The importance of lens galaxy environments

Charles R. Keeton, Ann I Zabludoff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

80 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

It is suspected that many strong gravitational lens galaxies lie in poor groups or rich clusters of galaxies, which modify the lens potentials. Unfortunately, little is actually known about the environments of most lenses, so environmental effects in lens models are often unconstrained and sometimes ignored. We show that such poor knowledge of environments introduces significant biases and uncertainties into a variety of lensing applications. Specifically, we create a mock poor group of 13 galaxies that resembles real groups, generate a sample of mock lenses associated with each member galaxy, and then analyze the lenses with standard techniques. We find that standard models of two-image (double) lenses, which neglect environment, grossly overestimate both the ellipticity of the lens galaxy (Δe/e ∼ 0.5) and the Hubble constant (Δh/h ∼ 0.22). Standard models of four-image (quad) lenses, which approximate the environment as a tidal shear, recover the ellipticity reasonably well (Δe/e ≲ 0.24) but overestimate the Hubble constant (Δh/h ∼ 0.15) and have significant (∼30%) errors in the millilensing analyses used to constrain the amount of substructure in dark matter halos. For both doubles and quads, standard models slightly overestimate the velocity dispersion of the lens galaxy (Δσ/σ ∼ 0.06) and underestimate the magnifications of the images (Δμ/ μ ∼ -0.25). Standard analyses that use the statistics of lens populations to place limits on the dark energy overestimate Ωλ. (by 0.05-0.14) and underestimate the ratio of quads to doubles (by a factor of 2). The systematic biases related to environment help explain some long-standing puzzles (such as the high observed quad/double ratio) but aggravate others (such as the low value of H0 inferred from leasing). Most of the biases are caused by neglect of the convergence (gravitational focusing) from the mass associated with the environment, but additional uncertainty is introduced by neglect of higher order terms in the lens potential. Fortunately, we show that directly observing and modeling lens environments should make it possible to remove the biases and reduce the uncertainties. Such sophisticated lensing analyses will require finding the other galaxies that are members of the lensing groups and measuring the group centroids and velocity dispersions, but they should reduce systematic effects associated with environments to the few percent level.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)660-678
Number of pages19
JournalAstrophysical Journal
Volume612
Issue number2 I
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 10 2004

Fingerprint

lenses
galaxies
Hubble constant
ellipticity
leasing
environmental effect
gravitational lenses
magnification
substructures
dark energy
centroids
halos
dark matter
statistics
shear
modeling
energy

Keywords

  • Cosmological parameters
  • Dark matter
  • Galaxies: clusters: general
  • Galaxies: halos gravitational lensing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Space and Planetary Science

Cite this

The importance of lens galaxy environments. / Keeton, Charles R.; Zabludoff, Ann I.

In: Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 612, No. 2 I, 10.09.2004, p. 660-678.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Keeton, Charles R. ; Zabludoff, Ann I. / The importance of lens galaxy environments. In: Astrophysical Journal. 2004 ; Vol. 612, No. 2 I. pp. 660-678.
@article{a2cc1a9b0bb94c3aa789715751f97f69,
title = "The importance of lens galaxy environments",
abstract = "It is suspected that many strong gravitational lens galaxies lie in poor groups or rich clusters of galaxies, which modify the lens potentials. Unfortunately, little is actually known about the environments of most lenses, so environmental effects in lens models are often unconstrained and sometimes ignored. We show that such poor knowledge of environments introduces significant biases and uncertainties into a variety of lensing applications. Specifically, we create a mock poor group of 13 galaxies that resembles real groups, generate a sample of mock lenses associated with each member galaxy, and then analyze the lenses with standard techniques. We find that standard models of two-image (double) lenses, which neglect environment, grossly overestimate both the ellipticity of the lens galaxy (Δe/e ∼ 0.5) and the Hubble constant (Δh/h ∼ 0.22). Standard models of four-image (quad) lenses, which approximate the environment as a tidal shear, recover the ellipticity reasonably well (Δe/e ≲ 0.24) but overestimate the Hubble constant (Δh/h ∼ 0.15) and have significant (∼30{\%}) errors in the millilensing analyses used to constrain the amount of substructure in dark matter halos. For both doubles and quads, standard models slightly overestimate the velocity dispersion of the lens galaxy (Δσ/σ ∼ 0.06) and underestimate the magnifications of the images (Δμ/ μ ∼ -0.25). Standard analyses that use the statistics of lens populations to place limits on the dark energy overestimate Ωλ. (by 0.05-0.14) and underestimate the ratio of quads to doubles (by a factor of 2). The systematic biases related to environment help explain some long-standing puzzles (such as the high observed quad/double ratio) but aggravate others (such as the low value of H0 inferred from leasing). Most of the biases are caused by neglect of the convergence (gravitational focusing) from the mass associated with the environment, but additional uncertainty is introduced by neglect of higher order terms in the lens potential. Fortunately, we show that directly observing and modeling lens environments should make it possible to remove the biases and reduce the uncertainties. Such sophisticated lensing analyses will require finding the other galaxies that are members of the lensing groups and measuring the group centroids and velocity dispersions, but they should reduce systematic effects associated with environments to the few percent level.",
keywords = "Cosmological parameters, Dark matter, Galaxies: clusters: general, Galaxies: halos gravitational lensing",
author = "Keeton, {Charles R.} and Zabludoff, {Ann I}",
year = "2004",
month = "9",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1086/422745",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "612",
pages = "660--678",
journal = "Astrophysical Journal",
issn = "0004-637X",
publisher = "IOP Publishing Ltd.",
number = "2 I",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The importance of lens galaxy environments

AU - Keeton, Charles R.

AU - Zabludoff, Ann I

PY - 2004/9/10

Y1 - 2004/9/10

N2 - It is suspected that many strong gravitational lens galaxies lie in poor groups or rich clusters of galaxies, which modify the lens potentials. Unfortunately, little is actually known about the environments of most lenses, so environmental effects in lens models are often unconstrained and sometimes ignored. We show that such poor knowledge of environments introduces significant biases and uncertainties into a variety of lensing applications. Specifically, we create a mock poor group of 13 galaxies that resembles real groups, generate a sample of mock lenses associated with each member galaxy, and then analyze the lenses with standard techniques. We find that standard models of two-image (double) lenses, which neglect environment, grossly overestimate both the ellipticity of the lens galaxy (Δe/e ∼ 0.5) and the Hubble constant (Δh/h ∼ 0.22). Standard models of four-image (quad) lenses, which approximate the environment as a tidal shear, recover the ellipticity reasonably well (Δe/e ≲ 0.24) but overestimate the Hubble constant (Δh/h ∼ 0.15) and have significant (∼30%) errors in the millilensing analyses used to constrain the amount of substructure in dark matter halos. For both doubles and quads, standard models slightly overestimate the velocity dispersion of the lens galaxy (Δσ/σ ∼ 0.06) and underestimate the magnifications of the images (Δμ/ μ ∼ -0.25). Standard analyses that use the statistics of lens populations to place limits on the dark energy overestimate Ωλ. (by 0.05-0.14) and underestimate the ratio of quads to doubles (by a factor of 2). The systematic biases related to environment help explain some long-standing puzzles (such as the high observed quad/double ratio) but aggravate others (such as the low value of H0 inferred from leasing). Most of the biases are caused by neglect of the convergence (gravitational focusing) from the mass associated with the environment, but additional uncertainty is introduced by neglect of higher order terms in the lens potential. Fortunately, we show that directly observing and modeling lens environments should make it possible to remove the biases and reduce the uncertainties. Such sophisticated lensing analyses will require finding the other galaxies that are members of the lensing groups and measuring the group centroids and velocity dispersions, but they should reduce systematic effects associated with environments to the few percent level.

AB - It is suspected that many strong gravitational lens galaxies lie in poor groups or rich clusters of galaxies, which modify the lens potentials. Unfortunately, little is actually known about the environments of most lenses, so environmental effects in lens models are often unconstrained and sometimes ignored. We show that such poor knowledge of environments introduces significant biases and uncertainties into a variety of lensing applications. Specifically, we create a mock poor group of 13 galaxies that resembles real groups, generate a sample of mock lenses associated with each member galaxy, and then analyze the lenses with standard techniques. We find that standard models of two-image (double) lenses, which neglect environment, grossly overestimate both the ellipticity of the lens galaxy (Δe/e ∼ 0.5) and the Hubble constant (Δh/h ∼ 0.22). Standard models of four-image (quad) lenses, which approximate the environment as a tidal shear, recover the ellipticity reasonably well (Δe/e ≲ 0.24) but overestimate the Hubble constant (Δh/h ∼ 0.15) and have significant (∼30%) errors in the millilensing analyses used to constrain the amount of substructure in dark matter halos. For both doubles and quads, standard models slightly overestimate the velocity dispersion of the lens galaxy (Δσ/σ ∼ 0.06) and underestimate the magnifications of the images (Δμ/ μ ∼ -0.25). Standard analyses that use the statistics of lens populations to place limits on the dark energy overestimate Ωλ. (by 0.05-0.14) and underestimate the ratio of quads to doubles (by a factor of 2). The systematic biases related to environment help explain some long-standing puzzles (such as the high observed quad/double ratio) but aggravate others (such as the low value of H0 inferred from leasing). Most of the biases are caused by neglect of the convergence (gravitational focusing) from the mass associated with the environment, but additional uncertainty is introduced by neglect of higher order terms in the lens potential. Fortunately, we show that directly observing and modeling lens environments should make it possible to remove the biases and reduce the uncertainties. Such sophisticated lensing analyses will require finding the other galaxies that are members of the lensing groups and measuring the group centroids and velocity dispersions, but they should reduce systematic effects associated with environments to the few percent level.

KW - Cosmological parameters

KW - Dark matter

KW - Galaxies: clusters: general

KW - Galaxies: halos gravitational lensing

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=7544236553&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=7544236553&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1086/422745

DO - 10.1086/422745

M3 - Article

VL - 612

SP - 660

EP - 678

JO - Astrophysical Journal

JF - Astrophysical Journal

SN - 0004-637X

IS - 2 I

ER -