Microlensing Surveys for Finding Planets Kem Cook LLNLNOAO

Microlensing Surveys for Finding Planets Kem Cook LLNL/NOAO With thanks to Dave Bennett for most of these slides

Microlensing Surveys Ushered in the Current Era of time-domain surveys • • • MACHO, OGLE, EROS started in the early 1990 s Microlensing search needed repeated observations of millions of stars Simple point-source point-lens detected and proved the principle – Huge databases of light curves over 1000 s of days for millions of stars • • • Anomalous microlensing detected--binary lensing Extreme binary system is star and planet Follow-up collaborations formed to detect planets in 1995 – PLANET collaboration • Probing Lensing Anomalies NETwork – MPS collaboration • Microlensing Planet Survey • Current follow-up – PLANET – Micro. FUN • Current Galactic Surveys – OGLE – MOA

PLANET Telescope System Collaboration member telescopes MOU in place with Robo. Net

The Physics of Microlensing • Foreground “lens” star + planet bend light of “source” star • Multiple distorted images – Total brightness change is observable • Sensitive to planetary mass • Low mass planet signals are rare – not weak • Peak sensitivity is at 2 -3 AU: the Einstein ring radius, RE • 1 st Discovery from Groundbased observations announced already

Lensed images at arcsec resolution A planet can be discovered when one of the lensed images approaches its projected position. Animation from Scott Gaudi

Simulated Planetary Light Curves • Planetary signals can be very strong • There a variety of light curve features to indicate the planetary mass ratio and separation • Exposures every 10 -15 minutes • The small deviation at day – 42. 75 is due to a moon of 1. 6 lunar masses.

Microlensing surveys need VOEvents • Alert to new microlensing events – Currently done via email and web post – Multiple surveys mean possible confusion • Analysis of ongoing events suggests ‘anomaly’ – Email anomaly alerts (2 nd level alerts) – Analysis may suggest optimum sampling time • Photometry follow-up for planets • Spectroscopic follow-up – Spatial resolution of source star (eg limb darkening) – Multiplication of source star flux • Current follow-up networks use email, telephone and web pages to relay information

1 st Exoplanet Discovery by lensing The OGLE 2003 -BLG-235/MOA 2003 -BLG-53 light curve (Bond et al, 2004). The right hand panel shows a close-up of the region of the planetary caustic. The theoretical light curves shown are the best fit planetary microlensing light curve (solid black curve indicating a mass ratio of q = 0. 0039), another planetary mass binary lens light curve (green curve with q = 0. 0069), and the best fit non-planetary binary lens light curve (magenta dashed curve), which has q > 0. 03.

MOA/OGLE Planetary Event Best fit light curve simulated on an OGLE image

2 nd Exoplanet Discovery by lensing OGLE 2005 -BLG-71 (Udalski, Jaroszynski, et al OGLE & FUN. Addl’ data from MOA & PLANET). Data from OGLE, FUN, PLANET & MOA Central caustic light curve perturbation (d = 1. 3 or 1/1. 3): Additional planet discoveries by PLANET, MOA & OGLE, also in preparation

3 rd Exoplanet Discovery by lensing Short duration deviation suggests planetary mass ratio binary--details in Nature, January 2006

Exoplanets via Gravitational Microlensing • Planetary signal strength independent of mass – if Mplanet/M* 3 10 -7 – low-mass planet signals are brief and rare • ~10% photometric variations – required photometric accuracy demonstrated • Mplanet/M*, separation (w/ a factor of 2 accuracy) – Mplanet and M* measured separately in > 30% of cases – follow-up observations measure Mplanet , M*, separation for most G, K, and some M star lenses • finds free-floating planets, too

Planetary Parameters from Microlensing • Mass ratio & planetary separation in Einstein radius units – Radial velocity planets only give mass ratio sin(I) – But the properties of the source star are well known for radial velocities! • High resolution observations can reveal source star – Light curve fit gives source star brightness – HST observations may reveal a source apparently brighter than required by the fit - due to light from the lens • Pending HST DD proposal by Gould, Bennett & Udalski – Favorable case due to long timescale event and indications of blending in ground-based photometry - could be K dwarf at 2 kpc • 30 -50% of events have detectable sources – Future JWST or AO observations will confirm the lens star ID and determine the lens-source proper motion (~10 years later) • Measurement of microlensing parallax plus finite source effect gives planetary mass directly – Weak parallax detection for OGLE-235/MOA-53 gives mass between ~0. 06 and ~0. 7 M (Bennett & Gould, in preparation) – MOA upgrade from 0. 6 m to 1. 8 m telescope and increased OGLE sampling rate should improve data for future events

Comparison of Planet Detection Techniques • Transit detection planetary systems are blue boxes • Microlensing from ground or space quite competitive • MPF is a proposed satellite microlensing mission • Microlensing discoveries are purple dots Updated from Bennett & Rhie (2002) Ap. J 574, 985

VOEvent and Microlensing • VOEvent will simplify communication – Between surveys and follow-up – Within a follow-up team – Among follow-up teams • VOEvent content needed for – Anomaly type – Prediction of behavior – Prioritization of follow-up • Other potential needs – Verification of follow-up – Optimum resource allocation