A Search For Compact Object Dark Matter in The Universe Utilizing

Michigan Technological University
Digital Commons @ Michigan Tech
Dissertations, Master's Theses and Master's Reports
2023
A Search for Compact Object Dark Matter in the Universe Utilizing

Gravitational Millilensing of Gamma-ray Bursts
Oindabi Mukherjee
Michigan Technological University, omukherj@mtu.edu
Copyright 2023 Oindabi Mukherjee
Recommended Citation
Mukherjee, Oindabi, "A Search for Compact Object Dark Matter in the Universe Utilizing Gravitational
Millilensing of Gamma-ray Bursts", Open Access Dissertation, Michigan Technological University, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.37099/mtu.dc.etdr/1673
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/etdr

Part of the Other Astrophysics and Astronomy Commons
A SEARCH FOR COMPACT OBJECT DARK MATTER IN THE UNIVERSE
UTILIZING GRAVITATIONAL MILLILENSING OF GAMMA-RAY BURSTS
By
Oindabi Mukherjee
A DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
In Physics
MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
2023
© 2023 Oindabi Mukherjee

This dissertation has been approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Physics.
Department of Physics
Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Robert J. Nemiroff
Committee Member: Dr. Petra Huentemeyer
Committee Member: Dr. Elena Giusarma
Committee Member: Dr. Jon Hakkila
Department Chair: Dr. Ravindra Pandey

Contents
Author Contribution statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
List of Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv
1 Biref History of Dark Matter, GRBs, and Gravitational Lensing 1
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Brief History of Dark Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.1 Baryonic Dark Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2.2 Non-Baryonic Dark Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.3 History of Gamma-ray Bursts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.4 History of Gravitational Lensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.5 History of Gravitational Lensing Detection in GRBs . . . . . . . . . 14
1.6 Plan and Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2 Gamma-ray Bursts: An Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
v
2.1 Prompt Emission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.1.1 Temporal Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.1.2 Spectral Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.2 Candidate Progenitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.3 Afterglow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3 Measuring Distances in Cosmology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.2 Distance Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.2.1 Comoving Distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.2.2 Angular Diameter Distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4 Gravitational Lensing: A Millilensing Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.1 Introduction to Gravitational Lensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.2 Types of Lensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.3 Probability of Lensing: Detection Volume Formalism . . . . . . . . 47
4.4 Millilensing with GRBs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.4.1 Calculating Impact Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.4.2 Probability of Millilensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5 Detectors and Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5.1 Overview of Fermi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.2 DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
vi
5.2.1 BATSE Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.2.2 GBM Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
6 A Framework for Detecting Gravitational Millilensing in GRBs 71
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
6.2 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.2.1 Computing the Burst Duration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
6.2.2 The Echo Search Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
6.2.3 Computing the Brightness Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
6.3 Light Curve Similarity Test (LST) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
6.3.1 Hardness Similarity Test (HST) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
7 Recent Claims of Gravitational Lensing on GRBs . . . . . . . . . 89
7.1 Results for LST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
7.2 Results for HST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
8 Cosmological Analysis to Limit CO DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
8.2 Special Cases: Results and Discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
8.3 Cosmological Limits: Results and Discussion: . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
9 Summary and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
9.1 Conclusions from Millilensing Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
9.2 Conclusions from Millilensing Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
vii
9.3 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
9.4 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
viii
Author Contribution Statement
Chapter 7 is rooted in research disseminated through a series of publications. Specif-
ically, three of these studies have been published in the Research Notes of the AAS
Journal. In addition, another work stemming from the same research has been sub-
mitted to The Astrophysical Journal and is currently under review.
For all these papers, the breakdown of contributions is as follows:
Oindabi Mukherjee: I am the lead author for all the aforementioned papers. This
designation signifies that I was instrumental in the manuscripts’ conceptualization,
data analysis, and writing. I conducted all analyses presented, and I took primary
responsibility for drafting, revising, and finalizing the content of each paper.
Dr. Robert Nemiroff: As my academic advisor and the second author, Dr. Nemiroff
was essential in supervising my research journey. He consistently provided invaluable
feedback, reviewing each version of the manuscripts thoroughly and offering construc-
tive critiques that shaped and refined the work.
ix
Acknowledgments
I sincerely appreciate my advisor, Dr. Robert Nemiroff, whose confidence in my
capabilities has been truly motivating. His steadfast support and guidance have been
indispensable throughout this journey. For all his contributions, I am deeply grateful.
I am thankful to Dr. Ravindra Pandey, the department chair, for welcoming me to
the Michigan Tech—physics community.
I am grateful to Dr. Petra Huentemeyer, Dr. Elena Guisarma, and Dr. Jon Hakkila
for agreeing to be on my committee. Their constructive input has been instrumental
in improving my work; for this, I extend my deepest appreciation.
I am grateful to my current research group, including Alice Allen, Ogetay Kayali,
Casey Aldrich, Logan Andersen, and Walker Schumann. Their company has offered
me a rewarding experience.
xi
List of Abbreviations
BATSE Burst and Transient Source Experiment
BH Black Hole
CGRO Compton Gamma Ray Observatory
CO Compact Object
CP Combination of Charge conjugation symmetry and Parity symmetry
CTIME Continuous Time
DM Dark Matter
FRB Fast Radio Bursts
FRED Fast Rise Exponential Decay
GBM Gamma-ray Bust Monitor
GRB Gamma-ray Burst
GW Gravitational Wave
HST Hardness Similarity Test
IMP-6 Interplanetary Monitoring Platform-6
LAD Large Area Detector
LHC Large Hadron Collider
LIGO Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory
LST Light Curve Similarity Test
xiii
OSO-7 Orbiting Solar Observatory-7
PBH Primordial Black Hole
QCD Quantum Chromodynamics
SD Spectroscopy Detector
TTE Time Tagged Event
WIMPS Weakly Interacting Massive Particles
xiv
Abstract
In this dissertation, I explore the existence of Compact Object (CO) Dark Matter
(DM), examining its predicted millilensing impact on the light curves of Gamma-Ray
Bursts (GRBs). The hypothesis under investigation is that if CO DM exists, it will
act as a gravitational lens, influencing light emanating from GRBs and creating a
measurable gravitational echo. The detection of this echo is conditional on several
factors, including the spatial alignment of the observer, lens, and source and the mass
of the CO DM.
Recent studies have reported the potential detection of millilensing in several GRBs,
including GRB 950830, GRB 081122A, GRB 081126A, GRB 090717A, GRB 110517B,
GRB 200716C, and GRB 210812A. Two millilensing tests were implemented to eval-
uate these findings: a light-curve similarity test and a hardness similarity test. Ac-
cording to this analysis, none of these GRBs passed both tests convincingly, with
some GRBs even dismissing millilensing above an 8-σ confidence level.
Using data from the Fermi satellite, I examined numerous GRBs to identify possible
gravitational echoes. Although no clear gravitational lensing events were detected,
the absence of detections still provided important constraints on the presence of CO
DM within specific mass ranges. In particular, if CO DM accounts for 6.9% of the
xv
total DM, equivalent to a CO DM density value of roughly 0.0183, the mass range
between 105.95 M⊙ to 106.3 M⊙ can be ruled out as a viable CO DM candidate. This
conclusion is supported by confidence greater than 90%. In addition, when the CO
DM density parameter is 0.256, the mass range that can be eliminated as a viable CO
DM candidate extends from 104.6 M⊙ to 107.1 M⊙ with a 90% confidence. Therefore,
this mass range cannot constitute the majority of DM, narrowing the possibilities for
CO DM’s contribution to the overall DM composition.
xvi
Chapter 1
Biref History of Dark Matter,
GRBs, and Gravitational Lensing
1.1 Introduction
One of the most pressing enigmas in contemporary physics is the nature of Dark
Matter (DM), an obscure and exotic substance constituting 27% of the observable
universe. The term “dark” is derived from the characteristic of DM that doesn’t
emit or scatter sufficient light to be observed by the telescopes. Nevertheless, its
presence can be inferred from its effects on the visible matter surrounding it. DM
primarily engages with its environment through gravitational interactions, facilitating
1
its capacity to attract and sustain objects within its gravitational field. This is
analogous to the Sun holding planetary bodies in their respective orbits. Despite
its elusiveness, the existence of DM is necessitated by the motions of objects that
cannot be accounted for by any other means.
Proposed constituents of DM encompass a spectrum of entities, extending from undis-
covered elementary particles—anticipated targets in particle astrophysics—to more
condensed manifestations such as black holes, neutron stars, or compact star clusters.
In the present investigation, I probe the intriguing hypothesis that DM manifests itself
in these compact forms.
The gravitational effects of DM provide a valuable means to test and explore the
properties of this elusive substance. Gravitational lensing, the bending of light from
a bright source due to the gravitational pull of a Compact Object (CO), is a powerful
tool for investigating CO DM. Galaxies and quasars are examples of bright sources
used to probe this effect [12]. Transient sources, such as Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs),
which emit intense bursts of energy in a short duration, are particularly useful for
searching for CO DM, given their abundance and cosmological distribution. Impor-
tantly, GRBs can explore a mass range of CO DM inaccessible to other sources,
making them uniquely suited for this purpose.
The hypothesis is that if the universe were to have a sufficiently high cosmological
density of CO DM [64], gravitational lensing events would be observable in the light
2
curves of individual GRBs [80]. Detection of gravitational lenses from temporally-
resolved sources may allow an investigation of the portion of the universe consisting
of COs within a particular mass range. Conversely, the absence of such observations
would impose limitations on CO mass and cosmological density values.
When COs act as gravitational lenses with masses ranging between 104 M⊙ and 109
M⊙ , the resulting gravitational lensing effect is known as millilensing [73]. The term
′
milli′ describes the angular separation between lensed images on the order of milli-
arcseconds, even if the images are not resolved angularly. Blaes and Webster [11] was
one of the first papers to explore this mass range. The masses investigated in my
study fall within the millilensing range, which has the potential to probe a range of
astrophysical systems, such as supermassive black holes at the centre of galaxies or
free-floating in the Inter-Galactic Medium (IGM), dwarf galaxies, globular clusters
and even the hypothetical Primordial Black Holes (PBHs). The mass range that
can be probed using millilensing is constrained. On the lower end, GRBs’ duration
and intensity limit it. On the higher end, it is restricted by the amount of available
background data collected after each GRB. To probe masses below 104 M⊙ , sources
that are shorter and brighter than GRBs are needed. Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs) are
sources that can probe this mass range, but their detection rate is currently low, and
therefore, they cannot yet provide strong constraints.
3
1.2 Brief History of Dark Matter
The concept of DM can be traced back to 1933 when the Swiss astrophysicist Fritz
Zwicky first proposed its existence [106]. However, it was not until the 1970s that DM
gained significant attention in research, with the Rubin and Ford [91] paper providing
crucial evidence for its existence through accurate measurement of the rotation curve
of the Andromeda galaxy.
DM candidates can be classified into two broad categories - baryonic and non-
baryonic. Baryonic DM is expected to contribute only a small fraction to the total
amount of DM, while non-baryonic DM is believed to be the dominant component.
Non-baryonic DM candidates are further classified into hot or cold depending on
their velocity distribution. Based on large-scale structure and N-body simulations,
cold DM is considered the leading candidate for DM. Examples of hot DM include
neutrinos, whereas WIMPs and Axions are prominent candidates for cold DM. The
mass scale of DM candidates is considered to be broad, starting at 10−5 eV and
extending up to 1012 M⊙ .
CO DM is a hypothetical type of DM that consists of massive, compact objects that
do not emit significant amounts of light or other detectable radiation. These objects
typically contain remnants of astrophysical processes, such as black holes or neutron
4
stars. The term “compact” refers to these objects’ high mass-to-size ratio, making
them difficult to detect through traditional astronomical methods.
1.2.1 Baryonic Dark Matter
Baryonic DM refers to objects made of standard baryonic matter - protons, neutrons,
and electrons - that are not easily detectable. While these are composed of normal
matter, their compact nature and the existing conditions make them difficult to ob-
serve, thereby contributing to the DM component of the universe. Baryonic DM
candidates are diffuse gas, compact objects such as brown dwarfs, black holes, dwarf
galaxies, globular clusters, or planets that do not emit enough light to be detected
directly.
Brown dwarfs are substellar objects that are more massive than planets but do not
have enough mass to sustain nuclear fusion in their cores like stars. The mass range
for brown dwarfs typically falls between approximately 13 to 80 times the mass of
Jupiter or roughly 0.013 to 0.08 M⊙ .
Neutron stars are extremely dense remnants of massive stars undergoing a supernova
explosion. They are composed primarily of neutrons and have strong gravitational
fields. The mass range for neutron stars is estimated to be about 1.1 to 2.0 M⊙ .
5
Black holes are formed from the gravitational collapse of massive stars. They are
characterized by their intense gravitational pull, from which no light can escape. The
mass of black holes can vary significantly, ranging from a few times the mass of the
Sun to millions or even billions of solar masses. Stellar-mass black holes, formed from
the collapse of individual stars, typically have masses ranging from about 3 to 100
M⊙ . Supermassive black holes are significantly more massive than stellar-mass black
holes. They are found at the centers of galaxies and can have masses ranging from
106 to 109 M⊙ . These are good CO candidates since they could fall under the mass
I explore.
Dwarf galaxies are small galaxies composed of up to several billion stars, a small
number compared to our own Milky Way’s 200-400 billion stars. Dwarf galaxies are
classified based on their shape into dwarf elliptical, dwarf irregular, and dwarf spiral
galaxies. Some of the best-known dwarf galaxies are the Magellanic Clouds, visible
from the southern hemisphere. They usually have a mass of approximately 107 to 109
M⊙ , making them good CO DM candidates. Despite their small size, dwarf galaxies
are important because they often serve as building blocks for larger galaxies and can
provide key insights into galaxy formation and evolution.
Globular clusters are spherical collections of stars that orbit a galactic core, such
as our Milky Way. They are densely packed with stars, often featuring hundreds of
thousands and even up to a million stars within a relatively small region, spanning
6
just about 10 to 30 parsecs. The stars within a globular cluster are typically older,
providing a snapshot of the early universe, and their distribution and movement offer
clues about the formation and evolution of the galaxy in which they reside. Therefore
these can act as good CO lenses with masses typically in the range of 104 to 106 M⊙ .
MACHO stands for “Massive Compact Halo Object”, one of the proposed types
of baryonic DM. MACHOs are hypothetical objects composed of normal baryonic
matter, such as protons and neutrons, that are too dim to be seen directly but can
still exert a gravitational pull on visible matter. MACHOs are a specific subset of
compact objects composed of normal baryonic matter. The concept of MACHOs as a
candidate for DM was popularized in the 1980s and 1990s. The term MACHO itself
was coined later, but earlier papers that laid the groundwork for the idea include ones
by authors such as Bernard Carr and Joseph Silk [16]. A paper by Paczynski [78]
proposed the method of gravitational microlensing to detect MACHOs and mentioned
them as potential contributors to the galaxy’s mass. By monitoring large numbers
of stars in the Milky Way, astronomers have been able to place constraints on the
abundance of MACHOs in the galaxy and rule out certain models of MACHO DM.
7
1.2.2 Non-Baryonic Dark Matter
Non-baryonic DM refers to a type of DM that is composed of particles that are
not made up of protons, neutrons, or other known baryonic particles. Scientists
have proposed several theoretical candidates for non-baryonic DM particles, including
weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs), axions, sterile neutrinos, etc.
Neutrinos share many common attributes with DM, such as being produced early
in the history of the Universe, being invisible to telescopes, being ubiquitous, and
possessing mass. Nonetheless, there are several obstacles to accepting neutrinos as
the solitary component of DM. One significant issue is that DM particles must move
slowly to facilitate matter clustering. If neutrinos are the constituents of DM, the
universe’s map would appear vastly dissimilar to what we observe today, with the
matter being dispersed instead of coalescing into small clumps due to neutrinos’
high speeds. Additionally, the total number of neutrinos can be estimated, and
experiments have established an upper limit on the mass of each neutrino species
[78]. The product of these two quantities yields a total mass significantly less than
the total DM present in the Universe. As a result, even if neutrinos account for some
DM, they cannot explain all of the Universe’s missing mass.
WIMPs are hypothetical particles that are a leading candidate for DM. WIMPs are
8
believed to be electrically neutral, very stable, and interact very weakly with ordinary
matter through weak nuclear force and gravity. They are so named because they are
thought to have a mass of ten to one thousand times that of a proton. Due to their
weak interactions with ordinary matter, they are difficult to detect.
Axions are hypothetical elementary particles first proposed in the 1970s as a solution
to the strong CP problem in quantum chromodynamics (QCD), a fundamental theory
of the strong nuclear force. The name Axion is derived from the fact that they were
initially proposed as the “missing” axial-vector bosons in QCD. Axions are extremely
weakly interacting particles, which makes them difficult to detect directly. They are
also extremely light, with a mass of 10−5 to 10−3 eV. Due to their weak interaction
and light mass, axions have the potential to make up a significant fraction of the DM
in the universe.
PBHs are theorized to have formed shortly after the Big Bang. Physicist Yakov
Zel’dovich first proposed the idea of PBHs in the 1960s and 1970s as a possible
solution to the DM problem [105]. Later Stephan Hawking, through mathematical
calculations, showed that the mass of the PBHs could be as small as 10−5 g and
upwards [34]. It is thought that PBHs could have formed in the very early Universe
(less than one second after the Big Bang) during the so-called radiation-dominated
era. The essential ingredient for forming a PBH is a fluctuation in the universe’s
density, inducing its gravitational collapse.
9
Over a century ago, Einstein predicted the existence of gravitational waves (GWs). In
an affirmation of his prediction, in 2015, LIGO reported the detection of these waves.
The discovery resulted from a black hole merger, marking a significant milestone in
the field [1]. The masses of these black holes were surprisingly found to be about
thirty times the mass of the Sun. Subsequent GW detections have also identified
merging black holes with unusually large masses, prompting some scientists to reassess
the possibility of hypothetical PBHs as DM constituents. A study by Capela et al.
[15] explores the potential link between DM and PBHs. They used data from the
Advanced LIGO gravitational wave detector to place constraints on the fraction of
DM made up of PBHs weighing between 1 and 100 solar masses.
1.3 History of Gamma-ray Bursts
The US Vela satellites launched into space to detect nuclear detonations for the first
time detected gamma-ray flashes from space on July 2, 1967. These results were
sent for investigation by the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. Soon after, in 1973, a
paper by Klebesadel et al. [43] published the results of sixteen bursts detected between
1969 and 1972. A second paper by Wheaton et al. [103] also reported on observations
of some gamma-ray flashes by the US OSO-7 and the IMP-6 satellites. The Soviet
Kosmos-461 spacecraft further confirmed the existence of GRBs [57]. The location
information provided by these detectors hinted that the origin of these flashes could
10
not have been from the Earth, Sun, or any other planets nearby.
In the early days of GRB research, the lack of precise location information for the
bursts made it difficult to identify their sources. In 1997, the Italian-Dutch satellite
BeppoSAX could precisely locate GRBs in the sky for the first time [22], allowing
scientists to identify their host galaxies and study them in more detail [47]. This led to
the speculation that long GRBs were associated with the deaths of massive stars, while
short GRBs were associated with the collision of neutron stars. In the following years,
several other satellites, such as the Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory, High Energy
Transient Explorer 2 (HETE-2), and the Swift satellite, were launched to study GRBs
in more detail. These missions provided new insights into the properties of GRBs, such
as their luminosities, spectra, and time variability. In 2007, the Fermi Gamma-ray
Space Telescope was launched, allowing for the detection of even more GRBs and the
study of their high-energy properties. In addition, satellite-based detectors like the
Hubble Space Telescope and ground-based telescopes such as the Keck Telescope and
the Very Large Telescope were used to study the afterglow of GRBs, which provided
new insights into the properties of the surrounding medium and the nature of the
relativistic outflows. In recent years, the discovery of gravitational waves, ripples
in space-time caused by massive celestial events, has provided new insights into the
possible candidate progenitors of long GRBs. The detection of gravitational waves
from the collision of two neutron stars provided evidence that such collisions could
be a source of short GRBs [2, 3].
11
1.4 History of Gravitational Lensing
The concept of gravitational lensing has its roots in the theoretical works of Isaac
Newton, who in 1704 suggested in his book Opticks that light would bend in the
presence of a gravitational field. Later, Henry Cavendish and Johann Georg von
Soldner also noted that Newtonian gravity predicted this bending of starlight around
a massive object in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. However, it was Albert
Einstein who, decades later, would fully encapsulate this concept. Gravitational
lensing, a phenomenon originating from Albert Einstein’s groundbreaking theory of
general relativity presented in 1915, describes the bending of light in the presence of
a gravitational field. This concept was tested in 1919 when a team led by British
astronomer Arthur Eddington conducted an experiment during a total solar eclipse.
They observed the shift in apparent positions of stars near the Sun compared to their
usual positions, providing the first empirical confirmation of light bending due to
gravity [25]. The Sun is now known to act as a gravitational lens, and the deflection
angle predicted by the theory can be observed during a solar eclipse.
In 1924, Orest Chwolson proposed that gravitational lensing could create multiple
images of the same astronomical object [18]. Following Khvolson’s work, Einstein
further developed the theory in 1936 [27], despite skepticism about its observational
feasibility. Einstein predicted an accompanying brightening of the light source, an
12
effect now fundamental to microlensing study. This phenomenon has enabled the
detection of exoplanets and offered insights into the structure of distant galaxies in
recent studies.
Despite Einstein’s doubts, the first observational evidence of gravitational lensing
surfaced in 1979. This breakthrough was marked by the discovery of the“Twin QSO”
or “Old Faithful,” [99] where two quasars in close proximity were found to be images
of the same distant quasar, lensed by a galaxy lying in the foreground. The 1980s
through the 1990s saw gravitational lensing observations becoming more common
with discovery of multiple images, arcs, and rings. Notably, the “Einstein Cross” was
discovered during this period, where a single quasar’s light appeared as four separate
images arranged around a foreground galaxy due to gravitational lensing [37].
The same system that provided the “Einstein Cross”, Q2237+0305, also became
instrumental in the discovery of microlensing, reported by Irwin et al. [38]. The
study of this system demonstrates the utility of gravitational lensing as a tool for
understanding the universe’s structure. A significant milestone was reached in 2006
when gravitational lensing was employed to construct the first 3D map of DM in
the universe [56]. This was achieved by analyzing minute distortions in the shapes of
galaxies, an occurrence termed weak gravitational lensing, which allowed astronomers
to infer the distribution of the foreground DM.
13
Gravitational lensing has been observed across a variety of cosmic contexts. For in-
stance, with their significant gravitational pulls, individual galaxies can act as lenses,
as was first detected with the Twin QSO. More massive still are galaxy clusters, some
of the largest structures in the universe, which have exhibited gravitational lensing,
notably in the case of the Bullet Cluster where the lensing effect was used to trace
the distribution of DM [19].
Interestingly, gravitational lensing has also been detected with supernovae, such as the
supernova Refsdal, where its light, lensed by the galaxy cluster MACS J1149.5+2223,
resulted in four distinct images [42]. Additionally, the cosmic microwave background
(CMB), considered the faint echo of the Big Bang, has been observed to undergo
gravitational lensing by the universe’s large-scale structure [82].
1.5 History of Gravitational Lensing Detection in
GRBs
The concept of gravitational lensing in GRBs was first introduced in 1973 by Paczyn-
ski [80]. Despite numerous attempts to detect gravitational lensing signatures in
individual GRBs using radio, optical, and gamma-ray data, none have yet resulted in
a clear detection. Previous searches for millilensing in BATSE GRBs were conducted
by Nemiroff et al. [73] and Marani et al. [54]. Assuming a 0.3 matter density and
14
a 0.7 cosmological constant density, Nemiroff et al. [73] concluded that a significant
amount of baryonic matter is excluded from forming compact lenses in the mass range
105 to 109 M⊙ . Ougolnikov [77] searched for millilensing in 1512 BATSE GRBs.
Recently, however, there have been several claims of gravitational millilensing in the
light curves of single GRBs. The first claim published in 2021 was of GRB 950830 by
Paynter et al. [81]. Subsequently, two papers claiming millilensing in GRB 090717A
were by Kalantari et al. [40], and Kalantari et al. [41]. After that, two papers claiming
millilensing in GRB 200716C were published by Yang et al. [104] and Wang et al. [101].
However, preliminary analyses of GRBs 950830, 090717A, and 200716C by Mukherjee
and Nemiroff [60], Mukherjee and Nemiroff [61], and Mukherjee and Nemiroff [62]
have shown that these GRBs are not clear examples of gravitational lensing, and
a more detailed analysis is currently under review [63]. In addition to these three
GRBs, four more GRBs have been claimed to be good candidates for millilensing.
A paper by Veres et al. [97] claims that GRB 210812A is gravitationally millilensed,
and a separate publication by Lin et al. [51] suggests the existence of four: GRB
081126A, GRB 090717A, GRB 081122A, and GRB 110517B with varying degrees
of confidence. These papers claim that the first emission episode (hereafter called
a pulse) near trigger time is gravitationally lensed by a second pulse immediately
following the first pulse, indicating that both pulses are gravitationally-lensed images
of the same parent pulse. Based on my analyses and existing observations, GRBs are
among a select group of sources where gravitational lensing has not been definitively
15
detected yet.
1.6 Plan and Outline
Chapter 2 discusses the nature and observations of GRBs, which are essential for the
context of this dissertation. In Chapter 3, I review the basics of distance measure-
ments in cosmology, providing the theoretical groundwork for the research. Chapter
4 talks about gravitational lensing, especially the theory behind millilensing, and how
it can be used to search for DM with GRBs. Chapter 5 explains the detectors used to
identify GRBs and describes the data used. Then, in Chapter 6, I present a detailed
method for searching gravitational lenses. Chapter 7 reviews recent claims about de-
tecting gravitational lenses in GRBs. Chapter 8 combines my findings and discusses
them. It brings together the research. Finally, Chapter 9 wraps up the study and
looks at possible areas for future research, showing how this work can lead to more
exploration.
16
Chapter 2
Gamma-ray Bursts: An Overview
Gamma-ray Bursts (GRBs) are among the most luminous and energetic events known
in the cosmos. They were discovered as short-lived bursts of gamma-ray photons [43].
Despite their fleeting nature, with their visible presence in the sky lasting anywhere
from a few milliseconds to several minutes, the high-energy photons emitted during
these bursts can tell us about their extreme environments and the intervening uni-
verse. One of the remarkable features of GRBs is their seemingly isotropic distribution
in the sky, giving an early indication of their extragalactic origin. Identifying the first
GRB counterparts at other wavelengths (X-ray, optical, and radio) led to the mea-
surement of cosmological redshifts for GRBs, firmly establishing them as cosmological
sources.
17
Figure 2.1: The image depicts a GRB emanating from a region where stars
are formed, with a bright and intense display. The energy released during
the explosion is directed into two narrow, opposite streams or jets. Credit:
NASA/Swift/Mary Pat Hrybyk-Keith and John Jones
Events involving the coalescence of binary compact objects, such as a pair of neutron
stars or a neutron star and a black hole, are generally believed to give rise to short
GRBs. These intense occurrences can result in the formation of a black hole encased
by an accretion disk, which in turn can launch a relativistic jet and ultimately produce
a GRB. Detections of gravitational waves emanating from a neutron star merger are
thought to be accompanied by a short-duration GRB [3], [2].
Conversely, the collapse of massive stars is often associated with long GRBs. Our
understanding of these phenomena is reinforced by observed correlations between
18
Figure 2.2: Emission mechanism of a GRB. Credit: NASA’s Goddard
Space Flight Center/ICRAR
long-duration GRBs, star-forming regions, host galaxies, and supernovae [47].
2.1 Prompt Emission
Prompt emission refers to the initial burst of gamma rays emitted during a GRB.
The name GRB can be attributed to this property. At its peak emission, brighter
GRBs typically outshine the entire gamma-ray sky.
The exact mechanism for the prompt emission is not fully understood for both short
and long GRBs. Still, it is thought to involve the acceleration of particles to extremely
high energies. One popular theory is the internal shock model, which suggests that
19
the collision of relativistic outflows from the central engine of the GRB causes prompt
emission. These outflows have different Lorentz factors (a measure of the relative ve-
locity of the outflow to the speed of light). When expanding shells collide, they create
internal shocks that heat the plasma and accelerate particles to extremely high ener-
gies, producing gamma-ray emissions. Another theory is the external shock model,
which suggests that the interaction of the relativistic outflows with the surround-
ing medium causes the prompt emission. This interaction creates an external shock
that heats the plasma and accelerates particles to extremely high energies, producing
gamma-ray emission.
Despite the ongoing uncertainty surrounding the origins of prompt emission, the
significant number of GRBs detected has prompted extensive observational studies.
This has led to an empirical comprehension of their temporal and spectral properties.
2.1.1 Temporal Properties
The variation in the luminosity of GRBs over time, known as temporal structures,
distinctly differs from one burst to another. This differentiation is illustrated in
Figure 2.3, which showcases the light curves - a representation of the evolution of
GRBs’ brightness over time - for a selection of prominent GRBs detected by the
Fermi GBM. These plots underscore the uniqueness of each GRB, emphasizing that
20
Figure 2.3: Light curves of several GRBs
no two light curves are identical. Despite the individuality inherent to each GRB,
they do exhibit some common characteristics.
Burst Duration: The duration of GRBs is a fundamental temporal property, often
measured as T90 , which is the time interval over which 90% of the burst’s fluence (total
energy) is observed [45]. This definition helps mitigate the effects of background noise
and the detection threshold. The observed T90 durations of GRBs span a wide range,
21
from milliseconds to hundreds of seconds, but are typically divided into two groups:
short-duration GRBs (T90 < 2s) and long-duration GRBs (T90 > 2s) [45].
Burst Structure and Variability: GRBs’ prompt emission light curves are highly vari-
able and complex. High variability may suggest a compact central engine and a
highly dynamic emission process. The light curves often show patterns of multiple
peaks (‘pulses’) with different amplitudes, widths, and asymmetries. In contrast,
some bursts have a smooth, single-peaked structure.
Pulse Properties: Pulse patterns in GRBs display a variety of shapes, ranging from
simple to complex structures. While many are characterized by an asymmetric shape
with a swift increase in intensity followed by gradual decay, known as the fast-rise-
exponential-decay (FRED) profile, this is not the only pattern observed. GRB pulses
can exhibit diverse behaviors, including multiple peaks, plateau phases, or irregular
decay patterns. Several empirical models have been proposed to describe these diverse
GRB pulse shapes. For instance, the Norris et al. [74] model is well-known for its use
of the FRED profile. The distribution of pulse durations, rise times, decay times, and
the relationships between these parameters provide valuable insights into constraining
GRB models and understanding the physical processes driving these emissions.
Temporal Gaps and Quiescent Times: Some GRBs exhibit non-detection periods
(“gaps” or “quiescent times”) in their light curves between successive pulses. These
22
features can provide clues about the nature of GRBs. However, currently, it is uncer-
tain if these separated emission episodes arise from the same physical process, such
as internal or external shocks. Additionally, we don’t yet know whether the time
separation is a product of an intrinsic attribute of the central source or a feature of
its environment.
Precursors and Extended Emission: Some GRBs, particularly short GRBs, show weak
gamma-ray emission episodes (precursors) before or extended emissions lasting tens
to hundreds of seconds after the main burst. An example of a precursor is the short
GRB 090510A shown in Figure 2.3. It had a short precursor about 0.5 seconds before
the main burst. The main event was extremely short, only about 0.2 seconds, and
showed a complex, multi-peaked light curve.
Onset and Ending of the Burst: The onset of the burst can be characterized by
parameters such as the time to reach peak flux or the rise asymmetry. The burst
ending could be abrupt or gradual.
2.1.2 Spectral Properties
Spectral Energy Distribution: GRBs are initially detected in the gamma-ray part of
the electromagnetic spectrum, typically in the energy range of a few keV to a few
MeV. The spectral energy distribution describes how the burst’s intensity (or number
23
of photons) varies with energy. It is usually represented as a plot of photon or energy
flux versus photon energy.
Spectral Shape: The shape of the GRB spectrum is typically not a simple power law
but has a more complex, curved shape. The most commonly used model to describe
this shape is the Band function, named after David Band, who first proposed it. The
Band function is a smoothly broken power law with two power-law segments joined
together at a “break energy” (E0 ) [8].
Peak Energy: The peak energy is a key spectral parameter of GRBs. It is the energy
at which the νF ν spectrum of the GRB (the photon energy times the photon flux at
that energy) reaches its maximum. This is usually in the range of tens to hundreds
of keV.
Spectral Evolution: Many GRBs show spectral evolution, where the spectrum’s shape
changes over time. This is often characterized as “hard-to-soft” evolution, where the
spectrum starts out with a higher peak energy (harder) and evolves towards a lower
peak energy (softer). This is discussed by Ford et al. [29].
Spectral Lags: Spectral lags represent the time delay between the arrival of high-
energy and low-energy photons from a GRB [75]. The cause of these lags has yet to
be fully known. One intriguing theory, the pulse scale conjecture [33, 69], suggests that
emissions across all energy bands commence simultaneously. The observed spectral
24
lags could be explained by the subsequent difference in pulse evolution across various
energies. Even if emissions start simultaneously, lower energy pulses stretch in time
compared to higher energy pulses, resulting in a spectral lag. However, this lag
doesn’t affect the initial pulse start time, which remains constant across all energies.
2.2 Candidate Progenitors
The main paradigm explaining the origin of long GRBs is the collapsar model, where
a rapidly rotating, massive star exhausts its nuclear fuel and undergoes gravitational
collapse, resulting in a black hole.
This catastrophic event not only triggers a supernova explosion but also leads to the
formation of an accretion disk around the newborn black hole. As a result, a pair
of ultra-relativistic jets erupt along the rotation axis, and if one of these jets points
towards Earth, it is perceived as a long GRB. Supporting this model is the observation
that long GRBs are often associated with Type Ic supernovae, particularly a subtype
with extremely high kinetic energy known as hypernovae. The additional energy in
hypernovae, relative to standard supernovae, is thought to be related to the formation
of the black hole and the launching of the GRB jets.
The two main hypotheses for the progenitors of short GRBs are the merger of two
25
neutron stars and the merger of a neutron star and a black hole. The first hypothesis
is that two neutron stars in a binary system merge, resulting in the formation of
a black hole and the emission of a GRB. This scenario is supported by detecting a
gravitational wave signal from the merger of two neutron stars (GW170817) followed
by a short GRB (GRB 170817A) [2, 3]. The gravitational waves were detected by
LIGO and Virgo, and the GRB was detected by Fermi and INTEGRAL. The second
hypothesis is that a neutron star and a black hole in a binary system merge, forming a
black hole and a GRB emission. This scenario is supported by the observed properties
of some short GRBs, consistent with a black hole in the system.
2.3 Afterglow
Afterglow refers to radiation emission following the initial burst of gamma rays during
a GRB. The afterglow can be observed in different wavelength bands, including X-
rays, ultraviolet, optical, infrared, and radio.
The afterglow is thought to be caused by the interaction of the relativistic outflows
from the GRB with the surrounding medium. As the outflows expand and slow down,
they heat the medium and create shocks that accelerate particles to high energies.
These particles then emit radiation, producing the afterglow.
26
The afterglow emission can be divided into two phases: the early afterglow, which
lasts for the first few hours after the GRB, and the late afterglow, which lasts for
several days to weeks. The early afterglow is dominated by the forward shock, which
is the shock that is created by the interaction of the relativistic outflows with the
surrounding medium. The late afterglow is dominated by the reverse shock created
by the medium’s interaction with the decelerating outflows.
The study of the afterglow can provide insights into the properties of the surrounding
medium, the nature of the relativistic outflows, and the physical processes that are
taking place during a GRB. For example, the afterglow can be used to estimate
the distance to the GRB, the energy of the outflows, and the composition of the
surrounding medium.
27
Chapter 3
Measuring Distances in Cosmology
3.1 Introduction
Modern cosmology relies heavily on well-founded theoretical frameworks and models,
with the concept of an expanding universe playing a central role. This revolution-
ary idea has reshaped our comprehension of the cosmos. The Friedmann-Lemaı̂tre-
Robertson-Walker (FLRW) metric [30, 48, 90, 98] and the Λ-CDM model [26] form
the backbone of our understanding and quantification of this cosmic expansion.
The FLRW metric offers a mathematical model of the universe in the context of
general relativity. It is predicated on the assumptions of isotropy and homogeneity,
which express the Cosmological Principle. Isotropy suggests that the universe appears
29
the same in all directions, and homogeneity implies that the universe’s properties are
consistent at all locations.
The line element for the FLRW metric can be mathematically expressed as:
dr2
ds2 = −c2 dt2 + a(t)2 [ 2
+ r2 (dθ2 + sin2 θdϕ2 )], (3.1)
1 − kr
where ds2 is the spacetime interval, c is the speed of light, dt is the time interval, dr,
dθ, and dϕ are differential coordinates.
Equation 3.1) introduces the scale factor a(t), which describes how the distance be-
tween two points in the universe changes over time. This dynamic aspect is funda-
mental to our understanding of cosmic expansion or contraction.
Another key component of the FLRW metric is the spatial curvature constant k.
This constant represents the curvature of the universe: a positive curvature (k = 1)
corresponds to a closed universe, zero curvature (k = 0) to a flat universe and a
negative curvature (k = −1) to an open universe.
The Λ-CDM model, the contemporary standard cosmology model, is an enhanced
version of the FLRW model by incorporating additional physical phenomena and
components. This model assumes a flat universe (k=0) consistent with the most
30
precise cosmological observations. In this model, Λ refers to the cosmological constant
associated with dark energy, an elusive form of energy that pervades all of space and
results in the observed acceleration of the universe’s expansion. CDM represents Cold
Dark Matter, a hypothesized form of non-baryonic matter that exerts gravitational
attraction yet is not observable, rendering it undetectable by conventional means.
The density parameters, denoted by the Greek letter Omega (Ω), quantify the con-
tributions of different components to the universe. The matter density parameter
(ΩM ) encompasses ordinary (baryonic) matter and DM. Conversely, the dark energy
density parameter (ΩΛ ) encompasses the contribution from dark energy.
The critical density (ρc ) is
3Ho2
ρc = . (3.2)
8πG
Ho is the Hubble parameter, and G is the gravitational constant.
Measurements from the Planck satellite show that ΩM and ΩΛ are approximately
0.315 and 0.685, respectively. This implies that matter makes up about 31.5% and
dark energy about 68.5% of the universe’s total energy density. Their combined value
closely approximates 1, reinforcing the idea of a flat universe as suggested by the
Λ-CDM model.
31
To derive these density parameters, precise observations and measurements are cru-
cial. One key approach involves examining the cosmic microwave background (CMB)
radiation, the afterglow of the Big Bang. Minute temperature variations in the CMB
provide data about the density of normal and DM and the universe’s curvature.
Another approach utilizes Type Ia supernovae. Given their consistent intrinsic bright-
ness upon explosion, the apparent brightness observed provides a distance measure,
offering insights into the universe’s expansion history.
Lastly, the large-scale patterns of galaxies across the universe contribute to our un-
derstanding of these density parameters. The galaxy distribution, a cosmic web
influenced by DM’s gravitational forces, helps refine our estimates of the universe’s
matter and dark energy composition.
3.2 Distance Measures
Estimating the distance between two spatial points within the universe presents dis-
tinct challenges in cosmology. Primarily, we must account for the universe’s ongo-
ing expansion, which leads to constant growth in the separation of “comoving” ob-
jects—those moving with the expansion. Moreover, our observations of the universe
are fundamentally based on past events, a consequence of our earth-bound viewpoint.
32
This is due to the finite speed of light and the time it takes for light from distant
objects to reach us.
Adding to the complexity, various cosmological models offer different conceptions of
space and its structure. Specifically, space might not conform to the fundamental
premises of Euclidean geometry. In Euclidean terms, the volume of a sphere is given
by 43 πr3 . However, some cosmological models suggest a non-Euclidean, or curved,
universe. In these models, the standard Euclidean formula for the volume of a sphere
no longer applies, necessitating alternative volume calculations based on the universe’s
curvature.
3.2.1 Comoving Distance
The comoving distance metric provides a means to calculate distances in a manner
that considers the universe’s expansion. It can be envisioned as the spatial sep-
aration between two points in the universe, calculated along a grid that expands
synchronously with the universe. This implies that, unlike physical or “proper” dis-
tances that increase with cosmic expansion, the comoving distance between any two
fixed points remains unchanged with time. The comoving coordinate system grows
with the universe, preserving the spatial separations between comoving observers.
This concept allows for a more consistent comparison of distances at various epochs
33
in the universe’s history. Given that the light we observe from distant GRBs has
journeyed for billions of years to reach us, their proper distances have grown due to
cosmic expansion during this transit time. However, the comoving distances to these
GRBs stay invariant, providing a stable frame of reference. From an observational
standpoint, the comoving distance to a GRB (or any distant object) can be derived
from its redshift and a model depicting the universe’s expansion history.
Cosmologists use two components to describe the spatial extent of the universe: the
line-of-sight (radial) and transverse comoving distances.
Line-of-sight Comoving Distance: The line-of-sight comoving distance, also known
as the radial comoving distance, is measured along the observer’s line of sight to an
astronomical object. As given by Hogg [36]
Z z
c 1
DC = dz, (3.3)
H0 0 E(z)
where c is the speed of light, H0 is the present Hubble constant, z is the redshift, and
p
E(z) = Ωr (1 + z)4 + ΩM (1 + z)3 + Ωk (1 + z)2 + ΩΛ . (3.4)
34
Hence E(z) represents the cosmological parameters that dictate the expansion dynam-
ics of the universe. These include ΩM for matter density (including both baryonic
and DM, ΩΛ for dark energy density (the energy attributed to space itself), Ωr for ra-
diation density, and Ωk for the curvature density parameter (reflecting the universe’s
spatial geometry). Following the Λ-CDM model, this research assumes a flat universe
(Ωk =0) with matter and dark energy being the dominant components. Thus, I only
use ΩM and ΩΛ . The investigation of additional potential density parameters such
as Ωphantom energy , Ωdomain walls , and Ωcosmic strings can be found in the work by Nemiroff
and Patla [71].
Transverse Comoving Distance: The transverse comoving distance measures the sep-
aration between two objects at the same redshift but along a direction perpendicular
to the line of sight. This distance is essential for understanding the universe’s large-
scale structure and estimating the angular size of distant objects. In a spatially flat
universe, the transverse comoving distance (DM ) equals the line-of-sight comoving
distance (DC ). However, in a non-flat universe, it can be calculated based on the
curvature parameter (Ωk ). These distances are conveniently summarized by Hogg
[36].
For a flat universe (k = 0),
DM = DC , (3.5)
35
For a closed universe (k > 0),
p
c 1 DC H0
DM = √ sinh Ωk , (3.6)
H0 Ωk c
For an open universe (k < 0),

c 1 p DC H0
DM = p sin |Ωk | . (3.7)
H0 |Ωk | c
3.2.2 Angular Diameter Distance
The angular diameter distance is a unique cosmological measure that connects an
object’s physical extent with its observed angular size. This concept becomes es-
pecially important when considering objects located at substantial cosmological dis-
tances where the universe’s expansion significantly impacts the interpretation of ob-
servations.
The angular diameter distance, DA , to an object situated at redshift z is defined as the
ratio of its physical transverse size to its observed angular size (measured in radians).
For smaller cosmological scales, where the universe’s curvature can be neglected, this
measure coincides with the conventional understanding of distance used in Euclidean
geometry.
36
However, the universe’s expansion is pivotal on the grand cosmological scale. As
we observe objects at higher redshifts, the light we perceive was emitted when the
universe was more compact. This leads to a counterintuitive effect where the angular
diameter distance grows with increasing redshift, reaches a maximum, and diminishes
for larger redshifts. Consequently, objects at high redshifts appear larger in angular
size than what one would naively expect from the continuously expanding proper
distance. This behavior is characteristic of an expanding universe and typifies the
non-Euclidean geometry of our cosmos.
The angular diameter distance is related to the transverse comoving distance by
DM
DA = . (3.8)
1+z
Figure 3.1: Side view of the lensing geometry. The labels O, L, and S
stand for the observer, lens, and source. The labeled distances are angular
diameter distances [67].
Figure 3.1 shows the various cosmological distances pertinent to the gravitational
37
A
lensing study. Firstly, the angular diameter distance DOL represents the distance
between the observer O and an object or lens L at redshift zl . It is expressed as
Z zl
A c 1
DOL = dz. (3.9)
Ho (1 + zl ) 0 E(z)
This formula contains the redshift of the lens zl , the universe’s expansion rate repre-
sented by the Hubble constant Ho , and the function E(z).
A
Similarly, the angular diameter distance, DOS , is the distance between the observer
O and a source S at redshift zs . This distance is given by,
Z zs
A c 1
DOS = dz. (3.10)
Ho (1 + zs ) 0 E(z)
An important point in cosmology is that distances are not always additive due to the
A
universe’s expansion. An example is the angular diameter distance DLS between a
lens L at redshift zl and a source S at redshift zs . It’s not calculated as the difference
A A A A
DOS − DOL , as one might intuitively expect. This is because DOS and DOL are
calculated over different ranges of redshifts, with different rates of cosmic expansion
occurring during the light’s travel. This difference in the scale factor’s evolution over
A
different redshift intervals must be accounted for when computing DLS . Therefore
38
A
DLS is given by,
Z zs Z zl
A c 1 1
DLS = dz − dz . (3.11)
Ho (1 + zs ) 0 E(z) 0 E(z)
The first integral corresponds to the total comoving distance from the observer to
the source, accounting for the cosmic expansion during the light’s journey from the
source to us. The second integral gives the comoving distance from the observer to
the lens. These two values’ differences isolate the comoving distance between the
c
lens and the source. The term Ho (1+zs )
adjusts the comoving distance by factoring in
the redshift zs of the source, converting it into an angular diameter distance. This
scaling accounts for the universe’s expansion from when the light was emitted from
the source until now.
In the Λ-CDM model, the currently most widely accepted cosmological model, I
assume a flat Universe (Ωk = 0) composed of ordinary matter, DM (represented by
ΩM ), and dark energy (represented by ΩΛ ). This simplifies the expression for E(z), the
scale factor in the Friedmann equations describing the Universe’s expansion. Thus,
p
E(z) = ΩM (1 + z)3 + ΩΛ . An exact analytical solution to the integral equations
for the comoving and angular diameter distances is not feasible under this model,
√ dz
R
primarily because the integral takes the form of , which doesn’t have
ΩM (1+z)3 +ΩΛ
a standard closed analytic form. Therefore, numerical methods are required to solve
39
these integrals, which this research employs to compute the distances.
However, in a simpler cosmological model where dark energy is not present (i.e.,
ΩΛ = 0), the equation simplifies to an integral that can be solved analytically. This
results in the comoving distance being proportional to the inverse hyperbolic sine of
the redshift, a solution relevant in the era before the discovery of cosmic acceleration.
40
Chapter 4
Gravitational Lensing: A
Millilensing Focus
4.1 Introduction to Gravitational Lensing
Gravitational lensing occurs when light from a distant source is deflected, and the
measured flux is magnified due to intervening matter between the source and the
observer. These effects can be explained by Einstein’s general theory of relativity,
which describes how energy distorts time and space. Einstein predicted that a photon
passing through the vicinity of a CO would be deflected by a certain angle, which can
41
b α
M
Figure 4.1: Deflection of the light path due to CO
be calculated using the equation

4GM
α= (4.1)
c2 b
where G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the CO, c is the speed of
light, and b is the impact parameter, which refers to the distance between the CO
and the closest approach of the photon.
Gravitational lensing occurs when the path of light from a distant object is bent
and distorted by an object, similar to the effect of a magnifying glass on a candle.
In gravitational lensing terminology, the deflecting object is called the lens. One of
the most significant uses of this phenomenon is that distant sources are magnified,
enabling us to study them in more detail. Figure 4.2 illustrates lensing due to a
quasar in front of a distant galaxy. The quasar, acting as the lens, distorts the light
rays around it, resulting in two different images of the source marked in red. The
number and location of the images depend on the orientation of the observer, lens,
and source. In some cases, a complete circle of light, known as the Einstein ring, is
produced when perfect symmetry exists between the observer, lens, and source. The
Hubble Space Telescope (HST) has provided recent observational evidence of lensing
through distorted galaxies and Einstein rings, as shown in Figure 4.3.
42
Figure 4.2: Gravitational lensing. Image Credit: F. Courbin, S. G. Djor-
govski, G. Meylan, et al., Caltech / EPFL / WMKO
4.2 Types of Lensing
Gravitational lensing is classified into different types based on the effects observed.
The two main types are strong lensing and weak lensing. Based on the angular sepa-
ration of the images, strong lensing is further classified into Microlensing, Millilensing,
Picolensing, and Femtolensing.
Strong gravitational lensing is a phenomenon in which the gravitational field of a
massive object, such as a galaxy cluster, black hole, or a massive star, bends the
path of light from a background source, like a distant galaxy or quasar, causing it
to be distorted, magnified, and sometimes multiply imaged [87]. The most striking
feature of strong lensing is the presence of multiple images of the background source,
arranged in a characteristic pattern known as an Einstein ring when the source,
lens, and observer are in line. These images’ number, shape, and position depend
on the lensing object’s mass and distribution, the lensing system’s geometry, and the
43
Figure 4.3: Strong and weak gravitational lensing. Image Credit
ESA/Hubble and NASA
observer’s position relative to the lens. Figure 4.3 is an example of strong gravitational
lensing.
Weak gravitational lensing occurs when the path of light from a distant object is
slightly distorted due to the gravitational pull of an intervening object like a galaxy
or cluster of galaxies [46]. Unlike strong lensing, which produces multiple and highly
distorted images of the background object, weak lensing only causes a slight distortion
in the object’s shape. This can happen when the orientation of the source is not
symmetrical to the lens. The tiny distortions of galaxies seen in the background
of Figure 4.3, are the hallmark of weak lensing. However, since weak lensing is
more frequent than strong lensing, it provides an important tool for investigating
the universe’s large-scale structure [96], DM distribution in galactic halos [35], and
individual galaxies’ properties [52].
44
Gravitational microlensing involves the bending of light by a low-mass object, typ-
ically a single star. The masses of these lenses lie within the range of 10−6 to 105
M⊙ . As an example of strong lensing, microlensing also causes multiple images of
the lensed object. However, due to the low mass of the lensing object in microlens-
ing, these images are usually extremely close together. They cannot be resolved as
separate entities with the current telescopic capabilities. The angular separation be-
tween the images is typically on the order of 10−6 arcseconds. As a result, observers
on Earth don’t see distinct multiple images as in strong lensing but rather a singu-
lar, brightened image of the source. This brightening occurs when the lensing star
passes directly/nearly in front of the source star, leading to a noticeable increase and
subsequent decrease in brightness, forming a characteristic light curve. Researchers
can identify and study otherwise invisible objects, such as rogue planets, dim stars,
and black holes, through their effects. Recently microlensing has been used to detect
exoplanets [10, 13].
Millilensing is gravitational lensing that occurs when the lensing object has a mass of
104 to 109 solar masses. The average angular separation of the images is on the order
of 10−3 arcseconds. The time delay between the images may vary from less than a
second to about 104 seconds. Millilensing has been used to measure the distribution
of DM in the universe [55, 66, 73]. In addition, millilensing has been proposed as a
possible method for detecting intermediate-mass black holes, which are thought to be
the missing link between stellar-mass black holes and supermassive black holes.
45
Picolensing occurs when the angular separation of the multiple images is on the
order of 10−12 arcseconds and the lensing mass range is 10−12 to 10−7 M⊙ . The lens
candidates could be primordial black holes, molecular clouds, and small planets. A
method to detect the lensing of GRBs by this type of COs has been suggested by
Nemiroff and Gould [70].
Femtolensing occurs when the angular separation of the multiple images is on the
order of 10−15 arcseconds. The mass range of the lenses is 10−16 to 10−13 M⊙ and an
average time delay between the images is 10−24 seconds. The lens candidates could be
primordial black holes and comets. These exceedingly low-mass lenses might cause
interference fringes within the GRB energy spectrum, uniformly distributed across
the energy space. Past research endeavors, such as those by Band et al. [9] and
Briggs [14], have conducted extensive analyses on GRB spectra spectral lines, leading
to mixed findings. Such spectral lines, if present, could potentially be confused with
cyclotron absorption lines, causing a debate over their interpretation. The absence of
multiple line detections in the BATSE data, studied by Briggs [14], could establish
lower boundaries on the mass and density of COs.
46
4.3 Probability of Lensing: Detection Volume For-
malism
The likelihood of detecting a CO through gravitational lensing in a dataset can be
determined by utilizing the formalism of detection volume proposed by Nemiroff [67].
The first step in defining detection volumes is to establish detection thresholds. This
is a predefined value that determines whether an effect will be considered observable
or not. Criteria such as the amplification of a source by a lens above detectability
and the separation of two source images greater than a specific angle are parameters
to judge whether a lens will fall within the detection volume.
The next step is to define the lens volumes. The lensing relations are rewritten to
show at what distance from the observer-source axis the lens must be to create a
measurable effect. A radius known as the impact parameter (b) is calculated within
which the lensing effect is stronger than the minimum effect - meaning all lenses
closer, in some cases further to the axis than this radius, will create an effect that
meets the detection threshold. The radius b changes with the distance between the
observer and the lens, creating a different b at each observer-lens distance. A curve
is defined by joining all the bs at each lens distance. By rotating this curve about the
observer-source axis, a surface is defined. The volume inside this surface is considered
47
the lensing volume.
Figure 4.4: Light rays emanating from the source (S) get deflected by the
point gravitational lens (L).
As shown in Figure 4.4, a source S is at a distance DOS from the Observer O and
has an angular separation β from the CO lens L, which is at a distance DOL from
the observer. Light rays 1 and 2 represent two paths that light can traverse from S
to O due to the presence of L. The impact parameter b signifies the span between L
and the line joining S to O. x+ and x− signify the distances from L to the nearest
approach points of light rays 1 and 2. In simpler terms, they represent the closest
distance each light ray gets to L while traveling their separate paths. A detection
48
criterion establishes a proper b for any proper distance from the observer. Should
the lens move nearer to the observer-source axis OS, the effect becomes more potent
than at the radius b. Therefore, the lens volume that fulfills the detection criteria as
expressed in the paper by Nemiroff [67] is given by,
Z P
DOS
V = πb2 dDOL
P
. (4.2)
0
Here, the superscript P denotes the proper cosmological distance. At small red-
shifts, this distance is essentially a conventional Newtonian distance measure. Given
a constant proper number density n of lenses on the path to the source, the overall
probability P = nV of a lens being within the lens volume is small.
In an instance where N sources are being observed, each with a small probability
p of success, the probability of observing at least one lensing event among multiple
sources can be modeled as a Poisson process, where the rate parameter is the sum of
the individual probabilities for each source. This leads to the formula
P = 1 − e−λ [67], (4.3)
49
P
where λ = pi , the sum of the individual probabilities.
In a more general context, a whole probability distribution of lens types exists so
that the number density of lenses, denoted between a parameter M , and M + dM ,
P
is nL (M, DOL )dM . A usual lens attribute is its mass. With this in mind, the more
general probability of lensing beyond the detection thresholds is,
Z M =Mmax Z P
DOS
P P
P = dM dDOL nL (M, DOL )πb2 (M, DOL
P
)[67]. (4.4)
M =Mmin 0
4.4 Millilensing with GRBs
Identifying lensed GRBs necessitates a detailed examination of their time-based and
spectral attributes. When a CO, serving as a lens, is situated on or near the trajectory
of light from a GRB, the CO’s gravitational field can delay light seen by an observer.
This delay can create multiple images of the source; the second image to arrive can be
considered the gravitational echo of the first image. The time gap between the initial
signal and this echo depends on variables like the CO’s mass and the positioning of
the GRB in relation to the lens. I aim to search for these gravitational echoes within
individual GRB signals.
50
4.4.1 Calculating Impact Parameters
As shown in Figure 4.4, the two rays, 1 and 2, when tracked backward, produce two
images S1 and S2 as would be seen by an observer at O.
The total apparent intensity will be the sum of the individual apparent intensities of
these two images. Given these parameters and this lens geometry, the total apparent
light intensity derived by Refsdal and Bondi [89] is given as

1 α β
IT = + IN , (4.5)
2 β α
where α is the angle between the two light rays, β is the angle LOS between the lens
L and the source S, and IN is the apparent intensity of the source if there was no
lens L.
The amplification factor A is the total apparent intensity divided by the source’s
intensity when there is no deflection. Hence it is given by

IT 1 α β
A= = + . (4.6)
IN 2 β α
51
Amplification Impact Parameter (bf ): As this impact parameter is derived from the
amplification factor, it is called the amplification impact parameter. It is sometimes
referred to as bA , where A stands for amplification or even bf , where f represents flux.
From here on, I will refer to this impact parameter as bf .
As demonstrated by Refsdal and Bondi [89]
s 2
bf 8Rs (DOS − DOL )
α= + , (4.7)
DOL DOS DOL
where Rs is the Schwarzschild radius.
From Figure 4.4 it can be seen that β = Rs /DOL . Substituting the values of α and
β in Equation 4.6
" ! !#
1 8Rs DOL (DOS − DOL ) 1/2 8Rs DOL (DOS − DOL ) −1/2
A= 1+ + 1+ .
2 b2f DOS b2f DOS
(4.8)
Now let’s find out bf in terms of A. To do that first, let’s introduce a variable B for
convenience such that

8Rs DOL (DOS − DOL )
B= . (4.9)
b2f DOS
52
So this equation simplifies to
√ 1
2A = 1+B+ √ . (4.10)
1+B
Squaring both sides and rearranging to the quadratic form
B 2 − 4B(A2 − 1) − 4(A2 − 1) = 0. (4.11)
Comparing this equation with the general form of a quadratic equation ax2 +bx+c = 0
we get
a = 1, b = −4(A2 − 1), and c = −4(A2 − 1).
Applying the quadratic formula, we find that
h p i
B = 2 (A2 − 1) ± A (A2 − 1) . (4.12)
To further simplify this equation, we multiply and divide the right side of the equation
53
√
by A − A2 − 1. Now equation 4.12 becomes
√
A2 − 1
B= √ . (4.13)
A − A2 − 1
Substituting the value of B, inverting, and rearranging we get

DOL A
b2f = 4Rs DOL (1 − ) √ −1 . (4.14)
DOS A2 − 1
Taking the square root, b can be written as
r
DOL
bf = 4Rs DOL (1 − )Φ, (4.15)
DOS
where
1/2
A2

Φ= − 1, (4.16)
A2 − 1
Therefore we can write b as

p
bf = 4Rs Def f Φ (4.17)
where Def f = DOL DLS / DOS [24].
The formula for the amplification impact parameter also applies to sources other than
54
GRBs.
Time delay impact parameter (b∆t ): The relative time delay in the arrival of photons
results from two contributing factors. The first factor is geometric and is defined by
the differential path lengths. The second factor originates from the varying gravita-
tional potentials encountered along the two paths (also known as the Shapiro effect).
Due to these differing potentials, the two rays undergo distinct general relativistic
time dilations. The time delay for a point mass lens as summarized by Mao [53] is,
(r − rs )2 4GM

1
∆t = (1 + zl ) − 2 ln r , (4.18)
c 2Def f c
In this formula, r refers to the point where an imaginary light ray intersects the image
plane. Meanwhile, rs designates the location of the source when projected onto the
image plane, and zL refers to the redshift of the lens.
The time delay equation used by Nemiroff et al. [66] to calculate the impact param-
eters is given by,
c∆t (|x2− − x2+ |) (b∆t − x− )

= − 2 ln , (4.19)
(1 + zl )Rs 2Def f Rs (x+ − b∆t )
55
where
r
b∆t b∆t 2
x∓ = ( )∓ ( ) + 2Def f Rsch . (4.20)
2 2
The two rays expected to arrive within the maximum detectable search time must
be within a certain distance from the observer-source axis. This distance is called
b∆t(max) . Conversely, the lens echo image cannot be detected if the two images arrive
within the minimum detectable search time, specified as b∆t(min) . To consider this
possibility in the analysis, the distance of the lens from the observer-source axis must
be greater than b∆t(min) for the candidate echo to be noticeable. Therefore, the impact
parameters serve as boundaries that enclose the volume where L can be detectable.
The values of impact parameters b∆t(max) and b∆t(min) can be computed from Equation
4.4.1.
4.4.2 Probability of Millilensing
A lens is detectable if it lies inside both bf and b∆t(max) but outside b∆t(min) . This
detection process involves defining a volume between the observer O and each GRB
at redshift zs . A CO lens with mass Mco within this volume could create a detectable
gravitational lens echo. Following Equation 4.3 and given these impact parameters,
the volume within which a lens will be detectable is [73]
56
Z zs
V = π(b2outer − b2inner )dDOL
P
. (4.21)
0
The term (b2outer − b2inner ) replaces b2f in Equation 4.4.2. The term bouter represents the
outer boundary of the detectable volume and is given by
bouter = (bf , b∆t(max) )min . (4.22)
Whereas binner is b∆t(min) and represents the radius of the innermost detection volume.
To obtain the number of detectable millilenses for each GRB, the above equation
must include the density of lenses in a specific universe condition. This number is
Z zs
NL = nL π(b2outer − b2inner )dDOL
P
, (4.23)
0
where
3Ho2 (1 + zL )3 ΩCO
nL = . (4.24)
4πRs c2
In this research, I probe various scenarios concerning CO DM. For this purpose, I
adjust the density parameter of a CO lens (ΩCO ) within a range of values from 0 to
57
0.265. This maximum value corresponds to the estimated fraction of the universe’s
total matter density, ΩM , attributed to DM. By setting different ΩCO values within
this range, I simulate and analyze various possible distributions of CO DM in the
universe. Current data from the Planck satellite suggests that ΩM is approximately
0.315, with visible matter accounting for about 0.05 and DM density or ΩDM con-
stituting the remaining 0.265. Accordingly, my study’s upper limit of ΩCO is 0.265,
corresponding to a scenario where all DM in the universe comprises COs with a spe-
cific mass. In other words, an ΩCO value of 0.265 for a particular mass of the lens
implies that all DM consists exclusively of COs having that mass. However, this could
be considered an extreme case. I also examine scenarios with ΩCO values less than
0.265 to account for other possibilities, for example, when the CO DM with a unique
mass comprises only a fraction of ΩDM in the universe. The analysis is carried out
for different masses ranging from 104 M⊙ to 109 M⊙ .
For each distinct scenario, represented by a specific ΩCO value, I calculate the number
of detectable millilenses, NL , with a unique mass for each GRB using Equation 4.4.2.
The sum of NL values for all GRBs provides the total number of detectable millilenses
NT , with a specific mass. This calculation is performed for all masses between this
mass range. The same procedure is repeated for all ΩCO values. Next, the probability
of getting at least one NT is computed for each scenario and each mass using Equation
4.3. The probability of observing a specific number of events in a Poisson process is
given by the Poisson distribution:
58
λk e− λ
P = . (4.25)
k!
Here k is the number of events. This formula can be used when a lens is detected.
Equation 4.3 is derived from this formula substituting k=0.
59
Chapter 5
Detectors and Data
In this research, all of the GRBs under scrutiny were detected by the Fermi Gamma-
ray Space Telescope’s Gamma-ray Burst Monitor (GBM) [58], which has cataloged
over 3000 GRBs since its launch. However, the research includes a singular GRB de-
tected by the Burst and Transient Source Experiment (BATSE) [28] on the Compton
Gamma-Ray Observatory [31], specifically GRB 950830, owing to the claim of grav-
itational lensing associated with it. The upcoming sections will provide a detailed
overview of the Fermi detector. Although specifics of the BATSE detector aren’t
discussed in this chapter, the data from both Fermi and BATSE will be discussed.
61
5.1 Overview of Fermi
The Fermi, formerly known as the Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST),
is a space observatory used to conduct gamma-ray astronomy observations from low
Earth orbit. Astronomers use its highest energy instrument, the Large Area Telescope
(LAT), to perform an all-sky survey of astrophysical and cosmological phenomena,
such as active galactic nuclei, pulsars, high-energy sources, and DM. Fermi also has
the GBM used to study gamma-ray bursts and solar flares.
62
Figure 5.1: GLAST launch aboard a Delta II rocket, 11 June 2008. Credit:
NASA
Launched on June 11, 2008, aboard a Delta II 7920-H [7] rocket as shown in Figure
5.1, Fermi is named after the high-energy physics pioneer Enrico Fermi. The mission
is a collaboration between NASA, the United States Department of Energy, and
government agencies in France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and Sweden. It is currently
the most sensitive gamma-ray telescope in orbit.
63
The LAT is an imaging gamma-ray detector that detects photons with energies rang-
ing from about 20 million to about 300 billion electron volts, covering approximately
20% of the sky.
Figure 5.2: The Fermi telescope before it was launched. Credit: NASA’s
Goddard Space Flight Center.
Gamma-ray Burst Monitor (GBM): GBM consists of 12 sodium iodide (NaI) detec-
tors, each with a thickness of 1.27 cm and a diameter of 12.7 cm, directly connected
to a Photomultiplier Tube (PMT) of the same diameter. Figure 5.2 shows six of the
twelve NaI detectors. A more detailed image of a single NaI detector is shown in
Figure 5.3.
64
Figure 5.3: NaI Detector shipped from Jena Optronik August 2002. Credit:
NASA
These detectors can detect gamma rays with energies from about 8 keV to 1 MeV,
making NaI an ideal scintillation material for this energy range due to its low cost,
high efficiency, and adequate spectral resolution. To achieve lower energy coverage
than BATSE, a 0.25 mm beryllium window is used. The detectors are arranged in
four banks of three to reduce systematic errors for burst locations and improve the
triggering algorithm. Additionally, the thickness of the detectors is optimized for
the energy range where bursts typically emit the most energy and provide a cosine
angular response, similar to BATSE.
65
Figure 5.4: The BGO detector. Credit: NASA
It also contains two Bismuth Germanate (BGO for Bismuth Germanium Oxide) de-
tectors, each measuring 12.7 cm in diameter and thickness, as shown in Figure 5.4.
To improve resolution and redundancy, each detector is viewed by two PMTs. BGO
is an ideal scintillation material for the energy range of approximately 150 keV to 40
MeV, providing good sensitivity due to its high-density composition. The cylindrical
BGO crystal has an energy resolution of 14% at 661 keV and 4% at 10 MeV and
overlaps with the lower energy range of the LAT. The detectors are coupled to 2
PMTs on opposite sides to ensure homogeneous light collection and redundancy in
case of PMT failure or degradation. Positioning the BGO detectors on opposite sides
of the LAT, as seen in Figure 5.2, provides almost complete sky coverage.
General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems designed and built the spacecraft
in Gilbert, Arizona. It operates in a low, circular orbit for around 96 minutes. It
66
maintains its orientation, looking away from the Earth, with a “rocking” motion
to ensure equal sky coverage. The instruments underwent rigorous environmental
testing, including vibration, vacuum, and high and low temperatures, to ensure their
reliability in space.
Data collected by the instruments are publicly available through the Fermi Science
Support Center website, and software for data analysis is also accessible.
5.2 DATA
5.2.1 BATSE Data
BATSE utilizes a method for detecting transient events that involves triggering when
the count rate in the 50-300 keV energy range increases by at least 5.5 times the back-
ground count rate, as measured by two or more LADs. This count rate is calculated
over integration periods of 0.064, 0.256, or 1.024 seconds.
The Time Tagged Event (TTE) BATSE data containing counts from the three trig-
gered detectors have been used to analyze GRB 950830. The TTE data format records
information about individual Large Area Detector (LAD) events, including the time
of occurrence, discriminator channel, and detector number. Each event has a time
67
resolution of 2 ms, and the data is stored in a continuously running ring buffer. When
a burst trigger is activated, data is only recorded from the LADs that detected the
burst, and the accumulation of data ceases once three-quarters of the buffer is filled.
The remaining one-quarter of the memory contains data from all eight LADs that
precede the trigger event. The four BATSE energy channels utilized here are channel
1 (20 - 60 keV), channel 2 (60 - 110 keV), channel 3 (110 - 320 keV), and channel 4
(320 - 2000 keV).
5.2.2 GBM Data
In time, GBM produces two main types of scientific data: pre-binned (CTIME and
CSPEC) or unbinned (TTE) data. These snippets of data are produced for every trig-
ger and are available continuously. The pre-binned data types, CTIME and CSPEC,
are available in daily chunks, while the unbinned TTE data has been available in
hourly chunks since late 2012. The data files generated by GBM are formatted using
FITS, allowing for multiple data extensions with accompanying metadata stored in
headers. In addition, there is a primary header that provides metadata relevant to
the entire file.
The temporally pre-binned (64-millisecond) CTIME data consists of counts divided
into 8 different energy channels. The energy ranges for these channels are; channel
68
1 (4.5 - 11.8 keV), channel 2 (11.8 - 26.9 keV), channel 3 (26.9 - 50.4 keV), channel
4 (50.4 - 101.6 keV), channel 5 (101.6 - 293.8 keV), channel 6 (293.8 - 537.8 keV),
channel 7 (537.8 - 983.3 keV), and channel 8 (983.3 - 2000 keV).
2-microsecond TTE data containing individual detector counts were utilized for all the
GRBs analyzed here. The TTE data contains counts having 1 to 128 energy channels.
My analysis combined these 128 energy channels into the 8 channels following the
CTIME data.
69
Chapter 6
A Framework for Detecting
Gravitational Millilensing in GRBs
6.1 Introduction
This research reviewed many GRBs recorded by the Fermi GBM. I aimed to discern
potential secondary pulses indicative of gravitational lensing. From a pool of 3478,
I analyzed 882 GRBs, which is a sufficient sample size to limit the cosmologically
significant density of CO DM within the millilensing mass range.
Among the analyzed 882 GRBs, the redshift zGRB values for 90 are known, providing
a reliable basis for further analysis. For 444 GRBs, the redshift values are estimated
71
by Osborne et al. [76], Shahmoradi [92], Shahmoradi and Nemiroff [93]. For the
remaining 348 GRBs, I used the median value of all the GRBs with spectroscopic
redshift as their redshift value.
My examination focused on potential echoes after the primary signal in time without
overlapping the two signals. It is important to note that I searched for echoes arriving
after the primary signal returns to background levels. Hence, prior signals are not
considered part of the primary signal in this analysis. A paper by Ji et al. [39] is an
example of a search within the prior signal.
Between 2020 and 2022, several claims of GRB gravitational lensing were made,
as discussed in chapter 1. Seven GRBs were claimed to have a second episode of
emission that originated from the same parent source. To study these specific cases,
my analysis followed two tests [63]; the light curve similarity test (LST) and the
hardness similarity test (HST) as described in sections 6.3 and 6.3.1.
6.2 Methodology
The data analysis process for identifying gravitational lensing events in GRBs involved
a systematic series of steps.
The TTE data and not the CTIME data were used in this study, as TTE data has
72
a higher time resolution than the CTIME data. The TTE data from -30 to 300
seconds relative to trigger time was first binned into a specific time resolution. Gen-
erally, long GRBs were binned into 1.024-second durations, whereas short GRBs were
binned into 0.064-second resolutions. The detectors and energy channels registering
a signal notably above background levels were selected for further analysis. Next, the
background of the GRB in each energy channel was modelled. The background is
represented as dB(Ei , t)/dt, where E refers to the energy channels and i is the channel
number. Two time intervals were chosen to fit the background; one was right before
the start of the primary GRB signal (generally between -30 to -10 seconds), and the
other was right after the lens search interval (generally between 200 to 240 seconds).
To avoid fitting any real echo signal, the interval used to fit the background and the
interval used to search for an echo were kept separate. For many GRBs, especially
those whose background is not well-behaved, the data even before 200 seconds have
been used to fit the background. In those cases, however, the background interval to
search for an echo would decrease.
The start and end times of the main GRB pulse were determined using the T90
method, as detailed in section 6.2.1. These times were then used to sum up the GRB
signal into two main adjoining segments (S1 and S2 ), each of equal time width. The
GRB signal was summed up into two segments, not one to account for situations
when the echo signal is not time aligned and arrives between time bins. In such
cases, its amplitude would be artificially diminished. This could lead to missing echo
73
signals distributed over two adjoining time bins if the burst signal is summed up to
one segment.
A predefined search interval (tmin ,tmax ) was then scrutinized for lensing evidence using
the echo search algorithm, as described in section 6.2.2. Specifically, any signal in the
predefined search interval exceeding 5 σ and separated from the primary pulse was
considered a potential echo. Upon detecting a candidate echo, LST and HST were
carried out. If the two pulses were not sufficiently similar, the recho value obtained
from aligning the pulses by minimizing χ2 was recorded as the rmin . The process to
obtain recho will be discussed in section 6.3.
If the algorithm failed to detect a candidate echo, the values of rmin , tmin , and tmax
were documented.
6.2.1 Computing the Burst Duration
The parameter T90 is used to quantify the time frame during which a GRB emits
90% of the total fluence. The starting and ending points for T90 are defined by the
moments when 5% and 95% of the total energy are emitted.
The integrated counts S(t) detected from a GRB event, with the background counts
subtracted, are calculated over a time period as
74
X ∆S(tj )
S(t) = ∆tj . (6.1)
j
∆tj
Here j refers to a time bin index. The count integration is conducted over a prede-
termined time interval, set before the start and after the end of the event.
The zero-fluence interval precedes the GRB emission and is followed by the total-
fluence interval. If the background fit were perfect, the slope of the curve indicating
the burst intensity would remain flat during both the zero-fluence and the total-
fluence interval. However, discrepancies between the background fit and the original
background counts may cause negative slopes. These negative slopes mean a bet-
ter background fit is needed; hence, the T90 method is also a good way to test the
background fit.
The start and end times of zero-fluence and total-fluence intervals are manually set.
The corresponding levels Lz and Lt are found by calculating the average value of S(t)
during these intervals. In determining the Lt level, only the region after the first
emission episode returns to the background is considered to avoid missing any later
emissions. Hence, this method, although similar to the T90 time usually computed, is
different from it. The total number of counts from the GRB, ∆L, is then given by
∆L = Lt − Lz . (6.2)
75
The fluence level Sf , at a fraction f is found using
Sf = Lz + f ∆L. (6.3)
In this analysis, Sf denotes the accumulated counts until a fraction f of the total
source counts is received. Specifically, I compute the integrated counts S0.05 and
S0.95 , representing the points at which 5% and 95% of the total source counts have
been gathered, respectively.
Next, the corresponding times, denoted as τ0.05 and τ0.95 , at which these fluence values
occur, are identified . In other words, τ0.05 and τ0.95 are the times when the integrated
counts reach the levels of S0.05 and S0.95 , respectively.
Finally, the duration T90 can be obtained as
T90 = τ0.95 − τ0.05 . (6.4)
76
Figure 6.1: The integrated counts of GRB 211211A in 1.024-second time
bins.
Figure 6.1 plots the background subtracted integrated counts S(t) over time for GRB
211211A. It can be seen that the slope is close to zero before the start of the event,
and it returns to zero after the event is over.
77
Figure 6.2: The light curve of GRB 211211A in 1.024-second time bins.
The T90 duration is marked by the dotted lines.
Figure 6.2 is a light curve plot of GRB 211211A showing the T90 duration between the
red dotted lines. Once the start and end times are established using the T90 method,
this time range is used to sum up the signal into two main segments.
78
6.2.2 The Echo Search Procedure
Figure 6.3: The light curve of GRB 211211A in 1.024-second time bins
showing s1 and s2 and the echo search interval
Initially, the main GRB signal starts near the trigger time, and the subsequent back-
ground following the main signal is separated into two distinct data sets. Next, as
stated before, the GRB pulse within the T90 duration is split into two adjacent seg-
ments of equal width S1 and S2 , as shown in Figure 6.3.
In this analysis, a sliding window technique is applied. This technique involves exam-
ining background counts within a defined time interval, denoted as (tmin ,tmax ). The
window’s duration, introduced as TS , is identical to the time width for S1 and S2 .
79
As the analysis progresses, the duration window TS advances through the data
in increments of the original time binning. Within each TS , between the interval
(tmin ,tmax ), the background data is summed and stored in a variable called BC . The
polynomial fit of the background is also similarly summed and stored in a variable
called BP .
To ensure the main signal does not influence the background count analysis, a variable,
N , is defined. N is intentionally set to four, representing the number of window
increments intentionally skipped immediately after the end of the main signal. This
approach ensures any residual effects from the main signal are not included in the
background count analysis. The echo search interval is marked in grey in Figure 6.3.
For multiple GRBs, the region beyond T90 extends longer, frequently leading to false
echo detection. Suppose there was a subsequent echo immediately following S2 . In
that case, it would span two times TS like the main signal, but if it directly follows
S2 with no intervening spaces, it becomes indistinguishable from the main signal.
Therefore, I regard it as part of the first two segments. Two background spaces
might suffice to separate the search interval from the main signal. However, it is
possible that the GRB did not completely return to the background in these two
spaces. To be on the side of caution, I require the search interval to be four spaces
away from S2 . This requirement helps confirm a genuine background between the two
segments. Analysis of numerous GRBs with extended tails indicates that skipping
80
four intervals is the optimal strategy. The decision not to bypass four times TS is
related to optimization considerations. Skipping fewer TS aids in getting a smaller
tmin , enabling probing of smaller masses. Since I aim to probe the lowest possible mass
range, tmin must be as small as possible. However, to increase the efficiency of this
algorithm, the number of false echo detections must be minimized. Hence it involves
striking a balance between minimizing tmin and the number of false detections.
Next, a variable Cl is used as the critical threshold for the algorithm to detect an
echo. It is given as
√
Cl = BP + σ ∗ BP (6.5)
where σ is the standard deviation and is assumed to be 5. If BC > Cl , then the
algorithm declares the detection of an echo. It also outputs the time at which the
echo was detected.
6.2.3 Computing the Brightness Ratio
If no echo is detected, the values of rmin and ∆rmin are computed and stored. rmin
is defined as the ratio of 5 σ over the background level divided by the height of the
second highest of the two peaks,
81
(Cl )max
rmin = (6.6)
(Si )min
where i represents either 1 or 2, whichever is smaller. Here, the highest 5 σ value; i.e
(Cl )max is chosen.
Finally, the variance and standard deviation of rmin are computed.
The standard deviation, ∆rmin is given by
s
2 (Cl )max + BC Si + Bi
∆rmin = rmin + . (6.7)
Cl2 Si2
Here BC is the background underlying (Cl )max , Bi is the background underlying Si
The GRBs for which this algorithm detected a lens were stored to be used later. Once
all the GRBs were analyzed, the next step was to perform the LST and the HST on
these GRBs.
6.3 Light Curve Similarity Test (LST)
If two pulses within a GRB are gravitational lens images of a single parent pulse,
their light curves should be statistically identical. A χ2 analysis is employed to assess
the similarity of light curves. To compute χ2 , first, the values of two independent
82
variables were determined: the fluence ratio between the two pulses, denoted as recho ,
and the time difference between the arrival of the first and second pulses, represented
by tof f set . Specifically, recho is used to artificially decrease the fluence of the first pulse
to match it to the fluence of the second pulse, and tof f set is used to align the two
pulses temporally. Following [69] and [33], tof f set is assumed to be constant across all
energies and times. Since gravitational lensing does not change the relative timings
internal to images, all source images should exhibit the same light curve, with an
amplitude scale factor recho .
Given any recho , the reduced formula used for the χ2 is
X (recho P1 (t) − P2 (t))2

χ2 = 2
, (6.8)
t
recho P1 (t) + P2 (t) + B1 (t) + B2 (t)
adapted from Press et al. [86] and Cochran [20], where P1 (t) is the number of counts in
the first pulse over time, B1 (t) is the number of counts in the background underlying
the first pulse over time, P2 (t) is the number of counts in the second pulse over time,
and B2 (t) is the number of counts in the background underlying the second pulse over
time. When subtracting two normally distributed random variables, the resulting
variance is derived from the sum of their individual variances, which originates from
the combined spreads of each variable. The χ2 formula addresses this by dividing
by the sum of P1 (t) and P2 (t), accommodating the uncertainty in both datasets and
evaluating their similarity. When multiplied by a constant, the principle that the
83
variance of a random variable is determined by multiplying the original variance by
the square of that constant is applied in this context. Thus, as P1 (t) is reduced
2
by recho , its variance term becomes recho times P1 (t). Furthermore, the background
underlying each pulse adds to the total variance. Consequently, the denominator
encapsulates the total variance of P1 (t) and P2 (t), factoring in the Poisson noise
inherent in the data.
The first step in my analysis procedure was determining a background level for each
GRB in each energy channel. This was done with a polynomial fit. Next, the counts
from all the detectors and all energy channels that detected an obvious signal over the
background were summed. A single background level was then found for the summed
energies. Next, tof f set and recho were determined simultaneously by minimizing χ2 in
a pulse alignment procedure.
Each pulse’s start and end times were found separately to perform pulse alignment.
The start time of the first pulse was chosen to be when the summed counts in bins
of a specific duration increased to over some sigma (σ) value above the background
fit – nearest the pulse peak. The pulse was then considered to continue until the
summed counts dropped below the same σ value. To be consistent with a possible
gravitational lens interpretation, both pulses were taken to have the same duration.
Then for a range of values of recho , the recorded counts following the first pulse were
shifted in multiples of microseconds to find the tof f set and recho that minimized χ2 .
84
Evaluating the similarity between two pulses using a broad duration covering most of
each pulse may not be optimal. Comparing extended, faint pulse regions distant from
the peak (typically near the start and end of the pulses) could yield a low χ2 value,
indicating a higher likelihood of similarity, even if the central regions significantly
differ. Consequently, the light-curve similarity test compares bins near the pulse
peak. However, I implemented the Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) method
to achieve this.
In this approach, I first identified the bin containing the maximum number of counts
for the first pulse. Subsequently, I calculated the times that yielded half the maximum
number of counts on each side of the pulse. I then determined the corresponding
region of the second pulse using tof f set and the duration of the first pulse. Lastly,
the central regions of the two pulses were compared for light curve similarity using
the aforementioned χ2 formula. The primary advantage of this method is its scale-
invariant nature, which allows for a more accurate comparison. Additionally, by
avoiding pulse fitting, potential model dependencies were eliminated.
Model Test: To evaluate the efficacy of the light curve similarity method in identi-
fying an authentic gravitational lens, an artificial induction of the first pulse from
GRB 090717A was introduced into the background at 150.0 seconds. Following the
pulse alignment procedure, the values of tof f set and recho , which corresponded to the
minimum χ2 , were chosen. Subsequently, the FWHM approach was employed to
85
determine the FWHM duration to be compared between both pulses.
The analysis revealed that the light curve similarity method could detect congruence
with at least 2.0-σ confidence for all recho values, beginning from 1.0 and extending
to a value of 0.04.
6.3.1 Hardness Similarity Test (HST)
If two pulses within a GRB are gravitational lens images of a single parent pulse,
their hardnesses should be statistically identical. This hardness test stems from the
conjecture that gravitational deflection does not alter a photon’s energy, implying
that the gravitational lensing magnification of a source remains consistent across all
wavelengths [79].
I analyze most of the measured flux for each pulse in the hardness similarity test,
requiring a different approach for calculating start times compared to the light curve
similarity test. Specifically, I determine the start and end times for the first pulse
based on a designated σ above background, as discussed in section 6.3. For the second
pulse, I employ consistent start and end times obtained from the pulse alignment
procedure outlined in section 6.3, ensuring that tof f set remains unchanged.
Given the background fits, pulse start times, and pulse durations, the counts above
86
the background Pn,c were determined, where the first subscript ‘n’ refers to the pulse
number and the second subscript ‘c’ refers to the energy channel, in both pulses and
all energy bands. The hardness ratio for each energy channel rc is found by taking the
ratio of the summed counts in the second pulse P2,c to the summed counts in the first
pulse P1,c and is given by rc = P2,c /P1,c . When summing over all energy channels,
Pn,all is also determined, followed by rall . The errors in the ratios were based on the
Poisson noise inherent in the backgrounds and the pulses [21].
87
Chapter 7
Recent Claims of Gravitational
Lensing on GRBs
The 7 GRBs that were claimed to be gravitationally lensed were GRB 950830, GRB
081122A, GRB 081126A, GRB 090717A, GRB 110517B, GRB 200716C and GRB
210812A. First, the detectors and the energy channels that detected signals well above
the background were selected to analyze each GRB. After an exploratory analysis, to
obtain optimal χ2 results, a particular time resolution is chosen for all analyses. Table
7.1 provides information on the detectors, energy channels, and the time resolution
used for each GRB.
89
Table 7.1
The detectors and energy channels used for each GRB.
GRB Detectors Energy Channels Time resolution

950830 5,6,7 1,2,3, and 4 0.005
081122A n0, n1, n2, n3, n4, n5, n8, n9, and n10 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 0.256
081126A n0, n1, n3, and n9 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 0.512
090717A n0,n1,n2,n9,and na 2,3,4,5,and 6 0.256
110517B n6, n7, and n8 2, 3, 4, and 5 0.256
200716C n0, n1, n2, and n9 2,3,4,5, and 6 0.008
210812A n1, n6, n7, n8, n9, n10, and n11 3, 4, 5, and 6 1.024
Table 7.2
The parameters used for the Light Curve Similarity tests for each GRB.
GRB tof f set recho tlp1 tF W HM σ difference
950830 0.401 0.715 -0.055 0.07 3.0
081122A 13.816 0.372 0.512 2.56 4.81
081126A 30.379 0.650 -2.048 4.096 3.08
090717A 42.282 0.542 4.096 6.4 5.84
110517B 16.612 0.788 0.512 5.12 8.45
200716C 1.909 0.654 0.288 0.168 9.35
210812A 32.824 0.237 0.0 2.048 2.11
7.1 Results for LST
First, the background of the GRB signal was fit with a polynomial. Afterward,
optimized values for tof f set and recho were determined by minimizing χ2 . The FWHM
90
method was used to determine the regions for comparison. It gave the start time of
pulse 1 represented as tlp1 and the FWHM duration (tF W HM ). The start and end
times of pulse 2 were obtained by adding tof f set to the start and end times of pulse
1. Table 7.2 provides the values of tof f set , recho , tlp1 tF W HM , and σ difference for each
GRB.
Figure 7.1: The light curve of GRB 950830 in 0.004-second time bins.
Poisson errors are shown in green. Vertical dotted lines represent the pulse’s
‘Start Time’ (ST) and ‘End Time’ (ET).
GRB 950830 is claimed to be gravitationally lensed by Paynter et al. [81]. BATSE
detected this GRB in the year 1995. Two major emission episodes are visible in
Figure 7.1. From a quick visual inspection, it can be seen that the first pulse at a
91
time resolution of 0.004 seconds has two peaks that are more clearly defined than the
second pulse. Furthermore, the first pulse’s decay seems faster than the second’s.
The χ2 analysis found that the light curves of the two pulses differ at about the 3.0-σ
level (or 99.73 %). Considering the 1-σ error associated with the bin exhibiting the
highest number of counts, the observed variation in the results was ± 0.52-σ.
Lin et al. [51] claimed that GRB 081122A is gravitationally lensed. This GRB was
detected by the Fermi GBM in the year 2008. From visual inspection of Figure 7.2,
92
it can be argued that the two-peak structure of the first pulse is much more clearly
defined than the second pulse in 0.256 seconds time resolution. The χ2 analysis found
that the probability that the two pulses were drawn from the same parent pulse shape
was less than approximately 0.00015 %, equivalent to above 4.8 σ. Considering the
1-σ error associated with the bin exhibiting the highest number of counts, there was
no variation in the results.
GRB 081126A was claimed to be lensed by Lin et al. [51]. This GRB was also detected
by the Fermi GBM in the year 2008. Figure 7.3 shows the two pulses in 0.512 seconds
93
time resolution. A couple of differences are evident from the visual inspection of these
two pulses. Firstly, there are many bins near the peak of the first pulse, whereas there
seems to be only one clearly defined peak bin for the second pulse. Secondly, the decay
of the second pulse is much slower than the decay of the first pulse.
According to the χ2 results, the two pulses differ in shape at around 3.08-σ (or
99.793%). No variation in the results was found considering the 1-σ error associated
with the bin exhibiting the highest number of counts.
94
Two papers by the same author [40], [41] as well as a paper by Lin et al. [51] claimed
that GRB 090717A is a confirmed case of lensing. This GRB was detected by the
Fermi GBM in the year 2009. Figure 7.4 is the light curve of GRB 090717A in 0.256
second time resolution. It can be seen that there are a couple of extensions (or small
peaks) in the first pulse that are not visible in the second one.
The light curve similarity test reveals that the two pulses exhibit markedly distinct
temporal shapes with a significance of 5.84-σ. In other words, their probability of
being similar is just 1 in 2.15 × 106 chance. Considering 1 σ error in the bin that
contained maximum counts, it was found that the results varied by only ± 0.44-σ.
95
Figure 7.5: The light curve of GRB 110517B in 0.256-second time bins.
The detection of GRB 110517B by Fermi GBM, posited by Lin et al. [51] to have
an echo succeeding the main signal, reveals intriguing distinctions within its pulse
structures. An examination of the light-curve plot (Figure 7.5) with a 0.256-second
time resolution reveals that while both pulses contain two peaks, the intensity of these
peaks varies. Specifically, the second peak is more prominent than the first in the
initial pulse. However, this order is reversed in the second pulse, where the first peak
surpasses the second in brightness.
96
This marked contrast between the two pulses of GRB 110517B stands out at around
the 8.45 ± 0.035-σ confidence level, considering 1 σ error in the bin with the maximum
counts.
Figure 7.6: The light curve of GRB 200716C in 0.008-second time bins.
Yang et al. [104] and Wang et al. [101] claimed that GRB 200716C detected by the
Fermi GBM in the year 2020 is gravitationally lensed. At lower time resolutions, the
light-curve plot of this GRB doesn’t display significant differences between the two
pulses. However, the details emerge in a high-resolution light-curve plot of 0.008 sec-
onds, as depicted in Figure 7.6. This high-resolution plot reveals a marked difference:
97
the first pulse is characterized by two distinct peaks, while the second pulse features
only a single peak.
Applying the LST method, the two pulses exhibit distinct differences at the 9.35-
σ confidence level. This corresponds to odds of similarity at approximately 1 in
1.09 × 1017 . Considering the 1-σ error in the bin that contained maximum counts, it
was found that the results varied by only ± 0.13-σ.
In their study, Veres et al. [97] proposed that GRB 210812A, detected by Fermi
98
Table 7.3
The parameters used for the Hardness Similarity tests for each GRB.
GRB thp1 tdur σ difference
950830 -0.09 0.184 1.6
081122A -1.28 6.144 1.76
081126A -2.048 8.192 0.23
090717A -1.024 22.016 1.76
110517B -3.328 11.264 0.09
200716C 0.016 0.56 0.22
210812A -1.024 9.216 0.36
GBM in 2021, contains an echo following the main pulse. Although an inspection
of the 1.024-second light curve (Figure 7.7) doesn’t immediately reveal substantial
differences between the two pulses, they were found to diverge at approximately a
2.11-σ confidence level (96.525%). No variation in the results was found considering
the 1-σ error associated with the bin exhibiting the highest number of counts.
However, when the same assessment was applied across various time resolutions, the
results did not consistently demonstrate a significant discrepancy between the two
pulses. Interestingly, visual differences did become apparent at certain higher time
resolutions. I suspect these inconclusive χ2 results were due to a significant decrease
in the number of counts (brightness) at higher time resolutions. This makes GRB
210812A a uniquely intriguing case amongst the 7 GRBs under study.
99
7.2 Results for HST
The analysis of the start and end times of pulse 1 involved examining the summed
counts across all energies. For this test, the start time was defined as when the
summed counts in the original time bins first rose above the background fit by over
1-σ, located closest to the pulse peak. The pulse was considered to continue until the
summed counts dropped below 1-σ. The designated start time of Pulse 1 is expressed
as thp1 . The start and end times of pulse 2 were determined by adding tof f set to the
start and end time of pulse 1, respectively. The duration of each pulse is denoted by
tdur . Table 7.3 provides the values of hp1 , tdur , and σ difference for each GRB.
100
Figure 7.8: Count ratios between the two pulses as a function of energy
channel for GRB 950830.
For GRB 950830, as seen in Figure 7.8, the r3 value for channel 3 is somewhat lower
than the other energy channels. It was found that channel 3 differs from channel 4 at
the 1.8-σ level. From a χ2 test performed to check how different all the r values were
from rall , it was found that the r values differed from rall at about 1.6-σ (or 89.659
%).
101
Figure 7.9: Count ratios between the two main pulses as a function of
energy channel for GRB 081122A
The plot for GRB 081122A, Figure 7.9 shows the r-values for channels 2, 3, 4, 5,
and 6. From a χ2 test performed to check how different all the r values were from
rall , it was found that the r values differed from rall at about 1.76 σ (or 92.162 %).
Moreover, the ratio r2 differs from r4 , r5 , and r6 by more than 3-σ, while the ratio r3
differs from r5 and r6 at about the 2-σ level.
102
channel for GRB 081126A.
Figure 7.10 shows the r-values for the energy channels 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, from left
to right for GRB 081126A. The results showed that r3 differed from r5 by 1.345 σ
and r3 differed from r5 by 1.796 σ, indicating only a marginal difference for GRB
081126A. However, no significant deviation was observed among the r-values from
rall , suggesting that both pulses had similar energy spectra.
103
energy channel for GRB 090717A
The plot for GRB 090717A, Figure 7.11 depicts the r-values for the energy channels
2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, from left to right. This figure shows that the r value for channels
2, 3, and 4, including the 1-σ error bars, differs from the dotted line that depicts
rall . It was also found that the r values differed from rall at about 1.76-σ (or 92.199
%). Furthermore, some specific energy channels differed from others at a relatively
high formal significance. For example, it was found that r2 differed from r3 and r4
separately at the 3.2-σ level. As these discrepancies were found later from inspection
of the data, they are not necessarily definitive in excluding the lensing hypothesis.
104
channel for GRB 110517B.
Figure 7.12 depicts the r-values for the energy channels 2, 3, 4, and 5, from left to
right for GRB 110517B. The analysis found no evidence to reject the similarity of all
the r-values from rall . All r values were statistically consistent with rall . Thus, it was
concluded that the two pulses have consistent spectra.
105
energy channel for GRB 200716C
The r-values for GRB 200716C are shown in Figure 7.13. From left to right, these
values correspond to energy channels 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Although it was found that
the r3 value differs from r4 by 1.74-σ, the r values of other energy channels were all
in rough agreement, not only with each other but with the combined rall . Therefore,
the conclusion is that the two pulses had statistically consistent hardnesses.
106
channel for GRB 210812A.
The plot for GRB 210812A, Figure 7.14 depicts the r-values for the energy channels 3,
4, 5, and 6, from left to right. The analysis found no evidence to reject the similarity
of all the r-values from rall . The results showed that the r4 differed from r5 by 2.368
σ, r3 differed from r5 by 1.627 σ, and r5 differed from r6 by 1.691 σ. However, it was
found that all r values were statistically consistent with rall . Thus, it was concluded
that the two pulses have consistent spectra.
107
Chapter 8
Cosmological Analysis to Limit CO
DM
8.1 Introduction
This research methodology leverages certain parameters - specifically rmin , tmin , and
tmax - to compute the volume over which a gravitational lens is detectable. These
parameters are crucial in calculating cosmological variables, which can help infer the
density and mass of CO Dark Matter.
In this chapter, I introduce three tables. Although previously presented and ex-
plained, the variables populating each column are defined again below for clarity and
109
ease of reference.
1) GRB Name: Refers to the names of the GRBs detected by Fermi GBM.
2) tbin : The time resolution used to bin up the GRBs.
3) PD : The polynomial degree used to fit the background of GRBs.
4) T90 : The duration in seconds during which the first emission episode of the GRB
emits 90% of the total fluence.
5) tmin : The start time in seconds to search for the gravitational echo.
6) tmax : The end time in seconds to search for the gravitational echo.
7) rmin : The ratio of 5 σ over the background level divided by the height of the second
highest of the two peaks.
8) ∆rmin : The standard deviation of rmin .
9) zGRB : The redshift of the GRB.
Table 8.1 lists the cosmological parameters for GRBs with spectroscopic redshift and
contains data for 90 GRBs. Table 8.2 includes the same columns as the previous table
but covers an expanded dataset of 444 GRBs whose redshifts have been estimated
110
[76, 92, 93]. Table 8.3 includes the parameters for 348 GRBs whose redshifts are
unknown. For these GRBs, the median of the GRBs with spectroscopic redshifts has
been computed and used. All the tables are sorted chronologically by GRB detection
dates.
Long GRBs with T90 durations exceeding two seconds typically underwent analysis
using a 1.024-second time resolution. Conversely, short GRBs with T90 less than two
seconds were analyzed with a 0.064-second time resolution, and those with T90 less
than 0.256 were analyzed using a time width of 0.016 seconds.
As described in Chapter 6, Section 6.2, the standard procedure I employ involves fit-
ting a polynomial to the background data starting at the 200-second mark. However,
starting this fitting process at the 180-second mark for some GRBs yielded better
results. For several others, it was necessary to use data from before the 180-second
mark to achieve an optimal fit.
tmax is defined as the time immediately preceding the data used for the background
fitting. Therefore, many tmax values clustered just below these chosen start points of
200 and 180 seconds, resulting in repeated tmax values. The selection of these specific
start points - 200 and 180 seconds - was not arbitrary. A slight deviation of a few
seconds from these markers wouldn’t notably alter the outcome, which explains why
we see these recurring values.
111
For each GRB, I selected the polynomial of the lowest degree that provided the
best fit. Given the highly variable nature of a GRB’s background, visual inspection
became an essential step in my analysis. The process started with an initial visual
check, followed by a more structured evaluation of the fit’s adequacy. This involved
comparing the sum of counts above and below the fitted polynomial.
If the counts below the fit outnumbered those above, the fit was deemed unacceptable.
To rectify this, I would either increase the polynomial’s degree or include more data to
enhance the fit. This ensured that no relevant signal was overlooked due to overfitting.
However, a situation where the counts above the fit exceeded those below did not
automatically signify a good fit. In such cases, further visual inspection was required
to confirm the choice of the polynomial. It’s important to note that the distinction
between a ‘good’ and ‘very good’ fit has a relatively minor impact on determining
the parameters.
Table 8.1
Limits on gravitational echo for the 90 spectroscopic GRBs
GRB Name tbin PD T90 tmin tmax rmin ∆rmin zGRB

(Fermi GBM) (s) (s) (s) (s) (Spectroscopic)
080804A 1.024 1 19.456 60.928 168.448 0.186 0.038 2.2

080905A 0.064 1 0.96 2.976 199.904 0.581 0.14 0.12
080916A 1.024 1 28.672 86.528 158.208 0.366 0.079 0.69
080928A 1.024 2 14.336 42.496 147.968 0.847 0.225 1.69
081121A 1.024 1 19.456 59.904 198.144 0.192 0.04 2.51
112
081221A 1.024 2 30.72 95.744 198.144 0.111 0.022 2.26
081222A 1.024 2 17.408 54.784 198.144 0.249 0.052 2.77
090102A 1.024 1 22.528 69.12 198.144 0.062 0.013 1.55
090113A 1.024 1 11.264 32.256 147.968 0.504 0.114 1.75
090328A 1.024 2 54.272 169.472 198.144 0.199 0.041 0.74
090423A 1.024 1 14.336 36.352 158.208 0.916 0.256 8.0
090510A 0.064 2 0.832 3.04 199.904 0.229 0.049 0.9
090902B 1.024 2 19.456 62.976 198.144 0.007 0.001 1.82
090926A 1.024 2 13.312 44.544 178.688 0.01 0.002 2.11
091003A 1.024 2 21.504 67.072 198.144 0.051 0.01 0.9
091020A 1.024 2 14.336 41.472 198.144 0.278 0.058 1.71
091127A 1.024 2 9.216 30.208 198.144 0.187 0.039 0.49
100117A 0.064 1 0.256 0.736 159.904 0.815 0.227 0.92
100414A 1.024 2 21.504 69.12 198.144 0.027 0.005 1.37
100615A 1.024 1 35.84 110.08 168.448 0.323 0.068 1.4
100625A 0.064 3 0.192 0.672 99.872 0.4 0.093 0.45
100728B 1.024 3 6.144 17.92 98.816 0.316 0.067 2.11
100816A 1.024 2 2.048 6.656 198.144 0.116 0.024 0.8
101213A 1.024 1 39.936 121.344 158.208 0.444 0.098 0.41
101219B 1.024 1 50.176 148.992 178.688 0.709 0.175 0.55
110128A 1.024 1 11.264 30.208 158.208 0.869 0.233 2.34
110213A 1.024 2 29.696 91.648 198.144 0.374 0.081 1.46
110721A 1.024 3 17.408 54.784 147.968 0.118 0.024 0.38
110731A 1.024 2 10.24 31.232 198.144 0.069 0.014 2.83
111117A 0.064 2 0.576 1.76 139.872 0.339 0.076 2.21
120118B 1.024 3 22.528 65.024 138.752 0.399 0.087 2.94
120119A 1.024 2 40.97 127.488 198.144 0.068 0.014 1.73
120326A 1.024 3 11.264 34.304 68.096 0.309 0.066 1.8
120712A 1.024 1 15.36 46.592 147.968 0.193 0.04 4.15
120811C 1.024 1 12.288 33.28 198.144 0.721 0.18 2.67
121128A 1.024 2 17.408 53.76 147.968 0.147 0.03 2.2
130427A 1.024 3 13.312 45.568 198.144 0.04 0.0003 0.34
130518A 1.024 2 35.84 123.392 198.144 0.055 0.011 2.49
130702A 1.024 3 54.272 164.352 198.144 0.671 0.162 0.14
130925A 1.024 2 5.12 13.824 98.816 0.876 0.237 0.35
113
131108A 1.024 2 19.456 60.928 198.144 0.048 0.01 2.4
131231A 1.024 2 29.696 103.936 178.688 0.015 0.003 0.64
140304A 1.024 2 16.384 45.568 138.752 0.469 0.105 5.28
140508A 1.024 2 38.912 119.296 198.144 0.056 0.011 1.03
140606B 1.024 3 15.36 48.64 147.968 0.662 0.161 0.38
140620A 1.024 2 22.528 68.096 198.144 0.674 0.164 2.04
140801A 1.024 2 7.168 24.064 147.968 0.046 0.009 1.32
140808A 1.024 2 4.096 12.8 198.144 0.197 0.041 3.29
140907A 1.024 2 22.528 66.048 168.448 0.188 0.039 1.21
141028A 1.024 2 28.672 91.648 198.144 0.099 0.02 2.33
141118A 1.024 2 5.12 15.872 158.208 0.553 0.129 0.11
141220A 1.024 3 7.168 23.04 118.272 0.155 0.032 1.32
141225A 1.024 2 29.696 89.6 138.752 0.62 0.147 0.92
150101B 0.004 2 0.012 0.034 149.994 0.396 0.113 0.13
150301B 1.024 1 14.336 43.52 158.208 0.58 0.136 1.52
150314A 1.024 2 11.264 36.352 198.144 0.023 0.005 1.76
150403A 1.024 2 23.552 76.288 147.968 0.061 0.012 2.06
150514A 1.024 2 10.24 31.232 198.144 0.579 0.136 0.81
160624A 0.064 2 0.32 1.056 179.872 0.44 0.104 0.48
161001A 1.024 1 2.048 6.656 198.144 0.323 0.07 0.89
161017A 1.024 2 7.168 23.04 147.968 0.334 0.072 2.01
161129A 1.024 2 35.84 115.2 178.688 0.307 0.065 0.64
170607A 1.024 3 16.384 48.64 158.208 0.608 0.143 0.56
170705A 1.024 3 21.504 66.048 118.272 0.151 0.031 2.01
180620B 1.024 1 45.056 135.68 198.144 0.53 0.121 1.12
180703A 1.024 1 24.576 74.24 198.144 0.28 0.059 0.67
180720B 1.024 2 47.104 144.896 198.144 0.019 0.004 0.65
180728A 1.024 3 8.192 34.304 118.272 0.025 0.005 0.12
181010A 1.024 2 28.672 75.264 147.968 0.888 0.239 1.39
181020A 1.024 3 37.888 116.224 178.688 0.607 0.143 2.94
190114C 1.024 2 18.432 55.808 198.144 0.01 0.0002 0.42
190324A 1.024 2 12.288 54.784 198.144 0.101 0.021 1.17
200524A 1.024 2 33.792 103.936 198.144 0.208 0.043 1.26
200826A 0.064 2 0.896 2.72 199.904 0.054 0.011 0.75
200829A 1.024 2 6.144 35.328 178.688 0.011 0.002 1.25
114
201020A 1.024 1 7.168 19.968 147.968 0.69 0.17 2.9
201021C 1.024 2 44.032 130.56 178.688 0.755 0.192 1.07
201216C 1.024 2 30.72 97.792 198.144 0.02 0.004 1.1
201221D 0.064 2 0.192 0.672 179.872 0.594 0.149 1.05
210104A 1.024 2 31.744 97.792 198.144 0.242 0.05 0.46
210323A 0.064 2 0.448 1.44 179.872 0.295 0.066 0.73
210610B 1.024 2 57.344 188.928 248.32 0.041 0.008 1.13
210619B 1.024 2 54.272 165.376 198.144 0.023 0.005 1.94
210704A 1.024 2 4.096 12.8 198.144 0.298 0.065 2.34
210731A 1.024 3 30.72 92.672 198.144 0.419 0.092 1.25
211211A 1.024 2 31.744 100.864 198.144 0.011 0.002 0.08
220107A 1.024 2 32.768 98.816 198.144 0.306 0.065 1.25
220527A 1.024 3 17.408 56.832 147.968 0.068 0.014 0.86
221226B 1.024 1 2.048 6.656 168.448 0.383 0.085 2.69
230307A 1.024 2 33.792 104.96 198.144 0.005 0.001 0.06
115
Table 8.2
Limits on gravitational echo for 444 GRBs with estimated redshift

(Fermi GBM) (s) (s) (s) (s) (Estimated)
080715A 1.024 3 8.192 25.088 178.688 0.194 0.046 0.9

080723D 1.024 2 43.008 132.608 178.688 0.118 0.024 1.52
080730A 1.024 2 9.216 29.184 188.928 0.235 0.049 2.33
080730B 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 147.968 0.139 0.028 1.05
080807A 1.024 1 20.48 60.928 168.448 0.219 0.045 1.66
080808B 1.024 2 13.312 42.496 158.208 0.199 0.041 2.02
080821A 1.024 1 6.144 15.872 147.968 0.67 0.164 1.11
080824A 1.024 2 9.216 26.112 178.688 0.448 0.1 1.06
080825C 1.024 1 20.48 62.976 178.688 0.042 0.008 1.35
080906B 1.024 2 2.048 6.656 158.208 0.064 0.013 0.74
080925A 1.024 1 17.408 54.784 178.688 0.082 0.017 1.52
081009A 1.024 2 5.12 18.944 198.144 0.112 0.006 1.25
081009B 1.024 2 23.552 72.192 158.208 0.314 0.066 2.9
081028B 1.024 3 15.36 44.544 118.272 0.904 0.246 1.58
081107A 0.064 3 1.728 5.216 139.872 0.158 0.033 0.78
081110A 1.024 1 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.505 0.115 0.64
081118B 1.024 2 15.36 47.616 178.688 0.218 0.045 2.21
081122A 1.024 1 17.408 54.784 198.144 0.261 0.055 1.04
081122A 1.024 2 20.48 61.952 198.144 0.234 0.049 1.04
081124A 1.024 2 16.384 49.664 178.688 0.185 0.038 3.98
081125A 1.024 1 7.168 24.064 158.208 0.082 0.017 1.06
081126A 1.024 3 5.12 16.896 198.144 0.65 0.05 1.56
081130B 1.024 3 6.144 18.944 147.968 0.575 0.135 2.02
081217A 1.024 2 18.432 55.808 118.272 0.147 0.03 2.21
081224A 1.024 1 10.24 31.232 158.208 0.064 0.013 0.91
081231A 1.024 2 34.816 103.936 168.448 0.105 0.021 1.4
090112B 1.024 1 9.216 29.184 178.688 0.106 0.022 1.25
090117A 1.024 1 6.144 16.896 178.688 0.901 0.246 2.06
090129A 1.024 1 17.408 53.76 178.688 0.458 0.102 1.5
116
090131A 1.024 1 33.792 105.984 178.688 0.085 0.017 1.48
090202A 1.024 1 16.384 48.64 198.144 0.128 0.026 1.18
090217A 1.024 2 26.624 80.384 147.968 0.141 0.029 1.15
090411A 1.024 2 16.384 49.664 138.752 0.179 0.037 2.27
090424A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 198.144 0.04 0.005 0.55
090426C 1.024 2 6.144 17.92 138.752 0.445 0.099 0.9
090428B 1.024 3 13.312 41.472 118.272 0.581 0.136 3.12
090514A 1.024 2 40.96 122.368 158.208 0.484 0.108 4.26
090516C 1.024 1 15.36 47.616 147.968 0.533 0.122 1.92
090518B 1.024 2 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.418 0.092 1.42
090520D 1.024 2 14.336 41.472 168.448 0.254 0.053 2.64
090524A 1.024 1 53.248 160.256 198.144 0.184 0.038 2.22
090529C 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.136 0.028 0.68
090612A 1.024 3 5.12 16.896 147.968 0.208 0.043 0.97
090620A 1.024 1 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.075 0.015 1.23
090623A 1.024 1 44.032 134.656 178.688 0.232 0.048 1.45
090626A 1.024 2 44.032 135.68 178.688 0.036 0.007 1.47
090630A 1.024 2 2.048 5.632 178.688 0.64 0.157 1.09
090718B 1.024 1 8.192 42.496 178.688 0.091 0.019 1.12
090719A 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.031 0.006 0.93
090720A 1.024 2 4.096 10.752 147.968 0.795 0.207 1.0
090804A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.054 0.011 0.9
090809B 1.024 1 8.192 26.112 178.688 0.073 0.015 1.08
090813A 1.024 3 15.36 44.544 147.968 0.423 0.093 1.01
090815B 1.024 1 22.528 65.024 198.144 0.409 0.089 2.15
090820A 1.024 1 10.24 61.952 158.208 0.015 0.003 0.76
090831A 1.024 2 39.936 122.368 168.448 0.175 0.036 1.51
091010A 1.024 3 6.144 18.944 147.968 0.129 0.027 0.54
091020B 1.024 2 36.864 111.104 158.208 0.204 0.042 0.82
091031A 1.024 2 33.792 104.96 178.688 0.483 0.108 1.35
091101A 1.024 2 12.288 37.376 198.144 0.32 0.068 1.28
091103A 1.024 2 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.24 0.05 1.38
091209A 1.024 2 17.408 53.76 158.208 0.27 0.057 3.51
091220A 1.024 2 10.24 31.232 168.448 0.262 0.055 1.81
100122A 1.024 1 6.144 38.4 138.752 0.089 0.018 1.19
117
100211A 1.024 1 21.504 68.096 198.144 0.172 0.035 2.05
100225C 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 147.968 0.119 0.024 0.81
100313A 1.024 1 11.264 33.28 198.144 0.186 0.038 1.33
100322A 1.024 1 35.84 111.104 178.688 0.051 0.01 1.96
100324B 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.035 0.007 0.79
100325A 1.024 2 7.168 23.04 178.688 0.288 0.061 1.41
100325B 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 147.968 0.573 0.134 1.98
100330A 1.024 2 13.312 41.472 158.208 0.3 0.063 1.6
100410B 1.024 2 40.96 120.32 178.688 0.636 0.152 0.9
100513B 1.024 2 12.288 36.352 168.448 0.316 0.067 0.97
100515A 1.024 1 6.144 17.92 178.688 0.228 0.048 0.9
100517C 1.024 1 28.672 85.504 178.688 0.556 0.129 1.76
100517E 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 198.144 0.206 0.043 1.35
100528A 1.024 2 17.408 54.784 178.688 0.042 0.009 1.32
100604A 1.024 2 14.336 41.472 178.688 0.264 0.055 1.36
100612B 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 178.688 0.061 0.012 1.04
100719D 1.024 1 5.12 18.944 198.144 0.105 0.011 0.69
100722A 1.024 1 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.068 0.014 1.2
100814B 1.024 1 8.192 23.04 178.688 0.188 0.039 1.31
100820A 1.024 2 3.072 11.776 158.208 0.211 0.044 1.03
100825A 1.024 2 4.096 10.752 158.208 0.532 0.123 1.14
100829A 1.024 1 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.293 0.062 0.68
100910A 1.024 1 13.312 42.496 158.208 0.094 0.019 0.98
101003A 1.024 3 10.24 29.184 118.272 0.447 0.099 2.24
101013A 1.024 1 16.384 49.664 168.448 0.207 0.043 1.59
101016A 1.024 2 5.12 15.872 168.448 0.584 0.137 0.62
101112A 1.024 1 4.096 11.776 178.688 0.447 0.1 1.06
101126A 1.024 1 17.408 56.832 178.688 0.079 0.016 1.71
101208B 1.024 2 3.072 10.752 178.688 0.779 0.201 0.65
101213B 1.024 2 3.072 10.752 178.688 0.689 0.17 1.15
101224B 1.024 3 44.032 133.632 198.144 0.419 0.092 2.74
101227C 1.024 1 13.312 41.472 178.688 0.379 0.082 0.89
101231A 1.024 2 23.552 73.216 178.688 0.161 0.033 1.39
110118A 1.024 1 7.168 22.016 168.448 0.252 0.053 1.74
110120A 1.024 1 23.552 73.216 178.688 0.395 0.086 0.75
118
110123A 1.024 1 17.408 54.784 168.448 0.063 0.013 1.76
110125A 1.024 1 4.096 11.776 158.208 0.69 0.171 1.86
110301A 1.024 1 5.12 17.92 147.968 0.037 0.008 0.63
110304A 1.024 1 18.432 54.784 198.144 0.757 0.192 1.85
110318A 1.024 1 13.312 40.448 138.752 0.192 0.04 1.56
110402A 1.024 1 21.504 66.048 168.448 0.7 0.172 0.73
110421A 1.024 2 21.504 65.024 178.688 0.141 0.029 3.59
110430A 1.024 2 27.648 84.48 158.208 0.2 0.041 2.93
110505A 1.024 2 6.144 17.92 158.208 0.723 0.182 0.84
110517B 1.024 2 22.528 67.072 198.144 0.152 0.031 2.02
110517B 1.024 2 22.528 67.072 168.448 0.148 0.03 2.02
110521B 1.024 1 4.096 12.8 158.208 0.763 0.196 1.31
110529B 1.024 1 43.008 129.536 198.144 0.513 0.116 2.04
110610A 1.024 2 40.96 119.296 158.208 0.219 0.045 1.75
110625A 1.024 3 25.6 82.432 138.752 0.028 0.006 0.9
110626A 1.024 1 12.288 31.232 178.688 0.956 0.268 1.64
110703A 1.024 2 4.096 10.752 128.512 0.809 0.213 0.95
110705B 1.024 1 20.48 60.928 178.688 0.136 0.028 1.39
110706D 1.024 2 13.312 41.472 118.272 0.211 0.044 2.88
110709C 1.024 1 22.528 68.096 198.144 0.149 0.03 1.26
110709C 1.024 1 23.552 73.216 198.144 0.147 0.03 1.26
110710A 1.024 3 16.384 48.64 138.752 0.087 0.018 1.88
110716A 1.024 1 2.048 5.632 178.688 0.906 0.251 1.02
110720A 1.024 2 10.24 31.232 128.512 0.208 0.043 1.68
110730B 1.024 2 24.576 70.144 168.448 0.359 0.077 3.65
110806A 1.024 1 26.624 79.36 158.208 0.123 0.025 2.5
110809A 1.024 2 9.216 27.136 158.208 0.382 0.083 1.28
110813A 1.024 1 10.24 29.184 138.752 0.182 0.038 1.89
110819A 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.786 0.204 1.36
110903B 1.024 1 25.6 79.36 198.144 0.165 0.034 1.51
110904C 1.024 2 14.336 40.448 178.688 0.385 0.084 3.15
110906A 1.024 1 19.456 56.832 168.448 0.452 0.1 1.26
110909A 1.024 2 7.168 23.04 168.448 0.459 0.103 0.2
110921B 1.024 2 16.384 50.688 178.688 0.192 0.04 0.64
110929A 1.024 2 5.12 16.896 168.448 0.33 0.071 0.97
119
111003A 1.024 1 14.336 43.52 178.688 0.065 0.013 1.26
111009A 1.024 1 15.36 48.64 178.688 0.066 0.013 1.38
111012A 1.024 1 21.504 67.072 178.688 0.144 0.029 1.89
111012B 1.024 2 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.304 0.065 0.73
111103A 1.024 1 12.288 36.352 178.688 0.287 0.061 1.6
111109C 1.024 2 7.168 23.04 168.448 0.27 0.057 1.14
111113B 1.024 1 14.336 41.472 198.144 0.407 0.089 1.79
111127A 1.024 2 15.36 48.64 178.688 0.161 0.033 1.74
111203A 1.024 2 13.312 38.4 158.208 0.697 0.172 1.81
111220A 1.024 3 24.576 76.288 158.208 0.046 0.009 1.07
111228B 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.164 0.034 0.97
111230A 1.024 2 13.312 39.424 168.448 0.692 0.17 1.66
111230B 1.024 1 12.288 36.352 178.688 0.226 0.047 1.44
120102A 1.024 2 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.111 0.023 0.87
120107A 1.024 1 22.528 68.096 168.448 0.293 0.062 1.66
120118A 1.024 2 15.36 48.64 178.688 0.695 0.171 1.28
120121C 1.024 1 24.576 74.24 198.144 0.111 0.022 1.88
120129A 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.09 0.018 0.43
120130C 1.024 2 20.48 60.928 178.688 0.138 0.028 2.19
120204A 1.024 2 43.008 142.848 178.688 0.023 0.005 1.9
120206A 1.024 1 11.264 35.328 178.688 0.668 0.162 0.7
120213B 1.024 2 11.264 33.28 158.208 0.427 0.094 1.4
120217A 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 178.688 0.854 0.227 1.33
120226A 1.024 2 51.2 158.208 198.144 0.056 0.011 2.37
120226B 1.024 1 13.312 38.4 158.208 0.229 0.048 0.82
120227B 1.024 1 17.408 53.76 178.688 0.125 0.025 1.59
120304A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.442 0.099 1.71
120308B 1.024 2 2.048 6.656 178.688 0.206 0.043 1.13
120316A 1.024 1 25.6 80.384 198.144 0.102 0.021 1.16
120323B 1.024 2 4.096 11.776 178.688 0.561 0.132 0.94
120328B 1.024 1 27.648 88.576 178.688 0.026 0.005 1.66
120402B 1.024 3 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.299 0.064 2.33
120415C 1.024 2 9.216 25.088 158.208 0.692 0.171 1.69
120426A 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.036 0.007 0.47
120427A 1.024 2 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.17 0.035 0.99
120
120512A 1.024 2 18.432 55.808 168.448 0.141 0.029 1.08
120522B 1.024 2 14.336 42.496 178.688 0.581 0.136 1.93
120526A 1.024 3 41.984 130.56 178.688 0.048 0.01 1.49
120528A 1.024 2 13.312 40.448 168.448 0.484 0.109 0.86
120625A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.096 0.02 0.9
120703A 1.024 1 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.242 0.05 0.62
120709A 1.024 1 27.648 85.504 198.144 0.121 0.025 0.92
120727B 1.024 1 9.216 29.184 158.208 0.066 0.013 1.47
120806A 1.024 2 23.552 73.216 198.144 0.487 0.109 2.37
120830B 1.024 2 14.336 42.496 168.448 0.986 0.28 1.27
120908B 1.024 2 33.792 103.936 178.688 0.229 0.047 1.81
120919A 1.024 2 7.168 24.064 178.688 0.052 0.011 1.08
120921A 1.024 1 4.096 11.776 178.688 0.373 0.081 1.49
120926A 1.024 2 4.096 11.776 178.688 0.148 0.031 1.23
121029A 1.024 1 15.36 47.616 178.688 0.333 0.071 1.09
121118A 1.024 2 34.816 104.96 168.448 0.286 0.06 1.66
121122A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.044 0.009 0.96
121123B 1.024 2 34.816 107.008 158.208 0.098 0.02 1.63
121223A 1.024 3 8.192 25.088 68.096 0.085 0.017 1.64
130104A 1.024 2 15.36 48.64 118.272 0.299 0.063 1.86
130109A 1.024 1 8.192 22.016 147.968 0.567 0.133 1.55
130112A 1.024 2 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.745 0.189 1.21
130206B 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.115 0.024 1.16
130209A 1.024 2 9.216 30.208 168.448 0.153 0.031 1.3
130214B 1.024 1 13.312 39.424 168.448 0.149 0.031 1.48
130216A 1.024 2 6.144 18.944 168.448 0.152 0.031 1.28
130216B 1.024 1 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.487 0.11 1.06
130218A 1.024 1 31.744 94.72 147.968 0.266 0.056 1.59
130220A 1.024 1 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.063 0.013 1.01
130228B 1.024 1 15.36 48.64 178.688 0.206 0.043 1.06
130305A 1.024 2 22.528 69.12 158.208 0.199 0.041 0.75
130325A 1.024 1 7.168 24.064 178.688 0.128 0.026 0.94
130327B 1.024 2 30.72 94.72 198.144 0.042 0.008 1.79
130331A 1.024 2 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.183 0.038 0.9
130404B 1.024 2 26.624 80.384 198.144 0.492 0.11 3.98
121
130406A 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 178.688 0.672 0.164 0.97
130408B 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.389 0.086 1.38
130409A 1.024 2 23.552 73.216 168.448 0.233 0.048 1.68
130420C 1.024 3 31.744 82.432 118.272 0.192 0.039 3.55
130420D 1.024 1 28.672 81.408 178.688 0.843 0.222 1.01
130502B 1.024 2 24.576 80.384 158.208 0.02 0.004 1.11
130509A 1.024 1 15.36 48.64 178.688 0.223 0.046 1.17
130517A 1.024 1 31.744 97.792 198.144 0.068 0.014 2.92
130522A 1.024 2 21.504 66.048 158.208 0.505 0.114 2.04
130523A 1.024 1 20.48 60.928 198.144 0.418 0.091 1.18
130523B 1.024 2 6.144 16.896 198.144 0.202 0.042 1.41
130528A 1.024 1 28.672 86.528 168.448 0.451 0.1 2.79
130606C 1.024 2 25.6 78.336 198.144 0.2 0.041 1.82
130612B 1.024 1 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.081 0.017 0.76
130614A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.164 0.034 0.98
130623A 1.024 1 23.552 71.168 178.688 0.669 0.162 2.84
130623E 1.024 1 41.984 127.488 178.688 0.237 0.049 1.31
130628A 1.024 1 15.36 48.64 178.688 0.818 0.213 1.39
130630A 1.024 1 17.408 54.784 178.688 0.132 0.027 1.43
130701B 1.024 3 7.168 24.064 178.688 0.096 0.02 0.52
130715A 1.024 2 48.128 152.064 198.144 0.094 0.019 2.84
130722C 1.024 2 3.072 10.752 168.448 0.779 0.202 0.84
130725C 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 168.448 0.161 0.033 0.82
130727A 1.024 1 13.312 41.472 198.144 0.243 0.051 1.49
130803A 1.024 2 6.144 15.872 158.208 0.611 0.146 1.23
130818A 1.024 1 9.216 29.184 178.688 0.36 0.077 1.13
130829B 1.024 1 11.264 35.328 158.208 0.734 0.185 1.17
131008A 1.024 2 13.312 41.472 178.688 0.275 0.058 2.01
131031A 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 178.688 0.164 0.034 1.3
131108B 1.024 1 8.192 24.064 158.208 0.47 0.106 1.16
131122B 1.024 1 23.552 73.216 178.688 0.106 0.022 1.31
131127B 1.024 1 17.408 55.808 178.688 0.042 0.008 1.09
131202A 1.024 1 14.336 38.4 158.208 0.767 0.199 1.98
131209A 1.024 1 15.36 49.664 168.448 0.111 0.023 1.41
131215B 1.024 1 24.576 76.288 178.688 0.282 0.059 1.24
122
131216A 1.024 3 8.192 25.088 138.752 0.367 0.079 0.98
131217B 1.024 3 9.216 28.16 147.968 0.188 0.039 0.97
131229A 1.024 1 12.288 39.424 158.208 0.096 0.02 0.79
140115A 1.024 1 15.36 47.616 178.688 0.182 0.037 0.98
140308B 1.024 1 11.264 36.352 178.688 0.273 0.057 0.72
140311C 1.024 1 11.264 35.328 147.968 0.101 0.06 1.65
140322A 1.024 2 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.984 0.279 2.25
140416A 1.024 2 24.576 74.24 178.688 0.055 0.011 1.28
140430B 1.024 1 8.192 24.064 128.512 0.266 0.056 1.45
140501B 1.024 2 12.288 36.352 168.448 0.294 0.062 1.72
140513A 1.024 2 12.288 36.352 178.688 0.283 0.06 1.96
140516C 1.024 2 19.456 59.904 158.208 0.219 0.045 1.25
140523A 1.024 2 18.432 55.808 178.688 0.033 0.007 0.97
140528A 1.024 1 14.336 43.52 178.688 0.065 0.013 1.29
140610C 1.024 1 30.72 91.648 178.688 0.112 0.023 2.16
140701B 1.024 1 7.168 22.016 118.272 0.549 0.127 0.76
140723B 1.024 1 37.888 117.248 178.688 0.104 0.021 2.9
140817A 1.024 3 12.288 35.328 158.208 0.345 0.074 1.08
140821A 1.024 2 32.768 105.984 178.688 0.064 0.013 1.13
140827A 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 158.208 0.087 0.018 1.18
140906B 1.024 1 20.48 61.952 178.688 0.163 0.033 1.25
140916B 1.024 1 18.432 51.712 178.688 0.461 0.105 2.42
140917A 1.024 2 16.384 49.664 168.448 0.28 0.059 0.94
140928A 1.024 1 12.288 32.256 147.968 0.384 0.083 0.78
140928B 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 118.272 0.526 0.121 1.94
141004B 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 158.208 0.153 0.032 1.63
141016A 1.024 2 14.336 43.52 178.688 0.714 0.177 1.19
141205C 1.024 1 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.161 0.033 1.41
141207A 1.024 2 20.48 62.976 168.448 0.114 0.023 1.09
141215A 1.024 2 11.264 37.376 178.688 0.091 0.018 0.95
141222A 0.064 1 1.664 5.088 139.872 0.131 0.027 0.98
141222B 1.024 1 30.72 92.672 178.688 0.06 0.012 1.93
141229A 1.024 2 7.168 24.064 168.448 0.494 0.112 1.16
150118B 1.024 1 39.936 129.536 178.688 0.021 0.004 0.86
150127A 1.024 1 30.72 92.672 168.448 0.136 0.028 0.9
123
150131B 1.024 1 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.593 0.14 1.35
150201A 1.024 1 9.216 31.232 178.688 0.015 0.003 0.89
150206B 1.024 2 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.445 0.099 1.35
150213A 1.024 1 4.096 12.8 147.968 0.023 0.005 0.45
150228B 1.024 2 31.744 97.792 198.144 0.121 0.025 1.7
150306A 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.109 0.022 1.37
150319A 1.024 1 9.216 29.184 178.688 0.268 0.056 1.23
150324B 1.024 2 13.312 41.472 178.688 0.174 0.036 1.92
150422A 1.024 1 36.864 112.128 178.688 0.053 0.011 2.39
150426A 1.024 1 18.432 55.808 178.688 0.427 0.094 1.02
150506A 1.024 2 5.12 16.896 147.968 0.416 0.092 0.97
150528A 1.024 2 15.36 46.592 158.208 0.278 0.058 0.97
150530A 1.024 1 7.168 22.016 178.688 0.434 0.096 1.28
150614A 1.024 1 5.12 16.896 168.448 0.295 0.063 1.08
150619A 1.024 2 59.392 178.688 218.624 0.091 0.018 1.5
150630A 1.024 2 15.36 48.64 178.688 0.269 0.056 0.39
150702A 1.024 2 41.984 129.536 168.448 0.439 0.097 0.61
150705A 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 158.208 0.222 0.046 1.56
150721A 1.024 2 17.408 54.784 178.688 0.087 0.018 2.36
150724B 1.024 1 39.936 124.416 147.968 0.242 0.05 1.24
150729A 1.024 2 34.816 104.96 168.448 0.216 0.044 1.5
150817A 1.024 1 31.744 97.792 178.688 0.301 0.063 1.7
150817B 1.024 1 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.387 0.084 1.53
150822A 1.024 3 10.24 30.208 158.208 0.427 0.094 2.09
150824A 1.024 1 13.312 42.496 178.688 0.082 0.017 1.1
150828A 1.024 3 11.264 35.328 147.968 0.166 0.034 1.72
150831B 1.024 2 13.312 40.448 178.688 0.758 0.193 1.37
150902A 1.024 3 12.288 40.448 147.968 0.017 0.003 0.73
150913A 1.024 1 17.408 53.76 198.144 0.153 0.031 1.58
150919B 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 168.448 0.374 0.081 0.98
151011A 1.024 2 19.456 59.904 147.968 0.232 0.048 1.74
151021B 1.024 1 5.12 17.92 128.512 0.096 0.02 0.73
151111A 1.024 2 34.816 103.936 147.968 0.798 0.207 3.33
151120A 1.024 2 17.408 54.784 178.688 0.135 0.028 1.62
151212C 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 198.144 0.216 0.045 2.06
124
151227A 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.123 0.025 0.62
151227B 1.024 1 20.48 85.504 178.688 0.076 0.015 0.97
151228B 1.024 1 24.576 73.216 178.688 0.539 0.123 1.63
151229A 1.024 1 2.048 5.632 178.688 0.98 0.279 0.58
151229A 1.024 1 2.048 5.632 178.688 0.98 0.279 0.58
160101A 1.024 2 4.096 12.8 178.688 0.047 0.01 0.84
160102B 1.024 2 15.36 44.544 168.448 0.678 0.166 1.64
160102C 1.024 1 9.216 29.184 178.688 0.378 0.082 1.75
160106A 1.024 2 39.936 124.416 178.688 0.118 0.024 1.58
160111B 1.024 2 16.384 48.64 158.208 0.647 0.156 2.54
160113A 1.024 1 17.408 81.408 178.688 0.045 0.009 1.7
160118A 1.024 2 46.08 141.824 178.688 0.094 0.019 1.72
160125A 1.024 1 8.192 23.04 178.688 0.762 0.194 2.24
160216B 1.024 1 6.144 19.968 178.688 0.087 0.018 1.37
160303B 1.024 2 33.792 103.936 178.688 0.181 0.037 1.75
160310A 1.024 1 23.552 72.192 168.448 0.222 0.046 1.58
160310B 1.024 1 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.99 0.282 1.89
160325A 1.024 1 43.008 130.56 178.688 0.309 0.065 1.88
160330A 1.024 2 28.672 86.528 178.688 0.262 0.055 3.76
160401B 1.024 1 19.456 60.928 178.688 0.136 0.028 2.04
160406B 1.024 1 16.384 45.568 158.208 0.329 0.07 2.45
160421A 1.024 1 15.36 49.664 178.688 0.042 0.008 0.94
160422A 1.024 3 11.264 36.352 147.968 0.019 0.004 0.69
160424A 1.024 2 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.311 0.066 0.86
160519B 1.024 2 15.36 47.616 158.208 0.534 0.123 2.21
160521C 1.024 2 13.312 40.448 178.688 0.691 0.169 1.35
160530B 1.024 2 9.216 33.28 168.448 0.013 0.003 0.71
160605A 1.024 1 4.096 12.8 168.448 0.691 0.172 1.74
160628B 1.024 1 6.144 17.92 178.688 0.213 0.044 1.42
160718A 1.024 1 8.192 24.064 198.144 0.452 0.101 1.88
160724A 1.024 2 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.188 0.039 0.8
160731A 1.024 1 11.264 32.256 147.968 0.411 0.09 2.21
160815A 1.024 2 3.072 11.776 198.144 0.341 0.074 1.32
160816A 1.024 1 11.264 36.352 178.688 0.037 0.008 0.82
160818A 1.024 1 6.144 16.896 168.448 0.494 0.112 1.11
125
160819A 1.024 1 17.408 74.24 178.688 0.115 0.023 1.5
160825A 1.024 2 6.144 17.92 168.448 0.254 0.054 1.42
160905A 1.024 1 32.768 101.888 178.688 0.049 0.01 1.03
160910A 1.024 3 12.288 41.472 138.752 0.023 0.005 0.65
160920A 1.024 2 10.24 30.208 158.208 0.889 0.24 2.36
160921A 1.024 2 49.152 145.92 178.688 0.309 0.065 2.66
160928A 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 178.688 0.153 0.032 1.09
161004B 1.024 2 12.288 38.4 178.688 0.058 0.012 1.52
161015A 1.024 1 14.336 43.52 178.688 0.097 0.02 1.51
161020B 1.024 1 17.408 57.856 178.688 0.068 0.014 1.32
161020C 1.024 2 21.504 67.072 158.208 0.394 0.086 1.93
161105B 1.024 2 41.984 129.536 168.448 0.246 0.051 1.48
161106A 1.024 2 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.055 0.011 1.44
161106B 1.024 2 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.597 0.142 0.99
161109A 1.024 1 20.48 62.976 178.688 0.151 0.031 1.18
161206A 1.024 2 21.504 68.096 158.208 0.063 0.013 1.82
161218B 1.024 2 25.6 80.384 178.688 0.026 0.005 0.9
161220B 1.024 1 31.744 97.792 178.688 0.303 0.064 1.72
161229A 1.024 1 33.792 105.984 198.144 0.04 0.02 1.75
170101B 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 198.144 0.096 0.02 1.84
170111C 1.024 1 1.024 5.632 178.688 0.616 0.149 0.76
170114A 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 158.208 0.088 0.018 0.81
170114B 1.024 1 29.696 91.648 158.208 0.414 0.09 1.48
170115B 1.024 2 35.84 110.08 178.688 0.115 0.023 0.9
170121B 1.024 2 34.816 104.96 178.688 0.079 0.016 1.38
170124C 1.024 1 22.528 69.12 178.688 0.139 0.028 2.56
170126A 1.024 3 12.288 37.376 147.968 0.329 0.07 1.25
170131A 1.024 2 20.48 59.904 178.688 0.245 0.051 1.57
170207A 1.024 2 38.912 118.272 178.688 0.082 0.017 0.97
170208A 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 168.448 0.45 0.1 0.87
170208B 1.024 3 10.24 31.232 158.208 0.083 0.017 1.66
170209A 1.024 1 37.888 115.2 178.688 0.24 0.05 1.63
170228B 1.024 1 50.176 152.064 178.688 0.466 0.104 2.92
170308A 1.024 1 13.312 43.52 178.688 0.201 0.042 1.07
170329A 1.024 2 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.163 0.033 1.02
126
170402A 1.024 1 7.168 24.064 178.688 0.09 0.018 1.24
170402B 1.024 2 24.576 74.24 178.688 0.605 0.142 4.0
170403B 1.024 1 14.336 42.496 178.688 0.484 0.109 1.81
170422A 1.024 1 29.696 95.744 178.688 0.107 0.022 1.59
170423B 1.024 2 10.24 30.208 198.144 0.236 0.049 1.43
170511A 1.024 1 19.456 80.384 158.208 0.06 0.012 1.66
170522A 1.024 1 7.168 24.064 158.208 0.044 0.009 0.8
170527A 1.024 1 33.792 104.96 178.688 0.031 0.006 0.89
170530A 1.024 2 12.288 36.352 178.688 0.335 0.071 2.53
170606A 1.024 1 9.216 29.184 178.688 0.204 0.042 1.56
170607B 1.024 1 19.456 61.952 198.144 0.041 0.017 1.27
170610B 1.024 2 19.456 60.928 168.448 0.09 0.018 2.04
170614B 1.024 1 29.696 93.696 198.144 0.129 0.026 1.22
170626A 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.093 0.019 0.97
170629A 1.024 1 19.456 60.928 158.208 0.341 0.073 1.53
170711A 1.024 2 10.24 28.16 178.688 0.599 0.142 0.99
170728B 1.024 1 19.456 60.928 198.144 0.413 0.09 0.99
170730B 1.024 2 6.144 17.92 168.448 0.321 0.069 1.41
170803A 1.024 1 4.096 11.776 158.208 0.374 0.082 0.67
170808B 1.024 1 18.432 58.88 178.688 0.01 0.002 0.47
170808C 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 128.512 0.348 0.075 0.97
170825B 1.024 2 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.201 0.042 1.12
170830C 1.024 2 12.288 35.328 178.688 0.561 0.13 1.38
170906B 1.024 2 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.259 0.054 1.44
170912B 1.024 2 19.456 59.904 168.448 0.505 0.114 2.25
170915A 1.024 3 13.312 41.472 128.512 0.163 0.033 1.77
170921B 1.024 2 18.432 55.808 158.208 0.037 0.008 1.8
170926A 1.024 2 20.48 55.808 178.688 0.725 0.178 2.4
170929A 1.024 2 9.216 26.112 147.968 0.72 0.18 1.6
170929B 1.024 2 7.168 23.04 158.208 0.248 0.052 1.48
171002A 1.024 1 8.192 24.064 198.144 0.879 0.236 1.41
171004B 1.024 1 36.864 110.08 147.968 0.179 0.037 3.47
171013A 1.024 1 25.6 79.36 168.448 0.072 0.015 3.17
171022A 1.024 2 12.288 37.376 168.448 0.181 0.037 1.56
171102A 1.024 2 48.128 154.112 178.688 0.452 0.1 1.16
127
171120A 1.024 2 2.048 6.656 198.144 0.123 0.018 0.97
171208A 1.024 1 2.048 5.632 158.208 0.569 0.135 1.04
171209B 1.024 2 14.336 41.472 178.688 0.54 0.124 1.26
171212B 1.024 2 31.744 96.768 158.208 0.328 0.07 2.84
171212C 1.024 2 11.264 34.304 58.88 0.382 0.083 2.19
171227A 1.024 1 24.576 80.384 138.752 0.024 0.005 0.62
171230A 1.024 1 10.24 30.208 168.448 0.127 0.026 1.14
180113A 1.024 2 11.264 36.352 147.968 0.071 0.014 1.47
180113B 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 138.752 0.185 0.038 0.44
180113C 1.024 1 21.504 73.216 178.688 0.011 0.002 1.3
180119A 1.024 1 4.096 11.776 138.752 0.321 0.069 0.84
180120A 1.024 1 22.528 69.12 178.688 0.026 0.005 1.69
180125A 1.024 2 20.48 65.024 178.688 0.059 0.012 2.12
180126A 1.024 1 11.264 36.352 178.688 0.161 0.033 1.48
180210A 1.024 1 26.624 83.456 178.688 0.031 0.006 2.3
180305A 1.024 1 10.24 32.256 158.208 0.028 0.006 0.97
180330A 1.024 2 12.288 36.352 158.208 0.601 0.142 1.4
180409A 1.024 1 12.288 38.4 178.688 0.04 0.008 0.89
180427A 1.024 1 17.408 54.784 178.688 0.068 0.014 1.88
180504B 1.024 2 23.552 73.216 138.752 0.1 0.02 2.01
180505A 1.024 1 5.12 35.328 178.688 0.092 0.019 0.88
180506A 1.024 1 27.648 85.504 178.688 0.192 0.039 2.9
180515A 1.024 2 20.48 61.952 147.968 0.137 0.028 1.6
180522B 1.024 2 12.288 36.352 178.688 0.247 0.052 2.79
180605A 1.024 2 24.576 74.24 178.688 0.132 0.027 1.18
180611A 1.024 1 8.192 25.088 168.448 0.21 0.044 0.99
180615A 1.024 1 22.528 68.096 198.144 0.572 0.133 1.06
180630A 1.024 1 11.264 34.304 198.144 0.508 0.115 1.51
180706A 1.024 2 9.216 25.088 178.688 0.497 0.113 4.0
180709B 1.024 1 8.192 23.04 178.688 0.257 0.054 1.56
128
Table 8.3
Limits on gravitational echo for 348 GRBs assuming a median redshift
1.25.

(Fermi GBM) (s) (s) (s) (s) (Median)
081101B 1.024 2 7.168 24.064 147.968 0.146 0.03 1.25

081215A 1.024 1 5.12 18.944 178.688 0.018 0.004 1.25
081216A 0.064 1 0.32 1.632 179.872 0.187 0.041 1.25
081223A 0.064 1 0.832 2.528 199.904 0.493 0.115 1.25
090108A 0.064 2 0.512 1.504 169.888 0.463 0.109 1.25
090227B 0.064 1 0.32 1.056 179.872 0.061 0.013 1.25
090228A 0.064 1 0.128 0.416 179.872 0.05 0.011 1.25
090308B 0.064 1 1.728 5.216 179.872 0.259 0.055 1.25
090514B 0.064 1 1.216 3.36 149.92 0.369 0.082 1.25
090520C 1.024 2 4.096 11.776 178.688 0.259 0.055 1.25
090720B 1.024 1 22.528 68.096 147.968 0.631 0.151 1.25
090929A 1.024 1 4.096 12.8 178.688 0.337 0.073 1.25
091012A 0.064 1 0.64 1.888 169.888 0.179 0.038 1.25
100612A 0.064 1 0.832 2.592 199.904 0.305 0.067 1.25
100629A 0.064 2 1.024 2.72 169.888 0.339 0.075 1.25
100701B 1.024 1 11.264 36.352 178.688 0.141 0.029 1.25
100811A 0.064 1 0.384 1.056 159.904 0.257 0.057 1.25
101129B 0.064 2 0.704 2.08 179.872 0.228 0.049 1.25
101216A 0.064 1 2.048 6.24 179.872 0.377 0.083 1.25
110407B 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.042 0.008 1.25
110503B 1.024 2 6.144 18.944 168.448 0.463 0.104 1.25
110529A 0.064 2 0.384 1.184 199.904 0.289 0.065 1.25
110705A 0.064 1 0.256 0.736 149.92 0.092 0.02 1.25
111017A 1.024 1 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.052 0.01 1.25
111222A 0.064 1 0.32 1.056 169.888 0.137 0.03 1.25
120210A 0.064 2 5.248 13.856 119.904 0.992 0.285 1.25
120217B 0.064 2 1.344 4.256 179.872 0.127 0.026 1.25
120222A 0.064 2 0.896 2.72 179.872 0.213 0.045 1.25
129
120304B 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.854 0.227 1.25
120323A 0.064 1 0.32 1.12 179.872 0.034 0.007 1.25
120519A 0.064 1 0.896 2.656 179.872 0.214 0.046 1.25
120624A 0.064 2 0.384 1.184 179.872 0.095 0.02 1.25
120814A 0.064 2 0.832 2.4 179.872 0.39 0.088 1.25
120817B 0.016 2 0.064 0.184 179.976 0.154 0.035 1.25
120827A 1.024 1 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.538 0.124 1.25
120830A 0.064 3 1.024 3.104 119.904 0.187 0.04 1.25
130518C 1.024 2 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.266 0.056 1.25
130701C 0.064 1 1.472 4.576 39.904 0.124 0.026 1.25
130828B 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.179 0.037 1.25
131014A 1.024 2 4.096 12.8 147.968 0.005 0.001 1.25
131028A 1.024 1 12.288 39.424 178.688 0.021 0.004 1.25
140102A 1.024 3 3.072 11.776 158.208 0.047 0.01 1.25
140209A 0.064 1 0.768 3.68 149.92 0.043 0.009 1.25
140621A 1.024 2 7.168 24.064 168.448 0.284 0.06 1.25
140626B 0.064 2 1.472 4.256 199.904 0.547 0.129 1.25
140807A 0.064 1 0.576 1.76 149.92 0.223 0.048 1.25
140901A 0.064 1 0.128 0.416 119.904 0.085 0.019 1.25
141202A 0.064 1 1.28 3.936 149.92 0.163 0.034 1.25
141213A 0.064 3 0.576 1.76 149.92 0.357 0.08 1.25
150118C 0.064 1 0.192 0.672 199.904 0.382 0.09 1.25
150210A 1.024 2 19.456 60.928 178.688 0.261 0.055 1.25
150228A 1.024 1 4.096 12.8 198.144 0.301 0.064 1.25
150324A 1.024 2 6.144 17.92 178.688 0.33 0.071 1.25
150810A 0.064 2 0.448 1.44 189.92 0.182 0.039 1.25
150811B 0.016 1 0.592 1.816 149.976 0.176 0.038 1.25
150819B 0.064 1 0.96 2.976 179.872 0.054 0.011 1.25
150923C 0.064 1 1.792 5.344 169.888 0.292 0.063 1.25
151222A 0.064 3 0.448 1.504 169.888 0.309 0.069 1.25
151231B 0.064 2 0.576 1.632 179.872 0.46 0.107 1.25
160227B 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 178.688 0.082 0.017 1.25
160521B 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.106 0.022 1.25
160709A 0.064 1 0.832 2.592 149.92 0.525 0.125 1.25
160726A 0.064 1 0.768 2.272 169.888 0.669 0.169 1.25
130
160804B 0.064 3 0.576 1.888 129.888 0.236 0.051 1.25
160806A 0.064 1 1.6 4.64 149.92 0.451 0.102 1.25
160824B 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 198.144 0.12 0.025 1.25
160917A 1.024 1 17.408 53.76 178.688 0.366 0.079 1.25
160917B 1.024 2 14.336 42.496 178.688 0.397 0.087 1.25
170121A 1.024 2 2.048 6.656 158.208 0.489 0.112 1.25
170127C 0.016 1 0.128 0.392 179.976 0.071 0.016 1.25
170206A 0.064 3 1.28 3.936 179.872 0.034 0.007 1.25
170222A 0.064 2 1.664 4.96 179.872 0.226 0.048 1.25
170305A 0.064 3 0.384 1.184 129.888 0.328 0.075 1.25
170306B 1.024 2 18.432 59.904 178.688 0.048 0.01 1.25
170708A 0.064 1 0.128 0.416 159.904 0.339 0.081 1.25
170802A 0.064 2 0.448 3.168 169.888 0.307 0.068 1.25
170817B 1.024 3 2.048 6.656 128.512 0.185 0.039 1.25
170926B 0.064 2 1.152 3.296 159.904 0.7 0.179 1.25
171108A 0.016 1 0.048 0.168 69.976 0.248 0.059 1.25
171126A 0.064 1 1.28 3.936 139.872 0.251 0.054 1.25
171223A 0.064 1 0.256 0.736 179.872 0.143 0.031 1.25
180204A 0.064 1 1.088 3.36 169.888 0.251 0.054 1.25
180218A 1.024 1 3.072 15.872 178.688 0.031 0.006 1.25
180511B 0.064 2 1.856 5.408 159.904 0.423 0.095 1.25
180703B 0.064 1 1.6 5.024 179.872 0.079 0.016 1.25
180715A 0.064 2 0.512 1.504 179.872 0.353 0.079 1.25
180718C 1.024 1 3.072 10.752 178.688 0.503 0.115 1.25
180720A 1.024 1 7.168 24.064 178.688 0.042 0.009 1.25
180723A 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.076 0.016 1.25
180724A 1.024 1 37.888 117.248 178.688 0.146 0.03 1.25
180727A 0.064 2 0.896 2.592 179.872 0.459 0.106 1.25
180728C 1.024 2 3.072 10.752 178.688 0.512 0.118 1.25
180731A 1.024 1 26.624 79.36 168.448 0.155 0.032 1.25
180801B 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 178.688 0.722 0.18 1.25
180804A 1.024 2 23.552 73.216 178.688 0.185 0.038 1.25
180804D 1.024 1 12.288 36.352 178.688 0.757 0.192 1.25
180806A 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 168.448 0.082 0.017 1.25
180816A 1.024 2 29.696 92.672 158.208 0.103 0.021 1.25
131
180822A 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 178.688 0.264 0.055 1.25
180828A 1.024 2 8.192 26.112 178.688 0.05 0.01 1.25
180910A 1.024 1 33.792 101.888 178.688 0.335 0.071 1.25
180910C 0.064 1 0.256 0.736 169.888 0.522 0.128 1.25
180912A 1.024 2 37.888 115.2 158.208 0.146 0.03 1.25
180923B 1.024 1 7.168 25.088 178.688 0.044 0.009 1.25
181008A 1.024 2 33.792 105.984 178.688 0.206 0.042 1.25
181014A 1.024 2 21.504 65.024 198.144 0.177 0.036 1.25
181026A 1.024 1 15.36 48.64 158.208 0.556 0.129 1.25
181028A 1.024 2 30.72 93.696 178.688 0.056 0.011 1.25
181111A 1.024 2 16.384 47.616 147.968 0.304 0.064 1.25
181119B 1.024 1 30.72 91.648 158.208 0.469 0.105 1.25
181120A 1.024 2 16.384 49.664 178.688 0.392 0.085 1.25
181215A 1.024 2 18.432 55.808 168.448 0.487 0.11 1.25
181217A 1.024 1 26.624 79.36 178.688 0.146 0.03 1.25
190106B 1.024 1 11.264 36.352 158.208 0.064 0.013 1.25
190110A 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 178.688 0.152 0.031 1.25
190129C 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 168.448 0.352 0.076 1.25
190215A 1.024 2 23.552 74.24 168.448 0.099 0.02 1.25
190218A 1.024 1 43.008 128.512 168.448 0.094 0.019 1.25
190222A 1.024 1 7.168 20.992 168.448 0.641 0.155 1.25
190222B 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.193 0.04 1.25
190304A 0.064 1 2.24 5.92 179.872 0.412 0.092 1.25
190312A 1.024 1 11.264 35.328 168.448 0.323 0.069 1.25
190319A 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.316 0.067 1.25
190319B 1.024 2 16.384 49.664 158.208 0.353 0.076 1.25
190324B 1.024 1 32.768 103.936 168.448 0.072 0.015 1.25
190326B 1.024 2 55.296 168.448 198.144 0.349 0.074 1.25
190327A 1.024 1 38.912 114.176 178.688 0.518 0.118 1.25
190330A 1.024 2 32.768 98.816 158.208 0.161 0.033 1.25
190401A 1.024 2 21.504 67.072 178.688 0.112 0.023 1.25
190407C 1.024 1 2.048 5.632 178.688 0.562 0.133 1.25
190507B 1.024 2 23.552 74.24 158.208 0.128 0.026 1.25
190511A 1.024 1 27.648 87.552 168.448 0.058 0.012 1.25
190517A 1.024 1 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.13 0.027 1.25
132
190530A 1.024 1 17.408 55.808 178.688 0.013 0.003 1.25
190531B 1.024 1 30.72 99.84 178.688 0.03 0.006 1.25
190606A 0.016 1 0.224 0.68 179.976 0.044 0.01 1.25
190613B 1.024 2 6.144 15.872 178.688 0.375 0.082 1.25
190623A 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 158.208 0.678 0.167 1.25
190707A 1.024 2 30.72 93.696 198.144 0.195 0.04 1.25
190712A 1.024 2 3.072 10.752 178.688 0.641 0.156 1.25
190716A 1.024 2 9.216 28.16 178.688 0.343 0.074 1.25
190720A 1.024 2 5.12 17.92 158.208 0.05 0.01 1.25
190720B 1.024 1 6.144 17.92 188.928 0.192 0.04 1.25
190727A 1.024 1 27.648 84.48 168.448 0.182 0.037 1.25
190727B 1.024 1 34.816 107.008 178.688 0.12 0.024 1.25
190731A 1.024 1 15.36 49.664 178.688 0.036 0.007 1.25
190804C 1.024 2 9.216 29.184 178.688 0.517 0.118 1.25
190805A 1.024 1 9.216 28.16 147.968 0.288 0.061 1.25
190805B 1.024 1 20.48 61.952 147.968 0.218 0.045 1.25
190806A 1.024 2 16.384 49.664 178.688 0.41 0.09 1.25
190808B 1.024 2 31.744 98.816 147.968 0.227 0.047 1.25
190827A 1.024 1 33.792 102.912 168.448 0.116 0.024 1.25
190828C 1.024 2 13.312 42.496 178.688 0.054 0.011 1.25
190919A 1.024 1 43.008 131.584 168.448 0.16 0.033 1.25
190923A 1.024 1 2.048 5.632 178.688 0.434 0.098 1.25
191001A 1.024 3 21.504 65.024 178.688 0.41 0.09 1.25
191027A 1.024 2 4.096 12.8 178.688 0.689 0.171 1.25
191129A 1.024 1 23.552 73.216 138.752 0.291 0.061 1.25
191202A 1.024 1 13.312 42.496 158.208 0.1 0.02 1.25
191220B 1.024 2 28.672 88.576 178.688 0.136 0.028 1.25
191227A 1.024 2 19.456 71.168 178.688 0.037 0.008 1.25
191227B 0.064 2 0.128 0.416 149.92 0.056 0.012 1.25
200101A 1.024 2 13.312 46.592 198.144 0.01 0 1.25
200105A 1.024 1 12.288 36.352 158.208 0.7 0.173 1.25
200111A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.332 0.071 1.25
200120A 1.024 1 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.232 0.048 1.25
200125B 1.024 2 6.144 18.944 168.448 0.016 0.003 1.25
200130B 1.024 1 11.264 36.352 178.688 0.064 0.013 1.25
133
200207A 1.024 2 16.384 47.616 178.688 0.657 0.158 1.25
200219A 0.064 2 0.512 1.504 179.872 0.171 0.037 1.25
200219B 1.024 2 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.341 0.074 1.25
200219C 1.024 3 21.504 67.072 128.512 0.187 0.038 1.25
200227A 1.024 2 20.48 61.952 168.448 0.087 0.018 1.25
200228A 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.151 0.031 1.25
200301A 1.024 2 15.36 48.64 178.688 0.136 0.028 1.25
200311A 1.024 2 50.176 154.112 198.144 0.16 0.033 1.25
200313A 1.024 1 8.192 26.112 178.688 0.054 0.011 1.25
200317A 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 178.688 0.171 0.035 1.25
200320A 1.024 1 7.168 24.064 168.448 0.624 0.149 1.25
200323A 0.064 2 1.728 5.344 179.872 0.113 0.023 1.25
200325A 0.064 1 0.96 2.976 169.888 0.266 0.058 1.25
200325B 1.024 1 29.696 90.624 178.688 0.214 0.044 1.25
200327A 0.064 2 0.64 1.888 179.872 0.96 0.277 1.25
200403B 1.024 2 25.6 78.336 178.688 0.209 0.043 1.25
200403C 1.024 2 9.216 23.04 158.208 0.93 0.257 1.25
200404A 1.024 1 17.408 51.712 198.144 0.422 0.092 1.25
200412A 1.024 2 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.125 0.026 1.25
200412B 1.024 1 7.168 28.16 178.688 0.031 0.006 1.25
200415A 0.016 2 0.144 0.456 179.976 0.078 0.017 1.25
200416A 1.024 2 9.216 26.112 178.688 0.77 0.197 1.25
200502A 1.024 2 17.408 53.76 158.208 0.872 0.234 1.25
200505A 1.024 2 6.144 17.92 147.968 0.335 0.072 1.25
200510A 1.024 2 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.58 0.136 1.25
200517B 1.024 2 16.384 46.592 178.688 0.757 0.191 1.25
200530A 1.024 1 23.552 75.264 178.688 0.05 0.01 1.25
200605A 0.064 2 0.384 1.12 179.872 0.188 0.041 1.25
200607B 1.024 2 25.6 79.36 158.208 0.227 0.047 1.25
200622A 1.024 2 32.768 98.816 198.144 0.312 0.066 1.25
200629A 1.024 2 24.576 73.216 178.688 0.268 0.056 1.25
200703A 0.064 2 0.64 1.888 159.904 0.588 0.144 1.25
200703B 1.024 1 33.792 104.96 178.688 0.084 0.017 1.25
200711A 1.024 2 23.552 73.216 178.688 0.173 0.035 1.25
200714B 0.064 2 1.216 3.744 179.872 0.507 0.118 1.25
134
200714E 1.024 1 17.408 54.784 198.144 0.251 0.052 1.25
200716C 1.024 2 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.352 0.076 1.25
200716C 1.024 3 7.168 24.064 198.144 0.311 0.066 1.25
200826B 1.024 2 7.168 26.112 158.208 0.013 0.003 1.25
200901A 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.407 0.089 1.25
200903A 1.024 2 11.264 35.328 158.208 0.195 0.04 1.25
200909A 1.024 2 21.504 66.048 168.448 0.305 0.064 1.25
200924C 1.024 1 5.12 16.896 168.448 0.657 0.16 1.25
201004B 1.024 2 14.336 42.496 178.688 0.501 0.114 1.25
201016A 1.024 1 3.072 17.92 218.624 0.01 0.002 1.25
201105A 1.024 1 16.384 50.688 158.208 0.096 0.019 1.25
201105B 1.024 2 4.096 10.752 178.688 0.528 0.122 1.25
201109A 0.064 2 0.768 2.08 139.872 0.271 0.059 1.25
201207A 1.024 2 17.408 53.76 158.208 0.164 0.034 1.25
201208A 1.024 2 25.6 78.336 138.752 0.204 0.042 1.25
201215A 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 178.688 0.587 0.138 1.25
201217A 1.024 1 21.504 66.048 178.688 0.318 0.067 1.25
201218A 1.024 2 12.288 38.4 178.688 0.02 0.004 1.25
201227A 0.016 1 0.064 0.184 139.976 0.075 0.017 1.25
201231B 1.024 1 22.528 67.072 198.144 0.25 0.052 1.25
210101B 1.024 1 14.336 42.496 147.968 0.349 0.075 1.25
210117A 1.024 2 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.272 0.057 1.25
210123A 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.098 0.02 1.25
210202A 1.024 1 18.432 55.808 198.144 0.124 0.025 1.25
210207A 1.024 2 12.288 36.352 178.688 0.694 0.171 1.25
210228B 1.024 3 26.624 80.384 178.688 0.174 0.036 1.25
210306A 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 178.688 0.084 0.017 1.25
210308A 1.024 2 5.12 17.92 178.688 0.121 0.025 1.25
210324A 1.024 1 32.768 98.816 178.688 0.239 0.049 1.25
210406A 1.024 1 17.408 53.76 158.208 0.257 0.054 1.25
210410A 1.024 2 22.528 68.096 168.448 0.143 0.029 1.25
210422B 1.024 1 12.288 36.352 178.688 0.19 0.039 1.25
210424C 1.024 2 3.072 10.752 178.688 0.634 0.153 1.25
210427A 1.024 2 18.432 54.784 158.208 0.342 0.073 1.25
210429A 1.024 2 8.192 20.992 118.272 0.578 0.136 1.25
135
210511B 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 158.208 0.126 0.026 1.25
210515B 1.024 1 16.384 48.64 178.688 0.692 0.17 1.25
210516A 1.024 1 2.048 5.632 178.688 0.912 0.254 1.25
210518A 1.024 1 8.192 24.064 178.688 0.208 0.043 1.25
210524A 1.024 2 17.408 54.784 178.688 0.208 0.043 1.25
210528A 0.064 1 1.088 3.36 179.872 0.072 0.015 1.25
210531A 1.024 1 20.48 62.976 178.688 0.036 0.007 1.25
210615B 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 158.208 0.315 0.067 1.25
210619A 0.064 1 1.216 3.808 199.904 0.251 0.054 1.25
210622B 1.024 1 15.36 44.544 178.688 0.263 0.055 1.25
210626B 1.024 2 44.032 133.632 168.448 0.192 0.039 1.25
210627B 1.024 1 16.384 49.664 198.144 0.14 0.029 1.25
210704B 1.024 2 31.744 98.816 198.144 0.04 0.015 1.25
210706A 1.024 2 7.168 23.04 158.208 0.155 0.032 1.25
210706B 1.024 2 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.13 0.027 1.25
210709A 1.024 2 11.264 35.328 158.208 0.959 0.269 1.25
210714A 1.024 2 16.384 49.664 158.208 0.067 0.014 1.25
210716A 1.024 1 2.048 5.632 158.208 0.878 0.241 1.25
210725C 1.024 2 6.144 17.92 168.448 0.278 0.059 1.25
210727A 0.064 1 1.216 3.744 199.904 0.192 0.041 1.25
210730A 1.024 1 4.096 12.8 178.688 0.397 0.087 1.25
210801A 1.024 1 13.312 41.472 147.968 0.357 0.077 1.25
210802A 1.024 2 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.05 0.01 1.25
210803A 1.024 2 7.168 24.064 178.688 0.212 0.044 1.25
210807D 1.024 2 10.24 30.208 147.968 0.535 0.123 1.25
210812A 1.024 1 5.12 16.896 198.144 0.236 0.03 1.25
210815A 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 178.688 0.531 0.122 1.25
210821A 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 178.688 0.206 0.043 1.25
210822C 1.024 1 10.24 30.208 147.968 0.374 0.081 1.25
210826A 1.024 1 21.504 67.072 198.144 0.111 0.023 1.25
210827B 1.024 1 17.408 53.76 147.968 0.147 0.03 1.25
210909A 0.064 1 1.472 4.384 179.872 0.137 0.029 1.25
210925B 1.024 1 4.096 11.776 178.688 0.2 0.042 1.25
210928A 1.024 1 23.552 74.24 178.688 0.035 0.007 1.25
211002B 1.024 1 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.425 0.094 1.25
136
211019A 1.024 3 23.552 76.288 158.208 0.04 0.008 1.25
211021A 1.024 2 4.096 11.776 178.688 0.299 0.064 1.25
211102A 1.024 2 49.152 143.872 178.688 0.291 0.061 1.25
211102B 1.024 2 18.432 55.808 158.208 0.129 0.026 1.25
211116B 1.024 1 9.216 30.208 178.688 0.169 0.035 1.25
211120A 1.024 1 6.144 20.992 178.688 0.026 0.005 1.25
211120B 1.024 2 30.72 91.648 178.688 0.438 0.097 1.25
211124A 0.064 1 0.448 1.44 149.92 0.518 0.123 1.25
211204C 1.024 2 14.336 43.52 178.688 0.136 0.028 1.25
211216A 1.024 2 19.456 59.904 178.688 0.119 0.024 1.25
211216B 1.024 1 29.696 90.624 168.448 0.194 0.04 1.25
211217A 1.024 2 4.096 10.752 178.688 0.487 0.111 1.25
211219A 1.024 2 6.144 17.92 178.688 0.24 0.05 1.25
211225A 1.024 2 5.12 17.92 158.208 0.55 0.128 1.25
211229B 1.024 3 7.168 24.064 138.752 0.245 0.051 1.25
220107B 1.024 2 22.528 69.12 158.208 0.068 0.014 1.25
220111A 1.024 1 10.24 31.232 178.688 0.117 0.024 1.25
220114B 0.064 2 0.768 2.016 159.904 0.566 0.137 1.25
220115B 1.024 2 36.864 110.08 178.688 0.478 0.107 1.25
220120A 0.064 1 1.216 3.36 169.888 0.522 0.123 1.25
220222A 1.024 2 10.24 29.184 158.208 0.262 0.055 1.25
220304A 1.024 1 27.648 87.552 178.688 0.041 0.008 1.25
220320A 1.024 2 15.36 49.664 158.208 0.111 0.023 1.25
220401A 1.024 1 37.888 114.176 168.448 0.319 0.067 1.25
220408B 1.024 1 25.6 80.384 178.688 0.096 0.019 1.25
220411A 1.024 1 20.48 60.928 178.688 0.316 0.067 1.25
220421A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.132 0.027 1.25
220426A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 178.688 0.007 0.001 1.25
220507A 1.024 3 8.192 24.064 98.816 0.689 0.169 1.25
220511A 1.024 1 3.072 11.776 178.688 0.108 0.022 1.25
220512A 1.024 1 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.273 0.058 1.25
220516A 1.024 1 11.264 32.256 158.208 0.726 0.182 1.25
220523B 1.024 1 7.168 23.04 178.688 0.26 0.055 1.25
220525A 1.024 1 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.059 0.012 1.25
220608A 1.024 1 37.888 116.224 178.688 0.215 0.044 1.25
137
220608B 1.024 2 22.528 68.096 158.208 0.205 0.042 1.25
220610B 1.024 1 16.384 46.592 168.448 0.191 0.039 1.25
220617A 0.064 2 0.64 1.888 159.904 0.155 0.033 1.25
220619A 1.024 2 37.888 115.2 178.688 0.092 0.019 1.25
220624B 1.024 2 12.288 36.352 147.968 0.554 0.128 1.25
220727A 1.024 1 9.216 29.184 178.688 0.411 0.09 1.25
220803A 1.024 1 7.168 24.064 198.144 0.176 0.038 1.25
220810A 1.024 3 12.288 33.28 147.968 0.158 0.032 1.25
220829A 1.024 1 23.552 72.192 178.688 0.197 0.04 1.25
220831A 0.064 1 1.152 3.168 159.904 0.887 0.246 1.25
220831B 1.024 1 11.264 35.328 178.688 0.295 0.062 1.25
220903A 1.024 2 11.264 35.328 198.144 0.149 0.051 1.25
220905A 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.067 0.014 1.25
220910A 1.024 1 4.096 16.896 198.144 0.022 0.005 1.25
220915A 1.024 2 16.384 49.664 178.688 0.196 0.04 1.25
220915B 1.024 2 10.24 30.208 178.688 0.187 0.039 1.25
221016A 1.024 2 14.336 42.496 178.688 0.576 0.135 1.25
221020A 1.024 2 16.384 48.64 178.688 0.225 0.047 1.25
221022B 1.024 2 31.744 104.96 178.688 0.04 0.008 1.25
221023A 1.024 2 31.744 99.84 178.688 0.008 0.002 1.25
221027A 1.024 2 8.192 24.064 168.448 0.105 0.021 1.25
221029A 1.024 1 26.624 80.384 178.688 0.173 0.035 1.25
221119A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 198.144 0.505 0.028 1.25
221121A 1.024 2 27.648 85.504 158.208 0.12 0.024 1.25
221126A 1.024 1 6.144 18.944 158.208 0.071 0.014 1.25
221201A 1.024 1 27.648 85.504 178.688 0.298 0.063 1.25
221202B 1.024 2 25.6 79.36 168.448 0.133 0.027 1.25
221206B 1.024 2 8.192 25.088 178.688 0.154 0.032 1.25
221209A 1.024 1 4.096 12.8 178.688 0.024 0.005 1.25
221221A 1.024 3 8.192 25.088 138.752 0.145 0.03 1.25
230110A 1.024 2 5.12 16.896 178.688 0.27 0.057 1.25
230116B 0.016 3 0.08 0.264 149.976 0.104 0.024 1.25
230116E 1.024 1 38.912 118.272 178.688 0.124 0.025 1.25
230304B 1.024 2 17.408 54.784 178.688 0.036 0.007 1.25
230304D 1.024 2 28.672 87.552 168.448 0.347 0.074 1.25
138
230308A 0.064 1 0.64 1.888 179.872 0.07 0.015 1.25
230313A 1.024 2 5.12 18.944 118.272 0.221 0.046 1.25
230316A 1.024 2 24.576 72.192 168.448 0.159 0.033 1.25
230320B 1.024 1 12.288 37.376 178.688 0.531 0.122 1.25
230321B 1.024 3 7.168 23.04 198.144 0.169 0.035 1.25
8.2 Special Cases: Results and Discussions
Upon analyzing all 882 GRBs, the search algorithm identified 18 potential millilens
candidates. Subsequent testing through LST and HST refined this list, spotlighting
one promising lensing candidate: GRB 100131A. With a time resolution of 1.024
seconds, this GRB exhibited notable similarity between its two pulses, registering
above a 3-σ significance. Although nominally not excluded by tests, my inspection of
all the light curves at all energies and detectors caused me to conclude that it is not
a likely case of gravitational lensing. Figure 8.1 shows the light curve of this GRB.
It should further be noted that the recho value was too close to the LST limitation.
Given the ambiguity, GRB 100131A remains an intriguing yet unverified instance of
gravitational lensing and will not be considered in the results.
139
Figure 8.1: Light-curve of GRB 100131A
140
Figure 8.2 and Figure 8.3 are the light-curve plots of two GRBs rejected due to
background irregularity. Such irregularities can arise due to solar flares. When the
GBM detects a particularly bright GRB, it might trigger an autonomous repoint
request (ARR). This action prompts the satellite to adjust its position, ensuring that
the burst’s coordinates (determined by the GBM) remain within the LAT’s field of
view for approximately 2 hours. This often causes background fluctuations, making
it impossible to fit the background with a polynomial between 0-4.
141
142
Figure 8.4 and Figure 8.5 are the light-curve plots of two GRBs rejected due to
light-curve irregularity. These were unusual cases when the brightness of the second
emission episode was greater than the brightness of the first emission episode. These
cases are not considered in this search. In the generic case, the second episode is
never brighter than the first due to lensing geometry.
143
8.3 Cosmological Limits: Results and Discussion:
The parameters rmin , tmin , and tmax are used to compute the impact parameters bf ,
b∆t(min) , and b∆t(max) as described in chapter 4. A gravitational lens will be detectable
if it is inside both bf and b∆t(max) but outside b∆t(min) . Figures 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, 8.9, and
8.10 show how the impact parameter varies with the redshift of the lens (zl ) for
different masses ranging from 105.5 to 109 M⊙ for GRB 180728A.
Figure 8.6: The impact parameters for lens masses 105.5 M⊙
144
In Figure 8.6, it can be seen that the brightness impact parameter bf is smaller than
b∆t(min) . The lack of a shaded region means there is no location where a lens with a
mass of 105.5 M⊙ can be placed to produce two images of the source. This is expected
when the mass of the lens is too small to produce two images within a detectable
magnitude difference from each other. Hence there is no detectable volume. If the
lens is placed outside the green line, the time delay between the two images will be
too long to be detectable. If the lens is placed below the red line, the time delay will
be too small to be detectable.
145
In Figure 8.7, bf moves upward between b∆t(max) and b∆t(min) . The thin shaded
region marked in grey between the boundaries of bf and b∆t(min) represents the lens
detectable volume.
146
147
148
Figure 8.11: The impact parameters for lens masses 109 M⊙
As seen in Figure 8.11, bf continues to move upwards; however, the time delay impact
parameters are too close, and so there is no place where a lens with a mass of 109 M⊙
can be placed to produce two images of the source. The detectable region will vary
for each GRB depending on rmin , tmin , tmax , and zGRB .
Finally, b∆t(min) and b∆t(max) are used to compute the number of millilenses utilizing
the formula 4.23 given in chapter 4.
149
Figure 8.12: The total number of detectable millilenses (NT ) for 90 GRBs
with spectroscopic redshift
Figure 8.12 provides a depiction of the anticipated number of echoes that should
be found within the light curves of all GRBs, corresponding to each (ΩCO , MCO )
pair. It’s essential to note that while we may not expect to see a lens echo within an
individual GRB when we collectively consider all GRBs with spectroscopic redshift,
it’s probable to identify as many as four echoes for masses close to 106 assuming
ΩCO is 0.265. When considering GRBs with a spectroscopic redshift, the absence of
detected echoes does not substantially disprove any (ΩCO , MCO ) pair. Tables 8.4, 8.5,
and 8.6 compile the total count of millilenses (NT ) and their corresponding standard
deviation values, noted as ∆NT , under the assumptions of ΩCO being 0.1, 0.201, and
150
0.265 respectively.
Table 8.4
Total number of millilenses (NT ) considering all GRBs with spectroscopic
redshift and assuming ΩCO = 0.1.

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 1.11E-04 9.65E-05
4.5 4.82E-03 4.62E-03
5 4.95E-02 9.76E-03
5.5 7.99E-01 8.38E-02
6 1.71E+00 7.40E-02
6.5 8.89E-01 2.15E-02
7 1.40E-01 3.40E-03
7.5 1.54E-02 3.49E-04
8 1.57E-03 3.24E-05
8.5 1.57E-04 3.12E-06
9 1.98E-05 3.90E-07
Inspecting Table 8.4, it becomes evident that there is a detectable presence of at least
one millilens across masses close to 106 M⊙ , assuming that 0.377 of all DM consists
of CO DM of the given mass.
151
Table 8.5

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 2.22E-04 1.93E-04
4.5 9.64E-03 9.23E-03
5 9.89E-02 1.95E-02
5.5 1.60E+00 1.68E-01
6 3.42E+00 1.48E-01
6.5 1.78E+00 4.29E-02
7 2.80E-01 6.80E-03
7.5 3.08E-02 6.98E-04
8 3.13E-03 6.48E-05
8.5 3.15E-04 6.24E-06
9 3.97E-05 7.81E-07
In the case of Table 8.5, the data shows that a minimum of three detectable millilenses
can be expected for a mass near 106 M⊙ . Also, one millilens can be expected for a
mass near 105.5 and 106.5 , given the precondition that 0.758 of all DM comprises CO
DM with the specified mass.
152
Table 8.6

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 2.93E-04 2.54E-04
4.5 1.27E-02 1.22E-02
5 1.30E-01 2.57E-02
5.5 2.11E+00 2.21E-01
6 4.51E+00 1.95E-01
6.5 2.34E+00 5.66E-02
7 3.69E-01 8.96E-03
7.5 4.05E-02 9.20E-04
8 4.13E-03 8.55E-05
8.5 4.15E-04 8.23E-06
9 5.23E-05 1.03E-06
Finally, Table 8.6 suggests a detectable occurrence of at least four millilenses for
masses near 106 , at least two for 105.5 M⊙ and 106.5 M⊙ . This is under the assumption
that all DM is formed from CO DM of that mass.
153
Figure 8.13: The total number of detectable millilenses (NT ) for 444 GRBs
with estimated redshift
Figure 8.13 illustrates the expected count of millilenses present within the light curves
of the GRBs with estimated redshift values for each (ΩCO , MCO ) combination. Con-
sidering all 506 GRBs with an estimated redshift, up to fourteen echoes can be dis-
cerned. The aggregated count of millilenses (NT ) and the associated standard de-
viation, denoted as ∆NT , for assumed values of ΩCO at 0.1, 0.201, and 0.265, are
detailed in Tables 8.7, 8.8, and 8.9.
154
Table 8.7
Total number of millilenses (NT ) considering all GRBs with estimated

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
4.5 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
5 2.01E-02 3.24E-02
5.5 6.77E-01 8.91E-02
6 5.63E+00 1.46E-01
6.5 4.64E+00 4.82E-02
7 7.50E-01 6.49E-03
7.5 8.13E-02 5.91E-04
8 8.25E-03 5.46E-05
8.5 8.27E-04 5.20E-06
9 1.04E-04 6.45E-07
From Table 8.7, we observe a discernible presence of a minimum of five millilenses
close to the mass 106 , and four millilenses near 106.5 ) M⊙ , under the assumption that
0.377 of all DM is composed of CO DM of that specific mass.
155
Table 8.8

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
4.5 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
5 4.02E-02 6.48E-02
5.5 1.35E+00 1.78E-01
6 1.13E+01 2.93E-01
6.5 9.29E+00 9.64E-02
7 1.50E+00 1.30E-02
7.5 1.63E-01 1.18E-03
8 1.65E-02 1.09E-04
8.5 1.65E-03 1.04E-05
9 2.09E-04 1.29E-06
From Table 8.8, the data suggests at least ten detectable millilenses for masses close
to 106 M⊙ . Additionally, at least nine millilenses are anticipated for masses near 106.5
M⊙ , and one millilens is projected for masses close to 107 M⊙ and 105.5 M⊙ , assuming
0.758 of all DM is made up of CO DM of the mentioned mass.
156
Table 8.9

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
4.5 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
5 5.30E-02 8.54E-02
5.5 1.79E+00 2.35E-01
6 1.48E+01 3.86E-01
6.5 1.22E+01 1.27E-01
7 1.98E+00 1.71E-02
7.5 2.14E-01 1.56E-03
8 2.17E-02 1.44E-04
8.5 2.18E-03 1.37E-05
9 2.75E-04 1.70E-06
Table 8.9 indicates a presence of at least fourteen detectable millilenses around masses
of 106 , at least twelve near 106.5 M⊙ , and a minimum of one each around 105.5 M⊙ and
107 M⊙ . This observation is based on the premise that the entire DM is constituted
of CO DM within these mass ranges.
157
Figure 8.14: The total number of detectable millilenses for 348 GRBs
assuming a redshift of 1.25.
Figure 8.14 illustrates the expected count of millilenses within the light curves of
GRBs based on their estimated redshift values for each (ΩCO , MCO ) combination.
From the 249 GRBs analyzed, up to sixteen echoes can be discerned around masses
near 106 M⊙ assuming all DM is made of CO DM.
158
Table 8.10
The Total number of millilenses (NT ) considering 348 GRBs with a median
redshift of 1.25 and assuming ΩCO = 0.1.

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 3.77E-01 4.01E-02
4.5 7.63E-01 5.34E-02
5 1.76E+00 8.68E-02
5.5 3.75E+00 1.18E-01
6 6.17E+00 1.10E-01
6.5 3.65E+00 3.80E-02
7 5.88E-01 4.40E-03
7.5 6.26E-02 3.62E-04
8 6.32E-03 3.31E-05
8.5 6.33E-04 3.16E-06
9 7.97E-05 3.91E-07
Upon reviewing Table 8.10, one can observe a presence of a minimum of six millilenses
for masses close to 106 M⊙ , at least three millilenses for masses near 105.5 M⊙ and
106.5 M⊙ , and a minimum of one millilens for a mass approximate to 105 M⊙ . This is
based on the premise that 0.377 of all DM comprises CO DM of the specified mass.
159
Table 8.11
The Total number of millilenses (NT ) considering 348 GRBs with a median

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 7.55E-01 8.02E-02
4.5 1.53E+00 1.07E-01
5 3.52E+00 1.74E-01
5.5 7.50E+00 2.36E-01
6 1.23E+01 2.21E-01
6.5 7.29E+00 7.61E-02
7 1.18E+00 8.80E-03
7.5 1.25E-01 7.23E-04
8 1.26E-02 6.63E-05
8.5 1.27E-03 6.32E-06
9 1.59E-04 7.82E-07
Referring to Table 8.11, the analysis suggests the likelihood of detecting at least twelve
millilenses for masses approximating 106 M⊙ . Additionally, there’s an expectancy of
seven millilenses for masses close to 105.5 M⊙ and 106.5 M⊙ . For masses around 105
M⊙ , three millilenses can be anticipated, and for those near 104.5 M⊙ and 107 M⊙ ,
a single millilens is projected. This is predicated on the idea that 0.758 of all DM
constitutes CO DM of the mentioned mass.
160
Table 8.12
The total number of millilenses (NT ) considering 348 GRBs with a median

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 9.95E-01 1.06E-01
4.5 2.01E+00 1.41E-01
5 4.65E+00 2.29E-01
5.5 9.88E+00 3.12E-01
6 1.63E+01 2.91E-01
6.5 9.61E+00 1.00E-01
7 1.55E+00 1.16E-02
7.5 1.65E-01 9.54E-04
8 1.66E-02 8.74E-05
8.5 1.67E-03 8.34E-06
9 2.10E-04 1.03E-06
Upon reviewing Table 8.12, the data indicates the potential for observing no fewer
than sixteen millilenses for masses around 106 . Furthermore, at least nine are antici-
pated for masses near 105.5 M⊙ and 106.5 M⊙ . Predictions also suggest four millilenses
for those nearing 105 M⊙ , two millilens for masses proximate to 104.5 M⊙ , and one
for masses near 107 M⊙ . These projections are based on the premise that the entire
DM comprises CO DM of the specified mass.
161
Figure 8.15: The total number detectable millilenses (NT ) for all 882
GRBs.
Figure 8.15 illustrates the expected count of millilenses within the light curves of 882
GRBs. By analyzing all the GRBs, the possibility arises to detect up to thirty-five
echoes. Based on the entirety of GRB data, the observed count of echoes challenges
any given (ΩCO , MCO ) pairing.
162
Table 8.13
Total number of detectable millilenses (NT ) combining all GRBs and
assuming ΩCO = 0.1.

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 3.79E-01 4.57E-02
4.5 7.70E-01 6.60E-02
5 1.84E+00 1.24E-01
5.5 5.23E+00 1.75E-01
6 1.35E+01 1.97E-01
6.5 9.18E+00 6.20E-02
7 1.48E+00 8.65E-03
7.5 1.59E-01 7.84E-04
8 1.61E-02 7.22E-05
8.5 1.62E-03 6.95E-06
9 2.04E-04 8.57E-07
Reviewing Table 8.13, we can discern the presence of at least thirteen millilenses for
masses approximating 106 M⊙ , a minimum of nine millilenses in the vicinity of 106.5
M⊙ , at least five for those close to 105.5 M⊙ , and one each for masses around 105 M⊙
and 107 M⊙ . This is based assuming ΩCO = 0.1.
163
Table 8.14

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 7.57E-01 9.14E-02
4.5 1.54E+00 1.32E-01
5 3.68E+00 2.48E-01
5.5 1.05E+01 3.51E-01
6 2.70E+01 3.94E-01
6.5 1.84E+01 1.24E-01
7 2.96E+00 1.73E-02
7.5 3.18E-01 1.57E-03
8 3.23E-02 1.44E-04
8.5 3.24E-03 1.39E-05
9 4.08E-04 1.71E-06
Upon reviewing Table 8.14, the findings indicate that at least twenty-seven millilenses
are associated with a mass close to 106 M⊙ . Furthermore, at least eighteen millilenses
can be anticipated for masses approximating 106.5 M⊙ . The data also suggests ten
millilenses for those near 105.5 M⊙ , three for masses close to 105 M⊙ , two for masses
around 107 M⊙ , and one for those in the vicinity of 104.5 M⊙ . This is predicated on
the assumption that ΩCO = 0.201.
164
Table 8.15

M
log M⊙
NT ∆NT
4 9.98E-01 1.20E-01
4.5 2.03E+00 1.74E-01
5 4.85E+00 3.27E-01
5.5 1.38E+01 4.63E-01
6 3.56E+01 5.19E-01
6.5 2.42E+01 1.64E-01
7 3.90E+00 2.28E-02
7.5 4.20E-01 2.07E-03
8 4.25E-02 1.90E-04
8.5 4.26E-03 1.83E-05
9 5.37E-04 2.26E-06
Table 8.15 indicates that for masses in proximity to 106 , there’s an identifiable pres-
ence of no less than thirty-five millilenses. Additionally, the figure stands at a mini-
mum of twenty-four for masses around 106.5 M⊙ . The data further highlights at least
thirteen millilenses for masses nearing 105.5 M⊙ , a minimum of four for those close
to 105 M⊙ , three or more for those at 107 M⊙ , and at the very least, two for masses
akin to 104.5 M⊙ . It’s predicated on the notion that the entire DM comprises CO
DM with the aforementioned mass.
165
Figure 8.16: Probabilities of detecting a minimum of one millilens from a
total of 882 GRBs, based on the assumed ΩCO range (0.0, 0.265).
Figure 8.16 depicts the probability P of detecting at least one millilens given the
estimated number of millilenses that should have been found from the search of 882
GRBs. It shows the different probabilities corresponding to each (ΩCO , MCO ) pair.
These P values can be calculated from Equation 4.3. Specifically, when expecting
a single event (i.e., λ equals 1), the chance of observing at least one millilens event
is around 63.21%. As the expectation increases to three events (i.e., λ equals 3),
the chance of observing at least one event rises to approximately 95.02%. When
considering a scenario with λ at 35 as was found near the mass of 106 M⊙ given by
Table 8.15, the probability of observing at least one millilens event nears certainty,
166
with the odds virtually equivalent to 1 in 1015 . This implies that CO DM with a mass
close to 106 M⊙ can be ruled out at odds of 1 in 1015 .
If a millilensing case was discovered, it would contribute to a fractional millilens
count. Assuming all DM is made of COs and that 35 events near the 106 M⊙ mass
range should have been detected, the probability of observing more than one event
can be calculated using Equation 4.4.2. By subtracting the probabilities of observing
zero events (P (k = 0)) and one event (P (k = 1)) from 1, the likelihood of observing
more than one event (P (k > 1)) can be computed. With this approach, the chances
of observing more than one event remain significantly high, virtually approaching 1
in 1013 odds.
Table 8.16
Total probability (P ) combining all GRBs and assuming ΩCO = 0.0183.

M
log M⊙
P ∆P
4 6.65E-02 7.59E-03
4.5 1.31E-01 1.01E-02
5 2.84E-01 1.51E-02
5.5 6.14E-01 1.21E-02
6 9.14E-01 3.07E-03
6.5 8.12E-01 2.12E-03
7 2.36E-01 1.20E-03
7.5 2.85E-02 1.38E-04
8 2.93E-03 1.31E-05
8.5 2.94E-04 1.26E-06
9 3.71E-05 1.56E-07
167
Table 8.16 displays the probability (P ) of detecting at least one millilense for the
indicated masses. The data suggest that masses close to 106 M⊙ can be ruled out as
potential CO DM candidates when ΩCO is 6.9% of the total DM density (ΩM ), which
corresponds to an ΩCO value of approximately 0.0183. A confidence level of about
90% reinforces this finding. Delving into specifics, the mass range from 105.95 M⊙ to
106.3 M⊙ is excluded at this confidence interval. This ΩCO value is the minimum that
can effectively exclude this mass range with 90% confidence.
Table 8.17
Total probability (P ) combining all GRBs and assuming ΩCO = 0.256.

M
log M⊙
P ∆P
4 6.16E-01 3.79E-02
4.5 8.58E-01 1.87E-02
5 9.90E-01 2.11E-03
5.5 1.00E+00 7.23E-07
6 1.00E+00 6.91E-16
6.5 1.00E+00 1.13E-11
7 9.77E-01 5.11E-04
7.5 3.33E-01 1.33E-03
8 4.02E-02 1.76E-04
8.5 4.11E-03 1.76E-05
9 5.19E-04 2.18E-06
From Table 8.17, we observe that the chance of detecting at least one millilens in
the mass range 105 to 107 is consistently above 0.9. Specifically, the masses between
104.6 M⊙ and 107.1 M⊙ are ruled out as CO DM candidates with a 90% confidence level.
This suggests that CO DM within this mass range isn’t the primary contributor to
168
total DM.
169
Chapter 9
Summary and Conclusion
9.1 Conclusions from Millilensing Claims
The study investigated potential gravitational millilensing in seven distinct Gamma-
Ray Bursts (GRBs) that were suggested to be gravitational millilensing claims: GRB
950830, GRB 081122A, GRB 081126A, GRB 090717A, GRB 110517B, GRB 200716C,
and GRB 210812A.
In the case of GRB 950830, the authors [81] claimed that they detected millilens that
they identified as an intermediate-mass black hole. According to their calculation,
the chance that it is a false detection is 0.6%. However, according to my analysis,
different light curve analyses of the two pulses indicated a variance at the 2.63-σ level
171
(or 99.146%). Also, the hardness ratio or r values diverged from rall by approximately
1.9 σ (or 93.92%).
For GRB 081122A, the authors [50] claimed it is a suspected millilensing candidate
based on their auto-correlation (similar to LST) and hardness tests. However, my χ2
test results yielded a probability below 0.00015% that the two pulses originated from
the same parent pulse shape, equivalent to over 4.8 σ. In the Hardness Similarity
Test (HST), r values varied from rall around 1.9-σ (or 93.92%).
For the case of GRB 081126A, the authors [50] claimed from their results that it is
a definite case of millilensing. In contrast, my analysis shows that this GRB failed
the Light Curve Similarity Test (LST) and hence is not a definite case of millilensing
even though it passed HST. The χ2 results suggested a shape difference of the two
pulses at about 2.9-σ (or 99.638%).
Concerning GRB 090717A, the paper by Kalantari et al. [40] showed that it passed
their selection criteria and identified it as a confirmed lensing case using data from
one bright detector. However, summing up all the data from the detectors within
60 degrees, my results show a stark discrepancy in the light curves of the two bright
pulses. The LST revealed a variance at 5.84-σ, translating to a similarity probability
of 1 in 2.15 × 106 . The HST identified r values divergence from rall at around 1.76-σ
(or 92.199%).
172
For GRB 110517B, the authors [50] claimed it is a suspected millilensing candidate
based on their auto-correlation (similar to LST) and hardness tests. However, my
results indicate a substantial divergence in the pulse shapes, demonstrating an 8.45
± 0.035-σ confidence level. Despite this, all r values remained statistically consistent
with rall , leading to the conclusion of consistent spectra for the two pulses.
In the case of GRB 200716C, two separate papers [101, 104] claimed that the second
emission is a lensed event of the first. [104] calculated the false alarm probability
to be 0.07%. In contrast, the LST applied to GRB 200716C highlighted distinctive
differences at the 9.35-σ confidence level, representing a similarity odds of approxi-
mately 1 in 1.09 × 1017 . Despite this, the hardness of the two main pulses was deemed
similar, fitting the expected statistical range if both were lensed images of the same
parent pulse.
Finally, for GRB 210812A, the authors conclude that the p-value for similarity be-
tween the two pulses is 0.89. In comparison, according to my results, a difference
in light curves of the two pulses was detected at around 2.11-σ confidence level
(96.638%). All r values were statistically consistent with rall , concluding that the
two pulses have consistent spectra.
Possible reasons for the disagreement were that the authors claiming gravitational
lensing either did not use enough detectors or, at times, did not use higher-resolution
data to compare their results. Hence, their methods detected similarities that did not
173
hold up to my more detailed analysis.
Summarizing the outcomes, none of the seven GRBs provided clear evidence for a
gravitational lensing effect. GRB 090717A, GRB 110517B, and GRB 200716C, in
particular, were deemed unlikely to involve multiple-image gravitational lensing in
my analysis.
My findings suggest that higher-resolution time bins uncover more intricate details re-
garding the shape of the pulses. Nevertheless, there is a point at which the chi-square
value starts to decrease due to the diminishing number of counts per bin at higher
time resolutions. In contrast, as time resolution decreases, chi-square values rise, but
we lose essential shape information. Binning at a lower resolution is challenging as it
limits the shape data available for the two pulses. For instance, in the case of GRB
200716C, lower time resolutions would not expose the two distinct peaks in the first
pulse, leading to an inaccurately low chi-square value when compared to the second
pulse, which has a single, well-defined peak. Hence, the sigma confidence decreases
as the two peak structures in pulse 1 are no longer visible at these resolutions. Con-
versely, utilizing a higher time resolution for binning might cause background noise to
overshadow the number of real GRB counts per bin, masking genuine flux variations
between the two pulses.
174
9.2 Conclusions from Millilensing Search
Building on past research, my study further substantiates the use of GRBs as an
effective tool to probe and set limits on DM abundance in the Universe.
My findings confirm that CO DM, in the specific mass range of 105.95 M⊙ to 106.3 M⊙ ,
is unlikely to be a dominant DM candidate if it makes up at least 6.9% (corresponding
to an ΩCO of around 0.0183) of the total DM, with a confidence level of 90%.
Furthermore, under the assumption of ΩCO = 0.256, the broader mass range from
104.6 M⊙ to 107.1 M⊙ is also ruled out as a primary CO DM candidate with similar
confidence. This indicates that CO DM of masses within this range cannot serve as
the main constituent of DM, refining our understanding of the likely mass range for
CO DM.
9.3 Limitations
The χ2 test statistic used to detect similarity between two pulses in a GRB has two
primary drawbacks. First, it is influenced by data binning, and second, it necessitates
an adequate sample size. The dependency on binning choice is a common issue
regardless of the statistical tests applied. Consequently, the best approach is to
175
use various binning techniques to examine how the results change. I followed this
approach by employing at least five different time bins for each GRB, recording the
recho , tof f set , and sigma confidence values. I then calculated the standard deviation
and confidence intervals for each set separately. Even with different binning choices,
the differences between the two pulses are significant for all the GRBs, especially
GRB 090717A and GRB 200716C.
The χ2 test loses differential power when the number of counts per bin drops to five
or fewer counts above the background. Since the binned GRBs tested in this work
always exceeded five counts per bin, the differential power of the χ2 method was not
considered diminished. Moreover, the χ2 formula accounts for this, as the signal is
consistently measured over the variance.
Since the redshift values of 348 GRBs were not known, their redshifts were computed
using the median value of the spectroscopic redshifts. By adopting the median redshift
value, these results are robust and likely to provide an underestimated incidence of
GRB lensing, indicating that conclusions are conservative and not overstated. How-
ever, it’s worth noting that there remains a possibility of overestimation due to factors
like systematic sample bias. As more GRBs were included in the search, the ability
to provide stronger limits became possible.
176
9.4 Future Work
Future research with present or past satellites could encompass new searches in-
corporating GRBs that BATSE and Fermi detected. Utilizing a combined sample
from these detections could lead to more rigorous constraints. Furthermore, future
satellites such as the BurstCube mission [100] would increase the number of GRB
detections and thereby provide better limits.
Moreover, due to their transient nature, Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs) offer a valuable
resource for lensing searches. Since FRBs are typically shorter in duration than GRBs,
it is possible to investigate a lower mass range than was investigated here.
177
References
[1] B. P. Abbott et al. Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black
Hole Merger. physical Review Letters, 116(6):061102, February 2016. doi: 10.
1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102.
[2] B. P. Abbott et al. Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star
Merger. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 848(2):L12, October 2017. doi:
10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9.
[3] B. P. Abbott et al. GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a
Binary Neutron Star Inspiral. Physical Review Letters, 119(16):161101, October
2017. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101.
[4] Björn Ahlgren and Josefin Larsson. A search for lensed gamma-ray bursts in 11
yr of observations by fermi gbm. The Astrophysical Journal, 897(2):178, 2020.
[5] M. Aker et al. Improved Upper Limit on the Neutrino Mass from a Direct Kine-
matic Method by KATRIN. Physical Review Letters, 123(22):221802, November
179
2019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.221802.
[6] Astropy Collaboration, A. M. Price-Whelan, et al. The Astropy Project: Build-
ing an Open-science Project and Status of the v2.0 Core Package. The Astro-
nomical Journal, 156(3):123, September 2018. doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f.
[7] W. B. Atwood et al. The Large Area Telescope on the Fermi Gamma-Ray
Space Telescope Mission. The Astrophysical Journal, 697(2):1071–1102, June
2009. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1071.
[8] D. Band, J. Matteson, et al. BATSE Observations of Gamma-Ray Burst Spec-
tra. I. Spectral Diversity. The Astrophysical journal, 413:281, August 1993. doi:
10.1086/172995.
[9] D. L. Band et al. BATSE Gamma-Ray Burst Line Search. V. Probability of
Detecting a Line in a Burst. The Astrophysical Journal, 485(2):747–755, August
1997. doi: 10.1086/304448.
[10] J. P. Beaulieu et al. Discovery of a cool planet of 5.5 Earth masses through
gravitational microlensing. nature, 439(7075):437–440, January 2006. doi: 10.
1038/nature04441.
[11] OM Blaes and RL Webster. Using gamma-ray bursts to detect a cosmological
density of compact objects. The Astrophysical Journal, 391:L63–L66, 1992.
180
[12] R. D. Blandford and R. Narayan. Cosmological applications of gravitational
lensing. Anual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 30:311–358, January
1992. doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.30.1.311.
[13] I. A. Bond et al. OGLE 2003-BLG-235/MOA 2003-BLG-53: A Planetary Mi-
crolensing Event. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 606(2):L155–L158, May
2004. doi: 10.1086/420928.
[14] M. S. Briggs. Gamma-Ray Burst Lines. In Juri Poutanen and Roland Svensson,
editors, Gamma-Ray Bursts: The First Three Minutes, volume 190 of Astro-
nomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, page 133, January 1999. doi:
10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9910362.
[15] Fabio Capela, Maxim Pshirkov, and Peter Tinyakov. Constraints on primordial
black holes as dark matter candidates from capture by neutron stars. Physical
Review D, 87(12):123524, 2013.
[16] B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking. Black Holes in the Early Universe. In C. Dewitt-
Morette, editor, Gravitational Radiation and Gravitational Collapse, volume 64,
page 184, January 1974.
[17] Bernard Carr. Baryonic dark matter. Annual Review of Astronomy and Astro-
physics, 32(1):531–590, 1994.
[18] Orest Chwolson. Über eine mögliche form fiktiver doppelsterne. Astronomische
Nachrichten, volume 221, p. 329, 221:329, 1924.
181
[19] Douglas Clowe et al. A Direct Empirical Proof of the Existence of Dark Matter.
The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 648(2):L109–L113, September 2006. doi:
10.1086/508162.
[20] William G Cochran. The χ2 test of goodness of fit. The Annals of mathematical
statistics, pages 315–345, 1952.
[21] William G. Cochran. Sampling Techniques, 3rd Edition. John Wiley, 1977.
ISBN 0-471-16240-X.
[22] E. Costa et al. Discovery of an X-ray afterglow associated with the γ-ray burst
of 28 February 1997. nature, 387(6635):783–785, June 1997. doi: 10.1038/42885.
[23] C. C. Dyer and R. C. Roeder. Distance-Redshift Relations for Universes with
Some Intergalactic Medium. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 180:L31, Febru-
ary 1973. doi: 10.1086/181146.
[24] CC Dyer and RC Roeder. Distance-redshift relations for universes with some
intergalactic medium. The Astrophysical Journal, 180:L31, 1973.
[25] F. W. Dyson, A. S. Eddington, and C. Davidson. A Determination of the
Deflection of Light by the Sun’s Gravitational Field, from Observations Made
at the Total Eclipse of May 29, 1919. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society of London Series A, 220:291–333, January 1920. doi: 10.1098/rsta.1920.
0009.
182
[26] G. Efstathiou, W. J. Sutherland, and S. J. Maddox. The cosmological constant
and cold dark matter. nature, 348(6303):705–707, December 1990. doi: 10.
1038/348705a0.
[27] Albert Einstein. Lens-Like Action of a Star by the Deviation of Light in the
Gravitational Field. Science, 84(2188):506–507, December 1936. doi: 10.1126/
science.84.2188.506.
[28] GJ Fishman, CA Meegan, RB Wilson, WS Paciesas, TA Parnell, RW Austin,
JR Rehage, and JL Matteson. Batse: The burst and transient source experi-
ment on the gamma ray observatory. In Proc. GRO Science Workshop, GSFC,
volume 2, 1989.
[29] L. A. Ford et al. BATSE Observations of Gamma-Ray Burst Spectra. II. Peak
Energy Evolution in Bright, Long Bursts. The Astrophysical Journal, 439:307,
January 1995. doi: 10.1086/175174.
[30] A. Friedmann. Über die Krümmung des Raumes. Zeitschrift fur Physik, 10:
377–386, January 1922. doi: 10.1007/BF01332580.
[31] Neil Gehrels, Carl E Fichtel, Gerald J Fishman, James D Kurfess, and Volker
Schönfelder. The compton gamma ray observatory. Scientific American, 269
(6):68–77, 1993.
[32] Elena Giusarma, Martina Gerbino, Olga Mena, Sunny Vagnozzi, Shirley Ho,
183
and Katherine Freese. Improvement of cosmological neutrino mass bounds.
Physical Review D, 94(8):083522, 2016.
[33] Jon Hakkila and Robert J. Nemiroff. Testing the Gamma-ray Burst Pulse Start
Conjecture. The Astrophysical Journal, 705(1):372–385, November 2009. doi:
10.1088/0004-637X/705/1/372.
[34] Stephen Hawking. Gravitationally collapsed objects of very low mass. Monthly
Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 152:75, January 1971. doi: 10.1093/
mnras/152.1.75.
[35] Henk Hoekstra, H. K. C. Yee, and Michael D. Gladders. Current status of
weak gravitational lensing. New Astronomy Reviews, 46(12):767–781, November
2002. doi: 10.1016/S1387-6473(02)00245-2.
[36] David W. Hogg. Distance measures in cosmology. arXiv e-prints, art. astro-
ph/9905116, May 1999. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9905116.
[37] J. Huchra, M. Gorenstein, S. Kent, I. Shapiro, G. Smith, E. Horine, and R. Per-
ley. 2237+0305 : a new and unusual gravitational lens. The Astrophysical
Journal, 90:691–696, May 1985. doi: 10.1086/113777.
[38] M. J. Irwin, R. L. Webster, P. C. Hewett, R. T. Corrigan, and R. I. Jedrzejew-
ski. Photometric Variations in the Q2237+0305 System: First Detection of a
Microlensing Event. The Astrophysical Journal, 98:1989, December 1989. doi:
10.1086/115272.
184
[39] Lingyuan Ji, Ely D. Kovetz, and Marc Kamionkowski. Strong lensing of gamma
ray bursts as a probe of compact dark matter. Physical Review D, 98(12):123523,
December 2018. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.123523.
[40] Zeinab Kalantari, Alaa Ibrahim, Mohammad Reza Rahimi Tabar, and Sohrab
Rahvar. Imprints of gravitational millilensing on the light curve of gamma-ray
bursts. The Astrophysical Journal, 922(1):77, 2021.
[41] Zeinab Kalantari, Sohrab Rahvar, and Alaa Ibrahim. Fermi-GBM Observation
2
of GRB 090717034: χ Test Confirms Evidence of Gravitational Lensing by a
Supermassive Black Hole with a Million Solar Mass. The Astrophysical Journal,
934(2):106, August 2022. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7da9.
[42] Patrick L. Kelly et al. Multiple images of a highly magnified supernova formed
by an early-type cluster galaxy lens. Science, 347(6226):1123–1126, March 2015.
doi: 10.1126/science.aaa3350.
[43] Ray W Klebesadel, Ian B Strong, and Roy A Olson. Observations of gamma-ray
bursts of cosmic origin. The Astrophysical Journal, 182:L85, 1973.
[44] BV Komberg, VG Kurt, and AV Kuznetsov. Macrolensing of cosmic gamma-ray
bursts in the fourth batse catalog. Astronomy Reports, 43(9):580–586, 1999.
[45] Chryssa Kouveliotou, Charles A. Meegan, Gerald J. Fishman, Narayana P.
185
Bhat, Michael S. Briggs, Thomas M. Koshut, William S. Paciesas, and Geof-
frey N. Pendleton. Identification of Two Classes of Gamma-Ray Bursts. The
Astrophysical Journal Letters, 413:L101, August 1993. doi: 10.1086/186969.
[46] J. Kristian and R. K. Sachs. Observations in Cosmology. The Astrophysical
Journal, 143:379, February 1966. doi: 10.1086/148522.
[47] S. R. Kulkarni et al. Identification of a host galaxy at redshift z = 3.42 for
the γ-ray burst of 14 December 1997. nature, 393(6680):35–39, May 1998. doi:
10.1038/29927.
[48] Georges Lemaı̂tre. L’Univers en expansion. Annales de la Société
Scientifique de Bruxelles, 53:51, January 1933.
[49] ChunYu Li and LiXin Li. Search for strong gravitational lensing effect in the
current grb data of batse. SCIENCE CHINA Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy,
57(8):1592–1599, 2014.
[50] Shi-Jie Lin, An Li, He Gao, Lin Lin, Bin-Bin Zhang, Zi-Ke Liu, Jin-Hang
Zou, Zhao Zhang, Huan Zhou, Zheng-Xiang Li, et al. A search for millilens-
ing gamma-ray bursts in the observations of fermi gbm. arXiv preprint
arXiv:2112.07288, 2021.
[51] Shi-Jie Lin, An Li, He Gao, Lin Lin, Bin-Bin Zhang, Zi-Ke Liu, Jin-Hang
Zou, Zhao Zhang, Huan Zhou, Zheng-Xiang Li, et al. A search for millilensing
186
gamma-ray bursts in the observations of fermi gbm. The Astrophysical Journal,
931(1):4, 2022.
[52] Rachel Mandelbaum, Uroš Seljak, Richard J. Cool, Michael Blanton, Christo-
pher M. Hirata, and Jonathan Brinkmann. Density profiles of galaxy groups and
clusters from SDSS galaxy-galaxy weak lensing. Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society, 372(2):758–776, October 2006. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.
2006.10906.x.
[53] Shude Mao. Gravitational Lensing, Time Delay, and Gamma-Ray Bursts. The
Astrophysical Journal Letters, 389:L41, April 1992. doi: 10.1086/186344.
[54] G. F. Marani, R. J. Nemiroff, J. P. Norris, K. Hurley, and J. T. Bonnell.
Gravitationally Lensed Gamma-Ray Bursts as Probes of Dark Compact Ob-
jects. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 512(1):L13–L16, February 1999. doi:
10.1086/311868.
[55] GF Marani, RJ Nemiroff, JP Norris, K Hurley, and JT Bonnell. Gravitationally
lensed gamma-ray bursts as probes of dark compact objects. The Astrophysical
Journal Letters, 512(1):L13, 1999.
[56] Richard Massey et al. Dark matter maps reveal cosmic scaffolding. nature, 445
(7125):286–290, January 2007. doi: 10.1038/nature05497.
[57] EP Mazets, SV Golenetskii, VN Il’ı́nskı́ı́, Yu A Gur’yan, and TV Kharitonova.
187
Investigations of diffuse cosmic 7 radiation in the range 28 kev-4.1 mev. JETP
Lett, 20(2), 1974.
[58] Charles Meegan, Giselher Lichti, PN Bhat, Elisabetta Bissaldi, Michael S
Briggs, Valerie Connaughton, Roland Diehl, Gerald Fishman, Jochen Greiner,
Andrew S Hoover, et al. The fermi gamma-ray burst monitor. The Astrophysical
Journal, 702(1):791, 2009.
[59] Peter F Michelson, William B Atwood, and Steven Ritz. Fermi gamma-ray
space telescope: high-energy results from the first year. Reports on Progress in
Physics, 73(7):074901, 2010.
[60] Oindabi Mukherjee and Robert J. Nemiroff. Hardness test of GRB 950830
as a gravitationally lensed echo. Research Notes of the AAS, 5(5):103, may
2021. doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/abfdbd. URL https://doi.org/10.3847/
2515-5172/abfdbd.
[61] Oindabi Mukherjee and Robert J Nemiroff. Light-curve test of grb 090717 as a
gravitationally lensed echo. Research Notes of the AAS, 5(8):183, 2021.
[62] Oindabi Mukherjee and Robert J Nemiroff. Light curve test of grb 200716c as
a gravitationally lensed echo. Research Notes of the AAS, 6(3):42, 2022.
[63] Oindabi Mukherjee and Robert J Nemiroff. Light curve and hardness tests for
millilensing in grb 950830, grb 090717a, and grb 200716c. Submitted: ApJ,
2023.
188
[64] R. J. Nemiroff. Constraining compact dark matter with gravitational lensing.
Comments on Astrophysics, 15(3):139–147, March 1991.
[65] R. J. Nemiroff, J. P. Norris, C. Kouveliotou, G. J. Fishman, C. A. Meegan, and
W. S. Paciesas. Gamma-Ray Bursts Are Time-asymmetric. The Astrophysical
Journal, 423:432, March 1994. doi: 10.1086/173819.
[66] R. J. Nemiroff et al. Searching Gamma-Ray Bursts for Gravitational Lensing
Echoes: Implications for Compact Dark Matter. The Astrophysical Journal,
414:36, September 1993. doi: 10.1086/173054.
[67] Robert J Nemiroff. On the probability of detection of a single gravitational
lens. The Astrophysical Journal, 341:579–587, 1989.
[68] Robert J Nemiroff. Limits on compact dark matter from null results of searches
for lensing of quasistellar objects. Physical review letters, 66(5):538, 1991.
[69] Robert J. Nemiroff. The Pulse Scale Conjecture and the Case of BATSE Trigger
2193. The Astrophysical Journal, 544(2):805–810, December 2000. doi: 10.1086/
317230.
[70] Robert J. Nemiroff and Andrew Gould. Probing for MACHOs of Mass 10 -15
Msun to 10 -7 Msun with Gamma-Ray Burst Parallax Spacecraft. The Astro-
physical Journal Letters, 452:L111, October 1995. doi: 10.1086/309722.
189
[71] Robert J. Nemiroff and Bijunath Patla. Adventures in Friedmann cosmology: A
detailed expansion of the cosmological Friedmann equations. American Journal
of Physics, 76(3):265–276, March 2008. doi: 10.1119/1.2830536.
[72] Robert J. Nemiroff, Gabriela F. Marani, J. P. Norris, and J. T. Bonnell. Lim-
its on the cosmological abundance of supermassive compact objects from a
millilensing search in gamma-ray burst data. Physical Review Letters, 86(4):
580, January 2001. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.580.
[73] Robert J Nemiroff, Gabriela F Marani, Jay P Norris, and Jerry T Bonnell.
Limits on the cosmological abundance of supermassive compact objects from a
millilensing search in gamma-ray burst data. Physical review letters, 86(4):580,
2001.
[74] J. P. Norris, R. J. Nemiroff, J. T. Bonnell, J. D. Scargle, C. Kouveliotou, W. S.
Paciesas, C. A. Meegan, and G. J. Fishman. Attributes of Pulses in Long
Bright Gamma-Ray Bursts. The Astrophysical Journal, 459:393, March 1996.
doi: 10.1086/176902.
[75] J. P. Norris, G. F. Marani, and J. T. Bonnell. Connection between Energy-
dependent Lags and Peak Luminosity in Gamma-Ray Bursts. The Astrophysical
Journal, 534(1):248–257, May 2000. doi: 10.1086/308725.
[76] Joshua A Osborne, Amir Shahmoradi, and Robert J Nemiroff. A multilevel
empirical bayesian approach to estimating the unknown redshifts of 1366 batse
190
catalog long-duration gamma-ray bursts. The Astrophysical Journal, 903(1):33,
2020.
[77] OS Ougolnikov. The search for possible mesolensing of cosmic gamma-ray
bursts. double and triple bursts in batse catalogue. arXiv preprint astro-
ph/0111215, 2001.
[78] B. Paczynski. Gravitational Microlensing by the Galactic Halo. The Astrophys-
ical Journal, 304:1, May 1986. doi: 10.1086/164140.
[79] B. Paczynski. Gamma-ray bursters at cosmological distances. The Astophysical
Journal Letters, 308:L43–L46, September 1986. doi: 10.1086/184740.
[80] Bohdan Paczynski. Gravitational microlensing and gamma-ray bursts. The
Astrophysical Journal, 317:L51–L55, 1987.
[81] James Paynter, Rachel Webster, and Eric Thrane. Evidence for an intermediate-
mass black hole from a gravitationally lensed gamma-ray burst. Nature Astron-
omy, pages 1–9, 2021.
[82] Planck Collaboration, P. A. R. Ade, et al. Planck 2013 results. XVII. Gravita-
tional lensing by large-scale structure. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 571:A17,
November 2014. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321543.
[83] Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, et al. Planck 2018 results. I. Overview
191
and the cosmological legacy of Planck. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 641:A1,
September 2020. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833880.
[84] Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, et al. Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power
spectra and likelihoods. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 641:A5, September 2020.
doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936386.
[85] William H Press and James E Gunn. Method for detecting a cosmological
density of condensed objects. The Astrophysical Journal, 185:397–412, 1973.
[86] William H Press, Saul A Teukolsky, Brian P Flannery, and William T Vetter-
ling. Numerical recipes in Fortran 77: volume 1, volume 1 of Fortran numerical
recipes: the art of scientific computing. Cambridge university press, 1992.
[87] S. Refsdal. On the possibility of determining Hubble’s parameter and the masses
of galaxies from the gravitational lens effect. Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society, 128:307, January 1964. doi: 10.1093/mnras/128.4.307.
[88] S. Refsdal. On the Possibility of Determining the Distances and Masses of Stars
from the Gravitational Lens Effect. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical
Society, 134(3):315–319, December 1966. doi: 10.1093/mnras/134.3.315.
[89] Sjur Refsdal and Hermann Bondi. The gravitational lens effect. Monthly Notices
of the Royal Astronomical Society, 128(4):295–306, 1964.
192
[90] H. P. Robertson. Relativistic Cosmology. Reviews of Modern Physics, 5(1):
62–90, January 1933. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.5.62.
[91] Vera C. Rubin and Jr. Ford, W. Kent. Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from
a Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions. The Astrophysical Journal, 159:
379, February 1970. doi: 10.1086/150317.
[92] Amir Shahmoradi. A multivariate fit luminosity function and world model for
long gamma-ray bursts. The Astrophysical Journal, 766(2):111, 2013.
[93] Amir Shahmoradi and Robert J Nemiroff. Short versus long gamma-ray
bursts: a comprehensive study of energetics and prompt gamma-ray corre-
lations. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 451(1):126–143,
2015.
[94] Krzysztof Z. Stanek, Bohdan Paczynski, and Jeremy Goodman. Features in
the Spectra of Gamma-Ray Bursts. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 413:L7,
August 1993. doi: 10.1086/186946.
[95] Andrew Ulmer and Jeremy Goodman. Femtolensing: Beyond the Semiclassical
Approximation. The Astrophysical Journal, 442:67, March 1995. doi: 10.1086/
175422.
[96] L. Van Waerbeke et al. Detection of correlated galaxy ellipticities from CFHT
193
data: first evidence for gravitational lensing by large-scale structures. Astron-
omy and Astrophysics, 358:30–44, June 2000. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/
0002500.
[97] P Veres, N Bhat, N Fraija, and S Lesage. Fermi-gbm observations of grb
210812a: Signatures of a million solar mass gravitational lens. The Astro-
physical Journal Letters, 921(2):L30, 2021.
[98] A. G. Walker. On Milne’s Theory of World-Structure. Proceedings of the London
Mathematical Society, 42:90–127, January 1937. doi: 10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.90.
[99] D. Walsh, R. F. Carswell, and R. J. Weymann. 0957+561 A, B: twin quasistellar
objects or gravitational lens? nature, 279:381–384, May 1979. doi: 10.1038/
279381a0.
[100] K. Walters. CubeSat Instrument for Gamma Ray Detection. In American
Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #235, volume 235 of American Astro-
nomical Society Meeting Abstracts, page 206.10, January 2020.
[101] Yun Wang, Lu-Yao Jiang, Cheng-Kui Li, Jia Ren, Shao-Peng Tang, Zi-Min
Zhou, Yun-Feng Liang, and Yi-Zhong Fan. Grb 200716c: Evidence for a short
burst being lensed. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 918(2):L34, 2021.
[102] Steven Weinberg. Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and Applications of
the General Theory of Relativity. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1972.
194
[103] Wm A Wheaton, MP Ulmer, Wm A Baity, DW Datlowe, MJ Elcan, LE Peter-
son, Ray W Klebesadel, Ian B Strong, TL Cline, and UD Desai. The direction
and spectral variability of a cosmic gamma-ray burst. The Astrophysical Jour-
nal, 185:L57, 1973.
[104] Xing Yang, Hou-Jun Lü, Hao-Yu Yuan, Jared Rice, Zhao Zhang, Bin-Bin
Zhang, and En-Wei Liang. Evidence for gravitational lensing of grb 200716c.
The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 921(2):L29, 2021.
[105] Ya. B. Zel’dovich and I. D. Novikov. The Hypothesis of Cores Retarded dur-
ing Expansion and the Hot Cosmological Model. Soviet Astronomy, 10:602,
February 1967.
[106] F. Zwicky. Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln. Helvetica Phys-
ica Acta, 6:110–127, January 1933.
195

A Search For Compact Object Dark Matter in The Universe Utilizing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Search For Compact Object Dark Matter in The Universe Utilizing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Michigan Technological University

Digital Commons @ Michigan Tech

Dissertations, Master's Theses and Master's Reports

A Search for Compact Object Dark Matter in the Universe Utilizing

Copyright 2023 Oindabi Mukherjee

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/etdr

UTILIZING GRAVITATIONAL MILLILENSING OF GAMMA-RAY BURSTS

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

© 2023 Oindabi Mukherjee

Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Physics.

Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Robert J. Nemiroff

Committee Member: Dr. Petra Huentemeyer

Committee Member: Dr. Elena Giusarma

Committee Member: Dr. Jon Hakkila

Department Chair: Dr. Ravindra Pandey

Author Contribution statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

List of Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii

1 Biref History of Dark Matter, GRBs, and Gravitational Lensing 1

1.2 Brief History of Dark Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.2.1 Baryonic Dark Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.2.2 Non-Baryonic Dark Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

1.3 History of Gamma-ray Bursts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

1.4 History of Gravitational Lensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

1.5 History of Gravitational Lensing Detection in GRBs . . . . . . . . . 14

1.6 Plan and Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

2 Gamma-ray Bursts: An Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.1.1 Temporal Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2.1.2 Spectral Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

2.2 Candidate Progenitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

3 Measuring Distances in Cosmology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

3.2 Distance Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.2.1 Comoving Distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

3.2.2 Angular Diameter Distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

4 Gravitational Lensing: A Millilensing Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

4.1 Introduction to Gravitational Lensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

4.2 Types of Lensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

4.3 Probability of Lensing: Detection Volume Formalism . . . . . . . . 47

4.4 Millilensing with GRBs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

4.4.1 Calculating Impact Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

4.4.2 Probability of Millilensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

5 Detectors and Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

5.1 Overview of Fermi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

5.2.2 GBM Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

6 A Framework for Detecting Gravitational Millilensing in GRBs 71

6.2.1 Computing the Burst Duration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

6.2.2 The Echo Search Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

6.2.3 Computing the Brightness Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

6.3 Light Curve Similarity Test (LST) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

6.3.1 Hardness Similarity Test (HST) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

7 Recent Claims of Gravitational Lensing on GRBs . . . . . . . . . 89

7.1 Results for LST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

7.2 Results for HST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

8 Cosmological Analysis to Limit CO DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

8.2 Special Cases: Results and Discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

8.3 Cosmological Limits: Results and Discussion: . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

9 Summary and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

9.1 Conclusions from Millilensing Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

9.2 Conclusions from Millilensing Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175

9.4 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

Chapter 7 is rooted in research disseminated through a series of publications. Specif-

mitted to The Astrophysical Journal and is currently under review.