Is there a magnification paradox in lensing?

Talk for the AIfA cosmology/lensing seminar, 20 November 2007

O. Wucknitz [1,2]

  1. Argelander-Institut für Astronomie, Auf dem Hügel 71, 53121 Bonn, Germany
  2. Joint Institute for VLBI in Europe, Postbus 2, 7990 AA Dwingeloo, Netherlands

Abstract

[ paper abstract ]
We discuss the classic theorem according to which a gravitational lens always produces at least one image with a magnification greater than unity. This theorem seems to contradict the conservation of total flux from a lensed source. The standard solution to this paradox is based on the exact definition of the reference `unlensed' situation, in which the lens mass can either be removed or smoothly redistributed.

We calculate magnifications and amplifications (in photon number and energy flux density) for general lensing scenarios not limited to regions close to the optical axis. In this way the formalism is naturally extended from tangential planes for the source and lensed images to complete spheres. We derive the lensing potential theory on the sphere and find that the Poisson equation is modified by an additional source term that is related to the mean density and to the Newtonian potential at the positions of observer and source. This new term generally reduces the magnification and leads to violations of the theorem far from the optical axis, ensuring conservation of the total photon number received on a sphere around the source.

This discussion does not affect the validity of the focusing theorem, in which the unlensed situation is defined to have an unchanged affine distance between source and observer. The focusing theorem does not contradict flux conservation, because the mean total magnification (or amplification) directly corresponds to different areas of the source (or observer) sphere in the lensed and unlensed situation. We argue that a constant affine distance does not define an \emph{astronomically} meaningful reference.

By exchanging source and observer, we confirm that magnification and amplification differ according to Etherington's reciprocity law, so that surface brightness is no longer strictly conserved. At this level we also have to distinguish between different surface brightness definitions that are based on photon number, photon flux, and energy flux.

Key words: Gravitational lensing -- Cosmology: miscellaneous

This is the abstract for my paper about the subject. For more details, click here.




download Original presentation
PDF file (2.3 MB, last change 20 Nov 2007)
32 pages, suitable for presentation with acroread. This version also includes some hyperlinks for quick navigation and links to references.

download printable version
PDF file (1.3 MB, last change 20 Nov 2007)
Paper saving version. 4 pages, text mostly in b/w, colour figures. 8 slides per A4 page.



To publications
To my homepage
To the AIfA
To the University of Bonn


Script last modified on 7 Sep 2010
Last change to this data base entry on 20 Nov 2007