4.2 Deceleration Parameter
If a lensing potential is ever specified to better than a few per
cent accuracy, it will be possible to infer the distance ratio
Dds / Ds observationally and
consequently to solve for q0
(Refsdal 1966a,
Lacroix &
Schneider 1982).
It is also possible, in
principle, to measure q0 by comparing the locations and
magnifications of arc images of galaxies at different redshifts. In
the simple case of a circularly symmetric mass distribution, the arcs
will trace the variation of the Einstein radius with source redshift.
Unfortunately, for an optimal lens redshift of
zd ~ 0.6, the
Einstein radius only varies by about 12% as q0 increases
from 0 to 0.5. This is much less than the expected uncertainty in
the radial variation of the mass distribution in the cluster even if
a large number of galaxy velocities are acquired
(Tyson 1990).
Under extreme conditions, gravitational lensing may complicate alternative
determinations of q0 (e.g.
Omote & Yoshida
1990).
Undoubtedly, the best test of determinations of H0
and q0 through
gravitational lensing will be to obtain similar estimates of these
parameters from observations of different objects.
Gravitational lenses have certainly affirmed our belief in the
redshift distance relation. High redshift sources do appear to lie
beyond lower redshift lenses, even when the a posteriori
probability of small angular separations
occurring is small
(Burbidge 1985).
Also, the
approximate consistency of the Hubble constant derived from
Q0957+561
with values from more traditional approaches affirms the FRW model and
is incompatible with radical alternatives like the chronometric
cosmology
(Segal 1982)
which predicts t 1 month
(Blandford & Falco 1989, unpublished).
Even in the context of FRW models, some extreme effects are, in
principle, possible and certainly worth seeking. If the mean density
of the universe were so large (or the cosmological constant,
0, so
negative) that a typical backward propagating congruence had
conjugate points or foci (beyond which all images are inverted,
cf Section 3.3) at a modest
antipodal redshift, the character of the
imaging of higher redshift sources would be radically altered
(Petrosian &
Salpeter 1968,
Lebedev &
Lebedeva 1985,
Gott et
al. 1989).
For instance, intervening galaxy lenses would typically form
dim, single images. The existence of multiple images in
Q2016+112 may
then be used to set a lower bound of z = 3.27 on the antipodal
redshift
(Gott et
al. 1989).
This argument is, however, somewhat problematical in the
case of this object. There are at least two lensing galaxies
(probably at different redshifts) in the line-of-sight to
Q2016+112
and there is no robust imaging model of the object within the
framework of a conventional cosmology (but see
Narasimha et
al. 1987).
An antipodal model that invokes two additional unseen
galaxies near images A and B may be able to reproduce the observations.
The argument of Gott et al. is certainly valid in the case of
Q0142-100 which, at a redshift of z = 2.72,
sets a reliable lower bound on the antipodal redshift.
Gravitational lenses can also be used to limit the value of a
cosmological constant
(Fukugita et
al. 1990;
Turner 1990;
Fukugita &
Turner 1991;
Kochanek 1992).
The choice of
0 = 0 /
3H02 = 1 - 0, which allows
the universe to
remain flat and consistent with inflationary cosmological models, is
particularly interesting
(Peebles 1984).
In this case, the optical
depth to lensing increases more dramatically with redshift than in an
Einstein-De Sitter universe. We defer to the accompanying article by
Carroll et
al. (1992)
for a critical discussion of this point.