I Gravitational lensing: deriving magnification of lensed image

AI Thread Summary
In gravitational lensing, image magnification is defined as the ratio of the image area to the source area, but many sources relate it to the determinant of the jacobian of the lens equation. The lens equation is expressed as β=θ-α(Dlens-source)/(Dlens), leading to a jacobian matrix that describes the transformation. A discussion arose about deriving the relationship between magnification and the determinant of the jacobian, specifically μ=1/det[A]. One participant noted a potential oversight in equating the image-to-source area ratio with d²(θ)/(dβ)², questioning how the determinant relates to their findings. The conversation highlights the complexity of understanding these mathematical relationships in gravitational lensing.
astrostudent21
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
In gravitational lensing, the image magnification is defined as the image size over the source size. But many texts also give it as the determinant of the jacobian of the of the lens equation. How are these equivalent?
In gravitational lensing, the image magnification is defined as the image area over the source area. But many texts also give it as the inverse of the determinant of the jacobian, A, of the of the lens equation. My question is how these are equivalent.

The lens equation is β=θ-α(Dlens-source)/(Dlens)
The jacobian that describes it is then

Screenshot 2020-12-03 164231.png

many texts say that we can calculate the magnification as μ=1/det[A], but I have not found one that actually derives this relation from the initial definition of the magnification as the ratio of the image and source areas. I would really appreciate help from anyone who has experience with this topic!
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
astrostudent21 said:
Summary:: In gravitational lensing, the image magnification is defined as the image size over the source size. But many texts also give it as the determinant of the jacobian of the of the lens equation. How are these equivalent?

Have you looked at pages 63 - 65 in the book "Gravitational Lensing" by scott Dodelson? I was able to use the LOOK INSIDE! feature of Amazon to look at these pages.
 
George Jones said:
Have you looked at pages 63 - 65 in the book "Gravitational Lensing" by scott Dodelson? I was able to use the LOOK INSIDE! feature of Amazon to look at these pages.
Thank you so much for pointing me towards that book. I suppose what I was overlooking was that the image area over the source area is really the same thing as d^2(θ)/(dβ)^2 . I think I am on the right track now.

EDIT: Hmmm... actually I am not quite following the logic here. If mu = d^2(θ)/(dβ)^2, and dβ/dθ given by the matrix A, it seems to me that mu = (A^-1)^2, not det(A)^-1. I am not seeing where the determinant comes in. Am I missing something?
 
Last edited:
3I/ATLAS, also known as C/2025 N1 (ATLAS) and formerly designated as A11pl3Z, is an iinterstellar comet. It was discovered by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) station at Río Hurtado, Chile on 1 July 2025. Note: it was mentioned (as A11pl3Z) by DaveE in a new member's introductory thread. https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/brian-cox-lead-me-here.1081670/post-7274146 https://earthsky.org/space/new-interstellar-object-candidate-heading-toward-the-sun-a11pl3z/ One...
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
Back
Top