Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Strong gravitational lensing’s ‘external shear’ is not shear

Etherington, Amy; Nightingale, James; Massey, Richard; Tam, Sut-Ieng; Cao, XiaoYue; Niemiec, Anna; He, Qiuhan; Robertson, Andrew; Li, Ran; Amvrosiadis, Aristeidis; Cole, Shaun; Diego, Jose; Frenk, Carlos; Frye, Brenda; Harvey, David; Jauzac, Mathilde; Koekemoer, Anton; Lagattuta, David; Lange, Samuel; Limousin, Marceau; Mahler, Guillaume; Sirks, Ellen; Steinhardt, Charles

Strong gravitational lensing’s ‘external shear’ is not shear Thumbnail


Authors

Sut-Ieng Tam

XiaoYue Cao

Profile image of Qiuhan He

Dr Qiuhan He qiuhan.he@durham.ac.uk
Post Doctoral Research Associate

Andrew Robertson

Ran Li

Jose Diego

Brenda Frye

David Harvey

Anton Koekemoer

Profile image of Samuel Lange

Samuel Lange samuel.c.lange@durham.ac.uk
PGR Student Doctor of Philosophy

Marceau Limousin

Ellen Sirks

Charles Steinhardt



Abstract

The distribution of mass in galaxy-scale strong gravitational lenses is often modelled as an elliptical power-law plus ‘external shear’, which notionally accounts for neighbouring galaxies and cosmic shear along our line of sight. A small amount of external shear could come from these sources, but we show that the vast majority does not. Except in a handful of rare systems, the best-fitting values do not correlate with independent measurements of line-of-sight shear: from weak lensing in 45 Hubble Space Telescope images, or in 50 mock images of lenses with complex distributions of mass. Instead, the best-fit external shear is aligned with the major or minor axis of 88 per cent of lens galaxies; and the amplitude of the external shear increases if that galaxy is discy. We conclude that ‘external shear’ attached to a power-law model is not physically meaningful, but a fudge to compensate for lack of model complexity. Since it biases other model parameters that are interpreted as physically meaningful in several science analyses (e.g. measuring galaxy evolution, dark matter physics or cosmological parameters), we recommend that future studies of galaxy-scale strong lensing should employ more flexible mass models.

Citation

Etherington, A., Nightingale, J., Massey, R., Tam, S.-I., Cao, X., Niemiec, A., He, Q., Robertson, A., Li, R., Amvrosiadis, A., Cole, S., Diego, J., Frenk, C., Frye, B., Harvey, D., Jauzac, M., Koekemoer, A., Lagattuta, D., Lange, S., Limousin, M., …Steinhardt, C. (2024). Strong gravitational lensing’s ‘external shear’ is not shear. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 531(3), 3684-3697. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stae1375

Journal Article Type Article
Acceptance Date May 29, 2024
Online Publication Date Jun 3, 2024
Publication Date Jun 5, 2024
Deposit Date Jul 19, 2024
Publicly Available Date Jul 22, 2024
Journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Print ISSN 0035-8711
Electronic ISSN 1365-2966
Publisher Royal Astronomical Society
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 531
Issue 3
Pages 3684-3697
DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stae1375
Keywords gravitational lensing: strong, galaxies: structure
Public URL https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/2606145

Files





You might also like



Downloadable Citations