arxiv:astro-ph/ v2 13 Nov 1997

Transcription

1 A&A manuscript no will be inserted by hand later) Your thesaurus codes are: 47,4,8,8,86) ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event M Dominik arxiv:astro-ph/9735v 3 Nov 997 Institut für Physik, Universität Dortmund, D-44 Dortmund, ermany Received ; accepted Abstract For a given spatial distribution of the lenses and distribution of the transverse velocity of the lens relative to the line-of-sight, a probability distribution for the lens mass for a single observed event is derived In addition, similar probability distributions are derived for the instein radius and the separation of the lens objects and their rotation period for a binary lens These probability distributions are distinct from the distributions for the lens population, as investigated eg by the mass moment method of De Rújula et al 99) It is shown that the expectation value for the mass of a certain event as derived in this paper coincides with the estimated average mass of the underlying mass spectrum as found with the mass moment method when only one event is considered The special cases of a Maxwellian velocity distribution and of a constant velocity are discussed in detail For a rudimentary model of the alactic halo, the probability distributions are shown and the relations between the expectation values of the physical quantities and the event timescale are given For this model it is shown that within a 954 %-interval around the expectation value the mass varies by a factor of 8 For the observed events towards the LMC including the binary lens models for MACHO LMC# Dominik & Hirshfeld 996) and MACHO LMC#9 Bennett et al 996) the results are shown explicitly I discuss what information can be extracted and how additional information from the ongoing microlensing observations influences the results Key words: gravitational lensing dark matter Stars: lowmass, brown dwarfs alaxy: halo planetary systems Introduction Some attempts have been made to obtain information about the mass of the lens from observed microlensing events Unfortunately, the mass cannot be inferred directly Instead, the only relevant information directly available from a fit of a light curve to the observed data points is the timescale t, and the mass depends on this timescale M t ) as well as on the position of the lens and the transverse velocity of the lens relative to the line-of-sight Since the latter parameters are both not observable except for extraordinary cases where some additional information can be obtained), one can only obtain statistical information on the lens mass assuming distributions of the lens position and the transverse lens velocity riest 99), cited as RI in the following, argued that the most likely mass distribution is that which yields the best fit to the distribution of timescales of the observed events De Rújula et al 99), cited as RJM in the following, Jetzer & Massó 994) and Jetzer 994) have shown that one can extract statistical moments of the lens mass distribution from the moments of the distribution of the timescales While these attempts use the distribution of timescales to obtain information about the mass spectrum of the lenses as realized in nature, I will discuss another topic in this paper For a given observed event, I investigate the probability distributions of the lens mass and other physical quantities like the instein radius and the separation and rotation period of the lens objects for a binary lens These probability distributions give the answer to the question, how probable certain ranges of the considered physical quantity are for the given lens system having produced the event Note that this question is not answered by applying the methods of RI or RJM It is however of special importance for planetary systems Also note that additional parameters will enter the calculation of the event rate if one considers events which deviate from the point-source-point-masslens model A binary lens will give serious problems for determining the mass spectrum from the timescale distribution since one measures the agglomeration of two objects each from the mass spectrum for one event rather than a single object from the mass spectrum In contrast to this, the probability distributions presented in this paper also give meaningful results for anomalous events This paper is organized as follows In Sect, it is shown which information directly results from a fit of a galactic microlensing light curve In Sect 3, the relation between the event rate and the mass spectrum, the spatial distribution of the lenses, and the distribution of the relative velocity is given Section 4 shows how the probability distribution for the lens mass can be derived Section 5 gives results for the moments of further physical quantities and the probability distribution of these quantities around their expectation value In Sect 6, it is shown that the expectation value for the mass coincides with the value obtained by applying the mass moment method of

2 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event RJM to one event In Sect 7, two special forms of the velocity distribution are discussed in more detail: a Maxwellian distribution and a fixed velocity In Sect 8, the expectation values and the probability distributions for the lens mass, the instein radius, and the separation and the rotation period for binary lenses are shown for a simple model of the galactic halo In addition, intervals corresponding to probabilites of 683 % and 954 % are given for these quantities In Sect 9, the implications for the observed events towards the LMC Alcock et al 993; Auborg et al 993; Dominik & Hirshfeld 996; Alcock et al 996, 997; Pratt et al 996; Bennett et al 996) are discussed explicitly I discuss what information can be extracted and how the observation of more events influences the results Information from a fit of a galactic microlensing event From a fit of the light curve to the observed data of a galactic microlensing event, the only dimensional parameters are the point of time t max when the event occurs and the characteristic timescale t related to its duration While the point of time t max does not yield any relevant information, all physical quantities related to the observed event which involve a dimension depend on t This is true not only for the standard model of alactic microlensing a point-mass lens and a point source, but also for anomalous events binary sources and lenses, parallax effects, blending, finite size of the source and the lens) The geometry of the microlensing events depends on a length scale which can be chosen as the instein radius r of the lens of mass M at a distance D d from the observer, where the source is at a distance D s from the observer and at a distance D ds from the lens The instein radius r is then given by r 4M c D d D ds D s ) With µ M/M and x D d /D s, r can be written as r r µx x) ) where 4M r D s c 3) The characteristic time scale t is given by t r v, 4) where v is the transverse velocity of the lens relative to the line-of-sight source-observer Note that motions of the source and the observer are also absorbed into this quantity For a given t, the mass µ therefore follows as µ t v x x) t v c ζ x x), 5) r r Since these anomalous events correspond to a more general model and the point-source-point-mass-lens model is a special case or an approximation, the anomalous events are quite the normal thing! where v c is a characteristic velocity and ζ v /v c One sees that µ depends on the timescale t as well as on x and ζ By assuming distributions of x and ζ where the distribution of ζ may depend on x), it should in principle be possible to derive a probability distribution for µ For doing this, I have a look at the event rate in the next section 3 vent rate and mass spectrum Consider a coordinate system where the lens is at rest and let the source move on a straight line projected onto the lens plane with velocity v Following Mao & Paczyński 99), the characteristic width w is then defined as the range of impact parameters for which a microlensing event occurs Clearly, the width w is proportional to the instein radius r, so that w w r x) The event rate Γ is given by the product of the area number density of the lenses, the perpendicular velocity and the characteristic width of the considered type of event: Γ n v w 6) For variable lens position, the area number density of the lenses has to be replaced by an integral of the volume number density n over the line-of-sight direction x For a general lens population, the number density depends also on the mass µ of the considered objects, so that one gets D s dnx, µ) dµ dµ dx 7) as area number density of the lenses If the mass spectrum does not depend on x, one can separate the x and µ-dependence by dnx, µ) dµ Hx) dn µ) dµ, 8) where the function Hx) follows the volume mass density ρx) as ρx) ρ Hx), so that ρx) ρ at the reference distance where Hx) The total volume number density of lenses at the reference distance is dn µ) n dµ, 9) dµ so that the probability for a mass µ in the interval [µ, µ+dµ] is ωµ)dµ n dn µ) dµ dµ ) which gives the mass spectrum With Hv )dv being the probability of finding the perpendicular velocity in the interval [v, v + dv ], one obtains for the event rate Γ D s w r x)hx)v Hv ) dn µ) dµ dµ dv dx ) or Γ D sw <M> r x)ρx)v Hv )ωµ)dµ dv dx )

3 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event 3 with the average mass <M> ρ n Let v c be a characteristic velocity and ζ v vc The probability density for ζ is then given by Kζ) Hζv c )v c 3) Note that K may depend on x For any x, K is normalized as Kζ; x)dζ 4) With these definitions and r r µx x), one gets Γ D s w r v c µx x) Hx)ζ Kζ) dn µ) dµ 4 The probability density for the mass dµ dζ dx 5) q 5) gives the total event rate which includes events with all possible timescales from the mass spectrum and the distribution of the lens position and velocity By adding an integration over t and a δ-function one gets µx dn µ) Γ D s w r v c x) Hx)ζ Kζ) dµ δ t r ) µx x) dt dµ dζ dx 6) v c ζ The event rate contribution for timescales t in the interval [t, t + dt ] is given by dγ dt dt Let us now compare different mass spectra which have only the mass µ, ie dn dµ µ) δµ µ ) 7) If one assigns the same probability to any mass a-priori, one has ωµ) δµ µ ), ie dn dµ µ) ρ µm δµ µ ) 8) More generally, one can use any explicit form of the mass spectrum, eg a power law for dn dµ by using a weighting factor α µ p, ie dn dµ µ) α µp δµ µ ), 9) so that the case above corresponds to p For the power-law mass spectra, one obtains dγ D s w r v c α µ p+/ x x)hx) dt ζ Kζ)δ t r ) µ x x) dζ dx ) v c ζ For a given µ, the probability for a timescale in the interval [t, t + dt ] is given by dγ Γ dt dt as a function of t This fact has been used by RI and RJM to compare the distribution of the timescales t for different masses µ By exchanging the roles of µ and t one obtains the contribution of masses in the interval [µ, µ + dµ ] for events with t to the event rate as µ is called µ in the following) dγ dµ D sw r v c α µ p+/ x x) Hx) ζ µ Kζ)δ t v c ζ r x x) ) dxdζ, ) so that dγ Γ dµ gives the probability density for the mass µ The normalization factor is obtained by integration over µ, which gives Γ D s w t p+ vc p+ r p α [x x)] p Hx)ζ p+ Kζ)dxdζ D s w t p+ vc p+ r p α T p, p + ), ) where Tr, s) [x x)] r Hx)ζ s Kζ)dζ dx 3) For the case that the velocity distribution does not depend on x, the function Tr, s) separates as Tr, s) Ξr)Ws), 4) where Ξr) Ws) [x x)] r Hx)dx, 5) ζ s Kζ)dζ 6) The probability density for µ follows as ) p+ dγ Γ dµ r µ p+/ T p, p + ) t v c x ) x)hx)ζ µ Kζ)δ t v c ζ r dxdζ 7) x x) Note that the width w has cancelled out This is due to the fact that the fit parameters are kept fixed and only the unknown quantities µ, x, and v are varied Implicitly, the same probability is assigned to each parameter for the different values of µ, x, and ζ 5 Moments of the probability distributions for physical quantities The expectation value <µ> follows as dγ <µ> Γ dµ µ dµ µt, x, ζ)[x x)] p Hx) T p, p + ) ζ p+ Kζ)dζ dx, 8)

4 4 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event and for a general quantity t, x, ζ) one obtains dγ <> Γ dµ dµ t, x, ζ)[x x)] p Hx) T p, p + ) ζ p+ Kζ)dζ dx 9) This means that one averages over x with the density function [x x)] p Hx) and over ζ with the density function ζ p+ Kζ) For the quantity being of the form t, x, ζ) t )[x x)] k ζ l 3) one obtains <> Tk p, l + p + ) T p, p + ) For the mass, one has µt, x, ζ) t v c r so that k and l, and <µ> t v c r For p, this gives <µ> t v c r Fp, k, l) 3) ζ x x), 3) T p, p + 4) T p, p + ) T, ) Ξ) 33), 34) which is the same value as for the average mass in the mass spectrum if one uses only the information from a single event), which can obtained by the method of mass moments described in Sect 6 Note however that the probability density for µ for a specific event and the mass spectrum are different quantities and that the higher moments are different If the velocity distribution does not depend on x, one gets for the expectation value of the mass <µ> t v c r Ξ)W) Ξ) 35) Ξ) is related to the surface mass density Σ by D s Σ ρd d )dd d D s ρ and Ξ) is related to the optical depth τ by τ D s 4πD c 4 c D s ρ π r D s ρ M ρd d )dd d Hx)x x)dx Hx)dx D s ρ Ξ), 36) π Ξ) 37) Using these results, and noting that <v > v c W), 38) the expectation value of the mass can be written in the convenient form <µ> t v c W) π τ Σ M 39) using the optical depth τ, the area number density of the lenses Σ, the average square of the velocity <v >, and the timescale t Note that <µ> depends only on <v >, not on the form of the velocity distribution To investigate the distribution of around <>, I define κ <> [x x)]k ζ l 4) Fp, k, l) Using µt, x, ζ) µ r t v c one obtains for κ the probability density pκ ) dγ Γ dκ T p, p + ) ζ x x), 4) r x x) Hx)ζ Kζ) ) p+ [µκ )] p+/ t v c δ κ κ x, ζ)) dxdζ [ µκ )] p+/ x x) T p, p + ) Hx)ζ Kζ) δ κ [x x)]k ζ l ) dxdζ Fp, k, l) Fp, k, l) [ µκ )] p+/ T p, p + ) l [x x)] / k Hx)ζ l+ Kζ) ) κ Fp, k, l) δ [x x)] k ζl dxdζ l ) p+3 [Fp, k, l)] l l T p, p + ) κ p l+3 l [x x)] p 3+p) k l Hx) κ ) ) /l K Fp, k, l) [x x)] k dx 4) Note that this distribution depends only on the form of the distributions of x and ζ and not on any physical parameters like v c or ρ The distribution of λ lg κ is given by ψλ ) ln [Fk, ] p+3 p, l) λ l l T p, p + )

5 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event 5 [x x)] p 3+p) k l Hx) spatial distribution of the mass density and the velocity distribution is given RJM) K λ ) /l ) For the moments of the mass spectrum one gets Fp, k, l) dx 43) [x x)] k µ k Γ vc k D s w n Tk, k) tk 5) All moments of the probability distribution of can be reduced to the function Tk, j), which separates as the product of Ξk) and Wj) if the velocity distribution does not depend on x For the n-th moment one has < n > dγ Γ dµ n dµ n Fp, nk, nl) 44) The relative deviation of is given by σ κ σ <> < > <> <> With < > <> 45) Fp, k, l) F p, k, l) [Fp, k, l)] Tk p, l + p + ) T p, p + ), 46) [Tk p, l + p + )] one obtains σ κ σ <> F p, k, l) 47) 6 The method of mass moments For the moments of the t -distribution for several events, one obtains following RJM t m dγ t m Γ dt dt D sw r v c µx dn µ) x) Hx)ζ Kζ) Γ dµ t m δ t r ) µx x) dt dµ dζ dx v c ζ D sw r m+ vc m µ m+ dn µ) Γ dµ dµ [x x)] m+ Hx)ζ m Kζ)dζ dx D sw r m+ vc m ) m + n µ m+ T, m, 48) Γ where µ k n µ k dn µ) dµ dµ µ k ωµ)dµ 49) µ k yields for the case k, µ, and for k the average mass in units of M ) as µ µ ωµ)dµ dn µ) n dµ µ dµ ρ n M 5) One sees that the moments of the mass spectrum can be extracted from the moments of the time-scale distribution if the r k This gives for k µ Γ D s w n vc which yields Γ n D s w vc so that µ k vk c r k T, ) t, 5) T, ) t, 53) T, ) t k 54) Tk, k) t For k, one obtains µ t t vc r T, ) T, ) t t vc r T, ) Ξ), 55) since T, ) Ξ), which is the same value as obtained for the expectation value of the lens mass for p as derived above, if one considers a single observed event 7 Special forms of the velocity distribution Kζ) 7 Maxwell distribution A distribution Hv ) v v c implies { } exp v vc 56) Kζ) ζ exp { ζ }, 57) and for pκ ) and ψλ ) one has from qs 4) and 43) p+4 [Fp, k, l)] l pκ ) l Ξ p)wp + ) κ p+4 l [x x)] p 4+p) k l Hx) { ) } /l κ Fp, k, l) exp [x x)] k dx, 58) ψλ ) ln [Fk, ] p, l) p+4 λ l l Ξ p)wp + ) [x x)] p 4+p) k l Hx) { ) /l } exp λ Fp, k, l) [x x)] k dx 59)

6 6 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event For p and separation of the spatial distribution and [x x)] p+ 3+p) k l velocity distribution, these equations read x Hx) ) /l Ξk + )Wl) δ κ Φp, k)) /l [x x)] k/l) pκ ) κ l l Ξ) Ξ) d [x x)] k/l) 67) [x x)] k l Hx) The argument of the δ-function is zero for { ) } /l κ Ξk + )Wl) x ) ± 4 κ exp [x x)] k dx, 6) Φp, k)) /k, 68) Ξ) ) so that /l Ξk + )Wl) ψλ ) x 4 κ Ξ) Φp, k)) /k 69) This yields for pκ ) exp { λ ln l l Ξ) [x x)] k l Hx) λ ) /l } Ξk + )Wl) [x x)] k dx 6) Ξ) xamples for these distributions are shown in Sect 8, where the galactic halo is discussed 7 Fixed velocity A model with a fixed velocity corresponds to Kζ) δζ ) 6) pκ ) p [Φp, k)] k k Ξ p) [ H + H κ p k 4 κ Φp, k)) /k )) + 4 κ Φp, k)) /k + ))] 4 κ Φp, k)) /k 7) Note that pκ ) does not depend on l Since there exist real) solutions for x only for [κ Φp, k)] /k 4, 7) It follows that Wn) n and Fp, k, l) does not depend on l, so that Fp, k, l) Φp, k) 63) with Φp, k) Ξk p) Ξ p) With q 4), pκ ) follows as pκ ) 64) p+3 [Φp, k)] l κ p+3 l [x x)] p 3+p) k l l Ξ p) ) /l κ Φp, k) Hx)δ [x x)] k ) dx p+3 [Φp, k)] l l Ξ p) With the substitution κ p+3 l [x x)] p +p) k l Hx) δ κ Φp, k)) /l [x x)] k/l) dx 65) d[x x)] k/l k l [x x)]k/l x)dx, 66) one gets pκ ) p+3 [Φp, k)] l k Ξ p) κ p+3 l κ is restricted by κ κ,crit for k >, or by κ κ,crit for k <, where κ,crit 4 k Φp, k) 7) Since <> Φp, k), the critical value of is crit κ,crit <> 4 k, 73) which is a maximum for k > and a minimum for k < The distribution of can be written in terms of κ crit κ κ,crit κ 4 k Φp, k), 74) which yields the probability density p κ ) 4 p k Ξ p) κ p k 75) /k κ [ )) /k H + κ + ))] /k + H κ, 76) and for λ lg κ one gets the probability density ψ λ ) ln λ p 4 p k k Ξ p) [ H + H λ/k 77) )) + λ/k + ))] λ/k, 78)

7 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event 7 Since λ lg κ lg κ κ,crit ) λ lg Φp, k) k lg, 79) ψλ ) is given by ψλ ) ψλ + lg Φp, k) + k lg ) 8) 8 stimates and probability distributions for physical quantities for a simple galactic halo model The quantities to be discussed here are the transverse velocity v, the instein radius r which immediately yields the projected distance χr ), the mass M µm, the rotation period T of a binary For these quantities, t, x, ζ), k, l, and F, k, l) ares shown in Table The right expression for F, k, l) is valid if the velocity distribution does not depend on x, ρ denotes the semimajor axis in units of instein radii For the galactic halo, a velocity distribution of Hv ) v v c { } exp v vc can be used, where v v c The mass density of halo objects is modelled as 8) ρr) ρ a + R C a + r, 8) where r measures the distance from the alactic center, R C is the distance from the sun to the alactic center, a is a characteristic core radius and ρ is the local density at the position of the sun With the distance parameter x, which measures the distance along the line-of-sight from the observer to the LMC in units of the total distance D s, one obtains ρx) ρ + a R C + a + x R D s x Ds R C R C C cosα, 83) where α is the angle between direction of the alactic center and the direction of the LMC measured from the observer With ξ s D s R C, Hx) can be written as A + a RC, B cosα, 84) A Hx) A + Bxξ s + x ξs 85) Let the halo be extended to a distance of D h along the lineof-sight With ξ h D h /R C and ξ ξ h /ξ s, one obtains Ξ) and Ξ) ξ ξ A ξ s Hx) dx A A + Bxξ s + x ξ s ξ h dx A + B x + x d x A ξ s 4A B ξ A A ξ 3 s A ξ 3 s ξ arctan [ arctan ξ h + B 4A B ] B 4A B x x)hx)dx ξ h x x) A + Bxξ s + x ξ s xξ s x) A + B x + x d x dx, 86) { ξ h + ξ s + B)ln A + Bξ h + ξh A ξ sb + B [ A arctan ξ h + B 4A B 4A B ]} B arctan 87) 4A B Other values of Ξr) can be obtained numerically Selected values for Ξr) and Ws) and F, k, l) are shown in Tables, 3, and 4, using the values used by Paczyński 986) D s 5 kpc, R C kpc, x s 5, x h 5, α 8, a From these values, one obtains for the expectation values: <v > π vc 886 v c, 88) ) ) v c t <r > 7 AU, 89) km/s d ) ) <µ> 7 4 v c t, 9) km/s d Using slightly different values for D s and R C, and varying the core radius a between and 8 kpc yields estimates which differ by about 5 %

8 8 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event Table t, x, ζ), k, l, and F, k, l) for v, r, µ, T t, x, ζ) k l F,k, l) v v c ζ r t v c ζ µ T 4π c t v c r ζ - x x) ρ3 t D s v c x x) ζ T,) Ξ) W) T,) Ξ) W) T,) Ξ)W) Ξ) Ξ) T 3, ) Ξ 3 )W ) Ξ) Ξ) Table Selected values for Ξr) r Ξr) Table 3 Selected values for Ws) s Ws) Table 4 F, k, l) for v, r, µ, T F, k, l) v,r 886 µ 749 T 374 <T> 63 ρ 3/ v c km/s ) / ) / t a 9) d v With ρ c one obtains 4πR C ) ρ 86 3 v c M km/s pc 3, 9) so that for v c km/s, one gets Σ 4 M /pc and τ 5 7 The distribution of κ µ µ/<µ> is given by pκ µ ) Ξ) Ξ)) x x) Hx) { exp Ξ) } Ξ) κ µx x) dx 93) and the probability density ψλ µ ) is ψλ µ ) Ξ) Ξ)) ln x x) Hx) λµ { exp Ξ) } x x) dx 94) Ξ) λµ From q 93) the probability density Pµ) for the mass µ in units of M ) follows as Pµ) r t x x) Hx) v c Ξ) { exp µ } r x x) t dx, 95) v c which differs from the probability given by Jetzer & Massó 994, q 8)), by a factor µ /t Note that this probability density has to be of the form Pµ) ) µ t f t, 96) since µ t, to ensure normalization for any t For the other quantities estimated the probability densities are given by qs 6) and 6) The probability densities pκ ) and ψλ ) for r, µ, T are shown in Figs to 3 Note that r follows the velocity distribution, because k In the diagrams for ψλ ), symmetric intervals around <> are shown which give a probability of 683 % and 954 % respectively The bounds of these intervals are also shown in Table 5 The bounds are much larger for r and again much larger for µ than for T, which is due to the wide distribution of the velocity and µ ζ, r ζ, while T ζ The smallest and the largest value in the 954 %-interval differ by a factor of about 8 for µ, 6 for r and 5 for T 9 Application to observed events In this section I show the application of the method described here to the observed events towards the LMC The first events have been claimed by ROS Aubourg et al 993), namely ROS# and #, and MACHO Alcock et al 993), namely MACHO LMC#, in 993 The fit with a point-mass lens and point source for MACHO LMC# showed a discrepancy near

9 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event 9 Table 5 The bounds of symmetric intervals on a logarithmic scale around <> which correspond to probabilities of 683 % and 954 % λ 683 λ 954 λ 683 λ 683 λ 954 λ 954 v, r µ T Fig The probability density pκ v ) pκ r ) for κ v v / <v > r / <r > κ r left) and The probability density ψλ v ) ψλ r ) with symmetric 683 % and 954 % intervals around <v > or <r > right) Fig The probability density pκ µ ) for κ µ µ/ <µ> left) and the probability density ψλ µ ) with symmetric 683 % and 954 % intervals around <µ> right) the peak which has been solved with models involving a binary lens by Dominik & Hirshfeld 994, 996) The MACHO collaboration had found two other candidates, MACHO LMC# and #3, Alcock et al 996) which have been meanwhile dismissed In addition, they have claimed the existence of 7 additional events, MACHO LMC#4 to #, Pratt et al 996), where MACHO LMC#9 is due to a binary lens Bennett et al 996) In the MACHO data taken from 996 to March 997, 5 additional LMC candidates showed up Stubbs et al 997) It has been shown that the ROS# event involves a periodic variable star Ansari et al 995) and that ROS# involves an emission line Be type star Beaulieu et al 995), so

10 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event Fig 3 The probability density pκ T ) for κ T T/ <T> left) and the probability density ψλ T ) with symmetric 683 % and 954 % intervals around <T> right) that both ROS# and ROS# involve a rare type of stars which makes these events suspect as microlensing candidates eg Paczyński 996) In addition, the MACHO LMC# event is likely to be a binary star Pratt et al 996; Alcock et al 997) By assuming that the lens is in the galactic halo and using the halo model of the last section, expectation values for the desired quantities can be obtained by inserting the fit parameters into qs 88) to 9) Table 6 shows the expectation values for the instein radius and the mass for the events ROS# and ROS#, MACHO LMC#4 #8 and #, whereas the results for the binary lens events MACHO LMC# and MACHO LMC#9 are shown in Table 7 For MACHO LMC# six different binary lens models are shown Dominik & Hirshfeld 996; Dominik 996) Note that the lens for MACHO LMC#9 probably resides in the LMC Bennett et al 996) The parametrization used is that of Dominik & Hirshfeld 996): r hd denotes the projected half-distance between the lens objects in the lens plane, where r hd χr, m denotes the mass fraction in lens object r ) denotes the instein radius corresponding to the mass of object and t ) the characteristic time corresponding to r ) : r ) r m, 97) t ) t m 98) Similarly χ ) denotes the projected half-separation in units of instein radii corresponding to the mass of object, so that χ ) m χ 99) µ and µ denote the mass in units of M for objects and and the mass ratio r is given by r m m ) Table 8 MACHO LMC#: stimates of physical parameters of the binary lens models using a mass ratio r at the upper -σbound of r and corresponding values of t ) and χ) BA BA BA BA3 t /d t ) /d r χ χ ) <r > /AU <r ) > /AU <r hd > /AU <µ> <µ > <µ > <T min> /a Since the true semimajor axis a ρ r is not yielded by the fit, T is estimated using ρ χ, which corresponds to a minimal value T min, because ρ χ for any gravitationally bound system and T ρ 3/ The distribution of the physical quantities as well as symmetric intervals around the expectation value with probabilities of 683 % and 954 % are shown in the previous section The model BA3 has previously been omitted Dominik & Hirshfeld 996) due to the fact that the mass ratio between the lens objects is very extreme 4 3 ), which corresponds to unphysical values see Table 7) However, the uncertainty of the mass ratio is very large for extreme mass ratios Dominik

11 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event Table 6 xpectation values for the point-source-point-mass-lens events towards the LMC M # denotes MACHO events, while # denotes ROS events M #4 M #5 M #6 M #7 M #8 M # # # t /d <r > /AU <µ> Table 7 xpectation values of the physical parameters and used fit parameters for the 6 binary lens models for MACHO LMC#, denoted by BL, BL, BA, BA, BA, and BA3, and for MACHO LMC#9 BL BL BA BA BA BA3 LMC#9 t /d t ) /d m r χ χ ) 4 4 <r > /AU <r ) > /AU <r hd > /AU <µ> <µ > <µ > <T min> /a & Hirshfeld 996) due to the fact that the lens behaves nearly like a Chang-Refsdal lens The same degenaracy has recently been rediscovered in the context of lensing by a star with a planet by audi & ould 997) Table 8 shows the estimates for the 4 wide binary lens models BA, BA, BA, BA3) where fit parameters at the upper -σ-bounds of the mass ratio r have been used It can be seen that the expectation values for the separation and the mass change dramatically for the fits with small values of r, leaving much room for speculations about the nature of the lens object Recently, Rhie & Bennett 996) have speculated about a planetary companion in the MACHO LMC# event However, as shown in this and the last section, there are two fundamental uncertainties beyond the fact that there are only a few data points near the peak, which could have been solved by a denser sampling), namely the uncertainty in the mass ratio and the uncertainty due to the unknown lens position and its velocity The planetary model of Rhie & Bennett 996) corresponds to my model BA, where the expectation value of the mass of the lowmass object is about 6 M Taking into account an uncertainty of a factor of 3, a value of Jupiter masses is reached just at the -σ-bound As shown in Table 7, the expectation value for the mass of the low-mass object is about the same for all of my wide binary lens fits, so that there are the same prospects for a planet as the low-mass object for all of these models However, the high-mass object will be different The estimates of physical quantities like the mass of the lens objects), their separation and the rotation periods along with the uncertainties involved are needed to reveal the physical nature of the lens for each observed event One can check whether the mass range is consistent with the assumption of a dark object, and of which nature the lens should be in this case brown dwarf, white dwarf, neutron star, ) The determination of the mass range is crucial for claiming the existence of a planetary companion One can also check whether it is consistent to use a static binary lens model rather than one with rotating binary lens Dominik 997) Moreover, by comparing estimates for different lens populations eg the galactic halo and the LMC halo) one may obtain indications to which population the lens belongs In contrast to estimates on the mass spectrum, there is no direct influence from the ensemble of observed events on the estimates for a specific event However, there is an indirect influence, since the ensemble of events gives information about the mass spectrum, which in turn can be used to get a more accurate estimate for each observed event However, a lot of

12 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event events ) are needed to get accurate information on the mass spectrum Mao & Paczyński 996) To be used for the estimates for a specific event, some of the higher mass moments should have been determined Note that there will remain large uncertainties in the mass of a specific event even if the mass spectrum is known unless it contains a sharp peak), since due to the broad distribution of the velocity, the range of timescales t for a certain mass is broad, so that the mass range for a specific event in turn may also be large While a white dwarf scenario is preferred by the LMC observations eg Pratt et al 996), a brown-dwarf scenario is not ruled out Spiro 997) if one considers a flat halo Though there are some restrictions on the average lens mass from the observed events, which will improve with more data, it will remain highly uncertain into which mass regime a certain event falls Since the ongoing microlensing observations constrain the galactic models and therefore give rise to more accurate determinations of the structure of the lens populations, the knowledge on specific events will also be improved by this Acknowledgements I would like to thank the MACHO collaboration for making available the data for the MACHO LMC# event, A C Hirshfeld for a critical reading of the manuscript, and P Jetzer for some discussion about the subject References Alcock C, Akerlof C W, Allsman R A, et al, 993, Nat 365, 6 Alcock C, Allsman R A, Axelrod T S, et al, 996, ApJ 46, 84 Alcock C, Allsman R A, Alves D, et al, 997, ApJ 486, 697 Ansari R, Cavalier F, Couchot F, et al, 995, A&A 99, L Aubourg, Bareyre P, Bréhin S, et al, 993, Nat 365, 63 Beaulieu J P, Ferlet R, rison P, et al, 995, A&A 99, 68 Bennett D P, Alcock C, Allsman R A, et al, 996, Nucl Phys Proc Suppl 5, 5 Dominik M, 996, alactic microlensing beyond the standard model, PhD thesis, Universität Dortmund Dominik M, 997, alactic microlensing with rotating binaries, preprint astro-ph/9739, accepted for publication in A&A Dominik M, Hirshfeld AC, 994, A&A 89, L3 Dominik M, Hirshfeld AC, 996, A&A 33, 84 audi B S, ould A, 997, ApJ 486, 85 riest K, 99, ApJ 366, 4 Jetzer Ph, 994, ApJ 43, L43 rratum: 995, ApJ 438, L49) Jetzer Ph, Massó, 994, Phys Lett B 33, 347 Mao S, Paczyński B, 99, ApJ 374, L37 Mao S, Paczyński B, 996, ApJ 473, 57 Paczyński B, 986, ApJ 34, Paczyński B, 996, ARA&A 34, 49 Pratt M R, Alcock C, Allsman R A, et al, 996b, Nucl Phys Proc Suppl 5, 3 De Rújula A, Jetzer Ph, Massó, 99, MNRAS 5, 348 Rhie S H, Bennett D P, 996, Nucl Phys Proc Suppl 5, 86 Spiro M, 997, Proceedings of the 3rd International Worskhop on ravitational Microlensing Surveys, Notre Dame, IN, USA Stubbs C, et al MACHO collaboration), 997,

13 Figure left) M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event p v? ) 4 3 v?

14 4 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event Figure right) 5 v? ) 5 683% 954% :4 : : :8 :6 :4 : 4 6 v?

15 Figure left) M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event 5 5 p )

16 6 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event Figure right) ) % 954%

17 Figure 3 left) M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event 7 8 p T ) T

18 8 M Dominik: stimating physical quantities for an observed galactic microlensing event Figure 3 right) 3 5 T ) % 954% : :5 5 T