Arxiv:2011.06002V1 [Astro-Ph.CO] 11 Nov 2020

Astronomy & Astrophysics manuscript no. AO_cosmography ©ESO 2020 November 13, 2020 TDCOSMO VI: Distance Measurements in Time-delay Cosmography under the Mass-sheet transformation Geoff C.-F. Chen ,1,¢ Christopher D. Fassnacht,1 Sherry H. Suyu,2, 3, 4 Akın Yıldırım,2 Eiichiro Komatsu,2, 5 and Jose´ Luis Bernal6 1 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA 2 Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics, Karl-Schwarzschild-Strasse 1, D-85740 Garching, Germany 3 Physik-Department, Technische Universität München, James-Franck-Straße 1, 85748 Garching, Germany 4 Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics (ASIAA), 11F of ASMAB, No.1, Section 4, Roosevelt Road, Taipei, 10617, Taiwan 5 Kavli IPMU (WPI), UTIAS, The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8583, Japan 6 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, USA Received xxx, xxxx; accepted xxx, xxxx ABSTRACT Time-delay cosmography with gravitationally lensed quasars plays an important role in anchoring the absolute distance scale and hence measuring the Hubble constant, 퐻0, independent of traditional distance ladder methodology. A current potential limitation of time delay distance measurements is the “mass-sheet transformation” (MST) which leaves the lensed imaging unchanged but changes the distance measurements and the derived value of 퐻0. In this work we show that the standard method of addressing the MST in time delay cosmography, through a combination of high-resolution imaging and the measurement of the stellar velocity dispersion of the lensing galaxy, depends on the assumption that the ratio, 퐷s/퐷ds, of angular diameter distances to the background quasar and between the lensing galaxy and the quasar can be constrained. This is typically achieved through the assumption of a particular cosmological model. Previous work (TDCOSMO IV) addressed the mass-sheet degeneracy and derived 퐻0 under the assumption of ΛCDM model. In this paper we show that the mass sheet degeneracy can be broken without relying on a specific cosmological model by combining lensing with relative distance indicators such as supernovae type Ia and baryon acoustic oscillations, which constrain the shape of the expansion history and hence 퐷s/퐷ds. With this approach, we demonstrate that the mass-sheet degeneracy can be constrained in a cosmological-model-independent way, and hence model-independent distance measurements in time-delay cosmography under mass-sheet transformations can be obtained. Key words. method: gravitational lensing: strong – cosmology: distance scale 1. Introduction tathiou 2020) or not, clearly demonstrates that it is crucial to test any single methodology by different and independent datasets. The Hubble constant (퐻0) is one of the most important parameters in cosmology. Its value directly sets the age, the size, and the Time-delay cosmography (TDC; e.g., Treu & Marshall 2016; critical density of the Universe. Despite the great success of the Suyu et al. 2018) provides a technique to constrain 퐻0 at low ΛCDM model (Komatsu et al. 2011; Hinshaw et al. 2013; Planck redshift that is completely independent of the traditional distance Collaboration et al. 2018), a stringent challenge to the model ladder approach. When a quasar is strongly lensed by a galaxy, its multiple images have light-curves that are offset by a well- comes from a discrepancy between the extremely precise 퐻0 (= 67.4±0.5 km s−1 Mpc−1) value derived from Planck measure- defined time delay, which depends on the mass profile of the lens ments of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies and cosmological distances to the galaxy and the quasar (Refsdal under the assumption of ΛCDM (Planck Collaboration et al. 1964). A critical aspect of this technique is a model that describes the mass distribution in the lensing galaxy and along the line 2018), and the 퐻0 value from direct measurements of the local Universe (Verde et al. 2019). of sight between the background object and the observer. This arXiv:2011.06002v1 [astro-ph.CO] 11 Nov 2020 model is constrained by the morphology of the lensed emission The recent direct 퐻0 measurements (퐻0 = 74.03 ± −1 −1 of the background object, the stellar velocity dispersion in the 1.42 km s Mpc ) from Type Ia supernovae (SN1a), calibrated lensing galaxy, and by deep imaging and spectroscopy of the by the traditional Cepheid distance ladder (SH0ES collabora- fields containing the lens system. This model is combined with the tion; Riess et al. 2019), show a 4.4f tension with the Planck re- time delays (e.g., Bonvin et al. 2018) to measure the characteristic = ± ¹ º ± sults. However, a recent measurement of 퐻0 69.8 0.8 stat distances for the lens system: the angular diameter distance to the 1.7¹sysº km s−1 Mpc−1 from SN1a calibrated by the Tip of the lens (퐷d) and the time-delay distance, which is a ratio of the Red Giant Branch (CCHP) agrees at the 1.2f level with Planck angular diameter distances in the system: and at the 1.7f with SH0ES results (Freedman et al. 2019). The spread in these results, whether due to systematic effects (Efs- 퐷d퐷s −1 ¢ Current email address: [email protected] 퐷Δt ≡ ¹1 ¸ Idº / 퐻0 , (1) 퐷ds Article number, page 1 of 11 A&A proofs: manuscript no. AO_cosmography ¸4.1 −1 −1 where Id is the redshift of the lens, 퐷s is the distance to the population, the inference on 퐻0 shifted to 67.4−3.2 km s Mpc , background source, and 퐷ds is the distance between the lens in agreement with the Planck value and results from distance lad- and the source. In turn, these distances are used to determine ders (Riess et al. 2019; Freedman et al. 2019). Comparison of cosmological parameters, primarily 퐻0 (e.g., Suyu et al. 2014; the galaxy population distributions show that several observed Bonvin et al. 2016; Birrer et al. 2019; Chen et al. 2019; Rusu properties, such as central stellar velocity dispersion, are similar. et al. 2019; Wong et al. 2019; Jee et al. 2019; Taubenberger et al. In addition, elliptical galaxies are a very homogenous population, 2019; Shajib et al. 2020a). as evidenced by the tightness of correlations like the fundamental A recent analysis with this technique, using a blind analy- plane (Auger et al. 2010, and references therein). However, some sis on data from six gravitational lens systems1, inferred 퐻0 = major differences between the samples are that (1) the SLACS ¸1.7 −1 −1 73.3−1.8 km s Mpc , a value that was 3.8f offset from the lensing galaxies are at lower redshifts than those in the time-delay Planck results (Wong et al. 2019; Millon et al. 2020). This analy- sample, and (2) the SLACS lensing galaxies have smaller ratio of sis used two commonly used descriptions of the mass distribution effective radius to Einstein radius than the time-delay sample (see of the lensing galaxy. The first description consists of a NFW halo Fig. 16 in Paper IV). Possible potential biases and limitations of (Navarro et al. 1996) plus a constant mass-to-light ratio stellar using the SLACS sample are discussed by Paper IV and Shajib distribution (the “composite model”). The second description et al.(2020b). models the three dimensional total mass density distribution, i.e., In this work, we take a more general approach to constrain the luminous plus dark matter, of the galaxy as a power law (Barkana internal MST by combining the time-delay lens system with rela- 1998), i.e., d¹Aº / A−W (the power-law model). These models tive distance indicators without assuming a specific parametriza- yield 퐻0 measurements that are consistent within the errors for tion of the cosmological model. We show that one can hence individual lens systems; the final uncertainties on 퐻0 incorporate constrain the internal MST in a cosmological independent way a marginalization over the choice of mass model (Millon et al. and obtain more broadly applicable distance posteriors. In Sec- 2020). tion2, we introduce the basics of the mass-sheet transformation. Although the power-law and composite models are well- In Section3 and Section4, we discuss the distance measurements motivated by both observations (e.g., Koopmans et al. 2006, under the effects of the internal and external MST. In Section5, 2009; Suyu et al. 2009; Auger et al. 2010; Barnabè et al. 2011; we discuss error propagation under MST. In Section6, we provide Sonnenfeld et al. 2013; Humphrey & Buote 2010; Cappellari a cosmological-model-independent way to constrain the internal 2016) and simulations (Navarro et al. 1996), there is a well- MST. We summarize our work in Section7. known degeneracy in gravitational lensing known as the mass- sheet transformation (MST), that leaves imaging observables in- 2. The Mass-sheet transformation variant but will bias the determination of 퐻0 (Falco et al. 1985; Gorenstein et al. 1988). The line-of-sight mass distribution con- The mass-sheet transformation is a degeneracy affecting grav- tributes to first order mass-sheet-like effect (Fassnacht et al. 2002; itational lens systems. One can transform any projected mass Suyu et al. 2013; Greene et al. 2013; Collett et al. 2013); we will distribution, ^¹\º, into infinite sets of ^_ ¹\º via refer to this as an external MST. However, for the mass distribution of the lensing galaxy, there are different models that ^_ ¹\º = _^¹\º ¸ 1 − _, (2) can give the same lensing observables but would give different without degrading the fit to the lensed emission (Falco et al. time-delays. The most degenerate case is the one with spherical 1985), although MST does change the source size accordingly. symmetry in which the density profiles differ by a component Here ^¹\º is a scaled two-dimensional projected mass density that is uniform in within the radial ranges probed by lensing.

Load more