45
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laborator under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. LLNL-PRES-411078

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Arti GargInstitute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics

Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey

This work work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344.LLNL-PRES-411078

Page 2: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Outline

• The Galactic dark matter problem• Using microlensing to detect Galactic dark matter• The SuperMACHO survey• Candidate selection

– Follow-up observations– Light curve analysis

• Simulations– Detection Efficiency– Contamination Rate

• SuperMACHO candidates

Page 3: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

NGC 4216 in a simulated halo from:John Kormendy (http://chandra.as.utexas.edu/~kormendy/dm-halo-pic.html)

Dark MatterHalo

Visible GalaxyDisk

Galactic Dark Matter Halo:What’s it made of?

• MOND? • Dark Matter?

– Non-baryonic– Baryonic

Page 4: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Dark Matter on Many ScalesObservational evidence for Dark Matter on many

scales…not a priori necessary that the solution is the same on all scales

Jason Ware

The Entire Universe:Large Scale Structure

Abel 2218 (NASA HST)

Galaxy Clusters

Galaxy Halos2dF Galaxy Redshirt Survey

Baryons in Galaxies•Gas?

-Hot gas emits-Cold gas collapses

•MAssive Compact Halo Objects (MACHOs)?

Page 5: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Microlensing to Detect MACHOs

• In 1986, B. Paczynski suggested using gravitational microlensing toward the Magellanic Clouds to detect MACHOs

Large Magellanic Cloud

Milky Way Halo

Us

MACHOs

Light PathMW illustration: Mark Garlick (Space-art) Earth Image: Apollo 17

Anglo-Australian Observatory/Royal Observatory Edinburgh

Page 6: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Microlensing Primer

Lens L with Mass M

Source S

Image 1

Observer O

DOL DLSDOS

Page 7: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Microlensing Primer

Lens L with Mass M

Source S

Image 1

Observer O

DOL DLSDOS

2

4

c

GM

DD

D

OLOS

LSE =θDimensionless

Einstein angle

Microlensing: • Source and image are unresolved

- Source appears amplified• Relative motion between source and lens

- Temporal effect

Geometrical factorLens Mass

Page 8: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Microlensing Light Curve

Time

Flux

time of maximum

characteristic time(θE and vrel)

source brightness

amplification(umin, θE )

Source

Lens

Lens Trajectory

impact parameter = umin

Page 9: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Fraction of sources within rE of a lens at any time

Microlensing Survey Observables

i i

imeas t

t

E )ˆ(

ˆ

41

E

(Mollerach & Roulet 2002, Alcock et al. 2000)

Ensemble of events has a uniform distribution of umin

Spatial Distribution “Screen-” vs. “Self-” lensing

ii tt ˆ event withan detectingfor efficiency )ˆ(

survey of timeexposure total E

E

Optical Depth -

Page 10: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Previous Microlensing Surveys• MACHO survey (Alcock et al 2000, Bennett

2005)

– 13-17 microlensing event candidates– MACHO fraction ~16% of Halo

• EROS-2 (Tisserand 2008)

– Only 1 event observed, 39 expected– Upper limit: MACHO fraction <8%

• OGLE (Wyrzykowski et al. 2008)

– Upper limit: MACHO fraction <8%

EROS-2, Tisserand et al. 2007

• POINT-AGAPE survey (Calchi Novati 2005)

- 6 microlensing event candidates- MACHO fraction ~20% (MWG and

M31)• MEGA survey (de Jong et al. 2006)

- 4 microlensing event candidates- Favors self-lensing- MACHO fraction <30%

MW

Hal

o (t

owar

d Cl

ouds

)M

31 H

alo

log Mlens (M))M

AC

HO

fra

ctio

n of

Hal

o

MW Halo Results

Page 11: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

SuperMACHO ProjectLLNL/IGPP: A. Garg, K.H. Cook, S.Nikolaev, Harvard: A. Rest, C.W. Stubbs (P.I.), P. Challis, G. Narayan, UPitt: W.M. Wood-Vasey, NOAO: R.C. Smith, K. Olsen, A. Zenteno, JHU: M.E. Huber, UW: A. Becker, A. Miceli, FNAL: G. Miknaitis, McMaster: D.L. Welch, Catolica: L. Morelli, A. Clocchiati, D. Minniti,

OSU: J.L. Prieto, Texas A&M: N.B. Suntzeff

• CTIO 4m• Mosaic Imager: big FOV• Monitor 68 LMC fields

– 23 deg2 and ~50 million sources

• 150 half-nights• 5 years (2001-2006)

– Blocks of ~3 months/year

• Near real-time detection• Single filter: custom VR• Difference imaging

Page 12: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

SuperMACHO fields

Primary field setPrimary field set

Secondary field setSecondary field set

Page 13: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Difference Imaging

Detection Imageflux(timage)

Difference Imageflux(timage) – flux(ttempl)

Reference Imageflux(ttempl)

Page 14: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

RR Lyrae from MACHO (black) and SuperMACHO (red)

Page 15: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Outline

• The Galactic dark matter problem• Using microlensing to detect Galactic dark matter• The SuperMACHO survey• Candidate selection

– Follow-up observations– Light curve analysis

• Simulations– Detection Efficiency– Contamination Rate

• SuperMACHO candidates

Page 16: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Determining Optical Depth

• Candidate Selection – Establish a set of criteria for classifying an event as

microlensing

• Detection Efficiency– Likelihood of including a real microlensing event

with a given set of parameters (t0, msource, t, umin)

Page 17: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Sample Light Curves

Page 18: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Challenges to Candidate Selection

• High number of events– ~150,000 light curves identified as variable

• High rate of contamination– Up to 1455 background type Ia supernovae during

survey

• Gaps in sampling and low S/N– No bright time (near full moon) observations– Majority of stars near detection limit

Page 19: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Time

Inte

nsity

(flux

)Microlensing Candidate Selection

• Microlensing events have a predictable light curve

Page 20: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Time

Inte

nsity

(flux

)Microlensing Candidate Selection

• But many other things have a similar light curve (e.g. type Ia supernovae)

Page 21: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Microlensing Candidate Selection

• And if your nights off from the telescope and the weather conspire in the wrong way, discrimination is difficult

Use simulations to reduce

andquantify

contamination. Use follow-up observations to

identifycontamination and

develop better selection

criteria.

Page 22: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Classifying events using follow-up

• Spectroscopic Observations

Spectrum of a supernova Spectrum of the Sun, a typical star(How microlensing might look)

Source: http://homepages.wmich.edu/~korista/sun-images/solar_spec.jpg

Wavelength Wavelength

Inte

nsity

Inte

nsity

Page 23: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

SM-2004-LMC-821

VR~21

Spectral classification: Broad Absorption Line AGN

Page 24: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Classifying events using follow-up

• Spectroscopy is an excellent way to classify an event, but...– It is time-consuming and can’t be done for faint

events

• Obtaining a spectrum for every interesting event is not feasible

Page 25: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Classifying events using follow-up

• Multi-band observations - “poor man’s spectroscopy”

Page 26: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work
Page 27: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Classifying events using follow-up

• Multi-band observations - “poor man’s spectroscopy”

• The ratio of intensity in different “filters” gives a crude measure of the event’s wavelength spectrum– The ratios for “vanilla” stars (i.e. microlensing)

differ from supernovae• This method is less precise but can be used for

faint events

Page 28: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Stars have characteristic ratios of filter intensities

Page 29: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Classifying events using light curves

• Why do we need it?– Only have follow-up for 2 out of 5 years– Follow-up is incomplete and sometimes inconclusive

• What is it?– Software analysis tools that calculate ~50 “statistics”

describing the light curve• Unique?• Significant and Well-sampled?• Microlensing-like?• Unlike other things?

Page 30: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Unique?

-Frequent and periodic variability -Year-to-Year change in baseline

Variable Star Active Galactic Nucleus (AGN)

Page 31: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

-Need more data after peak

Significant and well-sampled?

Page 32: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Microlensing-Like?

-This is a Supernova

Page 33: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

-Fit well by microlensing and supernova models

Unlike other phenomena?

Page 34: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Passes all Criteria

Page 35: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Outline

• The Galactic dark matter problem• Using microlensing to detect Galactic dark matter• The SuperMACHO survey• Candidate selection

– Follow-up observations– Light curve analysis

• Simulations– Detection Efficiency– Contamination Rate

• SuperMACHO candidates

Page 36: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Pass

SimulationsModels ofLight Curves

Simulated Light Curves

Selection Criteria

Contamination Rate

Detection Efficiency

Supernovae

Simulated MicrolensingSimulated

Supernovae Ia

Fail

Microlensin

g

Supernovae

Microlensing

Page 37: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Simulating Errors

• Multiple sources of error– Random

• Poisson error– Systematic

• What we do to the image– Image differencing

» Image convolution» Imperfect subtraction

• How we measure the flux– Photometry (DoPhot)

Page 38: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Simulating Errors

• Multiple sources of error– Random

• Poisson error – analytical model– Systematic

• What we do to the image– Image differencing

» Image convolution – empirical correction» Imperfect subtraction

• How we measure the flux– Photometry (DoPhot) – empirical model

Page 39: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Difference Images

Page 40: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Simulating Imperfect Subtractions: Add events to a grid of light curves

• Obtain light curves for a grid of positions across FOV

• Add simulated event to light curve

Garg et al. 2008

Page 41: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Simulations of Microlensing

events

Simulations

Simulations of type Ia

Supernovae

Page 42: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Simulating Imperfect Subtractions

• Faster and requires less storage than adding fake stars to each image– Also, do not need to model the PSF– Simulations of >107 ML and SN Ia light curves

• Error Propagation– Reproduces systematic effects from reduction pipeline– Preserves correlations in observing conditions

• Straightforward to simulate other types of light curves

Page 43: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Microlensing Candidates

Garg et al., in prep

Page 44: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

PreliminaryEvent Rates

Inner fields(yellow)

Outer fields(green)

sparser

Rest et al., in prep.

Number of events and distribution consistent with expected type Ia SNcontamination plus ~20% MACHO fraction, but some caveats:

-Did we underestimate the SN rate?-Other forms of contamination (e.g. other types of SNe, CV’s, ???)?

Still a Work in Progress!!

Page 45: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Arti Garg Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Preliminary Results from the SuperMACHO Survey This work

Armin Rest, 02/13/08, UCSD

The SuperMACHO survey was undertaken as part of the NOAO Survey Program.