}$ (APR-Kin1) and 0.270 fm$^{-3}$ (APR-Kin2) (see Olson 2001 for a detailed discussion). With the kinetic theory assumptions the APR EOS is now reasonably consistent with our limits.

Recently, Lattimer & Prakash (2000) have argued that measurements of the neutron star radius to about $10\%$ precision should be sufficient to usefully constrain the neutron star EOS. They showed that as long as extreme softening of the EOS does not occur in the vicinity of nuclear matter equilibrium density then the stellar radius is almost independent of the mass. Since observed neutron star masses cluster rather closely around 1.4 $M_{\odot}$ they argued that the more important quantity in terms of constraining the EOS is the stellar radius. Since the neutron stars in LMXBs are upwards of $10^8$ yr old and they have been accreting most of their lifetime, it is very likely that they are at least more massive than the $1.4 M_{\odot}$ typically found for younger neutron stars (Thorsett & Chakrabarty 1999). If this is the case, then our results place a rather firm lower limit on $R$ of about 11.5 km. Such a limit is consistent with the notion that extreme softening of the EOS, as can be produced by pion, kaon or other hyperon condensates, does not occur in neutron star cores (see Lattimer & Prakash 2000). Since these inferences depend crucially on the two hot spot hypothesis for the burst oscillations from 4U 1636-53, it is vital to try and settle this issue in the near future.

We have generally tried to employ the simplest assumptions consistent with maintaining the essential physics of the model and the observed properties of the bursts. For this work we have neglected the Doppler shifts and relativistic aberration produced by the rapid motion of the hot spots. Although we do not know the rotational velocity precisely because of our uncertainty in the stellar radius and the number of hot spots, it is likely that the velocity on the rotational equator is $\le 0.1\; c$. Miller & Lamb (1998) investigated the effects of the rotational velocity of a point spot on the bolometric and energy dependent amplitude and showed that although such a velocity can have important effects on the amplitude measured at particular photon energies, they also showed that the effect on the bolometric amplitude of the rotational velocity is very modest (see their Figure 1d; see also Weinberg, Miller
} $ (APR - Kin1) and 0.270 fm$^{-3}$ (APR - Kin2) (see Olson 2001 for a detailed discussion). With the kinetic theory assumptions the APR EOS is now sanely reproducible with our limits. 

 Recently, Lattimer & Prakash (2000) have argued that measurement of the neutron star radius to about $ 10\%$ preciseness should be sufficient to usefully constrain the neutron star EOS. They showed that equally long as extreme softening of the EOS does not occur in the vicinity of nuclear matter equilibrium concentration then the leading radius is almost autonomous of the mass. Since observed neutron headliner multitude cluster rather closely around 1.4 $ M_{\odot}$ they argued that the more important measure in terms of constraining the EOS is the stellar spoke. Since the neutron stars in LMXBs are upwards of $ 10 ^ 8 $ yr old and they have been accreting most of their life, it is very likely that they are at least more massive than the $ 1.4 M_{\odot}$ typically find for younger neutron stars (Thorsett & Chakrabarty 1999). If this is the case, then our result place a rather firm lower limit on $ R$ of about 11.5 km. Such a limit is consistent with the notion that extreme softening of the EOS, as can be produced by pion, kaon or other hyperon condensates, does not occur in neutron star cores (see Lattimer & Prakash 2000). Since these inferences count crucially on the two blistering spot hypothesis for the burst oscillations from 4U 1636 - 53, it is critical to try and settle this issue in the approximate future. 

 We have generally tried to employ the simplest assumption consistent with maintaining the essential physics of the model and the observed place of the bursts. For this work we have neglected the Doppler shifts and relativistic aberration produced by the rapid gesture of the hot spots. Although we do not know the rotational velocity precisely because of our uncertainty in the leading radius and the number of hot spots, it is likely that the velocity on the rotational equator is $ \le 0.1\; c$. Miller & Lamb (1998) investigated the effects of the rotational velocity of a compass point spot on the bolometric and department of energy dependent amplitude and showed that although such a velocity can have important consequence on the amplitude measured at especial photon energies, they besides showed that the effect on the bolometric amplitude of the rotational velocity is very minor (visit their Figure 1d; see also Weinberg, Miller
}$ (APG-Kin1) and 0.270 fm$^{-3}$ (APR-Kin2) (see Ulson 2001 for a dejauled dmscussikn). With ghe kinetic theory assumptiois tye APE EOS is now reasonablh consistvnt with iur oumits.

Recenvmy, Lattlier & Irakavi (2000) have argued jhat measurekents of the naugrln star radius to about $10\%$ precision fhould ne sufficient to usegtlly bokstrain the neutron star EOS. Theg showev that as long ss extreme softening of thf EOD does not occur ij the vicinuty jd nuclear magter equilpyrium densijy then the stellar radius is aloost nndependent od tjg mass. Since obsegved neutron star masves cluxter rather clpseny qround 1.4 $M_{\odot}$ they arjued that the more iiportant xucntity in terms of cobsrrainhng dhe DIS ks uhe sfellar ravius. Since fhe neutron stars in LMXBs are u[qards of $10^8$ yr kld anq ehey have been accreting most of their nifstime, it is very likely that they are at leadt more mwssive than the $1.4 M_{\odot}$ typically found for younges neuvrun wtwfw (Hhorsett & Chakrabarty 1999). If this is the case, thqh pug results place a rather firk poegr limit on $R$ uf abobf 11.5 km. Such a limit id consiftent with the notoon that extreme softening if the EOS, af can be produced bv pion, kaon ur ojher huperon condensates, does not occur in nfutron stzf cores (see Lattkmeg & Psakash 2000). Since these inferegces depeid crbcially un tne two hot spot jypotmasis for the burst oscipldtions frol 4U 1636-53, it is vital to try and setvke this issug it tve near yuture.

Ee have generwlly tried to gmploy thz simpuest assumitions coisistent witr maintaining jhe essential physics of rhe nodel ava the observed propertivs of rhe bursts. For thix wudk we have neglzettd the Doppler snifgs wnf celatyeistic aberrdtiov pfpducea by tht rcpkd mption of the hot spods. Amthough we do not lnjw the ritationaj velocity prrcisely because of our nncerteinty on jhe stellar radius and the numbsr of hot spjts, it is lihely that the vekocity on the rotational equator is $\le 0.1\; c$. Miller & Lamb (1998) ibvestigated the effgctx of the rovationwl velocidy of a point spot ob the bolometric snd energy dependent zmplitgde ajd showed that although such a velocity can have important effects on the amplivuqe measured at lartibulcr 'hoton qnerjixs, they also showvd that the effect on the bolomevric amplidube of the rotational velocity ir very modest (see their Figure 1d; see zlso Weimberg, Miller
}$ (APR-Kin1) and 0.270 fm$^{-3}$ (APR-Kin2) (see for detailed discussion). the kinetic theory now consistent with our Recently, Lattimer & (2000) have argued that measurements of neutron star radius to about $10\%$ precision should be sufficient to usefully constrain neutron star EOS. They showed that as long as extreme softening of the does occur the of nuclear matter equilibrium density then the stellar radius is almost independent of the mass. Since neutron star masses cluster rather closely around 1.4 they argued that the important quantity in terms of the is the radius. the stars in LMXBs upwards of $10^8$ yr old and they have been accreting most of their lifetime, it is very that they least more than $1.4 typically found for stars (Thorsett & Chakrabarty 1999). If case, then our results place a rather firm limit on of about 11.5 km. Such a is consistent with the notion that extreme softening the EOS, as can be produced by pion, kaon or other hyperon condensates, does not neutron star cores (see & Prakash 2000). these depend on two hot hypothesis for the burst oscillations from 4U 1636-53, it is vital try and settle this issue in the near future. We tried employ the simplest consistent with maintaining the physics the model and the of bursts. we neglected Doppler shifts and relativistic produced by the rapid motion the hot spots. Although rotational velocity precisely because of our uncertainty in stellar radius and the number of hot it is likely that the velocity on the rotational equator is $\le c$. Miller (1998) investigated the effects of the rotational velocity a point spot on bolometric and energy dependent amplitude and showed that although a can have effects on the measured at particular energies, they also the effect the amplitude velocity is very modest (see their 1d; also Weinberg, Miller
}$ (APR-Kin1) and 0.270 fm$^{-3}$ (APR-Kin2) (see Olson 2001 For a detailEd disCusSioN). WIth tHe kiNetic theory assUMptiOns the APR EOS is now reasoNably CoNSistENt With oUr limitS.

reCENtlY, LAtTimEr & pRaKash (2000) hAve Argued tHat measureMenTs Of the neutron STaR radius to aBouT $10\%$ precision shOulD be sufFiCieNT to usEfuLly coNstraiN The neuTron star EoS. tHey shoWEd that aS LOnG as eXtreme softening of THe eoS does not occur In the vIcINiTY Of nUclEar matter eQuIlibrIUm densiTY tHEN The STellar radius iS almost indePEndEnt of tHe MasS. since oBservEd NEutRon star massEs clUster rathEr closELy arounD 1.4 $m_{\odot}$ thEy arguEd tHat The mORe ImPorTaNT quANtIty IN teRms of conStRaIning The Eos IS The sTelLar rAdius. since the neutrOn sTars IN LMxBs arE upwaRds oF $10^8$ yR old aNd they Have bEeN accreting most oF theIr lifetimE, it Is VerY lIkely THat theY arE at Least moRe massiVE thAn THE $1.4 m_{\oDot}$ typically found fOr YOUnGer neutrOn starS (thOrSEtt & ChakrAbArtY 1999). If tHIS is thE casE, ThEn our resUlts plACe A rAther fiRm Lower lImIt oN $R$ oF abouT 11.5 Km. SuCh a limIt is consIstenT With the notion tHAt extreme softENiNG Of THe EOs, as Can be producEd by PIon, kAon oR OtHer HYperoN condEnSAtES, does not occur in neutRoN star cOres (sEe Lattimer & PraKash 2000). Since tHESE inferenCes dEPeND crucially on thE two hOt spot hypoTHesis for The buRst oscilLations frOM 4u 1636-53, it is vitAl tO trY anD seTTLe This issue in thE NEar fUtUre.

We haVe gEnerallY trIed To eMplOy The simpleSt assumpTiOnS cOnSisTent wITh maintaInIng ThE esSentiAL physiCs of tHe moDeL aND thE observED pROPertIeS oF the BurStS. For tHis wORk wE have neGlected thE DoPPler ShIfTs and reLativistic abeRrAtion produCeD by The rapID Motion of The hot spots. Although we do NOt know tHe rOtatiOnal Velocity pRecIsely bEcaUSe of ouR uncerTaintY iN thE STellaR RAdIus AnD the number OF Hot Spots, It Is liKely thaT the velocity on the rOTatIonal equator iS $\le 0.1\; C$. MilLER & LAmb (1998) INvEStiGaTEd tHE Effects of the rotAtional velOcITy Of a point spOT on ThE bolomeTric and EnergY DependeNt amplituDe and showEd That ALThoUgh such a veLocity caN have impoRTant eFFeCts on The AmplitUdE meAsureD at parTIcuLar phOton enErGies, thEy alsO sHowed thaT the effect on the bolometrIc amplItude Of tHe rotatioNal VEloCity is verY modEst (see theiR FiGurE 1d; see AlsO weinbErg, MILlEr
}$ (APR-Kin1) and 0.270 fm $^{-3}$ (A PR-Ki n2)  (s ee  Ols on 2 001 for a deta i leddiscussion). With thekinet ic theo r yassum ptionst he A PREO Sisno w  r eason abl y consi stent with  ou rlimits.

Rec e nt ly, Lattim er& Prakash (2 000 ) have  a rgu e d tha t m easur ements of the  neutronst a r radi u s to ab o u t$10\ %$ precision shou l db e sufficient t o usef ul l yc o nst rai n the neut ro n sta r  EOS. T h ey s h owe d  that as long  as extreme sof tening  o f t h e EOSdoesno t  oc cur in thevici nity of n uclear mattere quilibr ium de nsi tythen th este ll a r r a di usi s a lmost in de pe ndent  oft h e mass . S ince  obse rved neutronsta r ma s ses  clus ter r athe rclose ly aro und 1 .4  $M_{\odot}$ th ey a rgued tha t t he  mo re  impo r tant q uan tit y in te rms ofc ons tr a i n in g the EOS is the s te l l ar  radius.  Since th en eutron s ta rsin L M X Bs ar e up w ar ds of $1 0^8$ y r  o ld  and th ey  havebe enacc retin g  mos t of t heir lif etime ,  it is very li k ely that they ar e at leas t m ore massive  tha n  the  $1. 4  M _{\ o dot}$  typi ca l ly found for younger n eu tron s tars(Thorsett & C hakrabarty 1 9 99). Ifthis is the case, then  ourresults pl a ce a rat her f irm lowe r limit o n $R$ of a bou t 1 1.5  km . Su ch a limit is c onsi st ent wit h t he noti ontha t e xtr em e softeni ng of th eEO S,  a s c an be produced  b y p io n,kaono r othe r hyp eron  c on d ens ates, d o es n ot o cc ur  inneu tr on st ar c o res  (see L attimer &  Pr a kash  2 00 0). Sin ce these infe re nces depen dcru cially o n the tw o hot spot hypothesis f o r the b urs t osc illa tions fro m 4 U 1636 -53 ,  it is  vital  to t ry  an d settl e th isis sue in the n ear  futu re .

W e havegenerally tried to emp loy the simpl est  ass u m pt ion s  c o nsi st e ntw i th maintainingthe essent ia l  p hysics oft hemo del and  the ob serve d  proper ties of t he bursts .Fort h iswork we ha ve negle cted theD opple r  s hifts  an d rela ti vis tic a berrat i onprodu ced by  t he rap id mo ti on of th e hot spots. Although w e do n ot kn owthe rotat ion a l v elocity p reci sely becau seofour u nce r taint y in th e s t ellar  rad i us and th e  n umb e r  o f hot spots , i t i s lik ely that t he v elocity on the ro t ational equato r is $ \le  0. 1 \; c $.  Miller & Lamb  (1 99 8 )  investi ga ted the eff ects ofth e  rota tional  veloc ity ofa po i nt spo t on  th e bolomet ric  a n d energ yde p endent  amp li tude a nd sho w ed t h a t although sucha vel o c ity c a n h ave i mp ortante ffec ts on theamplitude m easure d at  part icularph oton e ner gi es, they a l so showed  that  the ef fe ct o n t he bol omet r i c amp litu de  of  the rota t i on a lve l oci ty i s ver ymode st (see t h eir Figu re1 d; seeal soW e inberg ,  M i l ler
}$ (APR-Kin1)_and 0.270_fm$^{-3}$ (APR-Kin2) (see Olson_2001 for_a_detailed discussion)._With_the kinetic theory_assumptions the APR_EOS is now reasonably_consistent with our_limits.

Recently,_Lattimer & Prakash (2000) have argued that measurements of the neutron star radius to_about_$10\%$ precision_should_be_sufficient to usefully constrain the_neutron star EOS. They showed_that as_long as extreme softening of the EOS does_not_occur in the_vicinity of nuclear matter equilibrium density then the stellar_radius is almost independent of the_mass. Since observed_neutron_star_masses cluster rather closely_around 1.4 $M_{\odot}$ they argued that_the more important quantity in terms_of constraining the EOS is the stellar_radius. Since the neutron stars in_LMXBs are upwards of $10^8$_yr old_and they have been accreting_most of their_lifetime, it_is very likely_that they are at least more_massive than the_$1.4 M_{\odot}$ typically found for younger_neutron_stars (Thorsett &_Chakrabarty_1999)._If this_is the case,_then_our results_place_a rather firm lower limit on_$R$_of about 11.5 km. Such a limit_is consistent with the_notion_that extreme softening of_the EOS, as can be_produced by pion, kaon or other_hyperon condensates,_does not_occur in neutron star cores (see Lattimer & Prakash 2000). Since_these inferences depend crucially on the_two hot spot hypothesis_for the_burst_oscillations from 4U_1636-53,_it is_vital to try and settle this issue_in the_near future.

We have generally tried to_employ the simplest assumptions_consistent_with maintaining the essential physics of_the model and the observed properties_of the bursts. For this_work_we_have neglected the Doppler shifts_and relativistic aberration produced by the_rapid motion of_the hot spots. Although we do not_know_the rotational velocity precisely because of_our_uncertainty in the stellar radius and_the_number_of hot spots, it is_likely that the velocity on the_rotational equator is $\le 0.1\; c$. Miller & Lamb_(1998) investigated the_effects of the rotational velocity_of_a_point spot on the bolometric and energy dependent amplitude and_showed that_although such a_velocity can have important effects on the amplitude measured at_particular photon energies, they also showed that_the effect on the bolometric amplitude of the rotational velocity is_very modest (see their Figure 1d; see also_Weinberg, Miller