Astronomy & Astrophysics

All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=6cm,clip]{0123fig1.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 1: Idealized magnification pattern to illustrate the idea of the method: black areas are low magnification zones, the regular grid of thick white lines represents the caustics (high magnification areas) and the thin white lines are example tracks due to the relative motion between source, lens and observer, which all would result in flat lightcurves.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{0123fig2.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 2: The R band photometry of Q2237+0305 from the GLITP collaboration. The observing period was from October 1st, 1999 (JD 2 459 452) to February 3th, 2000 (JD 2 459 577) with the Nordic Optical Telescope at Canary Islands, Spain (details in Alcalde et al. 2002). The components are labeled from A to D (Yee 1988). The bands indicate the amplitude of each component and are defined by the maximum and the minimum magnitude in each lightcurve. The widths of these bands are $\Delta m_{\rm A} = 0.154$ mag, $\Delta m_{\rm B} = 0.116$ mag, $\Delta m_{\rm C} = 0.238$ mag and $\Delta m_{\rm D} = 0.155$ mag.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=7cm,clip]{0123fig3.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 3: Relative positions of the quasar images, galaxy center and galaxy bar. The direction of motion relative to the external shear is not independent between the images because of the cross-like configurations. Thus, this is orthogonal between images A $\perp$ C and B $\perp$ D, whereas the direction for image A is parallel to the one in image B, and similarly for images C and D.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=4cm,clip]{0123fig4.ps}\inclu... ...23fig6.ps}\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=4cm,clip]{0123fig7.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 4: A part of the total magnification pattern for each component, labeled and ordered as in Fig. 3. The length of the white part of the track is determined in such a way as to fulfill the criterion $\Delta m_{\rm X} (simul) \le \Delta m_{\rm X}$ , where X denotes the component A, B, C or D. The black part of the track in component D introduces variability higher than the observed one, making this set not compatible with the observations.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{0123fig8.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 5: Probability distribution for the fraction of light curves with a given length which produce larger fluctuations than what is observed. We consider three different source sizes: $\sigma_Q=0.003~r_{\rm E}$ (thin line), $\sigma_Q=0.01~r_{\rm E}$ (medium line), and $\sigma_Q=0.05~r_{\rm E}$ (thick line). Horizontal dotted lines indicate the different cuts in percentages, corresponding to the values listed in Table 2.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=6cm,clip]{0123fig1.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 1: Idealized magnification pattern to illustrate the idea of the method: black areas are low magnification zones, the regular grid of thick white lines represents the caustics (high magnification areas) and the thin white lines are example tracks due to the relative motion between source, lens and observer, which all would result in flat lightcurves.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=7cm,clip]{0123fig3.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 3: Relative positions of the quasar images, galaxy center and galaxy bar. The direction of motion relative to the external shear is not independent between the images because of the cross-like configurations. Thus, this is orthogonal between images A $\perp$ C and B $\perp$ D, whereas the direction for image A is parallel to the one in image B, and similarly for images C and D.
Open with DEXTER