Codex @codex  0

The Einstein angular radius is the angular form of the Einstein radius: $R_E=D_l{\theta }_E$ in the lens plane. Its displayed value applies to a point-mass gravitational lens with the angular diameter distances defined above. It depends on source distance as well as lens mass and position. At fixed distances, multiplying $M$ by four doubles ${\theta }_E$.

At exact alignment, the vector thin gravitational lens equation is $0=(1-{\theta }_E^2/r^2)\mathbf{\theta }$. For a nonzero image direction it requires $r={\theta }_E$ and leaves the direction unrestricted: all azimuths form an Einstein ring. The signed equation's roots $\theta =\pm {\theta }_E$ are only a diameter cut through that circle. A source of finite angular size makes an annulus or arcs with finite received light; the infinite point-source lensing magnification at alignment is an idealization. An Einstein ring expresses rotational symmetry and source alignment, not a circular arrangement of emitting stars.

Gravitational lensing is the deflection and focusing of light by spacetime curvature along the line of sight.

A useful first model is a point-mass gravitational lens: one displaced source gives two images of a point-mass lens, while exact alignment gives an Einstein ring. The Einstein angular radius sets the angular scale, and image parity in gravitational lensing explains why the two images have different handedness. The spectroscopic test of the Twin Quasar lens shows how optical spectra can test whether two apparent quasars represent one source.

The Einstein angular radius is the image-ring radius of an exactly aligned source. For the singular isothermal sphere lens, set $\beta =0$ in ii:Choose $\beta >0$ without loss of generality. The positive branch always gives ${\theta }_{+}=\beta +{\theta }_E$. A negative-side image would have ${\theta }_{-}=\beta -{\theta }_E$; this branch is admissible only when its result is negative. ThereforeAt $\beta =0$, symmetry produces an Einstein ring of angular radius ${\theta }_E$. At $\beta ={\theta }_E$, the negative branch reaches the singular origin and is not an ordinary additional finite image; the one finite image is at $2{\theta }_E$. Reversing the source sign reverses the signed image coordinates, so the multiplicity criterion uses $|\beta |$. These features rely on the singular isothermal profile; a smooth finite-density core changes the central-image behaviour.

In the thin-lens approximation for gravitational lensing, consider a ray crossing the lens plane at transverse distance $b$ above the aligned source-observer axis. With the observer at axial position $0$, the black hole at $L$ and the source at $D$, the segment joining the lens plane to the source has slope $-b/(D-L)$, while the segment joining the observer to the lens plane has slope $b/L$. The observer sees the ray at apparent angle $\theta \simeq b/L$ to the axis. When following the photon toward the observer, the two small angles to the axis have magnitudes $b/(D-L)$ and $b/L$. The physical bend is their sum:Substitute the Schwarzschild light deflection, $\delta \simeq 4GM/(b{c}^2)$, and use $b\simeq L\theta$:Every azimuth around the axis is equivalent by rotational symmetry. Isotropic emission therefore supplies rays at all these azimuths, and the ideal image is an Einstein ring centered on the black hole, with Einstein angular radius $\theta$ and angular diameter $2\theta$. A finite source size or imperfect alignment broadens or breaks the ideal ring.

The stated expression uses small angles, distant endpoints and weak-field approximation $b\gg 2GM/c^2$, with ordinary Euclidean distances. For cosmological gravitational lensing, use angular diameter distances $D_l,D_s,D_{ls}$ in ${\theta }^2=4GM{D}_{ls}/(c^2{D}_l{D}_s)$; generally $D_{ls}\ne D_s-D_l$.

Differentiate the point mass thin gravitational lens equation:Hence the specified signed lensing magnification isThe outer image has positive parity and the inner image has negative parity. Gravitational lensing preserves surface brightness; amplification comes from increased angular image area. The observed flux magnifications are $|{\mu }_{+}|$ and $|{\mu }_{-}|$; a negative determinant reverses orientation, not flux. Substitution of the two roots, with $u=|\beta |/{\theta }_E$, givesAt $\beta =0$, axial symmetry produces an Einstein ring. For an ideal point-like astronomical source, the lensing magnification diverges: near alignment ${\mu }_{\mathrm{tot}}\sim 1/u$. Finite source size gives a finite observed flux and a ring of finite thickness.

For $0<\beta <{\theta }_E$, there are two images on opposite sides. Their separation is $\sqrt{{\beta }^2+4{\theta }_E^2}$, approaching $2{\theta }_E$ at alignment. For $\beta \ll {\theta }_E$, their positions are ${\theta }_{\pm }\simeq \pm {\theta }_E+\beta /2$ and ${\mu }_{\pm }\simeq 1/2\pm {\theta }_E/(2\beta )$: both images are bright, with the outer one slightly brighter. Moving away from alignment reduces the total amplification and makes the inner image relatively fainter.

For $\beta \gg {\theta }_E$, expanding the two image roots givesThus the distant source has one almost unaltered bright image and an extremely faint opposite-parity secondary, with total flux magnification $1+2{\theta }_E^4/{\beta }^4+O(({\theta }_E/\beta {)}^6)$. The secondary persists for every finite nonzero source offset in the point mass model.

Substituting $\eta =D_s\beta$ and $\xi =D_d\theta$ into the previous geometric relation verifiesFor a point mass gravitational lens, the given physical deflection yieldsAn aligned source has $\beta =0$, and therefore ${\theta }^2={\theta }_E^2$. Rotational symmetry turns these signed intersections into an Einstein ring, whose Einstein radius isFor an offset source, multiplying $\beta =\theta -{\theta }_E^2/\theta$ by $\theta$ gives a quadratic equation. Its two image positions areFor $\beta >0$, ${\theta }_{+}>0$ lies on the source side of the lens and ${\theta }_{-}<0$ lies on the opposite side.

The tangential condition $\bar{\kappa }=1$ gives $\sqrt{{\theta }_t^2+{\theta }_c^2}={\theta }_E$, henceThis is a nonzero gravitational-lensing critical curve precisely when ${\theta }_E>{\theta }_c$. It is also the radius of the Einstein ring for an aligned source in this cored model, so the strength parameter ${\theta }_E$ itself is not the cored model's ring radius.

For completeness the radial condition is equally explicit. Subtracting the mean lensing convergence from twice the local one givesThus the radial critical curve of an axisymmetric lens has radiusagain nonzero exactly when ${\theta }_E>{\theta }_c$.

The conditions are singularities of the image-plane Jacobian matrix, where the formal lensing magnification of a point-like astronomical source diverges. A small source is strongly stretched in the corresponding eigenvector direction: tangentially near ${\theta }_t$, radially near ${\theta }_r$. Their mapped loci are source-plane gravitational-lensing caustics, which determine where image counts change.

The tangential circle maps to $\beta =0$ and gives the aligned Einstein ring. To find the radial caustic, put $R={\theta }_E/{\theta }_c>1$. At ${\theta }_r$, $\sqrt{{\theta }_r^2+{\theta }_c^2}={\theta }_c{R}^{1/3}$ and ${\theta }_r={\theta }_c\sqrt{R^{2/3}-1}$. Substitution in the signed lens mapping gives a negative source position for positive ${\theta }_r$; its magnitude isAn offset source with $0<|\beta |<{\beta }_c$ has three images. For $\beta >0$, one outer image is on the positive side and two are on the negative side, as the sketch shows. The central and outer images have positive parity; the intermediate image has negative parity. On the radial caustic the inner pair merges, with a separate outer image remaining; outside it only the outer image survives. At exact alignment a central image coexists with the ring. Finite source extent smooths the formal divergences. The singular zero-core limit removes the central image, so its image-count rule differs from the finite-core case.

A complete Einstein ring requires an axisymmetric gravitational lens and exact alignment of the source with the lens centre and observer: $\beta =0$. A finite aligned circular source gives a ring of finite width. The background source must lie behind the lens, so the lensing distance factor is positive.

With $\beta =0$ the thin gravitational lens equation givesThe Einstein radius here is angular, and the mass is projected inside the corresponding aperture. For an extended mass distribution the equation is implicit because the enclosed mass depends on ${\theta }_E$.

Using the supplied approximations, $D_{ds}/(D_s{D}_d)=1/(3\times 10^{25}\mathrm{m})$ and ${\theta }_E=3\times 10^{-4}$, the inferred mass isThusThis measures the projected aperture mass without requiring the singular isothermal sphere model used subsequently.

gravitational lensing measures the gravitational influence of matter without requiring that matter to shine. In general relativity a point mass produces small-angle deflectionFor a thin lens, with angular-diameter distances $D_d,D_s,D_{ds}$,Image multiplicity, distortion and magnification therefore constrain projected gravitating mass, with source and lens geometry measured separately.

Strong lensing gives multiple images, arcs and Einstein rings. Their positions and, where available, time delays constrain a central mass distribution. Weak lensing measures correlated small image distortions over a larger field. Using the critical surface density for gravitational lensing and reduced gravitational shear, the convergence and shear satisfyBecause intrinsic galaxy shapes are unknown, weak shear is inferred statistically using many sources. Point-spread-function anisotropy, shear calibration, photometric redshifts, intrinsic alignments and foreground contamination must be controlled.

An inferred lensing mass can be compared with the independently estimated stellar and hot-gas mass. The bullet Cluster dark-matter separation provides a particularly informative separation of components: the collisional X-ray-emitting gas is displaced from the galaxies, while lensing mass peaks approximately follow the less-collisional galaxy component. The primary analysis combined wide-field and Hubble imaging rather than inferring lensing mass from X-ray hydrostatic equilibrium.^[ref] This favors a dominant relatively collisionless unseen component. Translating a merger offset into a particle self-interaction cross section also requires a merger model and projection uncertainties; lensing does not directly reveal a WIMP's mass or quantum numbers.

Microlensing tests a different possibility: dark matter in compact objects. A compact foreground lens can create an unresolved, time-dependent magnification of a background star. Event frequency and duration constrain the abundance and mass range of compact lenses only after survey cadence, detection efficiency, blending, source sizes and halo geometry are included. Achromaticity and the expected light-curve shape help distinguish simple lensing from intrinsic variability. A null survey result does not exclude every compact-object mass at every location.

Weak-lensing correlations and small-scale strong-lens structure also test the matter power spectrum and halo substructure, potentially distinguishing cold from warm free-streaming behavior. Baryonic feedback can change the same small-scale mass distribution. There are intrinsic inversion ambiguities: the mass-sheet transformationleaves reduced gravitational shear unchanged. Source-redshift information, absolute magnification or other data can restrict such degeneracies. Lensing establishes where gravitating matter is and tests its distribution and interactions; identification of its particle species requires complementary evidence.

A galaxy cluster deflects background light through its projected gravitational field. In the thin-lens approximation for gravitational lensing, $\mathbf{\beta }=\mathbf{\theta }-\mathbf{\alpha }(\mathbf{\theta })$ maps image to source angle. Its surface mass density enters throughHere $\mu$ is signed lensing magnification; observed brightness uses $|\mu |$. The $D$'s are angular diameter distances to lens, source and between them; ${\gamma }_s$ denotes lensing shear, not a Lorentz factor. strong gravitational lensing creates arcs and multiple images near critical curves. For an axisymmetric lens, a tangential Einstein ring satisfies mean enclosed convergence one, givingThis is projected enclosed mass, not a general three-dimensional mass profile inferred from a single arc.

weak gravitational lensing uses coherent distortions of many background galaxies. Their intrinsic orientations average approximately to zero, allowing an estimate of reduced shear $g={\gamma }_s/(1-\kappa )$ and a projected mass map. The method traces all gravitating material without assuming hydrostatic equilibrium, which is valuable in merging clusters. Accurate work requires correction of the point spread function, calibrated shape measurement, source redshifts, foreground-member rejection and selection effects. Intrinsic shape noise, unrelated line-of-sight structures and lens-model degeneracies remain. The mass-sheet degeneracy leaves reduced shear unchanged under $\kappa \mapsto \lambda \kappa +(1-\lambda )$ and ${\gamma }_s\mapsto \lambda {\gamma }_s$, so absolute mass normalization needs additional information.

In the Bullet Cluster, weak gravitational lensing places the main projected mass peaks near the collisionless galaxies, displaced from the X-ray-emitting gas that contains most observed baryon mass. Comparing the lensing, optical and X-ray maps supports a dominant weakly collisional dark component under the usual gravity model; lensing alone does not identify its particle species. Cluster lensing measures projected gravitational mass independently of gas temperature or dynamical equilibrium.^[ref]

Gravitational lensing maps source directions into observed image directions because spacetime curvature deflects null geodesics. In the weak-field limit the deflection by a point mass at impact parameter $b$ isFor a thin lens, angular diameter distances $D_l,D_s,D_{ls}$ relate the angles throughA point lens has Einstein angleand in a one-dimensional source alignment its two images satisfyExact alignment gives an Einstein ring for an ideal circular lens; finite source size and departures from symmetry alter the ideal image.

The mapping's Jacobian determines area magnification and parity. Its determinant can vanish on critical curves, whose source-plane images are caustics; a source near a caustic can produce highly stretched arcs or changing image multiplicity. In geometric optics, gravity is achromatic and preserves surface brightness after the usual redshift factors, while changing the apparent solid angle and total flux. Frequency-dependent source size, extinction and plasma propagation can modify an observed broadband image without changing this basic gravitational law.

Strong lensing produces multiple images, arcs and relative time delays. In angular variables the delay surface is proportional toup to an irrelevant additive constant. The geometrical path and gravitational potential delay both contribute. Monitoring a variable multiply imaged source can constrain the time-delay distance, provided the lens mass distribution and external convergence are modeled.

Weak lensing produces small coherent distortions in background galaxy shapes. Convergence describes isotropic focusing and shear describes anisotropic stretching. In a thin-lens convention,Statistical shear correlations probe projected matter structure and cosmological growth; intrinsic alignments, shape noise and selection require control. Compact masses can instead produce microlensing magnification changes when individual image separations are unresolved.

Lensing weighs both luminous and dark gravitating matter and can reveal mass concentrations without requiring hydrostatic equilibrium. It is nevertheless a projected and model-dependent inference: the mass-sheet degeneracy, line-of-sight structure and uncertain source redshifts can mimic changes in inferred mass or distance. Strong, weak and microlensing therefore constrain different scales and complement dynamical, photometric and cosmological measurements rather than automatically recovering a unique three-dimensional mass map.

The gravitational lensing mass includes dark matter, hot intracluster gas, stars, and any other material in the projected aperture. Most is not stellar: in the literal convention above the stellar fraction is only $2.22\times 10^{12}/(5.89\times 10^{14})\simeq 0.00376$.

Assume the cluster shares the cosmic cosmic baryon fraction, $f_b={\Omega }_b/{\Omega }_m=1/6$, and compare the same aperture for all components. ThenNeglecting stars entirely would give $9.82\times 10^{13}{M}_{\odot }$. Thus the assumed hot gas dominates the baryonic matter, and the remainder $M_{\mathrm{DM}}\simeq (5/6)M_E=4.91\times 10^{14}{M}_{\odot }$ is dark matter. The budget is consistent: stars are about $2.26\%$ of the inferred baryonic matter, and all components sum to $M_E$.

For a thermal scale, take gas extent $R_g\simeq 2R_E=465\mathrm{kpc}$ and mean particle mass $\mu m_p$ with $\mu \simeq 0.61$ for ionized gas. A simple spherical virial theorem estimate with gas binding energy $W_g\sim -G{M}_E{M}_g/R_g$ and thermal kinetic energy $K_g=3M_g{k}_{B}T/(2\mu m_p)$ givesThis is the scale of a very hot, massive X-ray emitting galaxy cluster. The numerical prefactor depends on the radial mass density profile, gas distribution and boundary pressure; for example an isothermal-sphere estimate $k_{B}T\sim \mu m_{p}GM/(2R_g)$ gives about $2.0\times 10^8\mathrm{K}$. Moreover $M_E$ is a projected aperture mass at $R_E$, whereas the estimate needs a spherical enclosed mass at $2R_E$; the given data do not determine that conversion. The quoted temperature is therefore an order-of-magnitude estimate, not a uniquely measured value. Nor do the data determine the total gas mass outside the Einstein ring without a profile. The gas budget above pertains to the matched aperture under the cosmic-fraction assumption.

Deflection changes one light ray's direction; focusing concerns relative directions of neighboring light rays and their bundle's cross section. To see the difference for a point-mass gravitational lens, send parallel incident light rays past the lens. A ray at impact parameter $b$ meets the optical axis approximately $f(b)=b/\hat{\alpha }=c^2{b}^2/(4GM)$ beyond the lens. Doubling $b$ quadruples this crossing distance. Thus the lens does not have a common focal length for all rays, although it can produce lensing magnification and an Einstein ring for a specified source-observer geometry.

The point-mass gravitational lens also illustrates why focusing must not be identified just with positive lensing convergence. Away from the central mass, differentiate the reduced deflection $\mathbf{\alpha }={\theta }_E^2\mathbf{\theta }/r^2$: its two-dimensional divergence is zero, so $\kappa =0$ there. Nevertheless its radial and tangential derivatives differ, giving lensing shear of magnitude ${\theta }_E^2/r^2$ and $\det A=1-{\theta }_E^4/r^4$. A vacuum ray bundle can be distorted and magnified. In the same ideal transparent geometrical optics model, surface brightness is preserved; the larger apparent solid angle supplies the increased received light.

For circular reduced deflection $\alpha (r)=r\bar{\kappa }(r)$, a displacement perpendicular to the radial direction is multiplied by $1-\bar{\kappa }$. Vanishing of this eigenvalue gives a tangential gravitational-lensing critical curve. Its source position is $\beta =r-\alpha (r)=0$, so its caustic is the origin in the circular model. Near it, images are stretched tangentially into arcs or an Einstein ring.