next previous
Up: Observations of the

4. Origin of the tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray emission

The strong radio source PKS 1830-211 was first proposed to be a gravitational lensed QSO by Pramesh Rao & Subrahmanyan (1988). High resolution radio images obtained from several interferometric arrays have revealed that the source has a ring-like structure with two bright components on sub-arcsecond scales (Jauncey et al. 1991). This suggests a close alignement of the lensed source behind the lensing object. Actually, two absorption systems have been detected at tex2html_wrap_inline1321 (Wiklind & Combes 1996) and tex2html_wrap_inline1323 (Lovell et al. 1996), so it seems likely that the image of the background QSO (with a redshift tex2html_wrap_inline1325) is lensed by two different extragalactic objects (probably gas-rich spirals). The background source can be modeled as a core-knot-jet structure, similar to other flat-spectrum QSOs which are known to be tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray emitters (Nair et al. 1993). The tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray spectrum of 2EG tex2html_wrap_inline1041 is remarkably similar to several spectra of QSOs detected by EGRET, like 0234+285 and 0454-463 (von Montigny et al. 1995). These high-energy spectra are much steeper than those expected for galactic sources like pulsars. This fact, along with the spatial coincidence, strongly suggests the identification of 2EG tex2html_wrap_inline1041 with PKS 1830-211.

The presence of variability in the time history of 2EG tex2html_wrap_inline1041 could provide additional support to the proposed identification. This time history is presented in graphical form in Fig. 4 (click here) for a tex2html_wrap_inline1343 yr time span. We have used the data from the second EGRET catalog corrected and completed by McLaughlin et al. (1996). Systematic errors over the statistical uncertainties of EGRET flux measurements are difficult to estimate. These errors can be due to uncertainties in the instrumental calibration as a function of energy, uncertainties in angle within the instrument, and errors in the galactic diffuse radiation model. McLaughlin et al. (1996) have quantified these systematic errors assuming that tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray pulsars are nonvariable sources, obtaining an additional uncertainty of 6.5% tex2html_wrap_inline1347 1.0% which is included in the error bars in Fig. 4 (click here).

Figure 4: Time history of 2EG tex2html_wrap_inline1041 over a period of tex2html_wrap_inline1259 3.5 yr

A tex2html_wrap_inline1353-variability analysis of the entire light curve (see Romero et al. 1994) shows that the source behaviour is "probably variable''. This is mainly due to the large errors in the flux values during the viewing periods from mid-1992 to mid-1993. However, if we restrict our analysis to the lapse August 1991 - February 1992 we find clear evidence for significant variability. The flux increased from tex2html_wrap_inline1355 cm-2 s-1 in August 1991 to tex2html_wrap_inline1361 cm-2 s-1 at the end of 1991, and then decreased to tex2html_wrap_inline1367 cm-2 s-1 in February 1992. This implies a flux change by a factor of at least 2.5 over a time scale of tex2html_wrap_inline1259 6 months. This behaviour seems to be incompatible with a pulsar (see Ramanamurthy et al. 1995) or SNR-type source. Conversely, rapid tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray variability in PKS 1830-211 could be produced both intrinsically or by gravitational microlensing. In this latter case, the background tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray region in the innermost part of the QSO is magnified by a compact massive object in one of the intervening galaxies. The variability time scale is given by the time spent by the line of sight to the source in crossing the microlens Einstein radius, i.e.
where tex2html_wrap_inline1381 is the microlens Einstein radius, tex2html_wrap_inline1383 is a distance in Gpc obtained from the source-lens, lens, and source angular-diameter distances in a Robertson-Walker Universe, M is the mass of the lens in units of solar masses, and v3 is the velocity V of the lens in units of 103 km s-1 (see Romero et al. 1995 and references therein for details). Assuming a redshift tex2html_wrap_inline1395 for the background source and tex2html_wrap_inline1397 for the microlens, we find that tex2html_wrap_inline1399 tex2html_wrap_inline1401 if tex2html_wrap_inline1403 (we have considered H0=100 km s-1 and q0=1/2). Consequently, a MACHO-like object in the halo of the foreground galaxy could produce the observed variability.

Flux variations will occur in this scenario just if the angular radius of the source in the lens plane is smaller than the Einstein angular radius of the microlens. This imposes the constraint that the size of the tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray emitting region should be tex2html_wrap_inline1413 cm tex2html_wrap_inline1415 pc, in good accordance with the sizes expected for the tex2html_wrap_inline1035-spheres in blazars (e.g. Blandford & Levinson 1995). Since the tex2html_wrap_inline1035-spheres are much smaller than the compact radio cores, no correlation with lower frequency variability should be expected for the tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray microlensing events. In fact, the sizes of the optical and radio emitting regions in the lens plane should largely exceed the Einstein ring sizes for small compact objects and, consequently, no significant amplifications of the lensed images should happen at these wavelengths. On the other hand, intrinsic tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray variability seems to occur in the initial phases of high radio outbursts (e.g. Valtaoja & Teräsranta 1995). This fact could be used to discriminate between future intrinsic and extrinsic tex2html_wrap_inline1035-ray variability events in PKS 1830-211.

next previous
Up: Observations of the

Copyright by the European Southern Observatory (ESO)