Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: the theory of gravitational lensing has by now reached a considerable degree of sophistication @xcite . theorems have been found predicting ( or bounding ) the number of images in very general systems @xcite . shapes of stable caustics have been exhaustively classified @xcite , a non - perturbative notion of the lens map has been obtained @xcite , and various universal behaviors of images have been found for sources lying near caustics @xcite . these general results have been complemented by a number of detailed calculations for specific types of lenses . the majority of such calculations have been performed within the quasi - newtonian viewpoint of gravitational lensing commonly used in astrophysics @xcite . while various flavors of this formalism exist , most require that bending angles be small and that all lenses be nearly - newtonian mass distributions . this is to be contrasted with the more fundamental picture of gravitational lensing where light rays are modelled as null geodesics in a lorentzian spacetime . within this context , specific lensing calculations have been performed in kerr , reissner - nordstrm , and a handful of other geometries @xcite . while curvatures and bending angles may be large in these examples , they all involve ( at least conformally ) stationary spacetimes . it is of interest to understand if qualitatively new effects appear in dynamical cases . this paper considers the bending of light by ( decidedly non - stationary ) plane - symmetric gravitational waves . gravitational lensing by gravitational waves has previously been considered by a number of authors , although almost all of this work has been carried out within the weak - field regime @xcite . one exception is @xcite , where redshifts were computed in an exact solution to the vacuum einstein equation representing a plane gravitational wave . this work considered only very specific waveforms , and was confined to a coordinate patch too small to include caustics and other effects associated with the formation of multiple images . separately , extensive work has been devoted to non - perturbatively understanding the geodesic structure of generic plane wave spacetimes @xcite . this is clearly a subject closely related to gravitational lensing , although few explicit relations between the two subjects appear to have been made ( see , however , remarks in @xcite ) . it is the purpose of this work to provide a comprehensive and non - perturbative discussion of lensing in plane wave spacetimes . these geometries are a well - known subclass of _ pp_-waves ; plane - fronted waves with parallel rays . many plane wave spacetimes are exact solutions to the vacuum einstein equation . others may be interpreted as , e.g. , exact solutions in einstein - maxwell theory . while rather idealized from the astrophysical perspective , plane wave spacetimes admit a wide variety of interesting phenomena . depending on the waveform , any number of astigmatic and anastigmatic caustics may exist . examples admitting any specified number of images  even an infinite number  are easily constructed . in particular , even numbers of images can exist @xcite . the image count can also change in time even when a source does not cross an observer s caustic . despite all of these properties , plane wave spacetimes are geometrically very mild . they are topologically equivalent to @xmath0 and admit coordinate systems which cover the entire manifold .    aside from their value as models of gravitational radiation , the plane wave spacetimes considered here have also found numerous applications via the penrose limit . this limit provides a sense in which the metric near any null geodesic in any spacetime is equivalent to the metric of an appropriate plane wave spacetime @xcite . it allows problems in relatively complicated spacetimes to be reduced to equivalent problems in plane wave spacetimes ( which are often much simpler ) . this has been particularly valuable within string theory and related fields @xcite . penrose limits have also been applied to ordinary quantum field theory in order to investigate causality and effective indices of refraction for photons and gravitons propagating in curved spacetimes @xcite . more recently , penrose limits were used to deduce the effect of caustics on green functions associated with the propagation of classical fields in curved spacetimes @xcite . given the content of the penrose limit , lensing in plane wave spacetimes might be related to lensing in generic spacetimes as seen by ultrarelativistic observers . we make no attempt to justify this conjecture , however . this paper starts by providing a self - contained review of plane wave spacetimes in sect . [ sect : planereview ] . although most of this material is not new @xcite , it is not widely known . [ sect : numimages ] then derives the number of images of a point source that may be viewed in plane wave spacetimes . under generic conditions , this is found to depend only on the waveform and a certain time parameter associated with the observation event . the number of images does not depend on any properties of the source . once this is established , sect . [ sect : imageproperties ] computes image positions , frequency shifts , angles , and image distortion parameters in general plane wave spacetimes . sect . [ sect : symwaves ] applies these results to symmetric plane waves , which have constant waveforms . these geometries produce an infinite number of images of almost every source . their lensing properties are found to change significantly if the ricci tensor is increased beyond a certain threshold . lastly , sect . [ sect : sandwaves ] discusses `` sandwich waves ; '' wavepackets with finite width . these spacetimes generically admit images which appear at discrete times and then persist indefinitely . such images initially provide infinitely blueshifted , infinitely bright pictures into the infinitely distant past . very quickly , however , such images become highly redshifted and effectively fade away . one of these `` transient flashes '' is produced by almost every sufficiently weak vacuum ( ricci - flat ) wave . for weak waves , a second flash appears only if the ricci tensor of the wavepacket exceeds a certain threshold . throughout this work , the spacetime is assumed to be everywhere transparent . the language used also assumes that the geometric optics approximation @xcite holds even in situations where it would be severely strained ( such as when light is emitted near an observer s caustic ) . this paper restricts attention only to plane wave spacetimes in four spacetime dimensions . our sign conventions follow those of wald @xcite . the signature is @xmath1 . latin letters @xmath2 ( and occasionally @xmath3 ) from the beginning of the alphabet are used to denote abstract indices . greek letters @xmath4 are used to denote four - dimensional coordinate indices . the latin letters @xmath5 are instead coordinate indices associated with the two directions transverse to the direction of wave propagation . objects involving the latter type of index are often written in boldface with all indices suppressed . they are then manipulated using the standard notation of linear algebra [ e.g. , @xmath6 and @xmath7 . overall , notation related to plane wave spacetimes closely follows the conventions of @xcite . plane wave geometries may be interpreted as simple models for gravitational waves emitted from distant sources . alternatively , they arise as universal limits for the geometries near null geodesics in any spacetime @xcite . the typical definition of a plane wave spacetime @xmath8 requires that @xmath9 and that there exist global coordinates @xmath10 such that the line element takes the form @xmath11 @xmath12 is any symmetric @xmath13 matrix . its components describe the waveforms associated with a wave s three polarization states . this leaves the usual two polarizations associated with vacuum general relativity . note that the six polarization states typically stated to exist for linearized `` plane '' gravitational waves in generic theories of gravity @xcite can not all be represented by the metric ( [ planewavemetric ] ) . three of these polarizations may be realized only as geometries which are rather less plane - symmetric than those considered here . ] . the @xmath14 coordinate is interpreted as a phase parameter for the wave , while @xmath15 affinely parametrizes its rays . the remaining two coordinates @xmath16 span spacelike wavefronts transverse to the wave s direction of propagation . note that if @xmath17 in some region , the spacetime is locally flat there . in terms of a minkowski coordinate system @xmath18 , @xmath14 and @xmath15 satisfy @xmath19 and @xmath20 in such a region . we consider only nontrivial plane waves , so @xmath21 can not vanish everywhere .    the physical interpretation of the so - called brinkmann metric ( [ planewavemetric ] ) as a plane - symmetric gravitational wave follows from considering the integral curves of the vector field @xmath22 . these curves form a null geodesic congruence which may be interpreted as the rays of the gravitational wave . @xmath23 , so these rays have vanishing expansion , shear , and twist . there is therefore a sense in which they are everywhere parallel to one another . all rays are also orthogonal to the family of spacelike 2-surfaces generated by the two commuting spacelike vector fields @xmath24 . the induced metric on each such surface is flat : the wavefronts are 2-planes . the curvature is constant on these planes in the sense that the @xmath25 are curvature collineations : @xmath26 despite this , the @xmath25 are not everywhere killing . there do , however , exist linear combinations of @xmath27 and @xmath28 which _ are _ killing . @xmath28 itself is also killing , which may be interpreted as a statement that plane waves do not deform along their characteristics . plane wave spacetimes admit a minimum of five linearly independent killing fields . note that in flat spacetime , five ( out of the total of ten ) killing fields are symmetries of all electromagnetic plane waves @xcite . killing fields of plane wave spacetimes are discussed more fully in sect . [ sect : geodesic ] .    all non - vanishing coordinate components of the riemann tensor may be determined from @xmath29 it follows from this that the ricci tensor is @xmath30 where @xmath31 denotes the ordinary ( euclidean ) trace of the @xmath13 matrix @xmath32 . the ricci scalar always vanishes in plane wave spacetimes . more generally , there are no nonzero scalars formed by local contractions of the metric , the curvature , and its derivatives : @xmath33 . this is analogous to the fact that plane electromagnetic waves satisfy , e.g. , @xmath34 . note , however , that electromagnetic plane waves are not the only electromagnetic fields with vanishing field scalars . similarly , plane wave spacetimes are not the only curved geometries with vanishing curvature scalars @xcite . it follows from ( [ ricci ] ) that plane wave spacetimes satisfying the vacuum einstein equation ( and the vacuum equations of many alternative theories of gravity @xcite ) are characterized by the simple algebraic constraint @xmath35 . for vacuum waves , there exist two scalar functions @xmath36 and @xmath37 such that @xmath38 @xmath39 and @xmath40 describe the waveforms for the two polarization states of a gravitational plane wave propagating in vacuum . a plane wave is said to be linearly polarized if @xmath39 and @xmath40 are linearly dependent ( in which case one of these functions can be eliminated by a suitable rotation of the transverse coordinates @xmath41 ) . if @xmath39 and @xmath40 have compact support , the geometry is said to be a sandwich wave . this name evinces the image of a curved region of spacetime `` sandwiched '' between null hyperplanes in a geometry that is otherwise minkowski . physically , it corresponds to a wavepacket of finite length . note that the planar symmetry considered here is very special in the sense that passing waves do not necessarily leave any `` tail '' behind them . after interacting with a sandwich wave , all observers enter a region of spacetime which is perfectly flat . there is a sense in which test fields propagating on plane wave spacetimes also have no tails @xcite . a general ( not necessarily vacuum ) wave profile @xmath32 may be built by adding to ( [ hvac ] ) a term proportional to the identity matrix @xmath42 . there then exists a third polarization function @xmath43 such that @xmath44 if the ricci tensor of such a wave is associated with a stress - energy tensor via einstein s equation , that stress - energy tensor obeys the weak energy condition if and only if @xmath45 . assuming this , the stress - energy tensors associated with ( [ hgen ] ) are very simple . they could be generated by , e.g. , electromagnetic plane waves with the form @xmath46 } x^1 . \label{emfield}\ ] ] alternatively , ( [ hgen ] ) could be associated with the stress - energy tensor of the massless klein - gordon plane wave @xmath47    besides the vacuum case @xmath48 , another interesting class of wave profiles are those that are conformally flat . these satisfy @xmath49 , so @xmath50 . as gravitational lenses , all caustics of conformally - flat plane waves are associated with `` perfect '' anastigmatic focusing . for more general plane waves , caustics are typically ( but not necessarily ) associated with astigmatic focusing . the geometry of plane wave spacetimes has been analyzed in detail by a number of authors @xcite . one essential conclusion of this work is that nearly all interesting properties of plane wave spacetimes may be deduced from the properties of @xmath13 matrices @xmath53 satisfying the differential equation @xmath54 this is a `` generalized oscillator equation '' with @xmath55 acting like a matrix of squared frequencies . ( [ edef ] ) arises when solving for geodesics or jacobi fields in plane wave spacetimes . bitensors such as synge s function and the parallel propagator may be written explicitly in terms of its solutions . the same is also true for a plane wave s killing vectors . it is convenient to write all possible matrices @xmath56 in terms of two particular solutions . fix any is used here because this will later be interpreted as a @xmath14 coordinate associated with some observer . similarly , @xmath57 is often interpreted below as a @xmath14 coordinate associated with a source ( not necessarily when that source is observable at any observation point with @xmath58 ) . later , the notation @xmath59 is used to denote a @xmath14 coordinate associated with the emission of light from a source . ] @xmath60 and define @xmath61 and @xmath62 to be solutions to ( [ edef ] ) ( where derivatives are applied to the first arguments of @xmath51 and @xmath52 ) with the initial conditions @xmath63 here , the notation @xmath64 indicates a partial derivative with respect to the first argument of @xmath51 . we assume for simplicity that @xmath65 is a matrix of piecewise - continuous functions and that @xmath51 and @xmath66 are at least @xmath67 ( and piecewise-@xmath68 ) in both of their arguments . example expressions for @xmath51 and @xmath52 are discussed in sects . [ sect : symwaves ] and [ sect : sandwaves ] . given any two solutions @xmath69 and @xmath70 to ( [ edef ] ) , it is easily verified that their wronskian is conserved : @xmath71 here , @xmath72 denotes a matrix transpose . applying this formula with @xmath73 and @xmath74 shows that @xmath75 neither @xmath76 nor @xmath66 are necessarily symmetric matrices . nevertheless , ( [ genwronskian ] ) and ( [ wronskian ] ) may be used to show that the products @xmath77 _ are _ symmetric wherever they exist @xcite . letting @xmath78 and @xmath79 in ( [ genwronskian ] ) shows that @xmath80 for all @xmath81 . this is essentially etherington s reciprocity law @xcite . a similar calculation may be used to show that @xmath82 as well . it is sometimes useful to consider partial derivatives @xmath83 with respect to the second arguments of @xmath51 and @xmath52 . the resulting matrices remain solutions to ( [ edef ] ) . comparing initial conditions shows that @xmath84 @xmath51 may therefore be derived from @xmath52 . the opposite is also true wherever @xmath85 . geometrically , @xmath66 corresponds to the transverse coordinate components of a jacobi propagator describing the evolution of deviation vectors along geodesics passing between different pairs of points @xcite . @xmath52 is also related to image distortion . up to an overall time dilation factor , it translates small differences in image position on an observer s sky to spatial deviations from a fiducial source point . in the language of @xcite , @xmath52 is proportional to the jacobi map . the symmetric matrix @xmath86 plays a similar role , but translates source separations to _ emission _ ( rather than observation ) angles . it is proportional to an object typically referred to as the optical deformation matrix . these statements are explained more fully in sect . [ sect : imagedist ] . it is often useful when working with plane wave spacetimes to consider hypersurfaces of `` constant phase . '' recalling the interpretation of the @xmath14 coordinate as a phase , let @xmath87 denote such a hypersurface . given two points @xmath88 and @xmath89 ( with @xmath90 ) , define the multiplicity or `` index '' of these points to be @xcite @xmath91 we also set @xmath92 whenever @xmath93 . it follows from ( [ bswitch ] ) that @xmath94 . for most pairs of points , @xmath95 . such pairs are said to be `` disconjugate . '' pairs @xmath96 satisfying @xmath97 are instead said to be conjugate with multiplicity @xmath98 . similarly , we call the pairs @xmath99 `` conjugate hyperplanes '' and the pairs of real numbers @xmath100 `` conjugate phases '' when @xmath101 . despite the appearance of ( [ idef ] ) , the index map @xmath102 describes phenomena which do not depend on any choice of coordinate system . conjugate pairs as described here are closely related to the conjugate points commonly considered in differential geometry and optics . in general , distinct points @xmath103 and @xmath104 on a given geodesic are said to be conjugate if and only if there exist nontrivial deviation vectors along that geodesic which vanish at both @xmath104 and @xmath103 . in plane wave spacetimes , this condition reduces to @xmath105 . defining the multiplicity of a pair of conjugate points to be the number of linearly independent deviation vectors which vanish at those points , that multiplicity is equal to @xmath106 . the concept of conjugacy associated with @xmath107 does not , however , require the specification of any particular geodesic . it is uniquely defined even for pairs of points connected by multiple geodesics or by none . indeed , these are the only cases where @xmath108 . all strong lensing effects associated with plane wave spacetimes are related to the existence of conjugate hyperplanes . it follows from ( [ idef ] ) that every pair of conjugate phases @xmath100 satisfies @xmath109 finding conjugate pairs and their multiplicities may be viewed as a matter of direct computation once @xmath65 is specified . alternatively , various sturm - type comparison theorems can be used to make general statements regarding the existence and separations of conjugate pairs for various classes of plane wave . see , e.g. , chapt . xi of @xcite for results relating to mathematical problems of this type and @xcite for an application to `` tame '' plane wave spacetimes . more specific examples are discussed in sects . [ sect : symwaves ] and [ sect : sandwaves ] below . the qualitative structure of geodesics in plane wave spacetimes is closely related to the index @xmath107 . first note that every disconjugate pair of points @xmath110 is connected by exactly one geodesic . if two points are conjugate , the number of connecting geodesics is either zero or infinity . sizes of geodesically connected regions may be summarized by @xmath111 + i ( p_s , p_o ) = 3 . \label{indextheorem}\ ] ] a similar relation exists for null cones when @xmath112 : @xmath113 + i ( p_s , p_o ) = 2 . \label{indextheorem2}\ ] ] the latter result has been referred to as an `` index theorem '' in @xcite . ( [ indextheorem ] ) implies that geodesics emanating from @xmath104 and intersecting a hyperplane @xmath114 that is disconjugate to @xmath115 form a 3-dimensional region . indeed , these geodesics fill the entire hyperplane . more interestingly , geodesics intersecting a conjugate hyperplane with multiplicity 1 fill only a 2-dimensional region on that 3-dimensional surface . geodesics intersecting a hyperplane with multiplicity 2 form a line . similarly , the null cone of a point reduces to a 1-dimensional curve on every hyperplane with multiplicity 1 . a null cone intersecting a hyperplane with multiplicity 2 is focused to a single point on that hyperplane . these two cases correspond to astigmatic and anastigmatic focusing , respectively . anastigmatic focusing tends to be unstable in the sense that perturbations tend to split a single multiplicity 2 phase into two closely - spaced phases each with multiplicity 1 .     or a preferred @xmath116 hyperplane @xmath115 , plane wave spacetimes naturally divide into a number of open four - dimensional regions @xmath117 . these regions are separated from each other by the hyperplanes @xmath118 conjugate to @xmath115 . ]    in many applications , there exists a preferred point @xmath104 , or perhaps a preferred hyperplane @xmath115 . @xmath104 may , for example , represent the position of an observer at a particular time . fixing this point , the set of hyperplanes conjugate to @xmath115 divides a plane wave spacetime into a ( possibly infinite ) number of open regions @xmath117 . let @xmath119 denote the largest connected region containing @xmath115 and excluding any portion of a hyperplane conjugate to @xmath115 . if there exists a smallest @xmath120 conjugate to @xmath121 , the surface @xmath122 is clearly contained in the boundary of @xmath119 . @xmath123 may then be defined as the largest connected region which includes @xmath122 as a boundary and contains points @xmath103 satisfying @xmath124 and @xmath125 . this continues the spacetime `` above '' @xmath122 . similar constructions may be used to define @xmath126 and @xmath117 for values of @xmath127 other than 1 . [ fig : nn ] . fixing a particular nonzero integer @xmath127 and real number @xmath121 , it is not necessary that @xmath126 exist at all . in general , the domain of @xmath128 is an open subset of @xmath129 . this domain can be empty for some @xmath127 . the geodesic uniqueness result described above can now be reduced to the statement that a point @xmath104 is connected to another point @xmath130 by exactly one geodesic if and only if there exists some @xmath127 such that @xmath131 . two - point tensors like synge s world function , the parallel propagator , and the van vleck determinant may be defined unambiguously throughout `` @xmath132 . '' this excludes from @xmath133 only a set of measure zero .      beyond the qualitative geodesic structure of plane wave spacetimes discussed above , it is not difficult to obtain explicit coordinate expressions for all geodesics . let @xmath134 denote some geodesic and @xmath135 an affine parametrization of it . the vector field @xmath136 generating the characteristics of the gravitational wave is killing , so @xmath137 must be constant on @xmath138 . if this constant vanishes , @xmath138 is confined to a hypersurface of constant phase . such a geodesic has the form of a ( euclidean ) straight line in the coordinates @xmath139 . geodesics satisfying @xmath140 are more interesting . in these cases , the affine parameter can always be rescaled such that @xmath141 . it is then possible to identify that parameter with the phase coordinate @xmath14 . doing , so @xmath142 for all @xmath143 . the spatial components @xmath144 of any geodesic are fixed everywhere once @xmath145 and @xmath146 have been specified at some fiducial phase @xmath121 . in terms of the matrices @xmath51 and @xmath52 defined in sect . [ sect : ab ] , @xmath147 the associated @xmath15 coordinate of @xmath138 may be efficiently derived using that fact that the vector field @xmath148 is a homothety @xcite . this implies that @xmath149 ,      \label{vgeo}\ ] ] where @xmath150 is a constant . @xmath151 is closely related to the conserved quantity on @xmath138 associated with the killing field @xmath28 . the ( unit ) 4-velocity @xmath152 tangent to @xmath138 is related to @xmath153 via @xmath154 it follows that @xmath155 if the spacetime is nearly flat ( so @xmath156 ) , @xmath151 reduces to a particle s specific energy minus its specific momentum in the direction of the gravitational wave . the limit @xmath157 ( or @xmath158 ) may therefore be interpreted as ultrarelativistic motion in the direction of the gravitational wave . by contrast , the limit @xmath159 ( or @xmath160 ) corresponds to ultrarelativistic motion _ against _ the background wave . other killing fields present in essentially all plane wave spacetimes may be written as @xmath161 where @xmath162 is any 2-vector with the form @xmath163 for each choice of @xmath121 , there exists a four - parameter family of such vector fields . each of these is associated with a conservation law . two such conserved quantities may be summarized by @xmath164 . \label{pdef}\ ] ] fixing any @xmath121 , this 2-vector is conserved in the sense that it is independent of @xmath57 . another conserved 2-vector may be defined by @xmath165 . \label{cdef}\ ] ] in the weak - field limit , @xmath166 corresponds to the specific momentum transverse to the gravitational wave . in this same context , @xmath167 may be interpreted as the conserved quantity associated with boosts transverse to the gravitational wave . it constrains transverse displacements . note that both @xmath166 and @xmath167 depend on a choice of @xmath121 . this is analogous to the choice of origin necessary to define angular momentum in elementary mechanics .    in stationary spacetimes , it is common to discuss various quantities related to gravitational lensing in terms of stationary observers ( and often stationary sources ) . while plane wave spacetimes are not stationary , there does exist sufficient symmetry to define similarly preferred sources and observers . two geodesics @xmath138 and @xmath168 can be said to be `` instantaneously comoving '' at @xmath58 when @xmath169 these conditions imply that the 4-velocities of both geodesics are parallel - transported versions of each other on the constant - phase hyperplane @xmath115 . note , however , that geodesics which are comoving at one phase are not necessarily comoving at any other phase . as implied by ( [ indextheorem ] ) , bundles of geodesics are strongly focused on conjugate hyperplanes . consider such a hyperplane associated with a phase @xmath126 conjugate to @xmath121 with multiplicity 1 . it is clear from ( [ idef ] ) that @xmath170 is a matrix with rank 1 . there therefore exists a unit 2-vector @xmath171 such that @xmath172 @xmath171 is unique up to sign . choosing any @xmath173 orthogonal to @xmath171 , the transverse spatial coordinates of all geodesics starting at a given point @xmath104 focus to the line @xmath174 as they pass through @xmath175 . here , @xmath176 is any real number . all @xmath15 coordinates may be reached on @xmath175 by appropriate geodesics . geodesics starting at @xmath104 and intersecting a hyperplane @xmath118 with multiplicity 2 all focus to the single transverse position @xmath177 as they pass through @xmath118 . as in the multiplicity 1 case , all values of @xmath15 may be reached by appropriate geodesics . ( [ focusnondeg ] ) and ( [ focusdeg ] ) illustrate explicitly how conjugate hyperplanes with multiplicities 1 and 2 are associated with astigmatic and anastigmatic focusing , respectively . the former case involves focusing in only one transverse direction , while the latter case involves simultaneous focusing in both directions transverse to the gravitational wave . as noted above , all pairs of points not lying on conjugate hyperplanes are connected by exactly one geodesic . there is therefore no ambiguity in ascribing geodesic distances to these pairs . in particular , synge s world function @xmath178 is well - defined whenever its arguments do not lie on conjugate hyperplanes . plane wave spacetimes constitute one of the few examples where @xmath179 is known essentially in closed form : @xmath180 . \label{sigdef}\end{aligned}\ ] ] this is symmetric in its arguments : @xmath181 . the appearance of @xmath182 in ( [ sigdef ] ) indicates that @xmath179 tends to diverge when its arguments approach conjugate hyperplanes . more specifically , suppose that @xmath183 and @xmath184 . then , @xmath185 ^ 2      \label{signondeg}\ ] ] is an asymptotic approximation for @xmath179 if the bracketed term on the right - hand side of this equation is nonzero @xcite . it follows from ( [ focusnondeg ] ) that this expression is valid only when there does not exist any geodesic passing from @xmath104 to a point on @xmath118 with the same transverse coordinates as @xmath103 . the equivalent result if @xmath103 is near a hyperplane @xmath118 with multiplicity 2 is @xmath186 again , this is valid only when there does not exist any geodesic passing from @xmath104 to a point on @xmath118 with the same transverse coordinates as @xmath103 . one of the most basic questions that can be asked regarding a gravitational lens is the number of images that it produces of a particular source . stated somewhat differently , how many future - directed null geodesics connect a given timelike curve ( the source ) to a particular spacetime event ( the observer at a particular time ) ? this may be answered using the geodesic structure of plane wave spacetimes summarized above .     to an observation event @xmath104 . the arguments of sect . [ sect : numimages ] show that under generic conditions , exactly one image is emitted from each region @xmath117 lying before the observation event . the dashed lines correspond to constant-@xmath14 hyperplanes conjugate to @xmath115 . ]    to fix the notation , let @xmath104 denote a fixed observation event and @xmath138 the timelike worldline of a point source . assume that @xmath138 may be parametrized by an everywhere-@xmath67 function @xmath135 . the phase coordinate @xmath14 serves as a useful `` quasi - time '' @xcite for plane wave spacetimes is not a `` true '' time function because @xmath187 is null . generically , there do exist well - behaved functions @xmath188 where @xmath189 is everywhere timelike @xcite . these are time functions in the usual sense , although they do not appear to simplify any computations performed here . incidentally , the existence of such time functions implies that plane wave spacetimes are stably causal . plane waves are not , however , globally hyperbolic @xcite . hypersurfaces of constant @xmath190 are not cauchy surfaces . ] , so let @xmath191 satisfy @xmath192 for all @xmath143 . the source s worldline is not required to be geodesic . this section establishes that under generic conditions , an ideal observer at @xmath104 may see exactly one image of @xmath138 from each of the `` epochs '' @xmath117 described in sect . [ sect : conjugate ] . somewhat more precisely , there typically exists exactly one future - directed null geodesic from @xmath193 to @xmath104 for each @xmath194 such that @xmath117 exists . [ fig : multimage ] . recall that the boundaries of @xmath117 depend only on the spacetime under consideration , and not at all on the behavior of any particular source . this allows generic bounds to be placed on time delays associated with the various images that may be observed . recall from sect . [ sect : conjugate ] that each point in @xmath195 is connected to @xmath104 via exactly one ( not necessarily null ) geodesic . synge s function @xmath196 is therefore well - defined and explicitly given by ( [ sigdef ] ) for all @xmath57 such that @xmath197 . consider instead the rescaled function @xmath198 if @xmath194 , the domain of @xmath199 is equal to all @xmath57 such that @xmath197 . if @xmath200 , we additionally suppose that @xmath201 for reasons of causality . images of @xmath195 produced by a plane gravitational wave correspond to the zeros of @xmath202 .    recalling the form ( [ sigdef ] ) for @xmath179 , it is clear that @xmath202 depends on @xmath138 as well as the matrices @xmath51 , @xmath52 , @xmath182 , and @xmath203 . we have assumed in sect . [ sect : ab ] that @xmath76 and @xmath52 are at least @xmath67 . so is @xmath191 . the definition of @xmath117 ensures that @xmath204 everywhere @xmath199 is defined . @xmath182 is therefore @xmath67 and @xmath202 is continuous . @xmath202 is also monotonic . to see this , note that ( [ edef ] ) , ( [ wronskian ] ) , ( [ symmatrices ] ) , ( [ sigdef ] ) , and ( [ sigcapdef ] ) may be used to show that @xmath205 > 0 . \label{sigdot}\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath202 is both continuous and monotonic , so at most one zero can exist for each @xmath127 . this means that at most one image of a source may reach an observer from each epoch @xmath117 . _ exactly _ one such image exists if some @xmath206 are known to satisfy @xmath207 such bounds are easily established .      the simplest case to consider is one where @xmath117 lies `` in between '' hyperplanes conjugate to @xmath115 . suppose that both @xmath126 and @xmath208 exist for some @xmath209 . this is true in fig . [ fig : multimage ] for @xmath210 . more generally , ( [ signondeg ] ) and ( [ sigdeg ] ) imply that if there are no geodesics connecting @xmath104 to either @xmath211 or @xmath212 , @xmath213 it follows from these limits together with continuity that @xmath202 is surjective on @xmath129 . since this function is also monotonic , there must exist exactly one emission phase @xmath214 such that @xmath104 and @xmath215 are connected by a null geodesic . under the same assumptions , projectiles moving on timelike geodesics may be thrown from @xmath197 to @xmath104 only if @xmath216 . choosing @xmath217 to be sufficiently small ( but positive ) , these projectiles can require an arbitrarily large amount of proper time to intersect @xmath104 . it is somewhat curious that points @xmath197 satisfying @xmath218 can not be connected to @xmath104 by any causal geodesic . such points may , however , be reached by suitably accelerated curves which are everywhere causal . next , consider the case @xmath200 when there exists at least one conjugate hyperplane in the observer s past ( as occurs in the example illustrated by fig . [ fig : multimage ] ) . the arguments given above imply that if @xmath219 is geodesically disconnected from @xmath104 , @xmath220 the other boundary of the domain of @xmath221 occurs at @xmath222 . here , @xmath223 this limit clearly tends to @xmath224 if @xmath225 . physically , @xmath225 implies that @xmath104 can not be connected to @xmath226 by any null geodesic . assuming that this is true , there must exist exactly one @xmath227 such that @xmath104 and @xmath228 are connected by a null geodesic .      the results of sects . [ sect : inbetween ] and [ sect : young ] typically suffice to describe the images formed in plane wave spacetimes containing an infinite number of conjugate hyperplanes in an observer s past . it is , however , important to consider cases where only a finite number of conjugate points exist . this occurs , e.g. , for finite wavepackets where @xmath32 has compact support . it is also true of linearly polarized vacuum waves that are tame in the sense described in @xcite . if there is at least one conjugate hyperplane in the observer s past , let @xmath229 denote the smallest negative integer such that @xmath230 exists . if there are no conjugate hyperplanes in the observer s past , set @xmath231 . the case illustrated in fig . [ fig : multimage ] corresponds to @xmath232 if @xmath233 extends into the infinite past . regardless , we ask whether there exist any future - directed light rays from @xmath234 to @xmath104 . unlike in the cases considered above , sources spend an infinite amount of proper time in @xmath235 . even in flat spacetime , a source that accelerates for an infinitely long time may be causally - disconnected from certain observers via a rindler horizon . such phenomena can be ruled out here by supposing that there exists some finite constant @xmath236 such that @xmath237 > \kappa_{\mathrm{min } } \label{vdotbound}\ ] ] for all @xmath57 less than some cutoff . as is clear from ( [ kappadef ] ) and ( [ 4vel ] ) , the left - hand side of this inequality acts like the square root of a time dilation factor between the coordinate @xmath14 and the source s proper time . eq . ( [ vdotbound ] ) implies that the source s 4-velocity @xmath238 satisfies @xmath239 sufficiently far in the past . it therefore excludes sources which experience arbitrarily large boosts against the background gravitational wave in the distant past . it is satisfied by , e.g. , sources whose motion is geodesic sufficiently far into the past . assuming that @xmath240 exists , it is clear from ( [ sigdot ] ) that @xmath241 may be chosen sufficiently small that @xmath242 further assuming that @xmath243 is geodesically disconnected from @xmath104 ( if @xmath244 ) or that @xmath226 is not null - separated from @xmath104 ( if @xmath231 ) , it follows that there exists exactly one @xmath59 smaller than @xmath230 ( if @xmath245 ) or @xmath121 ( if @xmath231 ) such that @xmath246 is connected to @xmath104 via a future - directed null geodesic . the results just described may be summarized as follows : suppose that there does not exist any past - directed geodesic segment from @xmath104 to @xmath138 whose endpoints are conjugate ( in the usual sense ) . also assume that the source and observer are not instantaneously aligned with the background wave : @xmath247 . if there exists an `` oldest '' phase conjugate to @xmath121 , further require that there be some @xmath248 such that the source s motion is bounded by ( [ sourcebound ] ) sufficiently far in the past .    for each @xmath194 , these assumptions imply that an observer at @xmath104 sees exactly one image of @xmath138 as it appeared in @xmath117 . this provides a strong bound on the possible emission times of different images . if @xmath235 exists for every negative integer @xmath229 , an infinite number of images are formed . if , however , there is some smallest @xmath249 such that @xmath235 exists , @xmath250 images appear at @xmath104 . note that these results depend only on the waveform @xmath65 and the phase coordinate @xmath121 associated with the observer . the total number of images is the same for all sources satisfying the hypotheses outlined above . these hypotheses are generic . recalling ( [ indextheorem ] ) , the requirement that @xmath138 exclude any points conjugate to @xmath104 along a connecting geodesic is equivalent to demanding that the source s worldline avoid certain well - behaved one- or two - dimensional subsets of the three - dimensional hyperplanes conjugate to @xmath115 . similarly , the assumption that @xmath247 demands only that @xmath138 avoid a certain line on @xmath115 . the bound ( [ sourcebound ] ) on a source s asymptotic 4-velocity can fail to hold only for sources which accelerate for an infinitely long time . violating any of these conditions for a fixed observer would require that a source s worldline be quite exceptional . moreover , we now show that @xmath250 images appear under even broader ( but more difficult to state ) conditions than those just discussed .      despite the comments made above , our assumptions on the behavior of a source s worldline can be violated in certain cases . suppose , contrary to these assumptions , that there exists at least one point @xmath251 which is conjugate to @xmath104 along a geodesic connecting these two points . an infinite number of geodesics then pass between @xmath252 and @xmath104 . if the connecting geodesics are null , @xmath252 lies on a caustic of the observer s past light cone . continuous images of point sources  `` einstein rings ''  are then formed at @xmath104 ( ignoring the associated breakdown of geometric optics ) . such cases are not considered any further here . if conjugate points between the source and observer are associated with non - null geodesics , discrete images of @xmath138 appear at @xmath104 . in these cases , the methods used above are easily adapted to find how many images of @xmath195 arrive at @xmath104 . as already mentioned , there can be no more than one root for each @xmath253 . depending on the details of the system , the associated image from @xmath117 may or may not exist . the case considered in sect . [ sect : inbetween ] where @xmath195 lies in between successive conjugate hyperplanes is the simplest to analyze . assuming that @xmath138 does not intersect the caustic of @xmath104 , no images are formed of @xmath195 if either @xmath211 is connected to @xmath104 via a timelike geodesic or @xmath212 is connected to @xmath104 via a spacelike geodesic . otherwise , exactly one image exists from this region .    if there exists an oldest conjugate hyperplane @xmath254 as described in sect . [ sect : oldest ] , suppose that the source satisfies ( [ vdotbound ] ) for some @xmath255 . there are then zero images of @xmath234 if @xmath243 is connected to @xmath104 via a timelike geodesic . there is exactly one image if these points are either geodesically disconnected or are connected by a spacelike geodesic . the last cases to consider concern images of @xmath256 . first suppose that @xmath247 . if there exists at least one conjugate hyperplane in the observer s past , one image is formed of @xmath256 if either @xmath219 is geodesically disconnected from @xmath104 or it is connected by a timelike geodesic . no images are formed if @xmath219 and @xmath104 are connected by a spacelike geodesic . if @xmath247 and there are no conjugate points in the observer s past , condition ( [ vdotbound ] ) implies that there exists exactly one image of @xmath256 . cases where the source and observer are instantaneously aligned are more interesting . suppose that @xmath257 . there then exists one image of @xmath256 with @xmath258 . recalling that @xmath121 is not in the domain of @xmath221 , it is possible for a second image to be emitted from @xmath256 if @xmath259 somewhere . this may be seen by noting that @xmath260 two images of @xmath256 can therefore exist when @xmath261 and @xmath257 . if a source includes points which are conjugate to the observer ( in the ordinary sense ) , there is no simple result for the total number of images formed . nevertheless , it is always possible to say that the total number of images is less than or equal to @xmath262 if a source does not intersect a caustic of the observer s light cone . plane wave spacetimes typically produce multiple images of each source . even for sources whose intrinsic properties remain constant , these images can appear with different spectra , brightnesses , etc . we now compute these properties for generic configurations satisfying the hypotheses summarized in sect . [ sect : totimages ] .    for each image of a timelike worldline @xmath138 seen at @xmath104 , there is an associated null geodesic segment connecting @xmath104 to an appropriate emission point @xmath263 . in terms of synge s function ( [ sigdef0 ] ) , these points satisfy @xmath264 first derivatives of @xmath179 are always tangent to the connecting light ray . in particular , the vector @xmath265 at @xmath104 points along the geodesic which eventually intersects @xmath252 ( and is therefore past - directed ) . the derivative operator here is understood to act on the second argument of @xmath179 . also note that @xmath266 is normalized such that @xmath267 . parallel - transporting @xmath266 to the observation point yields @xmath268 the derivative operator in this equation is understood to act on the first argument of @xmath179 . both @xmath266 and @xmath269 may be viewed as ( dimensionless ) separation vectors between @xmath104 and @xmath252 . ( [ sigdef ] ) and the various identities of sect . [ sect : ab ] may be used to compute the explicit coordinate components of @xmath269 and @xmath266 . components transverse to the direction of wave propagation are @xmath270 , \label{tangent1}\ ] ] where @xmath271 and @xmath272 denote the transverse coordinates of the observer and source . a similar calculation shows that @xmath273 . \label{tangent2}\ ] ] @xmath274 and @xmath275 are related via @xmath276    much of the discussion below considers sources moving on geodesics . in these cases , use of ( [ spatgeo ] ) shows that @xmath277 here , @xmath278 . the various identities involving @xmath51 and @xmath52 discussed in sect . [ sect : ab ] may also be used to reduce the imaging condition ( [ sigzero ] ) to @xmath279 here , @xmath280 . ( [ siggeo ] ) is a nonlinear relation for the emission `` time '' @xmath59 in terms of the observer s position @xmath104 and the parameters @xmath281 , @xmath282 , @xmath283 , @xmath151 describing the source s worldline . as discussed in sect . [ sect : numimages ] , there can be many solutions to ( [ siggeo ] ) . these correspond to different images . neither @xmath59 nor @xmath266 depends on the observer s motion . nevertheless , redshifts and angles on the observer s sky do depend on that motion ( as is true even in flat spacetime ) . it is often useful to fix this effect by supposing that the observer is instantaneously comoving with the source . following ( [ comoving ] ) , this is taken to mean that the unit 4-velocities @xmath284 of the source and observer on @xmath115 satisfy @xmath285 recall from sect . [ sect : geodesic ] that the `` transverse momentum '' @xmath286 is generated by contracting @xmath287 with the two killing fields equal to @xmath25 at @xmath104 and having vanishing first derivative at that point . also note that ( [ comoving3 ] ) implicitly defines an instantaneous observer velocity @xmath288 normalized ( like @xmath153 ) such that @xmath289 . gravitational lenses typically discussed in astrophysics involve nearly - newtonian mass distributions which may be regarded as approximately stationary ( at least on sub - cosmological timescales ) . if both a source and an observer are sufficiently far from such a lens , there can be no significant redshift or blueshift from the gravitational field of that lens . roughly speaking , a light ray falling into any stationary gravitational potential must climb out of that same potential . this result breaks down if light passes through non - stationary regions of spacetime . indeed , plane wave spacetimes may produce images with significant frequency shifts @xcite . consider an approximately monochromatic beam of light emitted from @xmath252 and received at @xmath104 . a future - directed tangent vector @xmath290 to the emitted light ray may always be chosen such that @xmath291 is the angular frequency of the light as seen by its source . the frequency @xmath292 of this same light ray as measured by an observer at @xmath104 is @xmath293 , where @xmath294 is equal to @xmath295 parallel transported from the source to the observer . the observed and emitted frequencies are therefore related by @xmath296 here , @xmath297 and @xmath298 . the 2-vectors @xmath299 and @xmath300 appearing here are determined by the source and observer positions via ( [ sigdef ] ) , ( [ sigzero ] ) , ( [ tangent1 ] ) , and ( [ tangent2 ] ) . the resulting frequency shift is valid for all emission points not contained in a caustic of @xmath104 . now suppose that a source moves on a geodesic and that the observer is instantaneously comoving with this geodesic in the sense of ( [ comoving2 ] ) and ( [ comoving3 ] ) . then @xmath301 does nt depend on which image is chosen . ( [ tangentdiff ] ) , ( [ lambdadotgeo ] ) , and the symmetry of @xmath302 may be used to rewrite ( [ redshiftgen ] ) as @xmath303 the matrix in parentheses on the right hand side of this equation acts like a metric for the `` separation '' 2-vector @xmath304 $ ] . if both eigenvalues of @xmath305 are negative , the source is necessarily redshifted . conversely , sources are always blueshifted when this matrix is positive definite . if @xmath306 has both positive and negative eigenvalues , the sign of the frequency difference depends on the direction of @xmath307 . for special configurations , there is no frequency shift at all . various images formed from a single source appear at different points on an observer s sky . like redshifts , the relative angles between images change depending on an observer s 4-velocity @xmath308 . the angle @xmath309 between two images arriving at @xmath104 with tangents @xmath266 and @xmath310 is @xmath311 simplifying , @xmath312 this expression is valid for arbitrary source and observer configurations . specializing to geodesic sources and comoving observers , @xmath313 here , @xmath314 and @xmath315 . it is evident that angles are largely controlled by the difference between @xmath316 at the two emission times . another interesting angle to consider is the observed separation @xmath317 between a single image ( emitted at @xmath252 ) and a generator @xmath28 of the background gravitational wave . for arbitrarily moving source and observer configurations , @xmath318 for observers comoving with geodesic sources , @xmath319 this may be used to rewrite the angle @xmath309 between two different images partially in terms of the angles @xmath317 and @xmath320 those images make with @xmath28 . using ( [ costheta ] ) , @xmath321 similarly , the frequency shift ( [ redshiftgeodesic ] ) of an individual image may be rewritten as @xmath322 it is evident from this equation that images which appear highly blueshifted to comoving observers must satisfy @xmath323 .      thus far , all sources here have been modelled as though they were confined to timelike worldlines . real objects are not pointlike , however . they form extended worldtubes in spacetime . images of such worldtubes form null geodesic congruences which converge on @xmath104 . these images can be significantly distorted by the curvature of spacetime . it is simplest to quantify such distortions by first fixing a particular null geodesic @xmath324 passing between some part of the source and @xmath104 . precisely which geodesic is chosen is not important . @xmath324 serves only as an origin from which to discuss nearby light rays connecting @xmath104 to other points in the source . once this origin has been fixed , the image of an extended source may be described entirely using deviation vectors on @xmath324 ( at least for sufficiently small sources ) . [ fig : distortion ] .     is indicated together with another light ray separated from it by a deviation vector @xmath325 . the vector @xmath266 is also drawn . this is tangent to @xmath324 at the observation point @xmath104 . ] deviation vectors ( or jacobi fields ) satisfy the geodesic deviation ( or jacobi ) equation along @xmath324 . letting @xmath326 denote the past - directed null vector tangent to @xmath324 and obtained by parallel - transporting @xmath266 from @xmath104 , every deviation vector @xmath325 is a solution to @xmath327 this equation is linear , so @xmath325 must depend linearly on initial data . in particular , all deviation vectors can be written as linear combinations of appropriate bitensors contracted into the initial data . this is done to avoid confusion when writing down two - point tensors such as @xmath328 [ see ( [ bdef ] ) ] . ] @xmath329 and @xmath330 . all light rays observed at @xmath104 must necessarily intersect that point , so it suffices to set @xmath331 . the first derivative of a deviation vector at @xmath104 describes an angular deviation between one point of an image and the center associated with @xmath324 . we therefore consider deviation vectors @xmath325 with the form @xmath332 @xmath328 is known as a jacobi propagator . it satisfies the jacobi equation @xmath333 along @xmath324 together with the initial conditions @xmath334 note that @xmath328 is a bitensor . it maps vectors at @xmath104 into vectors at others points on @xmath324 . the transverse components of @xmath328 are @xmath335 where @xmath52 is the matrix defined in sect . [ sect : ab ] . other components of @xmath328 may be deduced from the eigenvector relations @xcite @xmath336    all parts of an image must arrive at an observer along null geodesics . additionally , an observer with 4-velocity @xmath308 can only measure angles of vectors orthogonal to @xmath308 . it therefore suffices to restrict attention to deviation vectors satisfying @xmath337 at @xmath104 . these constraints restrict all interesting initial data to a two dimensional space . the orthonormal vectors @xmath338 form a basis for this space at @xmath104 . they satisfy @xmath339 parallel - transporting @xmath340 to another point on @xmath324 yields @xmath341 which forms a sachs basis @xcite on @xmath324 . initial data appearing in ( [ bdef ] ) must be of the form @xmath342 where @xmath343 is an unconstrained 2-vector . the factor @xmath344 is included here so that @xmath343 is directly related to angles on an observer s sky . a sufficiently small image may be described by a suitable set of 2-vectors @xmath343 representing the angular locations of each portion of the image with respect to the center defined by @xmath324 . each @xmath343 may be translated into a physical displacement at the source using ( [ bdef ] ) and ( [ initdata ] ) . first note that for every particular @xmath343 , ( [ rdotb ] ) implies that @xmath345 throughout @xmath324 . indeed , @xmath325 is always a linear combination of the @xmath346 together with @xmath326 . components of @xmath325 proportional to @xmath326 are physically irrelevant , so we consider only the sachs components @xmath347 \alpha^{(j)}.\ ] ] defining the @xmath13 matrix @xmath348 it is then clear that @xmath349 for any @xmath343 . @xmath350 is referred to as the jacobi matrix or jacobi map @xcite . using ( [ btrans])-([elldotb ] ) , ( [ sachso ] ) , ( [ sachsgen ] ) , and ( [ ddef ] ) , @xmath351 if a source moves on a geodesic which is instantaneously comoving with the observer , @xmath352    this discussion implies that a portion of an image with angular separation @xmath353 from the fiducial direction associated with @xmath354 is spatially separated from the fiducial emission point @xmath355 by @xmath356 the factors of @xmath357 have been introduced here to emphasize that this description is valid only for infinitesimal deviations . regardless , ( [ binterpret ] ) shows that up to the time dilation factor @xmath358 , the matrix @xmath52 central to all aspects of plane wave geometry may be physically interpreted as a transformation converting infinitesimal angles on the vertex of a light cone into infinitesimal separations elsewhere on that light cone . @xmath52 depends only on the @xmath14 coordinates of the source and emission points , and not on any other aspects of the physical configuration . it may be computed for all possible observer - source pairs directly from the wave profile @xmath65 . angles of emission ( as opposed to observation ) of the various light rays travelling from the source to the observer may be found by differentiating ( [ binterpret ] ) and applying the appropriate time dilation factor : @xmath359 the last equality here makes use of ( [ redshiftgen ] ) . applying ( [ binterpret ] ) shows that @xmath360 the symmetric matrix @xmath361 therefore converts spatial locations to emission angles within the source ( with the constraint that all light rays intersect @xmath104 ) . it is referred to as the optical deformation matrix @xcite . ( [ binterpret ] ) implies that there is a sense in which circles on the observer s sky correspond to ellipses near @xmath252 . this deformation may be parametrized by performing a polar decomposition on @xmath362 : @xmath363 here , @xmath364 and @xmath365 represent rotation matrices through some angles @xmath366 and @xmath367 . the ratio @xmath368 is related to the ellipticity of the aforementioned ellipse . @xmath367 represents the angle between the principal axes of that ellipse and the sachs basis . @xmath369 and @xmath367 are referred as shape parameters @xcite .    recalling that polarization vectors are parallel - transported in the geometric optics approximation @xcite , any polarization vector must have sachs components which are constant along @xmath324 . in principle , the angle @xmath367 might therefore be measured by comparing the relative `` rotation '' between an object s observed shape and an appropriate polarization angle @xcite . for linearly polarized waves where @xmath65 can be made diagonal by an appropriate coordinate choice , @xmath370 with respect to this coordinate system and the basis ( [ sachsgen ] ) . it is shown in sect . [ sect : weakwave ] that @xmath367 also vanishes in a natural way for all sufficiently weak wavepackets which are nonzero only for short times . ( [ binterpret ] ) implies that @xmath371 converts angles at the observer to separations within the source . the determinant of @xmath350 must therefore relate solid angles at @xmath104 to physical areas near @xmath252 : @xmath372 it follows that @xmath373 may be interpreted as an `` angular diameter distance . '' absolute value signs are necessary here because @xmath374 changes sign after each pass through a conjugate hyperplane with multiplicity 1 . physically , such sign changes represent parity inversions of the resulting image . note that @xmath375 does not necessarily increase monotonically with the age of an image ( as computed using the source s proper time ) . closely related to the angular diameter distance is the luminosity distance @xmath376 one factor of @xmath377 arises here from considering light cones emanating from the source instead of the observer . the other factor of @xmath378 is related to the energy change associated with frequency shifts . now that various optical quantities have been computed for general plane wave spacetimes , we consider their application to various special cases . the simplest nontrivial plane waves are the symmetric waves . these are locally symmetric in the sense that @xmath379 . it follows from ( [ riemann ] ) that symmetric plane waves must have constant waveforms . also note that @xmath380 is killing in these examples [ as well as @xmath136 , which is killing in all plane wave spacetimes ] . particular symmetric plane waves may be specified entirely by the ( constant ) eigenvalues of @xmath65 . recalling the decomposition ( [ hgen ] ) of @xmath65 into @xmath39 , @xmath40 and @xmath43 , a coordinate rotation may always be used to set @xmath381 for symmetric waves . it is then evident that the two eigenvalues of @xmath65 are given by @xmath382 . it is always possible to set @xmath383 where @xmath384 the weak energy condition implies that @xmath385 , so at least one eigenvalue of @xmath65 must be negative ( implying that at least one of the @xmath386 must be positive ) . we assume for definiteness that @xmath387 . then , @xmath388 if the vacuum einstein equation is imposed , @xmath389 and @xmath390 . for conformally - flat geometries representing spacetimes associated with , e.g. , pure electromagnetic plane waves , @xmath391 and @xmath392 . other cases may be viewed as superpositions of gravitational and ( `` gravito''-)electromagnetic waves . all symmetric waves produce an infinite number of images of almost every source . it is clear from ( [ symwave ] ) that these waves are also linearly polarized . the angles @xmath367 and @xmath366 appearing in ( [ distortion ] ) therefore vanish when considering image deformations with respect to the sachs basis ( [ sachsgen ] ) . other lensing properties depend on the sign of @xmath393 . we call the case @xmath394 `` gravity - dominated '' and the case @xmath395 `` matter - dominated . ''      consider symmetric plane wave spacetimes where @xmath396 . gravity - dominated waves such as these generalize the vacuum waves satisfying @xmath397 . symmetric vacuum waves arise from , e.g. , the penrose limit of a null geodesic orbiting a schwarzschild black hole on the light ring .    for any gravity - dominated symmetric wave , the matrices @xmath51 and @xmath66 defined in sect . [ sect : ab ] are @xmath398 it is clear that @xmath399 has an infinite number of zeros for any choice of @xmath121 . each of these zeros represents a phase conjugate to @xmath121 . there are an infinite number of such phases in both the past and future of every observer . the discussion in sect . [ sect : numimages ] therefore implies that under generic conditions , an infinite number of images appear for almost every source . explicitly , all conjugate phases are given by @xmath400 where @xmath127 is any nonzero integer . it is evident from ( [ idef ] ) that all of these phases have multiplicity 1 . for any @xmath209 and any observation point @xmath104 with @xmath401 , exactly one image of each source is visible as that source appeared in @xmath117 . this corresponds to the region between @xmath402 and @xmath403 . note that @xmath399 switches sign on each pass through a conjugate phase . the parity of an image emitted from @xmath117 is therefore opposite to the parity of an image emitted from @xmath404 . specializing to cases where the source is a geodesic and the observer is instantaneously comoving with that source on @xmath115 , some configurations lead to redshifts and others to blueshifts . using ( [ redshiftgeodesic ] ) , @xmath405 an image is therefore redshifted if and only if @xmath406 it is blueshifted when @xmath407 . there is no frequency shift at all in cases where @xmath408 the direction of the frequency shift clearly depends only on the instantaneous orientation @xmath409 of the source and the observer on @xmath115 . in particular , it does not depend on which image is considered . all images of a particular source experience the same type of frequency shift . emission times @xmath59 for an observer comoving with a geodesic source may be found by solving ( [ siggeo ] ) . for gravity - dominated symmetric waves , this equation reduces to @xmath410 if @xmath411 , it is evident that the image from @xmath412 must satisfy @xmath413 . images from the distant past are therefore emitted at phases @xmath59 very nearly conjugate to @xmath121 : @xmath414 substituting this relation into ( [ psidef ] ) and ( [ redshiftgravsym ] ) shows that very old images cluster near @xmath28 on the observer s sky and experience increasingly - negligible frequency shifts : @xmath415 old images of slightly extended sources are also highly distorted and demagnified . their angular diameter and luminosity distances both scale like @xmath416 gravity - dominated symmetric waves therefore produce an infinite number of exponentially dimming images for almost every source .      matter - dominated symmetric waves satisfying @xmath395 act somewhat differently than gravity - dominated waves . in these cases , @xmath417 phases conjugate to @xmath121 occur at @xmath418 and at @xmath419 , where @xmath420 are any nonzero integers . if @xmath421 is an irrational number , these two families of phases are distinct . each conjugate pair then has multiplicity 1 . if @xmath421 is rational , some conjugate pairs have multiplicity 2 . in the conformally - flat case where @xmath422 , all conjugate phases have multiplicity 2 . in every other case where @xmath421 is rational , an infinite number of conjugate phases occur with each multiplicity . regardless of @xmath393 , an infinite number of images are formed for almost every source . now consider a luminous source moving on a geodesic . if the source and observer are instantaneously comoving in the sense of ( [ comoving2 ] ) and ( [ comoving3 ] ) , frequency shifts associated with each image are given by ( [ redshiftgeodesic ] ) . since @xmath423 is negative - definite in this case , all images are redshifted . if @xmath411 , an image originating from @xmath412 must be emitted just before the source intersects @xmath118 . all such images cluster towards @xmath28 in the observer s sky and have negligible frequency shifts . images emitted near conjugate hyperplanes with multiplicity 1 are highly distorted . images emitted near conjugate hyperplanes with multiplicity 2 are not significantly distorted at all . in both cases , however , older images are dimmer ( although the rate at which this occurs is much slower than for gravity - dominated symmetric waves ) .    regardless of the sign of @xmath393 , the oldest images formed by symmetric plane wave spacetimes depend on the spacetime structure at arbitrarily large transverse distances . if the metric is modified so that the wave decays at large distances , only a finite number of images discussed here would be unaffected . the oldest images found in pure symmetric waves likely do not appear at all in perturbed symmetric waves . symmetric plane waves are mathematically simple , but are not reasonable models for gravitational radiation emitted from compact sources . more interesting are waves where @xmath21 is nonzero only for a finite time : sandwich waves . suppose , in particular , that there exists some @xmath424 such that @xmath425 for all @xmath426 $ ] . it follows from ( [ riemann ] ) that such spacetimes are locally flat whenever @xmath427 or @xmath428 . the curved region containing the gravitational wave is effectively sandwiched between the two null hyperplanes @xmath429 and @xmath430 . every timelike curve eventually passes entirely through such a wave .    before an observer interacts with the wave , spacetime is flat and optics is trivial . the case @xmath431 where an observer has already passed through the wave is more interesting . in this case , @xmath51 and @xmath52 reduce to their flat space forms @xmath432 when @xmath433 . the forms of @xmath51 and @xmath52 inside the wave depend on the details of @xmath65 , and will not be discussed here . if @xmath434 , however , there always exist four constant @xmath13 matrices @xmath343 , @xmath435 , @xmath436 and @xmath437 such that @xmath438 note that the dots on @xmath435 and @xmath437 do not refer to derivatives in this case . they are only used as a labelling device . it follows from ( [ primedd ] ) that @xmath439 is independent of @xmath121 . moreover , @xmath440 if there were no wave at all , @xmath441 and @xmath442 .    in general , @xmath435 and @xmath437 have a simple physical interpretation . if two geodesics are comoving and have a transverse separation @xmath443 when @xmath428 , it follows from ( [ spatgeo ] ) that the transverse separation between these geodesics is @xmath444 immediately before they interact with the wave at @xmath445 . similarly , the relative transverse velocity of these geodesics is @xmath446 when @xmath427 . interpretations for @xmath343 and @xmath436 are somewhat less direct . consider two geodesics which intersect at some time @xmath431 after the wave has passed , but which have a relative transverse velocity @xmath447 at @xmath58 . the difference in transverse velocities between these two geodesics is then @xmath448 when @xmath427 . similarly , the difference in the transverse positions of these geodesics is @xmath449 at @xmath445 . it follows that @xmath343 controls shifts in position that are independent of the time @xmath121 at which the two geodesics cross each other .    in principle , @xmath343 , @xmath435 , @xmath436 , @xmath437 may all be found by solving ( [ edef ] ) if @xmath65 is known . at first glance , this would appear to imply that @xmath450 numbers are required to describe observations through a sandwich wave . the actual number of required parameters is somewhat less than this . first note that the wronskian identity ( [ wronskian ] ) implies that @xmath451 is a symmetric matrix . it also implies that @xmath452 further simplifications arise by recalling from ( [ symmatrices ] ) that @xmath453 and @xmath454 are symmetric . it follows that @xmath455 are symmetric as well . these expressions are completely general , and hold for any sandwich wave . they significantly constrain the number of independent parameters needed to specify @xmath51 and @xmath52 . equivalently , they limit the number of parameters that must be extracted from @xmath65 . it follows from the arguments of sect . [ sect : numimages ] that the number of images of a generic source observable in any plane wave spacetime is governed by the number of hypersurfaces conjugate to the @xmath456 hypersurface @xmath115 containing the observation event @xmath104 . continuing to assume that @xmath431 , all phases conjugate to @xmath121 must be smaller than @xmath457 . it follows from ( [ zerodet ] ) and ( [ bsandwich ] ) that conjugate phases occurring before the wave may be found by solving @xmath458 = 0      \label{conjsand}\ ] ] for all @xmath459 . this equation is quadratic , so at most two solutions exist . an observer ahead of the wave may therefore see at most three images of a source as it appeared behind the wave . there may also be at most one image of a source as it appeared ahead of the wave . in principle , any number of images may arise from inside the wave [ where ( [ bsandwich ] ) is not valid ] if @xmath21 is sufficiently large . conjugate phases found by solving ( [ conjsand ] ) clearly depend on the observation time @xmath121 . less obviously , the _ number _ of conjugate phases can also depend on @xmath121 . for an observer moving on a timelike worldline ( where @xmath121 increases monotonically ) , new conjugate phases  and therefore new images  sometimes appear at discrete times . these images correspond to observation times where ( [ conjsand ] ) momentarily degenerates to a linear equation . new images can therefore arise when @xmath460 and @xmath461 if @xmath462 , the two solutions to this equation are @xmath463 \pm \sqrt {   [ \tr \bm{\beta }   \tr \dot{\bm{\beta } } - \tr ( \bm{\beta } \dot{\bm{\beta}})]^2 - 4 \det \bm{\beta } \det \dot{\bm{\beta } } } } { 2 \det \dot{\bm{\beta } } } .\ ] ] only solutions satisfying @xmath464 are physically relevant . when a conjugate phase of this type first appears , it satisfies @xmath465 the associated image therefore provides a picture of the infinitely distant past . furthermore , an infinite amount of the source s history appears to the observer within a finite amount of proper time . this implies that new images are highly blueshifted . no matter how long an observer waits , no conjugate phase can exceed @xmath457 . the emission time for an associated image might therefore be expected to tend towards a constant value as @xmath466 . this means that a very large amount of proper time at the observer corresponds to only a small amount of proper time at a source . images which appear suddenly and are initially highly blueshifted become highly redshifted at late times . it is unclear precisely what these types of images imply . to the extent that geometric optics remains valid , all observers passing through @xmath467 momentarily see almost the entire universe appear infinitely blueshifted as it was in the infinitely distant past . furthermore , ( [ angleredshift ] ) implies that all of the universe is briefly compressed into a single point on each observer s sky . of course , such phenomena lie outside the domain of geometric optics . they may even lie outside of the realm of test fields propagating on a fixed background spacetime . extreme focusing events like these might indicate instabilities inherent in the plane wave geometry itself . it should , however , be noted that all of the infinities just alluded to are likely to have finite cutoffs in `` realistic '' plane waves which decay at large transverse distances . one important class of sandwich waves are those that are very weak and last only for a short time . in these cases , @xmath343 , @xmath435 , @xmath436 , and @xmath437 may be expanded as integrals involving successively higher powers of @xmath65 . to lowest order in such a scheme , @xmath51 and @xmath52 are approximately unaffected by the wave while inside of it . assuming that @xmath468 , the first corrections to this assumption are @xmath469 this approximation is consistent with ( [ wronskian ] ) [ and therefore ( [ wronsksand ] ) as well ] . in terms of the matrices appearing in ( [ bsandwich ] ) , @xmath470 , @xmath471 , and @xmath472 note that eqs . ( [ asand ] ) and ( [ bsand ] ) should be applied with care if @xmath65 involves many oscillations of an approximately periodic function . in these cases , the integral of @xmath65 can be very nearly zero . terms nonlinear in @xmath65 might then be significant . assuming that ( [ asand ] ) and ( [ bsand ] ) are indeed adequate approximations for @xmath51 and @xmath52 , a coordinate rotation may always be used to diagonalize @xmath437 . there then exist two constants @xmath473 and @xmath474 such that @xmath475 in this sense , all sufficiently short gravitational plane waves act as though they are linearly polarized [ so @xmath476 in ( [ distortion ] ) ] . in terms of the individual wavefunctions appearing in ( [ hgen ] ) , @xmath477 ,      \\ \mathcal{h}_2 & = & \int_0^{u_+ } \rmd w [ h_\|(w ) - h_+(w)].\end{aligned}\ ] ] the transverse coordinates @xmath16 have also been chosen such that @xmath478    if a wave satisfies the vacuum einstein equation , @xmath48 and @xmath479 . more generally , it follows from the weak energy condition that @xmath480 now assume that the integral of @xmath39 is non - negative , which entails only a minimal loss of generality . then , @xmath481 we say that a wave is gravity - dominated if @xmath482 and matter - dominated if @xmath483 . these definitions are closely analogous to those used to classify symmetric plane waves in sect . [ sect : symwaves ] . there , a wave was said to be gravity- or matter - dominated depending on the sign of the constant @xmath484 appearing in ( [ symwave ] ) .    for weak gravity - dominated wavepackets , there can be at most one phase conjugate to an observer satisfying @xmath485 . if this exists , it evident from ( [ bsand ] ) that @xmath486 is conjugate to @xmath121 with multiplicity 1 . this equation is valid only if @xmath487 . a conjugate phase therefore exists only for observers satisfying @xmath488 note that @xmath489 is the unique physically - relevant solution to ( [ newtau ] ) in the gravity - dominated case . waves that are matter - dominated ( so @xmath483 ) also admit the conjugate phase ( [ tau1 ] ) when @xmath121 satisfies ( [ observer1 ] ) . in the conformally - flat case where @xmath490 , this is the only conjugate phase . unlike in the gravity - dominated case , the multiplicity of @xmath491 is equal to 2 for conformally - flat waves . in all other matter - dominated cases , @xmath491 has multiplicity 1 and a second conjugate phase is admitted ( also with multiplicity 1 ) for all observers satisfying @xmath492 this occurs at @xmath493 note that ( [ observer2 ] ) is a more stringent condition than ( [ observer1 ] ) . as implied by the notation , @xmath494 . .46       .46    .47    consider a point source moving on a timelike worldline @xmath138 in a weak sandwich wave spacetime . such a source appears differently when observed at different times . it is clear that when @xmath495 , exactly one image of @xmath138 is viewable under generic conditions . as time passes , the wave eventually passes through the observer . a second image then appears when @xmath496 . this image is always emitted before the first . if the wave involves a sufficient amount of ricci curvature ) and ( [ bsand ] ) be valid . it is possible for , e.g. , sufficiently strong vacuum waves to admit two conjugate phases in the region @xmath427 . ] ( from e.g. , electromagnetic plane waves ) and is not conformally - flat , a third image appears when @xmath497 . this is emitted before the first two images . all images persist indefinitely once they appear . sufficiently far in the future , one image is observed of the source as it appeared after interacting with the gravitational wave . all other images predate this interaction . [ fig : emissionsand ] . when the second image first appears at @xmath498 , the new conjugate phase @xmath499 is divergent . at all later times , it is finite . the same is also true for the emission times associated with the second image . almost the entire past history of the source is therefore observable within a finite proper time . this implies an infinite blueshift . at late times , @xmath500 . the observed evolution of the source via the second image effectively freezes as @xmath59 asymptotes to @xmath501 ( which predates the source s interaction with the wave ) . images such as these are highly redshifted , as indicated in fig . [ fig : redshift ] . note that a similar transition from infinite blueshift to infinite redshift also applies to the third image if it exists . except that three different choices are made for the value of @xmath502 . curves for both images are shifted to the right as @xmath502 is decreased . the younger ( solid ) curves are almost unaffected by the wave if @xmath502 is sufficiently large . for smaller values of @xmath502 , both curves are strongly bent by the constraint that they ca nt pass through the dotted curve representing @xmath491 . ] .46       .46    another qualitative feature of the emission times plotted in fig . [ fig : emissionsand ] is that there is a sense in which pairs of images can `` switch roles . '' consider , e.g. , the left panel of that figure . at late times , the solid curve ( corresponding to the younger image ) is perfectly linear . indeed , it remains very nearly linear until @xmath503 . a rapid transition then occurs where the dashed curve effectively takes over this linear behavior while the solid curve strongly deviates from it . in a sense , the two images reverse their roles . this phenomenon occurs one more time ( somewhat less sharply ) around @xmath504 when the second image first appears . it arises essentially because @xmath505 for the younger image and @xmath506 for the older image . these constraints can cause emission curves to bend sharply  with large accompanying frequency shifts  in order to avoid intersecting @xmath491 . whether or not this occurs depends on whether the `` average '' linear increase of @xmath59 ever comes near @xmath491 . if it does , this role switching occurs . if not , the younger image is barely affected by the gravitational wave at all . this is illustrated in fig . [ fig : changingv ] , where emission curves for several sources are plotted simultaneously .    to summarize , images which appear at discrete times briefly appear as bright , highly blueshifted `` flashes . '' indeed , fig . [ fig : luminosity ] shows that their luminosity distances go to zero . simultaneously , the angular diameter distance of each new image tends to infinity . it is implied by ( [ angleredshift ] ) that all highly blueshifted images make must a very small angle @xmath317 with @xmath28 on the observer s sky . the second ( and third ) images therefore appear aligned with the direction of propagation of the gravitational wave when they first appear . this direction could be quite different from the location of the other image(s ) . as time progresses , all images migrate across the observer s sky as illustrated in fig . [ fig : angles ] . different images may remain separated from each other by large angles at all times . .46       .46 despite their simplicity , plane gravitational waves behave in qualitatively different ways from lenses associated with quasi - newtonian mass distributions . as expected from their dynamic nature , plane waves generically shift the observed frequencies of various images . they may also admit images which appear to move , deform , change brightness , and shift color as time progresses . more subtle differences relate to the number of images that are produced of a given source . for example , even numbers of images can appear generically ( which has led plane wave spacetimes to be cited @xcite as well - behaved examples where the odd number theorem @xcite does not apply ) . some plane waves can even produce an infinite number of discrete images . perhaps most striking of all are the bright flashes shown to be produced by generic sandwich waves in sect . [ sect : sandwaves ] . these correspond to individual images which appear at discrete times . more typical gravitational lenses can produce new images if a source crosses an observer s caustic . individual images then split into two ( or vice versa ) . the flashes produced by sandwich waves are quite different . their appearance does not require that a source pass through an observer s caustic . such images appear individually from the infinitely distant past . initially , they are infinitely bright and infinitely blueshifted points of light appearing in the direction of propagation associated with the gravitational wave .    many of these effects depend at least partially on the idealization that a plane wave extends undiminished to infinitely - large transverse distances . plane wave spacetimes are not asymptotically flat . despite being topologically trivial and locally well - behaved , they are not even globally hyperbolic : null geodesics passing between appropriately - chosen pairs of points can extend to arbitrarily large transverse distances in between those points . it is this property which permits the infinite number of images described in sect . [ sect : symwaves ] to be produced by symmetric waves . the flashes described in sect . [ sect : sandwaves ] also depend on the spacetime structure at arbitrarily large distances . this structure likely affects the formation of even numbers of images as well . indeed , the usual proofs of the odd number theorem require global hyperbolicity , among other assumptions @xcite ( see , however , @xcite for a more general formulation ) . if a spacetime has the geometry of a plane wave only out to some finite transverse distance , all results derived here remain valid if the associated images involve light rays which never extend sufficiently far to interact with any large - distance modifications . the infinite sequence of images formed by a symmetric plane wave would then be expected to become finite for spacetimes which are only approximately plane waves . calculations involving the oldest images could no longer be trusted in these cases . similarly , the bright flashes associated with ideal sandwich waves are likely to be somewhat less extreme for waves which decay at infinity . large brightnesses and large blueshifts can still exist , but these will be cut off at some finite maximum . such maxima may , however , remain quite large . it is reasonably clear that modifications of the geometry at large distances can remove some images . less obviously , these modification can also introduce new images . consider , for example , the @xmath507-wave spacetimes obtained by substituting @xmath508 in the metric ( [ planewavemetric ] ) . these generalize the plane wave spacetimes . it has been shown that if @xmath509 grows subquadratically as @xmath510 , the resulting geometries are globally hyperbolic @xcite . moreover , every pair of points is connected by at least one geodesic in these cases ( unlike in pure plane wave spacetimes where the growth of @xmath509 is precisely quadratic ) . this implies that modifications of the geometry at large transverse distances can introduce new null geodesics even between points at small transverse distances . it would be interesting to explore these effects in more depth to understand precisely how modifications of this sort ( or more general ones ) alter the lensing properties described here for ideal plane waves . it would also be interesting to better understand what the transient flashes of sect . [ sect : sandwaves ] imply for waves propagating on plane ( or almost - plane ) wave spacetimes . this can likely be facilitated by the green functions derived in @xcite . 1 perlick v 2004 _ living rev . relativity _ * 7 * 9 petters a o , levine h and wambsganss j 2001 _ singularity theory and gravitational lensing _ ( boston , ma : birkhuser ) schneider p , ehlers j and falco e e 1992 _ gravitational lenses _ ( new york , ny : springer - verlag ) petters a o and werner m c 2010 _ gen . * 42 * 2011 mckenzie r h 1985 * 26 * 1592 perlick v 1996 * 13 * 529 perlick v 2001 _ comm . math . phys . _ * 220 * 403 ehlers j and newman e t 2000 * 41 * 3344 friedrich h and stewart j m 1983 _ london _ a * 385 * 345 frittelli s and newman e t 1999 d * 59 * 124001 seitz s , schneider p and ehlers j 1994 * 11 * 2345 werner m c 2009 * 50 * 082504 blandford r and narayan r 1986 _ astrophys . j. _ * 310 * 568 damour t and esposito - farse g 1998 d * 58 * 044003 kovner i 1990 _ astrophys . j. _ * 351 * 114 frieman j a , harari d d and surpi g c 1994 d * 50 * 4895 faraoni v 2008 _ new astron . _ * 13 * 178 faraoni v 1998 _ int . _ d * 7 * 409 faraoni v 1991 _ gen . * 23 * 583 ehrlich p e and emch g g 1991 the conjugacy index and simple astigmatic focusing _ geometry and nonlinear partial differential equations _ eds v oliker and a treibergs ( providence , ri : american mathematical society ) ehrlich p e and emch g g 1993 geodesic and causal behavior of gravitational plane waves : astigmatic conjugacy _ differential geometry : geometry in mathematical physics and related topics _ eds r e greene r e and s - t yau ( providence , ri : american mathematical society ) beem j , ehrlich p and easley k 1996 _ global lorentzian geometry _ ( new york , ny : dekker ) harte a i and drivas t d 2012 d * 85 * 124039 hollowood t j and shore g m 2008 _ j. high energy phys . _ * 12 * 091 hollowood t j , shore g m and stanley r j 2009 _ j. high energy phys . _ * 08 * 089 bondi h and pirani f a e 1989 _ london _ a * 421 * 395 bondi h , pirani f a e and robinson i 1959 _ london _ a * 251 * 519 penrose r 1976 any spacetime has a plane wave as a limit _ differential geometry and relativity _ eds . m cahen and m flato ( dordrecht : reidel ) blau m , frank d and weiss s 2006 * 23 * 3993 berenstein d , maldacena j m and nastase h 2002 _ j. high energy phys . _ * 04 * 013 grignani g , harmark t , marini a and orselli m 2010 _ j. high energy phys . _ * 06 * 034 stanley r and hollowood t j 2011 _ j. high energy phys . _ * 10 * 096 wald r m 1984 _ general relativity _ ( chicago , il : university of chicago press ) eardley d m , lee d l and lightman a p 1973 d * 8 * 3308 pravda v , pravdov a , coley a and milson r 2002 * 19 * 6213 torre c g 2006 _ gen . rel . grav . _ * 38 * 653 gnther p 1988 _ huygens principle and hyperbolic equations _ ( london : academic press ) etherington i m h 1933 _ phil . mag . _ * 15 * 761 ellis g f r 1971 relativistic cosmology _ general relativity and cosmology : proceedings of the 47th international school of physics `` enrico fermi '' _ ed r k sachs ( new york , ny : academic press ) hartman p 1982 _ ordinary differential equations _ ( boston , ma : birkhuser ) hubeny v , rangamani m and ross s 2004 d * 69 * 024007 penrose r 1965 * 37 * 215 frittelli s , kling t p and newman e t 2000 d * 63 * 023006 surpi g c and harari d d 1999 _ astrophys . j. _ * 515 * 455 flores j l and snchez m 2006 _ lect . notes phys . _
Abstract:

Answer: plane - symmetric gravitational waves are considered as gravitational lenses . numbers of images , frequency shifts , mutual angles , and image distortion parameters are computed exactly in essentially all non - singular plane wave spacetimes . for a fixed observation event in a particular plane wave spacetime , the number of images is found to be the same for almost every source . this number can be any positive integer , including infinity . wavepackets of finite width are discussed in detail as well as waves which maintain a constant amplitude for all time . short wavepackets are found to generically produce up to two images of each source which appear ( separately ) only some time after the wave has passed . they are initially infinitely bright , infinitely blueshifted images of the infinitely distant past . later , these images become dim and acquire a rapidly - increasing redshift . for sufficiently weak wavepackets , one such `` flash '' almost always exists . the appearance of a second flash requires that the ricci tensor inside the wave exceed a certain threshold . this might occur if a gravitational plane wave is sourced by , e.g. , a sufficiently strong electromagnetic plane wave .