i would like to start with saying einstein himself was a fan of gravitational lensing, he famously predicted that stars hidden behind the sun would
become visable to the observer in an eclipse. he later was validated by observations.
his discovery was called strong gravitational lensing (SGL) and worked because "mass" was said to warp the fabric of spacetime and the warped space
time would provide a "curvature" for the light from distent sources, to be "bent" around closer objects of mass and be visable to our telescopes.
the method for finding these "gravitational lenses" or SGL events was to look for clusters of great mass whos combined gravatational warping of space
time could create a lense capable of imaging objects far off in the distence. einstein himself said the lenses would be very rare and hard to detect
and he was right.
the image shows cluster lensing of a quasar into multipule images using (SGL)
einstein also said that a "ring" could form around a lens if the alignment was just right between a
gravitational lens and a backround object
this is an image that looks to have an einsteins ring in a gravity lense
this is a 3d picture of galaxies forming a cluster lense (SGL)
it is asumed that dark matter accounts for the lensing potential combined with the mass lensing,
so what surrounds the mass and allows it to act like an effective lens?
the next picture is a sample of cluster lensing in the observable wave lengths with some other wavelengths "super imposed" to allow the lensing to be
then next finding was that galaxies were capable of lensing as well and some images produced the einsteins rings that he had pridicted.
but then a new form of gravitational lensing was found, this type of gravity lenses did not "bend" light "around" the outside of the lense it acually
optically and gravitationally lenses objects "through" the lense like a magnifying glass that was enhanced by gravity. this type of lensing showed a
very large amount of the galaxies we see, upto 20% of distent galaxies were being "magnified" both in size but also in brightness.
in fact if the lenses had not "magnifyed" the images and increased brightness these galaxies would not be visable at all even to our largest
telescopes. i call this type of lensing "density lensing" or (DL) because it used the optical density and refraction of the medium inside the lense
combined with the effects of light from gravity to acomplish the "magnifycation"
so smaller galaxies were shown to also be valuable sources of light information through lensing and as the light was amplified and the image size was
increased the ability to study very faint and very distent galaxies was increased we began to find very early galaxies that were suprising us with
their composition of different stars at different ages and some galaies that looked very mature at very early stages in the 11-12 billion years ago
the reason was we were looking back in time by looking at objects so far away that light would have to travel for billions of years to reach us so the
light was emitted in the distent past for the light to have traveled to us and for us to observer here and now.
kinda like looking at the past history of the universe.
then there is microlensing
on a much smaller scale and from the correct distence stars can themselves become "micro lenses"
this relies on the gravity of the forgroud object to "bend" light in a (SGL) type lense
even planets can be lenses at the right mass and distence from the observer and the object being lensed,
which brings up the question if these lenses can be effected by internal medium density and refractivity, could the material or density around these
lenses have an effect on how "powerful" the lenses are?
if the lenses themselves were inside a denser medium, would that increase the ability of the lense to magnify (DL) or bend(SGL) light?
so if these clusters are mass heavey do they attract a higher density of material around them and does this effect the optical properties of the
density lenses (DL) and (SGL)?
could the "more dense" material around the mass help to increase the effects of (DL) and (SGL)?
why is there xray emitions around this cluster?
and why do the sources that have high xray sources seem to be the best lenses?
and is it electron density that is creating the xrays in these images?
could the electron density around the lenses be variable because the mass is attracting the electron density and concentrating it at the points of
could the electron density effect light as it transitions the medium outside the lense thereby increasing the optical effect of the lensing
could the electron density from the filiment study account for "cluster" lensing potential?
what about galaxies are they sourrounded by electron density as most galaxies are thought to be part of a filimentary structure?
it almost looks like most objects if the correct angles and distences are used can be lenses.
could the dark matter sourounding these galaxies allowing for a higher lensing potential simply be electron density, as light can be effected by
magnetic feilds created by current flow?
our sun could be considered a lense as well if you were looking out side our heliosphere and the density was a lot more refractive and electric than
we beleive, could the shape of our helio bubble combined with gravity and different density mediums combine to form a lense that distorts our veiw of
so if our helio sphere and our galaxy both form lenses we have to look through two lenses before looking into intergalactic space.
does that mean that our distence calculations to an object are incorrect if they are outside our helio-bubble?
does that mean that our distence calculations to an object are incorrect even more if ouside our galaxy?
what about the cluster our galaxy is part of? if there is electron density between galaxies does this elcetron density effect light as it is
so how do we find these cosmic lenses?
for (SGL) or einstiens strong gravatational lensing we look for the effect of the forground lesing from large mass objects
for micro lensing from stars and planets we use the same technique
for density lenses we use the fact that light is effected by not only the distence it has to travel through space but also the effect the lense has on
the light wavelength and amplitude.
by looking for sub mm and infra red light directly outside the lense we can quickly locate potential sources of gravity lensing.
first the sky is scanned with the hearshal infra red space telescope and any source of sub mm and infra red is noted and checked by optical wavelenght
this works because the process of lensing (DL) has an effect of the light wavelenght and amplitude of the light emitted by the lens. the area around
the lense lights up in the infra red spectrum signaling a lensing light interaction.
this image is not acociated with wavelength/amplitude change from lensing
but how many galaxies are counted at high redshifts (cosmological redshift) and are acually lensed images?
here is a surprisingly mature cluster found with lensing
here is a galaxy at very high redshift that could be very old
does gravitational lensing "alter" the information incoded into light?
does gravitational lensing potential from two sources "factor" together and what happens if the two lenses are "in focus" with one another and a
bright object is being lensed and focused on our "local" lenses the galaxy and heliosphere (DL) are on a common angle of incidence with the bright
object through the lenses and would this bright lensed (DL) source also be increased in size and luminosity while being shifted from the transition of
a gravity density lense?
there has been alot of new findings with gravity lenses including some of the most distent galaxies ever observed
and in a different scale microscopes are using nano lenses to increase the magnification of ojects in the macro scale
this works because of the density and refractivity of the spherical nano glass sphere.
the same effects can be seen in density lensing (DL) except the added gravity can "help" with increased magnification.
types of lensing (AGNL) lensing not confirmed by observation
there is also an un observed "gravitational microscoping" effect that has yet to be observed
the lensing surface of the gravitational lense or helio lense is creating a magnifacational artifact (DL) with the help of gravity. the object in the
center is "lensed" onto the outter surface of the lense and size and brightness of the object at the center would be increased to cover most of the
observable surface of the lense. i call this gravitational microscoping (GM)
so if these image magnification artifacts can happen with gravitational microscoping (GM) which is an effect of (DL) and gravity,
can the magnifyed image artifact explain why some galaxies are rotating to fast for gravity to ever hold them together?
if the galaxies were smaller would the rotational speeds be proportionally slower as scale size decreased?
so the dark matter required to hold galaxies together may not be needed to explain why these galaxies are able to rotate so fast, if we take into
account the ability to return the image to its "acual" size no dark energy is required to hold things together
so what happens if the heliospheres we are looking at, have magnifyed images on there outter most surfaces?
would this make it much easyer to find planets?
so why would gravitational lensing be so important?
well if we are looking through lenses (our helio bubble and galaxy density) (DL) at an object that looks far away and its size and luminosity is "an
image artifact" we can no longer use a size/luminosity diagram to interpreate stars and their properties.
so with so many different lenses around how can we be sure of what we are looking at?
with the new way to find these lenses and the ability to study objects with lensing the whole universe may come into focus for us and for our greater
understanding of the universe.
edit on 28-5-2011 by XPLodER because: add img brackets
edit on 28-5-2011 by XPLodER because: add sources
on 28-5-2011 by XPLodER because: add picture and source
edit on 28-5-2011 by XPLodER because: add picture