analysis of high magnification events on q2237+0305 a juan gonzález-cadelo, rodrigo gil-merino...

Analysis of high magnification events on Q2237+0305 A

Juan González-Cadelo, Rodrigo Gil-Merino & Luis J. Goicoechea(University of Cantabria)

1’’

zLENS = 0.04

zSOURCE = 1.7

Observational data

OGLE collaboration GLITP collaboration

Caustic crossing microlensing

event?

New information about parameters

and models

RESULTS

International proyects

OBSERVATIONALDATA

ANALYSIS

SIMULATIONS

Models

Cosmology

GL Theory

Observational data

Mixture of data I(OGLE+GLITP)

Re-reduction of OGLE

1

1

N

j j ij

i N

j ij

t t t

tt t

1

1

N

j j ij

i N

j ij

F t t

Ft t

1

1

N

j j ij

i N

j ij

t t

t t

2

21

21

1

22

1

N

j j i Nj

i j i j iN j

j ij

N

i j i j ij

t t

F F t t

t t

F F t t

Mixture of data II (OGLE+GLITP)

Fit by minimization of 2

OGLE GLITPF t a b F t

N

i GLITPOGLE

N

i GLITPOGLE

GLITPN

i GLITPOGLE

OGLE

optimo

b

b

Fb

b

F

ba

1222

1222

1222

1

0

2

a

0.081763 0.845375

0.845375OGLE OGLE

OGLE OGLE

F F

Microlensing modelization

Parameters & models I

Cosmological model

0

0.1

0.660

m

sMpc

KmH

Friedman-Lemaitre’s Universe

22

0 11

111112,

ji

jiji

jiAzz

zzzz

H

czzd

0

0.039

1.695

o

d

s

z

z

z

Mpc zdD dAd 165,0

MpczdD sAs 1317,0 MpczzdD sdAds 1253,

Parameters & models II

Lens plane model

1

2

3

0.60

0.10

0.05

Mm

M

Mm

M

Mm

M

Mass of microlenses

,1

,2

,3

100

300

600

d

d

d

Kmv

sKm

vs

Kmv

s

Transversal velocity of microlenses

,1

,2

,3

765.4

2296.3

4592.6

s

s

s

Kmv

sKm

vs

Kmv

s

1 1 1

1 1 1s ds

s d os d d d d

D Dv v v v

z z D z D

Parameters & Models III

Source plane model

Geometry of the source circular

14

15

15

6 10

2 10

6 10

p

m

g

R cm

R cm

R cm

Intensity of source

Uniform disk

Standar accretion disk

Gaussian disk

Uniform disk

0 0

0

;

0 ; un

I r RI r

r R

int 0 , 100% intensityunR R

Gaussian disk

2

20 00

0

exp ;

0 ; gs

rI r RRI r

r R

int 03 , 95% intensitygsR R

Standar accretion disk

-11

3 1 44 2

0 00 0

0

exp 1 1 ;

0 ;

st

r rI u r R

I r R R

r R

int 010 , 95% intensitystR R

Observations Vs Simulations

Test 2

N

i iobs

iobsisim

t

tftf

1

2

2

Test

2 12

2

Results I: Best parameters

Parametrization Trayectories with 1

% of trayectories

with 1

300010sts02 3 6 % 1.145 0.002 1.141

300060sts01 1 2 % 1.147 0.000 1.147

300060sts02 3 6 % 1.110 0.010 1.083

600005sts03 14 26 % 1.109 0.008 1.063

600010sts02 27 50 % 1.117 0.003 1.091

600060stm01 5 9 % 1.143 0.006 1.127

600060sts02 1 2 % 1.107 0.000 1.107

2̂ 2̂ 2

min̂

Results II: Best source model

SOURCE MODEL(intensity+size)

Trayectories with

1 % of trayectories

with 1

Standar accretion disksmall

49 91 %

Standar accretion diskmedium

5 9 %

Results III: Best microlenses model

MICROLENS MODEL(velocity+mass) Trayectories with 1

% of

trayectories with 1

3 6 %

4 7 %

14 26 %

27 50 %

6 11 %

10.0

300

m

vd

60.0

300

m

vd

05.0

600

m

vd

10.0

600

m

vd

60.0

600

m

vd

Results IV: Caustic crossing?

Parametrization Trayectories with 1

Number of caustic

crossing events

% of caustic crossing events for that

parametrization

300010sts02 3 3 100 %

300060sts01 1 1 100 %

300060sts02 3 3 100 %

600005sts03 14 0 0 %

600010sts02 27 27 100 %

600060stm01 5 5 100 %

600060sts02 1 1 100 %

non caustic crossing trayectories 1425.93%

trayectories 54

Future steps

New observational data

New magnification patterns

New parametrizations