Paper detail

The Relative Lens-Source Proper Motion in MACHO 98-SMC-1

We present photometric and spectroscopic data for the second microlensing event seen toward the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC), MACHO-98-SMC-1. The lens is a binary. We resolve the caustic crossing and find that the source took 2 Delta t = 8.5 hours to transit the caustic. We measure the source temperature T_eff=8000 K both spectroscopically and from the color (V-I)_0~0.22. We find two acceptable binary-lens models. In the first, the source crosses the caustic at phi=43.2 deg and the unmagnified source magnitude is I_s=22.15. The angle implies that the lens crosses the source radius in time t_* = Delta t sin phi = 2.92 hours. The magnitude (together with the temperature) implies that the angular radius of the source is theta_* = 0.089 micro-arsec. Hence, the proper motion is mu=theta_*/t_*=1.26 km/s/kpc. For the second solution, the corresponding parameters are phi=30.6 deg, I_s=21.81, t_*=2.15 hours, theta_* = 0.104 micro-asrsec, mu=2.00 km/s/kpc. Both proper-motion estimates are slower than 99.5% of the proper motions expected for halo lenses. Both are consistent with an ordinary binary lens moving at ~ 75-120 km/s within the SMC itself. We conclude that the lens is most likely in the SMC proper.

preprint1998arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.