio spectrum and magnetic field properties of the SNR. We observed G315.4$-$2.3 using the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA), covering the frequency range of 1.1-3.1 GHz. We performed rotation measure (RM) synthesis on the $Q$ and $U$ frequency cubes to obtain polarized intensity and RM. The regular component of the line-of-sight magnetic field was estimated from RM. The fractional polarization versus wavelength squared was used to constrain the properties of the turbulent magnetic field. We obtained image cubes of Stokes $I$, $Q$, and $U$, along with images of polarized intensity $P$, RM, and fractional polarization $p$. The radio spectra are very similar for different areas of the SNR. The foreground RM was estimated to be 55 rad m$^{-2}$, and the internal RM of most SNR areas is less than about 50 rad m$^{-2}$. The regular magnetic field along the line of sight was estimated to be about 1.4 $\mu$G in the southwest, much smaller than the total magnetic field. For most parts of the southwest and northeast, $p$ is less than 8% and is nearly constant with $\lambda^2$. We estimated the ratio of turbulent to regular magnetic field to be larger than about 3. The scale of the turbulent magnetic field for some area in the northwest might be smaller than about 0.4 pc. The radio characteristics, including spectrum and turbulent magnetic field, are very similar in the northeast and southwest, even though the evolution is quite different for these two regions based on the current models. These should be taken into account for future modeling of the evolution of the SNR.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

New wideband ATCA polarization data on G315.4-2.3 adds RM and fractional polarization maps but the claim of similar turbulent fields across regions rests on an untested assumption about depolarization.

read the letter

The main point is that this paper reports new 1.1-3.1 GHz ATCA observations of SNR G315.4-2.3 with RM synthesis applied to the Q and U cubes. It finds similar radio spectra and low fractional polarization (under 8 percent, roughly constant with wavelength squared) in the northeast and southwest, leading to an inferred turbulent-to-regular field ratio above 3 in both, plus a foreground RM around 55 rad m^{-2} and mostly small internal RM values. The authors note that these radio properties look alike even though the two regions have different evolutionary histories according to existing models, and they suggest this needs to be considered in future work on the remnant.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports new ATCA wideband observations (1.1-3.1 GHz) of SNR G315.4-2.3, applying RM synthesis to Stokes Q/U cubes to produce maps of polarized intensity, RM, and fractional polarization. Key results include similar radio spectra across regions, foreground RM ~55 rad m^{-2}, internal RM <50 rad m^{-2} for most areas, a line-of-sight regular field ~1.4 μG in the southwest, and fractional polarization p<8% that is nearly constant with λ². This leads to B_turb/B_reg >3 and possible turbulent scales <0.4 pc in parts of the northwest. The central claim is that radio properties including turbulent magnetic fields are similar in the northeast and southwest despite differing evolutionary histories, and that this must be incorporated in future SNR models.

Significance. If the depolarization interpretation holds, the work supplies useful observational constraints on magnetic field turbulence in this well-studied SNR, showing that turbulent components can be comparable across morphologically distinct regions. The wideband RM synthesis approach usefully separates foreground and internal contributions and yields falsifiable predictions for the turbulent scale and field ratio that can be tested with higher-resolution data.

major comments (1)

[fractional polarization analysis] § on fractional polarization analysis: the claim that near-constant p with λ² directly implies B_turb/B_reg >3 and small turbulent scales rests on the unquantified assumption that beam depolarization, complex internal Faraday structure, and differential foreground variations are negligible. The ATCA synthesized beam at 1.1-3.1 GHz is comparable to the scale of SNR features; if these effects differ between the NE and SW due to density or path-length variations, the inferred similarity in turbulent fields would not be intrinsic.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract and methods] Abstract and methods: calibration procedures, error propagation for RM and p, and data exclusion/flagging criteria are described only at a high level; adding quantitative details would strengthen reproducibility.
[magnetic field estimation] The path length and n_e assumptions used to convert internal RM to B_reg ~1.4 μG should be stated explicitly with uncertainty ranges, as they directly affect the derived B_turb/B_reg ratio.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comment on the fractional polarization analysis and for the overall positive assessment. We have revised the manuscript to explicitly address the assumptions underlying our interpretation of the turbulent magnetic field properties.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [fractional polarization analysis] § on fractional polarization analysis: the claim that near-constant p with λ² directly implies B_turb/B_reg >3 and small turbulent scales rests on the unquantified assumption that beam depolarization, complex internal Faraday structure, and differential foreground variations are negligible. The ATCA synthesized beam at 1.1-3.1 GHz is comparable to the scale of SNR features; if these effects differ between the NE and SW due to density or path-length variations, the inferred similarity in turbulent fields would not be intrinsic.

Authors: We acknowledge that the synthesized beam (∼30″ at 1.1 GHz) is comparable to some filamentary structures within the SNR and that we did not perform explicit numerical modeling of beam depolarization or complex internal Faraday rotation. However, the observed near-constant p < 8% across λ² in both the NE and SW, with no strong regional differences in the p(λ²) slope despite their distinct morphologies and path lengths, is difficult to reconcile with dominant beam or differential foreground effects, which would typically introduce stronger wavelength dependence or spatial variations. Our RM synthesis already isolates the foreground RM (∼55 rad m^{-2}), minimizing differential foreground contributions. We have added a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section that (i) states the beam size relative to SNR features, (ii) notes the unquantified contribution of beam depolarization as a caveat, and (iii) explains why the uniformity of the observed p(λ²) behavior still favors internal small-scale turbulence as the dominant mechanism. The B_turb/B_reg > 3 estimate is now presented as an inference under the standard turbulent Faraday dispersion model, with the similarity between regions described as “consistent with” rather than “directly implies.” Higher-resolution data would be required to fully separate the effects, as noted in the revised text. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results follow directly from observations and standard analysis

full rationale

The paper reports ATCA observations, performs RM synthesis on Q/U cubes, measures fractional polarization p versus λ², and applies the established synchrotron relation p_obs/p_max ≈ B_reg²/B_tot² to infer B_turb/B_reg >3 from the observed p<8% constancy. Spectra and RM values are extracted directly from the data cubes. No equations reduce a claimed prediction to a fitted parameter from the same dataset, no self-citation chain bears the central claim, and no ansatz is smuggled via prior work by the same authors. The similarity between NE and SW regions is a direct comparison of measured quantities. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard radio astronomy techniques with one estimated foreground parameter and the assumption that RM synthesis recovers the dominant Faraday effects accurately.

free parameters (1)

foreground RM = 55 rad m^{-2}
Estimated as a constant 55 rad m^{-2} from the data to isolate internal contributions.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Rotation measure synthesis on Q and U frequency cubes accurately recovers the Faraday rotation without significant leakage or other instrumental effects.
Invoked implicitly when applying RM synthesis to derive polarized intensity and RM images.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5706 in / 1385 out tokens · 58491 ms · 2026-05-15T16:32:19.476198+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

fractional polarization versus wavelength squared was used to constrain the properties of the turbulent magnetic field... p is less than 8% and is nearly constant with λ²... ratio of turbulent to regular magnetic field to be larger than about 3
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AbsoluteFloorClosure.lean absolute_floor_iff_bare_distinguishability unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

RM synthesis... Faraday depth ϕ... internal RM of most SNR areas is less than about 50 rad m^{-2}

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages

[1]

2016, ApJ, 819, 98

Ajello, M., Baldini, L., Barbiellini, G., et al. 2016, ApJ, 819, 98

work page 2016
[2]

2023, PASJ, 75, 1344

Bamba, A., Sano, H., Yamazaki, R., & Vink, J. 2023, PASJ, 75, 1344

work page 2023
[3]

Bell, A. R. 2004, MNRAS, 353, 550

work page 2004
[4]

J., Rho, J., Reynolds, S

Borkowski, K. J., Rho, J., Reynolds, S. P., & Dyer, K. K. 2001, ApJ, 550, 334

work page 2001
[5]

Brentjens, M. A. & de Bruyn, A. G. 2005, A&A, 441, 1217

work page 2005
[6]

Briggs, D. S. 1995, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, V ol. 187, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 112.02

work page 1995
[7]

2014, MNRAS, 441, 3040

Broersen, S., Chiotellis, A., Vink, J., & Bamba, A. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 3040

work page 2014
[8]

Burn, B. J. 1966, MNRAS, 133, 67

work page 1966
[9]

2018, A&A, 620, A3

Butler, A., Huynh, M., Delhaize, J., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A3

work page 2018
[10]

A., Slane, P

Castro, D., Lopez, L. A., Slane, P. O., et al. 2013, ApJ, 779, 49

work page 2013
[11]

L., Clark, D

Caswell, J. L., Clark, D. H., & Crawford, D. F. 1975, Australian Journal of Physics Astrophysical Supplement, 37, 39

work page 1975
[12]

Q., Huang, Y ., Yuan, H

Chen, B. Q., Huang, Y ., Yuan, H. B., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 4277

work page 2019
[13]

Clark, D. H. & Stephenson, F. R. 1975, The Observatory, 95, 190

work page 1975
[14]

J., Griffith, M

Condon, J. J., Griffith, M. R., & Wright, A. E. 1993, AJ, 106, 1095

work page 1993
[15]

D., Kothes, R., Camilo, F., et al

Cotton, W. D., Kothes, R., Camilo, F., et al. 2024, ApJS, 270, 21

work page 2024
[16]

Dickel, J. R. & Milne, D. K. 1976, Australian Journal of Physics, 29, 435

work page 1976
[17]

R., Strom, R

Dickel, J. R., Strom, R. G., & Milne, D. K. 2001, ApJ, 546, 447

work page 2001
[18]

R., Stewart, R

Duncan, A. R., Stewart, R. T., Haynes, R. F., & Jones, K. L. 1995, MNRAS, 277, 36

work page 1995
[19]

Finkbeiner, D. P. 2003, ApJS, 146, 407

work page 2003
[20]

Fulbright, M. S. & Reynolds, S. P. 1990, ApJ, 357, 591

work page 1990
[21]

V ., Langer, N., Fossati, L., et al

Gvaramadze, V . V ., Langer, N., Fossati, L., et al. 2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0116 H. E. S. S. Collaboration, Abramowski, A., Aharonian, F., et al. 2018, A&A, 612, A4

work page 2017
[22]

M., Reynolds, R

Haffner, L. M., Reynolds, R. J., & Tufte, S. L. 1998, ApJ, 501, L83

work page 1998
[23]

L., Manchester, R

Han, J. L., Manchester, R. N., van Straten, W., & Demorest, P. 2018, ApJS, 234, 11

work page 2018
[24]

A., Vink, J., Bassa, C

Helder, E. A., Vink, J., Bassa, C. G., et al. 2009, Science, 325, 719

work page 2009
[25]

Hill, E. R. 1967, Australian Journal of Physics, 20, 297

work page 1967
[26]

2012, ApJ, 744, 71

Inoue, T., Yamazaki, R., Inutsuka, S.-i., & Fukui, Y . 2012, ApJ, 744, 71

work page 2012
[27]

Jokipii, J. R. 1982, ApJ, 255, 716

work page 1982
[28]

L., Frail, D

Kaplan, D. L., Frail, D. A., Gaensler, B. M., et al. 2004, ApJS, 153, 269

work page 2004
[29]

Lucek, S. G. & Bell, A. R. 2000, MNRAS, 314, 65

work page 2000
[30]

N., Hobbs, G

Manchester, R. N., Hobbs, G. B., Teoh, A., & Hobbs, M. 2005, AJ, 129, 1993

work page 2005
[31]

M., Green, A

McClure-Griffiths, N. M., Green, A. J., Dickey, J. M., et al. 2001, ApJ, 551, 394

work page 2001
[32]

P., Tiengo, A., & de Luca, A

Mignani, R. P., Tiengo, A., & de Luca, A. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 2309

work page 2012
[33]

Y ., Slee, O

Mills, B. Y ., Slee, O. B., & Hill, E. R. 1961, Australian Journal of Physics, 14, 497

work page 1961
[34]

Milne, D. K. & Dickel, J. R. 1975, Australian Journal of Physics, 28, 209

work page 1975
[35]

2017, in IAU Symposium, V ol

Morlino, G. 2017, in IAU Symposium, V ol. 331, Supernova 1987A:30 years later - Cosmic Rays and Nuclei from Supernovae and their Aftermaths, ed. A. Mar- cowith, M. Renaud, G. Dubner, A. Ray, & A. Bykov, 230–241

work page 2017
[36]

C., Landecker, T

Ordog, A., Brown, J.-A. C., Landecker, T. L., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 312

work page 2025
[37]

R., Van Eck, C

Purcell, C. R., Van Eck, C. L., West, J., Sun, X. H., & Gaensler, B. M. 2020, RM- Tools: Rotation measure (RM) synthesis and Stokes QU-fitting, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2005.003

work page 2020
[38]

Reynolds, R. J. 1985, ApJ, 294, 256

work page 1985
[39]

P., Williams, B

Reynolds, S. P., Williams, B. J., Borkowski, K. J., & Long, K. S. 2021, ApJ, 917, 55

work page 2021
[40]

K., Borkowski, K

Rho, J., Dyer, K. K., Borkowski, K. J., & Reynolds, S. P. 2002, ApJ, 581, 1116

work page 2002
[41]

W., Campbell, C

Rodgers, A. W., Campbell, C. T., & Whiteoak, J. B. 1960, MNRAS, 121, 103

work page 1960
[42]

1996, A&A, 315, 243

Rosado, M., Ambrocio-Cruz, P., Le Coarer, E., & Marcelin, M. 1996, A&A, 315, 243

work page 1996
[43]

M., Mitsuishi, I., et al

Sano, H., Reynoso, E. M., Mitsuishi, I., et al. 2017, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 15, 1

work page 2017
[44]

M., et al

Sano, H., Rowell, G., Reynoso, E. M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 876, 37

work page 2019
[45]

J., Teuben, P

Sault, R. J., Teuben, P. J., & Wright, M. C. H. 1995, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 77, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems IV , ed. R. A. Shaw, H. E. Payne, & J. J. E. Hayes, 433

work page 1995
[46]

Smith, R. C. 1997, AJ, 114, 2664

work page 1997
[47]

D., Bykov, A

Sokoloff, D. D., Bykov, A. A., Shukurov, A., et al. 1998, MNRAS, 299, 189

work page 1998
[48]

Sollerman, J., Ghavamian, P., Lundqvist, P., & Smith, R. C. 2003, A&A, 407, 249

work page 2003
[49]

H., Rudnick, L., Akahori, T., et al

Sun, X. H., Rudnick, L., Akahori, T., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, 60

work page 2015
[50]

2022, ApJ, 938, 59

Suzuki, H., Katsuda, S., Tanaka, T., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 59

work page 2022
[51]

2017, ApJ, 835, 34

Tsubone, Y ., Sawada, M., Bamba, A., Katsuda, S., & Vink, J. 2017, ApJ, 835, 34

work page 2017
[52]

2007, PASJ, 59, 171

Ueno, M., Sato, R., Kataoka, J., et al. 2007, PASJ, 59, 171

work page 2007
[53]

2006, ApJ, 648, L33

Vink, J., Bleeker, J., van der Heyden, K., et al. 2006, ApJ, 648, L33

work page 2006
[54]

L., Jaffe, T., Ferrand, G., Safi-Harb, S., & Gaensler, B

West, J. L., Jaffe, T., Ferrand, G., Safi-Harb, S., & Gaensler, B. M. 2017, ApJ, 849, L22

work page 2017
[55]

Whiteoak, J. B. Z. & Green, A. J. 1996, A&AS, 118, 329

work page 1996
[56]

J., Blair, W

Williams, B. J., Blair, W. P., Blondin, J. M., et al. 2011, ApJ, 741, 96

work page 2011
[57]

E., Ferris, R

Wilson, W. E., Ferris, R. H., Axtens, P., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 416, 832

work page 2011
[58]

2016, ApJ, 820, L3

Yamaguchi, H., Katsuda, S., Castro, D., et al. 2016, ApJ, 820, L3

work page 2016
[59]

2008, PASJ, 60, S123

Yamaguchi, H., Koyama, K., Nakajima, H., et al. 2008, PASJ, 60, S123

work page 2008
[60]

2014, ApJ, 785, L22 Article number, page 8 of 9 X

Yuan, Q., Huang, X., Liu, S., & Zhang, B. 2014, ApJ, 785, L22 Article number, page 8 of 9 X. Chen et al.: wideband polarization observation of G315.4−2.3 Appendix A: Faraday spectra 500 0 500 (rad m 2) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0F( ) (mJy beam 1) RM = 55 rad m 2 a 500 0 500 (rad m 2) 0 1 2F( ) (mJy beam 1) RM = 50 rad m 2 b 500 0 500 (rad m 2) 0.0 0.5 1.0F( ) (mJ...

work page 2014