Einstein Radii from Binary-Source Events arxiv:astro-ph/9604031v1 5 Apr 1996 Cheongho Han Andrew Gould 1 Dept. of Astronomy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 cheongho@payne.mps.ohio-state.edu gould@payne.mps.ohio-state.edu Abstract We show that the Einstein ring radius and transverse speed of a lens projected on the source plane, ˆr e and ˆv, can be determined from the light curve of a binarysource event, followed by the spectroscopic determination of the orbital elements of the source stars. The determination makes use of the same principle that allows one to measure the Einstein ring radii from finite-source effects. For the case when the orbital period of the source stars is much longer than the Einstein time scale, P t e, there exists a single two-fold degeneracy in determining ˆr e. However, when P < t e the degeneracy can often be broken by making use of the binary-source system s orbital motion. Once ˆr e, and thus ˆv are determined, one can distinguish self-lensing events in the Large Magellanic Cloud from Galactic halo events. In addition, we propose to include eclipsing binaries as sources for gravitational lensing experiments. Subject headings: binaries: spectroscopic - gravitational lensing submitted to The Astrophysical Journal: April 5, 1996 Preprint: OSU-TA-11/96 1 Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Fellow 1
1 Introduction There are many different effects that make a light curve of a microlensing event deviate from its characteristic achromatic and symmetric form: luminous lenses (Kamionkowski 1995; Buchalter, Kamionkowski, & Rich 1995), differential magnification during close encounters (Gould 1994; Nemiroff & Wickramasinghe 1994; Witt & Mao 1994; Witt 1995; Loeb & Sasselov 1995; Gould & Welch 1996), parallax effects caused by the Earth s orbital motion (Gould 1992; Alcock et al. 1995) and finally binary-lens events (Mao et al. 1994; Axerlod et al. 1994; Udalski et al. 1994, Mao & Di Stefano 1995; Alard, Mao, & Guibert 1995). Whenever any of these distortions is detected, it provides information about the physical parameters of individual lenses: distance to the lens for luminous lens, lens proper motion, µ = v/d ol, for differential magnification, observer-plane projected Einstein ring radius, r e = (D os /D ls )r e, for parallax, and the geometry of a lens binary system and sometimes the proper motion for binary lens events. Here, v is the speed of the lens relative to the Earth-source line of sight, and the physical and angular Einstein ring radius are related to the physical parameters of the lens by ( 4GML r e = c 2 ) D ol D 1/2 ls, θ e = r e, (1.1) D os D ol where D ol, D ls, D os are the distances between the observer, source, and lens, r e is the physical size of the Einstein ring, and M L is the mass of the lens. Another way a lensing light curve is distorted is due to binary source stars (Griest & Hu 1992). When a source is composed of binary stars that are located within the Einstein ring of the lens, both stars are gravitationally magnified: a binarysource event. The resultant light curve is the sum of individual light curves and is represented by 2 u 2 j F = A j F 0,j ; A j = + 2 u j (u 2 j + 4) 1/2, (1.2) j=1 where j = 1, 2 denote the primary and secondary source stars, F 0,j are the unmagnified fluxes, and u j are the projected locations of the source stars with respect to the lens in units of r e. In this paper, we make a case by case analysis of binary-source events and present analytic approximations for the light curves. Additionally, we show that the Einstein ring radius and the transverse speed projected on the source plane, ˆr e ( source-plane 2
Einstein ring radius ) and ˆv ( source-plane transverse speed ), can be determined from the light curve of a binary-source event, provided that the observations are followed by spectroscopic determination of the binary-source orbital elements. The basic principle that makes this measurement possible is that a binary acts like as enormous finite source and therefore is much more susceptable to finite-source effects than are single stars. Throughout this paper, we use a hat (ˆ) to represent a quantity projected onto the source plane. The source-plane Einstein radius and transverse speed are defined by D os ˆr e = D os θ e = r e, ˆv = ˆr e, (1.3) D ol t e where t e = r e /v is the Einstein ring crossing time. Note that when the source distance is known [e.g., for observations toward the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC)], measuring ˆr e and ˆv is equivalent to measuring θ e and µ since θ e = ˆr e /D os and µ = ˆv/D os. There exists, in general, a single two-fold degeneracy in determining ˆr e. However, the degeneracy can often be broken by making use of the binary s orbital motion. Once ˆr e, and thus ˆv are determined, it is possible to distinguish events caused by lenses in LMC from the Galactic halo events by using the difference in the values of ˆv between these populations. 2 Binary-Source Events The binary-source light curve distortions take various forms depending on many factors, e.g., the angular size of the projected separation between the source stars, source trajectories within the Einstein ring, the angular size of the Einstein ring projected onto the source plane, and the orbital motion. Among all possible binary-source events, we focus only on asymmetric and double-peak events, which can be distinguished from the single source events with relative ease (Griest & Hu 1992). These binary-source events can also be readily distinguished from other types of exotic lensing events. For example, a binary-source event might mimic the effect of parallax. However, if the time scale is short, the distortion is more likely to be caused by binary sources because the parallax effect can be detected only for long events. For long binary-source events, t e O(10 2 ) days, the orbital motion becomes important, and the periodic distortion due to the orbital motion will be different from the distortion caused by the Earth s periodic motion around the Sun. A binary-source 3
event does not display the sudden increase of magnification which is the characteristic of binary-lens events during a caustic crossing. For a binary-lens event in which the source star does not cross the caustics, the light curve might look like those for binary-source events. However, one still can separate the two types of events by using the color change which typically accompanies binary-source events. However, binarysource events other than asymmetric and double-peak types are not only difficult to distinguish from single-source or from other exotic events, but also provide little information about individual lenses. Therefore, we investigate only asymmetric and double-peak events. 2.1 Case I Let us begin with the simplest case where P t e (case I). Here P is the orbital period of source stars. Under this condition, the relative position of the source stars remains nearly fixed during the event, i.e., negligible orbital motion, and thus the source positions are well approximated by u 2 j = ω2 (t t 0,j ) 2 + β 2 j, (2.1.1) where ω = t 1 e, β j are the impact parameters, and t 0,j are the times of maximum magnification. Note that the Einstein time scale is same for both sources. Then the projected (two-dimensional) separation between two stars is related to ˆr e by l = (l 2 x + l2 y )1/2 = ˆr e [(ω t 0 ) 2 + β 2 ± ]1/2, (2.1.2) where l x and l y are the x- and y-components of the projected separation vector, l, between the two source stars and the coordinates (x, y) are respectively parallel and perpendicular to the direction of the lens motion. If l can be determined (see 2.4), is also possible to determine ˆr e, provided one can decompose the light curve into its individual components and so measure t = t 0,1 t 0,2 and β ± = β 1 ± β 2. However, there exists a degeneracy in the determination of ˆr e for case I. In general, there are two types of degeneracies in the binary-source lens geometry. The first type occurs because the direction of source motion (with respect to the lens) is not known. Fortunately, this type of degeneracy does not affect the the determination of ˆr e because of the radial symmetry of Einstein rings. The other type of degeneracy, which does affect the determination of ˆr e, arises because the y-component of the separation 4
can have two possible values depending on whether the sources are located on the opposite ( β + = β 1 + β 2 ) or at the same ( β = β 1 β 2 ) side with respect to the lens. The two degenerate cases are shown in the panel (a) and (b) of Figure 1. 2.2 case II Another form of binary-source event happens when P < t e. If the angular separation between binary-source stars is small compared to the source-lens separation, one can treat the difference between the center of light (CL) and the position of each source star as a perturbation δu j of the case when both stars are at the CL, i.e., u j = (u 2 + ˆλ 2 j 2uˆλ j cosθ j ) 1/2 u + δu j ; δu j = ˆλ j cosθ j + 1 2u j ˆλ2 j sin 2 θ j, (2.2.1) where u = u CL and u j are the locations of the CL and of each source star in units of r e, and θ j is the angle between the lines connecting the CL with the lens and the CL with each source (see Fig. 2). Here ˆλ j are the offsets of the two sources from the CL, i.e., ˆλ = ˆλ 1 + ˆλ 2 and ˆλ 1 F 0,1 = ˆλ 2 F 0,2 and they are related to the projected physical separations, l j, by ˆλ j = (l j /r e )(D ol /D os ) = l j /ˆr e. The angles are related by θ 2 = π θ 1. The corresponding flux perturbation is then where δf sep A 2 j=1 F 0,j δu j + A 2 2 F 0,j δu 2 j, (2.2.2) j=1 A = da du = 8 u 2 (u 2 + 4) 1/2, A = d2 A du 2 = 5u2 + 8 u(u 2 + 4) A. (2.2.3) By combining equations (2.2.1) and (2.2.2), and keeping terms up to second order in ˆλ j, one finds the perturbation term to be [ ] δf sep = A 2u (F 0,1ˆλ 2 1 + F 0,2ˆλ 2 2 ) sin 2 θ 1 5u2 + 8 (u 2 + 4) cos2 θ 1. (2.2.4) In the regime where u 1, equation (2.2.4) is approximated by δf sep A 2u (F 0,1ˆλ 2 1 + F 0,2ˆλ 2 2 )(3 sin2 θ 1 2), (2.2.5) 5
resulting in the fractional perturbation of F 1 3 sin 2 θ 1 2 2 Q L + 2 + Q 1 L δf sep ) 2 (ˆλ (2.2.6) u since A 1/u and A 1/u 2 in this regime. Here Q L = F 0,1 /F 0,2 is the luminosity ratio between two stars. This perturbation alone describes the deviation from the single source light curve well enough when the binary pair is composed of stars of similar type so that the location of the CL is close to the the center of mass (CM). However, the stars are orbiting around the CM not around the CL. Therefore, another perturbation term δf c arises due to the difference between the positions between the CM and CL, δu c. With similar geometry (see also Fig. 2), the location of the CM is u CM = (u 2 CL + ˆλ 2 c + 2u CLˆλ c cosθ 1 ) 1/2 u CL + δu c ; where the offset between the CL and the CM is δu c = ˆλ c cosθ 1 + 1 2u CL ˆλ2 c sin 2 θ 1, (2.2.7) ˆλ c = Q L Q M (1 + Q M )(1 + Q L )ˆλ. (2.2.8) Here Q M = M 1 /M 2 is the mass ratio. Note that for the geometry shown in Figure 2, Q L > Q M, so ˆλ c > 0. The flux difference due to the difference in the positions of the CL and the CM is then approximated by δf c = (F 0,1 + F 0,2 ) [ ] A δu c + A 2 δu2 c [ (F 0,1 + F 0,2 ) A cosθ 1ˆλc + 1 ] 2u (A sin 2 θ 1 + A u cos 2 θ 1 )ˆλ 2 c, (2.2.9) by keeping terms up to second order in ˆλ c. For ˆλ c u, the first term always dominates, implying a perturbation, δf c F cosθ 1 A ˆλ c. (2.2.10) A One then arrives at the final form of the approximation to the total flux, F = A(F 0,1 + F 0,2 ) + δf; δf = δf c + δf sep. (2.2.11) 6
The leading first terms of the fractional deviation from a single-source event are given by δf F (Q ) L Q M ) cosθ 1 (ˆλ 1 3 sin 2 ) 2 θ 1 2 (ˆλ (1 + Q M )(1 + Q L ) u 2 Q L + 2 + Q 1. (2.2.12) L u In Figure 3, we present three examples of case II events: (a) when δf sep δf c (e.g., pair of stars with same mass and luminosity), (b) when both perturbations take place, and (c) when δf sep δf c (e.g., same mass but F 0,1 F 0,2 such as a giant-white dwarf pair). All three example events have β = 0.4, t e = 100 days, and orbital period of P = 30 days. The mass and luminosity of the individual stars for each case are marked in each panel. The peaks of the curve occur with a frequency of P/2 for (a) events since the varying part of δf sep is proportional to sin 2 θ 1, while the frequency is P for (c) events because δf c cosθ 1. For the general case in which both perturbations play roles, the perturbation δf c /F u 1 decays slowly compared to δf sep /F u 2, and thus the δf c perturbation (period P) dominates the wings of the light curve while the δf sep perturbation (period P/2) dominates near the peak. 2.3 Breaking the Degeneracy The degeneracy affecting case I events can often be broken by using the orbital motion of stars. The principle is simple: when the orbital motion is important, the light curves resulting from the two degenerate lens geometries will be different. In the panels (a) and (b) of Figure 1, we present tracks of the actual orbiting source stars (dotted lines) compared to the hypothetical straight-line tracks assuming no orbital motion (solid lines). Breaking the degeneracy using the orbital motions of source stars is still possible for events with small orbital motion, e.g., P 5t e 10t e. To demonstrate this, we show, as an example, very different light curves resulting from the two would-be degenerate cases in the panels (c) and (d) of Figure 1. We assume that the event has t e = 20 days and the binary is observed to have F 0,1 = F 0,2, P = 100 days, the inclination angle i = 0, and the phase angle φ 1 = π π 2 = 60. For simplicity, we adopt a circular orbit with a mass ratio Q M = 1, i.e., the radii of orbital motion a 1 = a 2 = a/2; wherea = 0.4 AU is the semimajor axis, and the separation of l j = a j = constant, corresponding to source masses of 3.41 M. The projected separations on the source plane between the CM and individual source stars are ˆλ 1 = ˆλ 2 = 0.3 and 0.1 for the two cases when source stars are located at the same 7
and opposite sides with respect to the lens, respectively. Then there are two possible degenerate values of ˆr e = l j /ˆλ j = 1.3 AU and 4.0 AU, respectively. The degeneracy is clearly broken since the true light curve (c) is radically different from (d). 2.4 Required Observation For the determination of ˆr e, it is necessary to know both the lensing parameters and the orbital elements of the binary-source system. For a gravitationally lensed binary-source system, the individual masses can be estimated to a first approximation from the luminosities and colors. One can then further constrain the stellar masses by determining the stellar types from follow-up spectroscopy. To determine the luminosities and colors, the individual light curves must be extracted from the observed light curve or must be inferred from follow-up spectroscopy. Once the individual masses are known, the orbital elements, e.g., φ, i, and the eccentricity ǫ, can be determined from the radial velocity curve, which can be constructed from followup spectroscopy. For the determination of the orbital elements, a single spectral line from either star will be enough to constrain the stellar motion provided that the mass ratio M 2 /M 1 is known. Once all these orbital parameters are known, one can find the projected separation l = l 1 + l 2 as a function of time. The lensing parameters, t e, β j, and t 0,j, can be determined by fitting the decomposed light curves, taking the orbital motions into consideration. Eclipsing binaries provide excellent opportunities to determine ˆr e. This is because the pure lensing light curve can be easily recovered by dividing the observed light curve by the pre-event eclipsing light curve. In addition, the orbital elements of eclipsing binaries can be easily determined due to the known i = 90. The eclipse light curve can also be used to help constrain the luminosities of the binary sources. Current experiments have identified many eclipsing stars [ O(10 4 )] toward the Galactic bulge and LMC (Grison et al. 1995; Cook et al. 1995; Ka lużny et al. 1995), but, unfortunately, they are excluded as gravitational lensing source stars due to their variability. Because of the extra information which is automatically available in the case of eclipsing binaries, they should be reincluded in the lensing search. There already has been reported a candidate event (EROS2, Ansari et al. 1995) with a microlensing-type light curve superimposed on top of periodic eclipsing binary variability. We suggest follow-up spectroscopy of all events even when the light curves do not 8
exhibit obvious traces of a binary-source event. If a source is shown to be composed of binary stars, but there is no detectable distortion of the light curve, one can conclude that the source separation is much smaller than the Einstein ring. Therefore, one can set the lower limit of ˆr e. 3 Identification of Lens Population Once the values of ˆr e and thus ˆv are known, one can strongly constrain the nature of individual lenses. First, for the known distance to source stars, e.g., d bulge = 8 kpc and d LMC = 50 kpc toward the Galactic bulge and LMC, respectively, determining ˆr e is equivalent to measuring the angular Einstein ring size θ e = ˆr e /D os, and thus the proper motion µ = θ e /t e. While the time scale is a function of three parameters, t e = t e (M L, v, D ol ), the Einstein ring is a function of only two, θ e = θ e (M L, D ol ) and hence provides less degenerate information. Secondly, once µ is measured, one can easily distinguish Galactic halo from LMC self-lensing events from the difference in µ. This is because µ LMC µ halo. In Table 1, we present the expected typical values of ˆr e and ˆv for the LMC disk, LMC halo, and Galactic halo events. Also presented are the typical parameters for the geometry, D ol /D os, the lens mass M L, and the transverse speed, v, which are used in determining the expected ˆr e and v. We adopt heavier masses for LMC disk lenses because the lenses are expected to be objects above hydrogen-burning limit. As a tool to identify the lens population, ˆv will be more useful than ˆr e because ˆv does not depend on the lens mass, which, for any given event, is completely unknown. However, we note that for observations toward the Galactic bulge it is difficult to distinguish Galactic disk from Galactic bulge lenses using µ since both have similar distributions (Han & Gould 1995). Acknowledgement: We would like to thank G. Newsom for making helpful comments. This work was supported by a grant AST 94-20746 from the NSF. 9
REFERENCES Alard, C., Mao., S., & Guibert, J. 1995, A&A, 300, 17 Alcock, C. et al. 1995, ApJ, 441, 21 Ansari, R. et al. 1995, A&A, 299, L21 Cook, K. H. et al. 1995, ASP Conference Series, Astrophysical Applications of Stellar Pulsation, ed. R. Stobie & P. Whitelock (Cape Town) Axelrod, T. et al. 1994, BAAS, 184, 3302 Bower, R. L., & Deeming, T. 1984, Astrophysics I Stars (Jones and Bartlett Publishers INC.: Boston), 318 Buchalter, A., Kamionkowski, M., & Rich, R. M. 1995, ApJ, submitted Gould, A. 1992, ApJ, 392, 442 Gould, A. 1994, ApJ, 421, L71 Gould, A. & Welch, D. 1996, ApJ, 464, 000 Griest, K., & Hu, W. 1992, ApJ, 397, 362 Grison, P. et al. 1995, A&AS, 109, 447 Han, C., & Gould, A. 1995, ApJ, 447, 53 Ka lużny, et al. 1995, ASP Conference Series, Binary Stars in Clusters ed. G. Milone & J. C. Mermilliod Kamionkowski, M. 1995, ApJ, 442, L9 Loeb, A., & Sasselov, D. 1995, ApJ, 449, L33 Mao, S. et al. 1994, BAAS, 185, 1705 Mao, S., & Di Stefano, R. 1995, ApJ, 440, 22 Nemiroff, R. J. & Wickramasinghe, W. A. D. T. 1994, ApJ, 424, L21 Smart, W. 1962, Text-Book on Spherical Astronomy (Cambridge University Press: Brook Crutchley), 360 Udalski, A. et al. 1994, ApJ, 436, 103 10
Witt, H. J. 1995, ApJ, 449, 42 Witt, H. J., & Mao, S. 1994, ApJ, 430, 505 Witt, H. J., & Mao, S. 1995, ApJ, 447, 105 11
population D ol /D os M L r e ˆr e v ˆv (M ) (AU) (AU) (km s 1 ) (km s 1 ) LMC disk 0.99 0.5 1.35 1.36 30 30 LMC halo 0.94 0.1 1.44 1.53 100 106 Galactic Halo 0.20 0.1 2.40 12.0 220 1100 Table 1: Characteristic values of ˆr e and ˆv for different populations of lenses. Also presented are the typical parameters for the geometry, D ol /D os, the lens mass M L, and the transverse speed, v, which are used in determining the expected ˆr e and v. 12
(a) without motion with motion 10 8 total primary secondary (c) L S 1 F 6 4 S 2 2 0 40 20 0 20 40 t t 0 (days) (b) 10 8 (d) L F 6 S 1 4 S 2 2 0 40 20 0 20 40 t t 0 (days) Figure 1: Breaking the degeneracy in ˆr e. Without orbital motion, the lens geometries (a) and (b) would produce the same light curves. However, when the orbital motion is important, the light curves resulting from the two degenerate lens geometries will be different [(c) and (d)]. The tracks of the actual orbiting source stars (dotted lines) are compared to the straight-line tracks (solid lines) assuming no motion. 13
^ ^ λ 1 λ 2 ^ λ c CL CM θ 1 θ 2 u CL u CM u 1 u 2 L Figure 2: Case II binary-source geometry. Since u ˆλ j, the separations δu j u CL u j can be treated as a perturbation of the case when both stars are at the CL. The source stars are denoted by filled circles (bigger for the primary) and the lens is marked by L. Similarly, one can treat the separation δu c u CM u CL as a perturbation to take account of the CL around the center of mass (CM). 14
F 3 2 (a) δf sep >> δf cent F 0,1 =0.5, F 0,2 =0.5 M 1 =1.0, M 2 =1.0 1 F 3 2 (b) F 0,1 =0.75, F 0,2 =0.25 M 1 =1.0, M 2 =0.7 1 F 3 2 (c) δf sep << δf cent F 0,1 =0.998, F 0,2 =0.002 M 1 =1.0, M 2 =1.0 1 200 100 0 100 200 t (days) Figure 3: Case II event light curves: (a) when δf sep δf c (e.g., pair of stars with same mass and luminosity), (b) when both perturbations take place, and (c) when δf sep δf c (e.g., same mass but F 0,1 F 0,2 such as a giant-white dwarf pair). All three example events have β = 0.4, t e = 100 days, and orbital period of P = 30 days. The mass (in M ) and luminosity of individual stars for each case are marked in each panel. The peaks of the curve occur with a frequency of P/2 for (a) events since δf sep sin 2 θ 1, while the frequency is P for (c) events because δf c cosθ 1. For the general case in which both perturbations play roles, the perturbation δf c /F u 1 decays slowly compared to δf sep /F u 2, and thus the δf c perturbation (period P) dominates the wings of the light curve. 15