2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.newast.2007.08.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

First robotic monitoring of a lensed quasar: Intrinsic variability of SBS 0909+532

Abstract: To go into the details about the variability of the double quasar SBS 0909+532, we designed a monitoring programme with the 2 m Liverpool Robotic Telescope in the r Sloan filter, spanning 1.5 years from 2005 January to 2006 June. The rband light curves of the A and B components, several cross-correlation techniques and a large number of simulations (synthetic light curves) lead to a robust delay ∆t BA = − 49 ± 6 days (1σ interval) that agrees with our previous results (the B component is leading). Once the tim… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
45
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
2
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Monitoring lenses over time addresses these problems (Kochanek 2004;Kochanek et al 2006;Goicoechea et al 2008) while simultaneously permitting time delay measurements (e.g., recent measurements by Tewes et al 2013;Eulaers et al 2013;Rathna Kumar et al 2013). In particular, the Bayesian Monte Carlo method of Kochanek (2004) enables the extraction of probability densities for the physical parameters of interest (e.g., source size, M , etc.)…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Monitoring lenses over time addresses these problems (Kochanek 2004;Kochanek et al 2006;Goicoechea et al 2008) while simultaneously permitting time delay measurements (e.g., recent measurements by Tewes et al 2013;Eulaers et al 2013;Rathna Kumar et al 2013). In particular, the Bayesian Monte Carlo method of Kochanek (2004) enables the extraction of probability densities for the physical parameters of interest (e.g., source size, M , etc.)…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For each pair of quasar images, we see that the time delays measured from the two datasets agree to within 2σ. -SBS 0909+532: for our analysis, we used only the r-band data points obtained using the Liverpool Robotic Telescope between 2005 January and 2007 January presented in Goicoechea et al (2008) and Hainline et al (2013), based on homogeneity and sampling considerations. -RX J0911.4+0551: we used the light curves presented in Hjorth et al (2002), which were made publicly available by Paraficz et al (2006).…”
Section: Time Delays Of 24 Gravitationally Lensed Quasarsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of the 14 remaining systems, we did not model the mass distribution for four of them for the following reasons. 8 GHz, 15 GHz ∆t AB 10.1 +1.5 −1.6 (95% CI) 10.7 ± 0.8 HE 0435−1223 (Courbin et al 2011; R ∆t AB 8.4 ± 2.1 9.8 ± 1.1 Blackburne et al 2014) ∆t AC 0.6 ± 2.3 3.1 ± 2.2 ∆t AD 14.9 ± 2.1 13.7 ± 1.0 ∆t BC −7.8 ± 0.8 −8.0 ± 1.0 ∆t BD 6.5 ± 0.7 6.2 ± 1.5 ∆t CD 14.3 ± 0.8 13.6 ± 0.8 SBS 0909+532 (Goicoechea et al 2008; r ∆t AB −50 +2 R ∆t AB 16 ± 2 7.8 ± 14.0 Q0957+561 (Shalyapin et al 2012) r, g ∆t AB 417.4 ± 0.9 420.0 ± 1.4 SDSS J1001+5027 (Rathna Kumar et al 2013) R ∆t AB 119.3 ± 3.3 119.7 ± 1.8 SDSS J1004+4112 (Fohlmeister et al 2007; R, r ∆t AB −40.6 ± 1.8 −37.2 ± 3.1 Fohlmeister et al 2008) ∆t AC −821.6 ± 2.1 −822.5 ± 7.4 ∆t BC −777.1 ± 9.2 SDSS J1029+2623 (Fohlmeister et al 2013) r ∆t A(B+C) 744 ± 10 (90% CI) 734.3 ± 3.8 HE 1104−1805 (Poindexter et al 2007) R, V ∆t AB −152.2 +2.8 …”
Section: H 0 From Pixellated Modeling Of Ten Gravitational Lensesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, the observed structure function included observational noise. This noise has a significant effect on the measured variations at the shortest lags and the measured slope [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…and R 4/3 is the emission radius, e.g., [8] and references 1 The square root of the structure functions once the observational noise is properly subtracted therein. Hence, assuming that the involved scales as 2 , the expected relationship opt~1 0 UV is in clear disagreement with the observed one ( opt~ UV ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%