1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \documentclass{emulateapj}
3: \usepackage{amsmath}
4: \bibliographystyle{apj}
5:
6: \def\H{H_0 = 70~\rm km~s^{-1}~Mpc^{-1}}
7:
8: \begin{document}
9: \title{
10: The Spatial Structure of An Accretion Disk
11: }
12:
13: \author{Shawn Poindexter\altaffilmark{1},
14: Nicholas Morgan\altaffilmark{1},
15: Christopher S. Kochanek\altaffilmark{1}
16: }
17: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Astronomy, Ohio State University,
18: 140 West 18th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA,
19: (sdp,nmorgan,ckochanek)@astronomy.ohio-state.edu}
20:
21: \begin{abstract}
22:
23: Based on the microlensing variability of the two-image gravitational lens
24: HE~1104--1805 observed between $0.4$ and $8~\mu$m, we have measured the
25: size and wavelength-dependent structure of the quasar accretion disk.
26: Modeled as a power law in temperature, $T\propto R^{-\beta}$,
27: we measure a
28: B-band ($0.13~\mu$m in the rest frame) half-light radius of
29: $R_{1/2,\rm B} = 6.7^{+6.2}_{-3.2}\times10^{15}~$ cm ($68\%$ CL)
30: and a logarithmic slope of
31: $\beta=0.61^{+0.21}_{-0.17}$ ($68\%$ CL)
32: for our standard model with a logarithmic prior on the disk size.
33: Both the scale and the slope are consistent with simple thin disk models where
34: $\beta=3/4$ and $R_{1/2,\rm B} = 5.9\times 10^{15}~\rm cm$ for a
35: Shakura-Sunyaev disk radiating at the Eddington limit with $10\%$ efficiency.
36: The observed fluxes favor a slightly shallower slope,
37: $\beta=0.55^{+0.03}_{-0.02}$, and a significantly smaller size for
38: $\beta=3/4$.
39:
40: \end{abstract}
41:
42: \keywords{accretion, accretion disks ---
43: gravitational lensing --- quasars: individual (HE~1104--1805)}
44:
45: \section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
46:
47: A simple theoretical prediction for thermally radiating
48: thin accretion disks well outside the inner disk edge
49: is that the temperature diminishes with radius as
50: $T \propto R^{-3/4}$ \citep{Shakura73}.
51: This implies a characteristic size at wavelength $\lambda$ of
52: $R_\lambda \propto \lambda^{4/3}$, where $R_\lambda$ is the radius
53: at which $kT = hc/\lambda$.
54: Needless to say, it is unlikely that disks are this simple \citep[e.g.][]{Blaes04},
55: but measurement of the size-wavelength scaling would be a fundamental
56: test for any disk theory.
57: While the angular sizes of quasar accretion disks are far too small
58: to be resolved by direct observation, gravitational lenses can
59: serve as natural telescopes to probe accretion disk structure on
60: these scales.
61:
62: Here we make the first such measurement of this size-wavelength scaling.
63: Our approach, gravitational microlensing of a quasar, will be unfamiliar to the
64: AGN community, but it is the only method with the necessary spatial
65: resolution available to us for the foreseeable future
66: \citep[see the review by][]{Wambsganss06}.
67: The stars in the lens galaxy near the image of a multiply-imaged quasar generate
68: complex caustic networks with a characteristic scale
69: called the Einstein radius $R_{\rm E}$ set by the
70: mean stellar mass $\left<M\right>$.
71: For the lens system we consider here, HE~1104--1805,
72: $\left<R_{\rm E}\right> = 3.6\times10^{16}(\left<M\right>/h M_\sun)^{1/2}~\rm cm$.
73: Because the magnification diverges on the caustic curves of the pattern
74: and the source is moving relative to the lens and observer,
75: microlensing allows us to study the spatial structure of
76: anything smaller than $\left<R_{\rm E}\right>$.
77: Using microlensing to probe scales smaller than $R_{\rm E}$
78: has been successfully applied to resolve stars in Galactic
79: microlensing events \citep[e.g.][]{Albrow01}.
80: For quasars, this has been considered analytically or with simulations
81: \citep*[e.g.][]{Agol99,Goicoechea04,Grieger91},
82: but the data and algorithms needed to implement
83: the programs have only become available recently \citep[see][]{Kochanek04}.
84:
85: HE~1104--1805 is a doubly imaged radio-quiet quasar
86: at $z_s=2.319$ with a separation of $3\farcs15$ \citep{Wisotzki93}.
87: The lens at $z_l = 0.729$ was discovered in the near-IR by \citet*{Courbin98}
88: and with {\it HST} \citep{Remy98,Lehar00}.
89: Here we analyze 13 years of photometric data in 11 bands from the
90: mid-IR to B-band using the methods of \citet{Kochanek04} to measure the
91: wavelength-dependent structure of this quasar modeled as a power law
92: $R_\lambda \propto \lambda^{1/\beta}$.
93: We assume a flat $\Lambda$CDM cosmological model with
94: $\Omega_M = 0.3$ and $\H$ and
95: report the disk sizes assuming a mean inclination of $\cos{i}=1/2$.
96: In \S\ref{sec:datamethod} we describe the data set and our methods,
97: and \S\ref{sec:results} presents our measurement results and
98: our conclusions.
99:
100: \section{Data and Methods}\label{sec:datamethod}
101:
102: % # Band Source
103: % --------------------------------------------
104: % 0 R SMARTS, Ofek, Remy
105: % 1 B SMARTS, Gil-Merino, HST
106: % 2 I SMARTS, Remy, HST
107: % 3 IRAC1
108: % 4 IRAC2
109: % 5 IRAC3
110: % 6 IRAC4
111: % 7 V OGLE, Remy, HST
112: % 8 J SMARTS, Courbin, SOAR
113: % 9 H HST, SOAR
114: %10 K Courbin, Remy, SOAR
115:
116: We included observations of HE~1104--1805 in 11 bands:
117: B, V, R, I, J, H, K, $3.6~\mu{\rm m}$, $4.5~\mu{\rm m}$,
118: $5.8~\mu{\rm m}$, and $8.0~\mu{\rm m}$.
119: These included our own SMARTS optical/near-IR, SOAR near-IR,
120: {\it HST} and Spitzer IRAC data \citep{Poindexter07},
121: R-band monitoring data by \citet{Ofek03},
122: the V-band monitoring data from \citet{Schechter03} and \citet{Wyrzykowski03},
123: and earlier data from \citet{Remy98}, \citet*{Gil-Merino02},
124: \citet{Courbin98}, and \citet{Lehar00}.
125: Where possible we corrected the light curves for the 152 day time delay
126: between the images we measured in \citet{Poindexter07}.
127: Where we could not, we broadened the photometric
128: uncertainties by 0.07 mag so that the flux ratio uncertainties
129: would be larger by the 0.1 mag shifts we found between time-delay corrected
130: and uncorrected flux ratios.
131: The light curve is plotted along with one of the light curve models from our
132: analysis in Figure \ref{fig:lc}. As pointed out in \citet{Poindexter07},
133: image A has slowly switched from being bluer than image B
134: to being redder in the optical/near-infrared (see Figure \ref{fig:lc}),
135: while the mid-infrared flux agrees with the flux ratio of the
136: broad emission lines \citep{Wisotzki93}.
137:
138: Determining the structure of the disk as a function of wavelength from
139: such data is relatively straight forward. The divergences
140: on the caustics of the microlensing magnification patterns are only
141: renormalized by the finite size of the source quasar because
142: the observed magnification is the convolution of the pattern with the
143: source structure. Thus, larger emission regions will show smaller
144: variability amplitudes than smaller emission regions because they
145: smooth the patterns more. As we go from the K-band to the
146: B-band, the radius of a standard thin disk with $R_\lambda \propto \lambda^{4/3}$,
147: changes by a factor of $8.6$, corresponding to a change in the
148: disk area of almost two orders of magnitude. We see in Fig.~\ref{fig:lc}
149: that the bluer wavelengths show larger amplitudes than the red wavelengths,
150: so we immediately know that the blue emission regions are more compact
151: than the red.
152:
153: Our analysis uses the Bayesian Monte Carlo method of \citet{Kochanek04}
154: to analyze the data.
155: In essence, we randomly draw large numbers of trial light curves
156: from a range of physical models, fit them to the data and then use Bayesian
157: statistics to derive probability distributions for the disk structure.
158: We need, however, to discuss the physical variables used in the models
159: over which we average as well as our model for the structure of the
160: accretion disk.
161:
162: \begin{figure}[t]
163: \plotone{f1.ps}
164: \caption{The HE~1104--1805 multi-band light curves.
165: The curves show a model for the BVRIJHK bands and the four IRAC channels
166: ($3.6$ to $8.0~\mu$m).
167: For clarity we split the data into three panels and
168: show the B, V, R, and J-band data points in 200 day averages.
169: \label{fig:lc}}
170: \end{figure}
171:
172: We use the lens model sequence from \citet{Poindexter07}, which consists
173: of a de Vaucouleurs model matched to the {\it HST} observations
174: embedded in an NFW halo, to set the shear $\gamma$, convergence $\kappa$, and
175: stellar fraction $\kappa_*/\kappa$ for the microlensing magnification patterns.
176: The models were constrained to match the flux ratios of the mid-IR IRAC bands.
177: We used a mass function of $dN/dM \propto M^{-1.3}$ with $M_{max}/M_{min} = 50$
178: whose structure is broadly consistent with the Galactic disk mass function
179: of \cite{Gould00}.
180: The lens models were parameterized by $f_{M/L}$, the fraction of a
181: constant mass-to-light ratio ($M/L$) represented by the visible galaxy.
182: For each of ten models, $f_{M/L} = 0.1,0.2,\ldots,1.0$, we produce 2
183: magnification patterns with an outer dimension of $10 R_{\rm E}$ and
184: $8192^2$ pixels to achieve a pixel scale of
185: $4.4\times 10^{13}~(\left<M\right>/hM_\sun)^{1/2}$ cm/pixel
186: that is smaller than the gravitational radius
187: $r_g = GM/c^2 = 3.5\times 10^{14}~\rm cm$ expected for HE~1104--1805
188: (see \S\ref{sec:results}).
189: We experimented extensively with magnification patterns of different sizes
190: and scales to ensure that our choice of pixel scale and outer dimension did not
191: affect our results.
192: We used the velocity model from \citet{Kochanek04}, where the adopted values
193: are $73~\rm km/s$ for our velocity projected onto the lens plane,
194: $308~\rm km/s$ for the velocity dispersion of the lens estimated from
195: fitting an isothermal lens model and RMS peculiar velocities of
196: $135$ and $71~\rm km/s$ for the lens and source respectively.
197: We assume a uniform prior on the mean masses of the stars of
198: $0.1~M_\sun < \left<M\right> < 1.0~M_\sun$, but this has only
199: limited effects on the estimates of the disk size (see Kochanek 2004).
200: Our estimates of the disk properties average over all these parameters.
201:
202: \begin{figure}
203: \plotone{f2.ps}
204: \caption{Probability distributions for the B-band accretion disk half-light radius.
205: The bold solid (dashed) curve is the distribution based on a logarithmic
206: (linear) prior on the disk size.
207: The filled (open) square near the top is the median of the distribution
208: with a logarithmic (linear) prior along with the $68\%$ confidence error bars.
209: The lower curves show the contribution from the more significant
210: $\beta$ trials, labeled by their value of $\beta$.
211: The vertical lines show the
212: B-band thin disk size predicted from the I-band flux (Eqn. \ref{eqn:fluxsize})
213: and the size expected from standard thin disk theory (Eqn.
214: \ref{eqn:theorysize}) for Eddington limited ($L/L_{\rm E}=1$)
215: accretion with $\eta=10\%$ efficiency.
216: \label{fig:BbandSize}}
217: \end{figure}
218:
219: We modeled the disk as a face-on thermally radiating disk with temperature
220: $T\propto R^{-\beta}$ \citep[e.g.][]{Collier98},
221: corresponding to a surface brightness profile of
222: \begin{equation}
223: f_\nu \propto \nu^3 \left[\exp{(R/R_\lambda)}^\beta-1\right]^{-1}
224: \label{eqn:fnu}
225: \end{equation}
226: where the size scale is
227: $R_\lambda=R_{\rm B}(\lambda/\lambda_{\rm B})^{1/\beta}$
228: and $R_{\rm B}$ is the disk size at the observed
229: B-band ($1310$\AA~in the rest frame) and $\beta=3/4$ for standard
230: thin disk theory.
231: In many cases we report the half-light radius
232: $R_{1/2,\lambda}(\beta) = C(\beta)R_\lambda(\beta)$ where
233: for $\beta=3/4$, $C=2.44$.
234: While we do not include an inner disk edge of $R_{in}\simeq 2r_g$
235: to $6r_g$, the lack of this central hole has little effect
236: on our results unless $\beta\rightarrow 2$ or $R_B\simeq R_{in}$.
237: We tried disk models with profile exponents of $\beta=1/4,3/8,\cdots,7/4$,
238: making $4 \times 10^{6}$ trial light curves for each value of $\beta$.
239: In our final analysis we use the $3.3\times10^6$ light curves that
240: passed a threshold of $\chi^2/N_{dof} \leq 3$ for $N_{dof}=438$
241: degrees of freedom. We used both a logarithmic prior,
242: $P(R_\lambda) \propto 1/R_\lambda$, and a linear prior,
243: $P(R_\lambda) \propto \rm constant$, on the disk size.
244: Generally, a logarithmic prior is preferred for scale free
245: variables like $R_\lambda$,
246: but for this problem a linear prior may be more appropriate for small
247: source sizes because we are sensitive to the difference between small sizes only
248: during caustic crossings. If, however, we have solutions with the caustic
249: crossing sitting in a gap of the light curve, we will find that
250: $P(D|R_\lambda)$ approaches a constant value as $R_\lambda$ goes to zero.
251: This leads to a formal divergence in $P(R_\lambda|D)$ with a logarithmic
252: prior, suggesting that a linear prior may be more appropriate. In practice,
253: Figs. \ref{fig:BbandSize}-\ref{fig:BbandVsBeta} show the results for both
254: options and we use the results
255: for the logarithmic prior in our discussion.
256: For the results we give the value at the median of the probability
257: distribution and the 68\% ($1~\sigma$) confidence regions.
258:
259: \section{Results and Discussion}\label{sec:results}
260:
261: We have no difficulty reproducing the observed light curves, including
262: the presently observed color reversal. We illustrate this in
263: Fig.~\ref{fig:lc}, where we superpose our best fitting light
264: curve model on the data.
265:
266: \begin{figure}
267: \plotone{f3.ps}
268: \caption{B-band half-light disk radius $R_{1/2,\rm B}$
269: versus $\beta$ where $T\propto R^{-\beta}$.
270: The solid (dotted) contours represent the $68\%$, $90\%$, and $95\%$ confidence
271: levels of the microlensing measurements assuming a logarithmic (linear) prior on disk size.
272: The small solid contours is the B-band flux estimate considering a
273: $T\propto R^{-\beta}$ model fit to all the bands.
274: The dashed line shows the size estimated from just the B-band flux
275: measurement without the constraint on $\beta$ from the other bands.
276: The large solid square at $\beta=3/4$ shows the radius
277: predicted by thin disk theory (Eqn. \ref{eqn:theorysize}).
278: \label{fig:BbandVsBeta}}
279: \end{figure}
280:
281: We find a wavelength-size scaling of the accretion disk of
282: $\beta=0.61^{+0.21}_{-0.17}$ and $\beta=0.89^{+0.23}_{-0.16}$
283: for the logarithmic and linear priors respectively
284: (Fig.~\ref{fig:sizeVsWavelength}), where $R_\lambda \propto\lambda^{1/\beta}$
285: and $T\propto R^{-\beta}$. This is consistent with simple
286: thin disk theory ($\beta=3/4$). The B-band half light
287: radius is $R_{1/2,\rm B} = 6.7^{+6.2}_{-3.2}\times10^{15}$~cm
288: with the logarithmic prior and
289: $R_{1/2,\rm B} = 1.3^{+0.9}_{-0.6}\times10^{16}$~cm
290: with the linear prior (Figs. \ref{fig:BbandSize} and \ref{fig:BbandVsBeta}).
291: We use the half light radius rather than $R_\lambda$ because it has
292: less covariance with the exponent $\beta$.
293: We can also estimate the sizes for the individual bands, as shown in
294: Fig.~\ref{fig:sizeVsWavelength}, although these will be highly
295: correlated because the model only has the exponent $\beta$
296: and one scale length as actual parameters. If we fix
297: $\beta=3/4$, then we find that B-band size for this case is
298: $R_{1/2,\rm B}(\beta=3/4) = 9.0^{+6.5}_{-4.2}\times10^{15}$ cm.
299:
300: We can compare to thin disk theory only for the case of $\beta=3/4$ since
301: there is no simple generalization for alternate values of $\beta$. Based
302: on the CIV emission line width of HE~1104--1805, \citet{Peng06} estimated
303: a black hole (BH) mass of $M_{1104} = 2.4\times10^9 M_\sun$, which corresponds
304: to a gravitational radius of $r_g = GM/c^2 = 3.5\times 10^{14}~\rm cm$.
305: In thin disk theory \citep{Shakura73}, this implies a size scaling of
306: \begin{equation}
307: \begin{split}
308: R_\lambda &= \frac{1}{\pi^2}\left[\frac{45}{16}\frac{\lambda_{rest}^4 r_g \dot M}{h_p}\right]^{1/3} \\
309: &= (1.7\times10^{16}) \left[\frac{\lambda_{rest}}{\mu\rm m}\right]^{4/3}
310: \left[\frac{M_{BH}}{M_{1104}}\right]^{2/3}
311: \left[\frac{L}{\eta L_{\rm E}}\right]^{1/3}~{\rm cm},
312: \end{split}
313: \label{eqn:theorysize}
314: \end{equation}
315: where $\eta$ is the radiative efficiency ($L=\eta\dot M c^2$), $h_p$ is
316: the Planck constant,
317: and $L/L_{\rm E}$ is the fraction
318: of the Eddington luminosity radiated by the QSO. Thus the expected B-band
319: (rest frame $0.13~\mu$m) size for a disk radiating at the Eddington limit
320: ($L/L_{\rm E}$) with 10\% efficiency is $R_{\rm B} = 2.4\times10^{15}$ cm
321: corresponding to a half-light radius of $R_{1/2,\rm B} = 5.9\times10^{15}$ cm.
322: This agrees well with our measurement (Figs.~\ref{fig:BbandSize},
323: \ref{fig:BbandVsBeta}, and \ref{fig:sizeVsWavelength}).
324: For the $\beta=3/4$ model the disk scale
325: length is significantly larger than the gravitational radius
326: ($R_{1/2,\rm B} \sim 20 r_g$) and corrections for the inner edge of the
327: disk will be modest. Particularly if we allow for uncertainties
328: in the black hole mass estimate ($\sim 0.3$~dex), there is good agreement
329: with the simplest possible thin disk model.
330:
331: \begin{figure}
332: \plotone{f4.ps}
333: \caption{Half-light disk radius $R_{1/2,\lambda}$ versus wavelength.
334: The filled squares (open triangles) are the size estimates from microlensing
335: (the source flux, Eqn. \ref{eqn:fluxsize}).
336: Note that the microlensing uncertainties are highly correlated
337: because the only 2 actual variables are $R_{\rm B}$ and $\beta$.
338: The short dashed and dotted lines are the best fit power laws to these measurements.
339: The long dashed line shoes how the normalization of the points would shift
340: if we use $\beta=3/4$ rather than the best fit slope of $\beta=0.55$.
341: \label{fig:sizeVsWavelength}}
342: \end{figure}
343:
344: The magnification-corrected flux of the quasar provides a second
345: comparison scale under the assumption that the disk is thermally
346: radiating. If the quasar has a magnification corrected magnitude of
347: $m$, then
348: \begin{equation}
349: \begin{split}
350: R_\lambda(\beta) \simeq \frac{2.8\times10^{15}}{h \sqrt{K(\beta) \cos i}}
351: \frac{D_{OS}}{r_H}
352: \left[\frac{\lambda_{obs}}{\mu\rm m}\right]^{3/2} \\
353: \left[{\frac{\hbox{zpt}}{2409~\hbox{Jy}}}\right]^{1/2}
354: 10^{-0.2({\rm m}-19)} \hbox{cm}.
355: \label{eqn:fluxsize}
356: \end{split}
357: \end{equation}
358: where $\lambda_{obs}$ is the observed wavelength, $\hbox{zpt}$
359: is the filter zero point (normalized to the I-band), and
360: \begin{equation}
361: K(\beta) = \frac{1}{2.58}\int_0^\infty u du \left[ \exp(u^\beta)-1\right]^{-1}
362: \end{equation}
363: is the $\beta$-dependent term due to the temperature profile normalized
364: so that $K(\beta=3/4)=1$.
365: Assuming the magnifications of images A and B are
366: 11.5 and 4 respectively (as found
367: in the best fit macro model in \citealt{Poindexter07}),
368: we calculated the magnification corrected source magnitude in
369: each of the 11 bands to estimate
370: the disk size versus wavelength (Fig. \ref{fig:sizeVsWavelength}).
371: For the H-, I-, and V-band, we used
372: the {\it HST} observations of \citet{Lehar00}.
373: The mid-IR magnitudes are from {\it Spitzer} \citep{Poindexter07}.
374: We calibrated the SMARTS B/R and J/K data using the Guide Star
375: Catalog and 2MASS respectively.
376:
377: The sizes estimated from the flux are very well fit by
378: a power law (see Fig. \ref{fig:sizeVsWavelength})
379: with a slope equivalent
380: to $\beta=0.55^{+0.03}_{-0.02}$ when we assume a magnification uncertainty of
381: a factor of 2. While this slope is consistent with our
382: microlensing results, the size scale of
383: $R_{1/2,\rm B} = 1.8^{+0.7}_{-0.5}\times10^{15}$ is smaller
384: by a factor of 4 than
385: our standard estimate. This discrepancy depends on the
386: value of $\beta$, with a flatter temperature profile showing
387: less of a difference.
388: While there is little extinction in the lens, 2.9 mags of B-band
389: ($0.31~\mu$m rest frame) extinction in the source would reconcile
390: the flux and microlensing size estimates. However, with such an
391: extinction, neither SMC \citep{Gordon03} or AGN
392: \citep{Gaskell04} extinction curves can reconcile the two
393: estimates at all wavelengths. Nonetheless absorption in the source
394: could be a partial explanation.
395:
396: The general relationship we find between the microlensing,
397: thin disk and flux sizes seems to be typical. \citet{Pooley07}
398: noted qualitatively that microlensing sizes tended to be larger
399: than expected from the optical flux and thin disk models.
400: \citet{Morgan07} showed quantitatively that the microlensing sizes scaled as
401: expected with BH mass ($R_\lambda \propto M^{2/3}$) and were
402: consistent with being proportional to the flux sizes, but that the
403: absolute scales of the microlensing sizes were slightly larger
404: than the thin disk sizes and considerably larger than the
405: flux sizes.
406: Our results here suggest that part of the solution
407: may be that the effective temperature profile is somewhat
408: shallower than $T \propto R^{-3/4}$.
409:
410: Several local estimates \citep{Collier99,Sergeev05} have found
411: UV-optical wavelength dependent time delays of nearby AGN consistent
412: with $T\propto R^{-3/4}$. They also found the flux discrepancy, but
413: phrased the problem as needing to put the systems at higher than
414: expected distances (through a low value of $H_0$) in order to reconcile
415: the model disk surface brightness with the observed flux.
416:
417: Our current disk model is a face-on, thermally radiating disk without
418: the central temperature depression created by the inner edge of the
419: accretion disk (Eqn \ref{eqn:fnu}).
420: Omitting the inner edge has little effect because
421: at fixed wavelength little flux is radiated there and the finite
422: resolution of the magnification patterns
423: eliminates the formal surface brightness divergence in Eqn. (\ref{eqn:fnu}).
424: It is expected from theoretical work that microlensing
425: is primarily sensitive to an effective smoothing area, and the resulting
426: size estimate is only weekly sensitive to the true surface brightness
427: profile \citep[e.g.][]{Mortonson05, Congdon07}.
428: Nonetheless, a clear next step is to begin interpreting the
429: microlensing results using more realistic thin disk
430: models \citep[e.g.][]{Hubeny01} to see if adding such details
431: alters the basic picture. The present results suggest that part
432: of the solution may be to alter the temperature profile of the disk,
433: perhaps through irradiation of the outer regions by the inner regions.
434:
435: \acknowledgments
436: %
437: We thank R. Pogge, E. Agol, C. Morgan, and X. Dai for discussions
438: on microlensing, accretion disks, and suggestions for improving the
439: manuscript.
440: % Support
441: Support for this work was provided by NASA through an award
442: GRT00003172 issued by JPL/Caltech.
443: % Spitzer
444: This work is based in part on observations made with the
445: Spitzer Space Telescope,
446: which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of
447: Technology under a contract with NASA.
448: % HST
449: Based on observations made with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained
450: at the Space Telescope Institute. STScI is operated by
451: the association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. under the NASA
452: contract NAS5-26555.
453: % 2MASS
454: This publication makes use of data products from the Two Micron All Sky Survey,
455: which is a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared
456: Processing and Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by
457: NASA and NSF.
458: % GSC
459: The Guide Star Catalogue-II is a joint project of the STScI
460: and the Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino. STScI
461: is operated by the AURA, for NASA
462: under contract NAS5-26555. The participation
463: of the Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino is supported by the Italian
464: Council for Research in Astronomy. Additional support is provided by
465: ESO, Space Telescope European Coordinating
466: Facility, the International GEMINI project and the ESA
467: Astrophysics Division.
468:
469: \begin{thebibliography}
470:
471: % Imaging a Quasar Accretion Disk with Microlensing
472: \bibitem[Agol \& Krolik(1999)]{Agol99}
473: Agol, E. \& Krolik, J., 1999, \apj, 524, 49
474:
475: % H\alpha Equivalent Width Variations across the Face of a Microlensed K Giant in the Galactic Bulge
476: \bibitem[Albrow et al.(2001)]{Albrow01} Albrow, M., et al.\ 2001, \apjl, 550, L173
477:
478: \bibitem[Blaes(2004)]{Blaes04}
479: Blaes, O.M., 2004, in Les Houches Summer School LXXVIII (Springer: Berlin) 137
480:
481: % Testing thermal reprocessing in AGN accretion discs
482: \bibitem[Cackett et al.(2007)Cackett, Horne \& Winkler]{Cackett07}
483: Cackett, E. M., Horne, K., Winkler, H., 2007, [astro-ph/0706.1464]
484:
485: % Steps toward Determination of the Size and Structure of the Broad-Line Region in Active Galactic Nuclei. XIV. Intensive Optical Spectrophotometric Observations of NGC 7469
486: \bibitem[Collier et al.(1998)]{Collier98} Collier, S.~J., et al.\
487: 1998, \apj, 500, 162
488:
489: % A new direct method for measuring the Hubble constant from reverberating accretion discs in active galaxies
490: \bibitem[Collier et al.(1999)]{Collier99} Collier, S., Horne, K.,
491: Wanders, I., \& Peterson, B.~M.\ 1999, \mnras, 302, L24
492:
493: % Microlensing of an extended source by a power-law mass distribution
494: \bibitem[Congdon et al.(2007)]{Congdon07} Congdon, A.~B., Keeton,
495: C.~R., \& Osmer, S.~J.\ 2007, \mnras, 376, 263
496:
497: % Detection of the lensing galaxy in HE~1104--1805
498: \bibitem[Courbin et al.(1998)Courbin, Lidman \& Magain]{Courbin98}
499: Courbin, F., Lidman, C. \& Magain, P., 1998, \aap, 330, 57
500: % http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1998A%26A...330...57C&link_type=ARTICLE&db_key=AST
501:
502: % Dust and Extinction Curves in Galaxies with z>0: The Interstellar Medium of Gravitational Lens Galaxies
503: \bibitem[Falco et al.(1999)]{Falco99}
504: Falco, E.E., Impey, C.D., Kochanek, C.S., Leh\'ar, J., McLeod, B. A., Rix, H.-W.,
505: Keeton, C. R., Muñoz, J. A., Peng, C. Y., 1999, \apj, 523, 617
506:
507: % The Nuclear Reddening Curve for Active Galactic Nuclei and the Shape of the Infrared to X-Ray Spectral Energy Distribution
508: \bibitem[Gaskell et al.(2004)]{Gaskell04} Gaskell, C.~M.,
509: Goosmann, R.~W., Antonucci, R.~R.~J., \& Whysong, D.~H.\ 2004, \apj, 616,
510: 147
511:
512: % The Double Quasar HE~1104--1805: A Case study for time delay
513: % determination with poorly sampled lightcurves
514: \bibitem[Gil-Merino et al.(2002)Gil-Merino, Wisotzki \& Wambsganss]{Gil-Merino02}
515: Gil-Merino, R., Wisotzki, L. \& Wambsganss, J., 2002, \aap, 381, 428
516: % http://www.edpsciences.org/articles/aa/pdf/2002/02/aah3051.pdf?access=ok
517:
518: % QSO size ratios from multiband monitoring of a microlensing high-magnification event
519: \bibitem[Goicoechea et al.(2004)]{Goicoechea04}
520: Goicoechea, L. J., Shalyapin, V., González-Cadelo, J., Oscoz, A., 2004, \aap, 425, 475
521:
522: % A Quantitative Comparison of the Small Magellanic Cloud, Large Magellanic Cloud, and Milky Way Ultraviolet to Near-Infrared Extinction Curves
523: \bibitem[Gordon et al.(2003)]{Gordon03} Gordon, K.~D., Clayton,
524: G.~C., Misselt, K.~A., Landolt, A.~U., \& Wolff, M.~J.\ 2003, \apj, 594,
525: 279
526:
527: % Measuring the Remnant Mass Function of the Galactic Bulge
528: \bibitem[Gould(2000)]{Gould00}
529: Gould, A.\ 2000, \apj, 535, 928
530:
531: % The deconvolution of the quasar structure from microlensing light curves
532: \bibitem[Grieger et al.(1991)Grieger, Kayser \& Schramm]{Grieger91}
533: Grieger, B., Kayser, R., \& Schramm, T., 1991, \aap, 252, 508
534:
535: % Non-LTE Models and Theoretical Spectra of Accretion Disks in Active Galactic Nuclei. IV. Effects of Compton Scattering and Metal Opacities
536: \bibitem[Hubeny et al.(2001)]{Hubeny01}
537: Hubeny, I., Blaes, O.,
538: Krolik, J.~H., \& Agol, E.\ 2001, \apj, 559, 680
539:
540: % Quantitative Interpretation of Quasar Microlensing Light Curves
541: \bibitem[Kochanek(2004)]{Kochanek04} % HE~1104
542: Kochanek, C.S., 2004, \apj, 605, 58
543: % http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2004ApJ...605...58K&db_key=AST&link_type=ABSTRACT&high=40d6fc09bd23920
544:
545: % Tests for Substructure in Gravitational Lenses
546: \bibitem[Kochanek \& Dalal(2004)]{Kochanek04b}
547: Kochanek, C.S., Dalal, N., 2004, \apj, 610, 69
548:
549: % Turning AGN Microlensing From a Curiosity Into a Tool
550: \bibitem[Kochanek et al.(2007)]{Kochanek07}
551: Kochanek, C.S., Dai, X., Morgan, C., Morgan, N., Poindexter, S. \& Chartas, G., 2007,
552: in Statistical Challenges in Modern Astronomy IV in Statistical Challenges in Modern Astronomy IV
553: G. J. Babu and E. D. Feigelson, eds., (Astron. Soc. Pacific: San Francisco),
554: [astro-ph/0609112]
555:
556: % HST Observations of 10 Two-Image Gravitational Lenses
557: \bibitem[Leh\'ar et al.(2000)]{Lehar00}
558: Leh\'ar, J., et al., 2000, \apj, 536, 584
559: % notes: This is the HST observations paper for HE~1104 and Q0142
560:
561: % The Quasar Accretion Disk Size -- Black Hole Mass Relation
562: \bibitem[Morgan et al.(2007)]{Morgan07}
563: Morgan, C., Kochanek, C.S., Morgan, N.D., Falco, E.E., 2007, in preparation
564:
565: % SIZE IS EVERYTHING: UNIVERSAL FEATURES OF QUASAR MICROLENSING WITH EXTENDED SOURCES
566: \bibitem[Mortonson, Schechter \& Wambsganss(2005)]{Mortonson05}
567: Mortonson, M.J., Schechter, P.L., Wambsganss, J., 2005, \apj, 628, 594
568:
569: % Time-Delay Measurement of the Lensed Quasar HE~1104--1805
570: \bibitem[Ofek \& Maoz(2003)]{Ofek03}
571: Ofek, E.O. \& Maoz, D., 2003, \apj, 594, 101
572: % http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ApJ/journal/issues/ApJ/v594n1/58196/58196.web.pdf
573:
574: % Probing the Coevolution of Supermassive Black Holes and Galaxies Using Gravitationally Lensed Quasar Hosts
575: \bibitem[Peng et al.(2006)]{Peng06}
576: Peng, C.Y., Impey, C.D., Rix, H.-W., Kochanek, C.S., Keeton, C.R., Falco, E.E.,
577: Leh\'ar, J. \& McLeod, B.A., 2006, \apj, 649, 616
578:
579: % Mid-IR Observations and a Revised Time Delay for the Gravitational Lens System Quasar HE~1104--1805
580: \bibitem[Poindexter et al.(2007)]{Poindexter07} Poindexter, S.,
581: Morgan, N., Kochanek, C.~S., \& Falco, E.~E.\ 2007, \apj, 660, 146
582:
583: %X-ray and Optical Flux Ratio anomalies in Quadruply lensed Qusars: I.
584: % Zooming in on quasar emission regions
585: \bibitem[Pooley et al.(2007)]{Pooley07}
586: Pooley, D., Blackburne, J.~A., Rappaport, S., \& Schechter, P.~L.
587: \ 2007, \apj, 661, 19
588:
589: % Lag-Luminosity Relationship for Interband Lags between Variations in B, V, R, and I Bands in Active Galactic Nuclei
590: \bibitem[Sergeev et al.(2005)]{Sergeev05} Sergeev, S.~G.,
591: Doroshenko, V.~T., Golubinskiy, Y.~V., Merkulova, N.~I., \& Sergeeva,
592: E.~A.\ 2005, \apj, 622, 129
593:
594: \bibitem[Shakura \& Sunyaev(1973)]{Shakura73}
595: Shakura, N.I. \& Sunyaev, R.A., 1973, \aap, 24, 337
596:
597: % Microlensing of Relativisitic Knots in the Quasar HE~1104--1805 AB
598: \bibitem[Schechter et al.(2003)]{Schechter03}
599: Schechter, P.L., et al. 2003, \apj, 584, 657
600:
601: % Detection of the lensing galaxy for the double QSO HE~1104--1805
602: \bibitem[Remy et al.(1998)]{Remy98}
603: Remy, M., Claeskens, J.-F., Surdej, J., Hjorth, J., Refsdal, S., Wucknitz, O.,
604: S{\o}rensen, A.N. \& Grundahl, F., 1998, New Astronomy, 3, 379
605: % http://journals.ohiolink.edu/local-cgi/send-pdf/060006145159486174.pdf
606:
607: % Gravitational Lensing: Strong Weak and Micro, Saas-Fee Advanced Course 33
608: \bibitem[Wambsganss(2006)]{Wambsganss06}
609: Wambsganss, J, 2006, in Gravitational Lensing: Strong Weak and Micro, Saas-Fee
610: Advanced Course 33, G. Meylan, P. North, P. Jetzer, eds., (Springer: Berlin)
611: 453, [astro-ph/0604278]
612:
613: % The new double QSO HE~1104--1805: Gravitational lens with microlensing or binary quasar?
614: \bibitem[Wisotzki et al.(1993)]{Wisotzki93}
615: Wisotzki, L., K\"ohler, R., Kayser, R. \& Reimers, D., 1993, \aap, 278, L15
616: % http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1993A%26A...278L..15W&db_key=AST&link_type=ABSTRACT&high=40d6fc09bd16024
617:
618: % The Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment. Optical Monitoring of the Gravitationally Lensed Quasar HE~1104--1805 in 1997--2002
619: \bibitem[Wyrzykowski et al.(2003)]{Wyrzykowski03} % HE~1104
620: Wyrzykowski, \L. et al., 2003, Acta Astronomica, 53, 229
621: % http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2003AcA....53..229W&db_key=AST&link_type=ABSTRACT&high=40d6fc09bd16024
622:
623: \end{thebibliography}
624:
625: \end{document}
626: