a NASA S.D.O. idea “satellite to look inwards from the heliosphere boundry.

We are studying the helio system from all angles except one
I would like to think that outside our heliosphere looking inwards the sun and planets would be viewed much as we think of them from observations we have made by being in the “medium” solar wind that these objects are in.
But what if the sun and planets looked different outside the helioshock looking in?
When Einstein created an experiment to “measure” light or at least to explain how it travels the experiment was done in a lab on earth.
If we were outside the heliosphere instead of a lab on earth would the experiment show any changes to the nature of how light travels outside our helioshock?
If we were to “send” light to this satellite and measure an offset from calibrated wavelength we could account for any shifts in the length of the wave.if the satalite “sends” the same wavelength back to the emitter and measurements of wave length difference are calculated this is proof of a relective index. If measurements were made from fixed points on a fixed trajectory we could build up a composite refractive index in increments.

Refractive index
The refractive index or index of refraction of a substance is a measure of the speed of light in that substance. It is expressed as a ratio of the speed of light in vacuum relative to that in the considered medium.[note 1] The velocity at which light travels in vacuum is a physical constant, and the fastest speed at which energy or information can be transferred. However, light travels slower through any given material, or medium, that is not vacuum. (See: light in a medium).[1][2][3][4]
A simple, mathematical description of refractive index is as follows:
n = velocity of light in a vacuum / velocity of light in medium
Hence, the refractive index of water is 1.33, meaning that light travels 1.33 times as fast in a vacuum as it does in water.
As light exits a medium, such as air, water or glass, it may also change its propagation direction in proportion to the refractive index (see Snell's law). By measuring the angle of incidence and angle of refraction of the light beam, the refractive index n can be determined. Refractive index of materials varies with the frequency of radiated light. This results in a slightly different refractive index for each color. The cited values of refractive indexes, such as 1.33 for water, are taken for yellow light of a sodium source which has the wavelength of 589.3 nanometers.[1][2][5]

wiki ex content
by calculating how much change there is in medium density and refractive index at these fixed points we could plot a ratio.
If we were able to time a “second” satalite in a trajectory and time the fixed points correctly we could “send” these wave lenghts between the satalites and measure the refractive index on a perpendicular axis to the in/out measurements, we could calculate the refractive index of the heliosphere from a off center angle of incedence.
When telescopes are designed there is carful attention taken with the curved surfaces of the optics. Careful attention is given to the curvature because when these two “lenses” interact with each other, they do so curve to curve, not center of lens to center of lens.
Yes light travels through these centers but the optical effect is at the very outer edge of each lenses curvature.
You can make a telescope with no barrell if you hold a lens infront of a lense and adjust the focal properties your telescope would work.
The same pricipal comes into play when we use a telescope to look at a “gravitational” lense in space caused by mass distorting spacetime.
We have in effect used the lensing properties of the heliosphere as a curved optic with the curved optic created by the “gravitational lense” creating a telescope with no barrel.
We can use these lenses to study far distant galaxies but without knowing the properties of our local “heliospherical” lense we will have trouble calculating the properties of the lens we are looking at.
When you add to the equation the fact that our telescopes are inside the lens of the heliosphere, you end up with a telescope (observatory or space) inside one of the lenses of a much larger no barrel space based telescope (helio lense to gravatational lense = natural telescope).
.imagine if we get out side the heliosphere and the helio system looks different.
Imagine if we get outside the heliosphere and the whole universe looks different
Imagine if we get outside the heliosphere and the whole universe has lenses that we can now see.
If correcting for the optical refraction of our helio system the whole universe may prove to be full of lenses that we can now see with computer corrected images.
If a refractive index can be charted then our whole universe could change with our perspective
Like putting on perscription glasses to correct vision you need to measure the offset from focal point.

xploder

We need to wait and see what happens to the Voyager crafts first. Who knows what kind of intense radiation is present outside of Sol's protective shield.

I have been reading your various posts about the lensing that may be occurring throughout the universe and I do think that it is very interesting.

How does the post talking about cold-fusion/superconductors tie into your research on lensing in space? You know the one talking about deriving planck's constant etc. I recall you getting very excited about his discoveries/work.

I have an older friend who is an electrical engineer and has a crazy workshop with all kinds of huge rare earth magnets and tube amplifiers etc.. He is a computer coder also and worked on radio telescope arrays in his past. He has that Mad Scientist feel, lol. He works on all kinds of random experiments trying to validate out of the box ideas, so I try to let him know what I read about. He's hopefully going to take a look at Znidarsic's work for me. I'll ask him about your various posts too.

Are you saying that we may not be hundreds of light years away, and that it's all an illusion as far as our actual distance from other bodies outside the sun's field?

Originally posted by Anjaba
I have been reading your various posts about the lensing that may be occurring throughout the universe and I do think that it is very interesting.

How does the post talking about cold-fusion/superconductors tie into your research on lensing in space? You know the one talking about deriving planck's constant etc. I recall you getting very excited about his discoveries/work.

when im modeling something i like to see commonality with the micro/macro
and as the fundimental shape of nature micro/macro is spherical.
when trying to build a "working model" thought experiment one thing didnt make sence.
the solar wind is a dense medium traveling at over 1,000,000kmph
the speed of transition 1.094 x 10^6 m/s as it crosses into the interior region of the atom.
if there was a speed of transition on an atomic scale interaction,
then there must be an obserable corrilation on a helio size, on a sun size and on a planetary size.
if there was a transition at an atomic level then i had to look for a medium density / reflective index change in the helio system.
when you consider solar wind is "blowing" bubbles into the area around it you can asume the density difference part.
the solar conveyor idea is to explain a change in transition speed to a new constant of the solar wind.
darsicks work showed me this conveyor action as a change in speed and in terms of a transition.
waves traveling through the bubble would be modulated in lenght exchanging a small amount of frequency and wavelenght to travel faster.
reverse the effect out of the solar medium and you have a state of transition into lower frequency and longer lenght waves
this provides for a constant C in the heliosphere/solarconvayor at our scale and is comprable to micro observations

I have an older friend who is an electrical engineer and has a crazy workshop with all kinds of huge rare earth magnets and tube amplifiers etc.. He is a computer coder also and worked on radio telescope arrays in his past. He has that Mad Scientist feel, lol. He works on all kinds of random experiments trying to validate out of the box ideas, so I try to let him know what I read about. He's hopefully going to take a look at Znidarsic's work for me. I'll ask him about your various posts too.

without a context its a very abstract formula to model see above^^^^^^your quote

Are you saying that we may not be hundreds of light years away, and that it's all an illusion as far as our actual distance from other bodies outside the sun's field?

im saying i could hide a lens between two lenses and you would never see it (at the correct angles of incidence)
im saying that when you model a universe full of lenses,
some hidden between the focal commonality of other lenses
some out of focal alignment with our helio lense
we could be looking for galaxys while having glasses on that only "SEE" the perscriptions or lenses whithin the focal range of our helio lense.
so yes we could have masive hidden objects that produce spherical lenses that we cant see at our helio lense prescription.

xploder

reply to post by Anjaba


the very high temp super conductor resurch is important from a modeling point of veiw because it works in the magnetosphere of the earth and core of the earth.
as the solar medium travels throught the earth its wave patten in the core propogates electrical charge in an angular direction this provides a permanant "power source" to power the rotatation of the core independantly from the crust.
when theses "waves" are superconducted into the core the effective out put is rotation and a magnetic projection, (magneto-sphere).
gravity provides for two objects to "fall" in gravity at the same rate (newton)
because of the solar medium comonality at the point the test was preformed ie the induced effect on the falling mass in the medium is a constant C
xploder