Astron. Astrophys. 350, L19-L22 (1999)
3. Models
In this section, we will fit the OGLE V and I -band light
curves simultaneously with theoretical models. We start with the
simple standard model, and then consider a fit that takes into account
both parallax and blending.
Most microlensing light curves are well described by the standard
form (e.g., Paczynski 1986):
![[EQUATION]](img9.gif)
where is the impact parameter (in
units of the Einstein radius) and
![[EQUATION]](img11.gif)
with being the time of the
closest approach (maximum magnification),
the Einstein radius, v the
lens transverse velocity relative to the observer-source line of
sight, and the Einstein radius
crossing time. The Einstein radius is defined as
![[EQUATION]](img15.gif)
where M is the lens mass,
the distance to the source and is
the ratio of the distance to the lens and the distance to the
source.
To fit both the I -band and V -band data with the
standard model, we need five parameters, namely,
![[EQUATION]](img18.gif)
Best-fit parameters (and their errors) are found by minimizing the
usual using the MINUIT program in
the CERN library and are tabulated in Table 1. The resulting
is 893.9 for 496 degrees of freedom.
For convenience, we divide the data into one `unlensed' part and one
`lensed' part; the former has and
the latter has . For the standard
fit, the lensed part has for 161
data points, and the unlensed part has
for 340 data points; the somewhat
high for this part may be due to
contaminations of nearby bright stars (as can be seen in the finding
chart), particularly at poor seeing conditions. The
per degree of freedom for the
`lensed' part (with 161 data points) is about 2.5, indicating that the
fit is poor. This can also be seen from Fig. 1, where we show the
model light curve together with the data points. As can be seen, the
observed values are consistently brighter than the predicted ones for
in the I -band. Further, the
prediction is fainter by about 0.05 magnitude at the peak in the
V -band. We show next that both inconsistencies can be removed
by incorporating parallax effect and blending.
![[FIGURE]](img29.gif) |
Fig. 1. The I -band (left) and V -band (right) light curves observed by the OGLE collaboration are shown. In each panel, the constant part of light curve is shown at the top with their amplitudes shifted by 1.5 magnitude and with their time intervals (from to ) labelled at the top axis. The dotted line indicates the best-fit standard model (Eq. 1), while the solid line is for the best-fit model that takes into account both parallax and blending (Eqs. 5-9). Fit parameters are given in Table 1.
|
![[TABLE]](img31.gif)
Table 1. The best standard model (first row) and the best parallax model with blending (second row) for OGLE-1999-CAR-1.
To take into account the Earth motion around the Sun, we have to
modify the expression for in
Eq. (1). This modification, to the first order of the Earth's orbital
eccentricity ( ), is given by Alcock
et al. (1995) and Dominik (1998):
![[EQUATION]](img34.gif)
where is the angle between
and the line formed by the north
ecliptic axis projected onto the lens plane,
is now more appropriately the
minimum distance between the lens and the Sun-source line. The
expression of and
are given by
![[EQUATION]](img39.gif)
and
![[EQUATION]](img40.gif)
where is the time of perihelion,
is the transverse speed of the lens
projected to the solar position, ,
and is the longitude measured in the
ecliptic plane from the perihelion toward the Earth's motion; this is
given in the appendix of Dominik (1998),
![[EQUATION]](img45.gif)
where is the longitude of the
vernal equinox measured from the perihelion.
(rad), and the Julian day for
Perihelion is ; the readers are
referred to the The Astronomical Almanac (1999) for the
relevant data. Note that the inclusion of the parallax effect
introduces two more parameters, and
.
The two-color light curves show that the lensed object became bluer
by mag at the peak of magnification;
such chromaticity is easily produced by blending. The additional
source of light may be from the lens itself and/or it can come from
another star which lies in the seeing disk of the lensed star by
chance alignment. When blending is present, the observed magnification
is given by
![[EQUATION]](img51.gif)
To model the blending in two colors, we need two further parameters
- the fraction of light contributed by the unlensed component in
I and V , and
, at the baseline. Therefore, a fit
that takes into account both parallax and blending effects requires 9
parameters: ,
, ,
and .
The best-fit parameters for this model are given in Table 1.
Compared with the standard fit, the
is reduced from 893.9 to 640.8. The reduction in the lensed part is
dramatic: the drops from 407.9 to
177.7 for 161 data points. The for
the unlensed part is 463.2 (as compared to 486.0 for the standard fit)
for 340 data points. The per degree
of freedom is satisfactory. The predicted light curve (solid line in
Fig. 1) matches the observed data both in the I -band and
V -band. From Table 1, the blending fractions in the
V and I bands are not well constrained,
and
. The differential blending, however,
is reasonably constrained, due to
the observed differential magnification (0.05 mag) between the
I -band and V -band. The projected lens velocity is well
constrained while its direction has somewhat larger errors. For
completeness, we mention that the best model that accounts for
blending but not parallax has
while the best model that accounts for parallax but not
blending has . Hence the parallax
effect reduces the much more
effectively than blending. This can be easily understood since the
observed light curve is asymmetric, which cannot be produced by
blending.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999
Online publication: October 4, 1999
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |