Codex @codex  0

It is useful to rewrite the local lensing convergence asFor positive core radius, the requested limits areA singular isothermal sphere lens instead has $\kappa (\theta )={\theta }_E/(2|\theta |)$, which diverges at the centre. The finite core of the softened isothermal lensing potential regularizes this central lensing convergence; at large angular radius the two models have the same leading profile.

Choose a signed angular coordinate along the source-lens line. The singular isothermal sphere lens equation isFor $\beta >0$, the positive image is ${\theta }_{+}=\beta +{\theta }_E$. A negative image would require ${\theta }_{-}=\beta -{\theta }_E<0$, which is possible only for $\beta <{\theta }_E$. Here $\beta =4$ arcmin and ${\theta }_E=1$ arcmin, so there is only one image, at $\theta =5$ arcmin. Formally using the negative-image formula would produce a positive value, inconsistent with the branch from which it was obtained.

The paper defines its vector deflection as source minus image angle, ${\mathbf{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{paper}}=(\beta -\theta )\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$. This is the negative of the usual reduced deflection in $\mathbf{\beta }=\mathbf{\theta }-{\mathbf{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{standard}}$. Therefore its relation to lensing convergence isFor the SIS, ${\mathbf{\alpha }}_{\mathrm{paper}}=-{\theta }_E\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$. The two-dimensional polar-coordinate divergence givesUsing a plus sign with the printed inward deflection would incorrectly give negative convergence.

For a small intrinsically circular source, differentiate the thin gravitational lens equation. The radial and tangential source-image Jacobian matrix eigenvalues areThus the image is stretched tangentially around the lens centre, with no radial stretch in this idealized model. At $\theta =5$ arcmin, ${\lambda }_t=4/5$; the image is an ellipse with tangential-to-radial axis ratio $5/4$. It is not a complete ring. This local description assumes a source small enough that the Jacobian is nearly constant across it.

The signed lensing magnification isSince the lensing shear magnitude equals $\kappa$, it reduces to $\mu =(1-2\kappa {)}^{-1}$. At the image, $\kappa ={\theta }_E/(2\theta )=1/10$, henceThe image has positive parity and is $25\%$ brighter for the same intrinsic source. Gravitational lensing preserves surface brightness, so this flux amplification follows from its larger apparent solid angle. In evaluating the convergence, use the image angle $5$ arcmin, not the source angle $4$ arcmin.

For the singular isothermal sphere, integrate its projected surface mass density inside a circle of proper radius $\xi$:With $\xi =D_d\theta$ this gives the reduced deflection magnitudeindependent of $\theta$. Hence the singular isothermal sphere lens hasThe spherical three-dimensional mass $2{\sigma }^{2}r/G$ would give the wrong coefficient here; the thin gravitational lens equation needs the projected cylindrical mass.

Using the same ${\theta }_E=3\times 10^{-4}$ and $D_{ds}/D_s=0.5$, the one-dimensional velocity dispersion isThus $\sigma \simeq 2100\mathrm{km}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ within the idealized SIS model.

This circular lensing potential has reduced deflection $\alpha (r)={\theta }_{E}r/\sqrt{r^2+{\theta }_c^2}$, mean lensing convergence $\bar{\kappa }={\theta }_E/\sqrt{r^2+{\theta }_c^2}$ and local convergence $\kappa ={\theta }_E({\theta }_c^2+r^2/2)/(r^2+{\theta }_c^2{)}^{3/2}$. Its central convergence is finite for ${\theta }_c>0$. As the core shrinks to zero, the deflection tends to that of a singular isothermal sphere lens. This softening of the projected lensing potential must not be confused with replacing a three-dimensional density by a different cored profile.