It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by GodIsPissed
And why is it we can see so far out there but we can't see the our own planets up close?
I mean if we can see so far why aren't we looking at the planets up close?They always just show clusters!As far as they can see they should be able to see a hot alien chick on Jupiter..if there was one of course.
Why can't we see more planets up close?Besides Mars.Billions of planets out there and Mars is the only one we get to see up close?
If we have the technology to see wayyy past our own solar system then why can't we see our own planets up close?Should be able to see an ant's genitals on Mars with the technology we have
Originally posted by Illustronic
I do believe the Einsteinian Theory of Relativity does account for space distortion due massive gravitational fields. I don't see anything here that suggests our understanding of gravitational lensing imaging is unknown and we are on the wrong track of understanding the nature of things. The best part about the scientific method is that new discoveries add to the verification or amendment of the theories we see as repeatable and measurable phenomena. It's really the best operable way to progress.
ScienceDaily (Jan. 13, 2011) — Looking deep into space, and literally peering back in time, is like experiencing the universe in a house of mirrors where everything is distorted through a phenomenon called gravitational lensing. Gravitational lensing occurs when light from a distant object is distorted by a massive object that is in the foreground. Astronomers have started to apply this concept in a new way to determine the number of very distant galaxies and to measure dark matter in the universe.
Originally posted by DGenR8
Great thread, very interesting ideas.
Could the lensing also cause duplication/mirroring of objects as well as distance distortion?
S&F and 'A' for effort.
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
Originally posted by seraphnb
Huge fan! I love your work here on ATS and cannot wait for another thread.
I was wondering whether this could possibly lend a hand of credibility to the
whole "Nibiru/Nemesis/Elenin/et cetera" idea. I am not a big fan of the whole
"doomsday 2012" idea, but, here goes: Could it be possible that the asteroid
is just a few thousand kilometers out in space, but the lens of our planet be
distorting its distanceand size? I am sure that if NASA saw a meteor this close
and wanted to keep it a secret, they would be nice enough to not take pictures
of it with any probes.
Originally posted by aka_angrygoose
could elenin be just lensing
As i understood you try to make us believe that we see something different because lensing occurs almost everywhere and the universe and the distribution of stars and galaxy is in fact totally different because be are looking through multiple lenses.
In practice, the maximum gravitational perturbation by the Sun on the orbit of the Moon near eclipses may be taken as the time when the lunar and solar longitudes are equal. Details of the procedure are provided in the reference cited. We find that maximum eclipse occurs roughly 38±1.9 seconds of time, on average, before the time of gravity maximum. If gravity is a propagating force, this 3-body (Sun-Moon-Earth) test implies that gravity propagates at least 20 times faster than light.
Lastly, we note experimental evidence from neutron interferometers that purports to demonstrate a failure of the geometric weak equivalence principle, that gravity is due to a curvature of space-time. (Greenberger & Overhauser, 1980) This experiment confirmed the strong equivalence principle (local equivalence of a uniform acceleration and a gravitational field), but its results are incompatible with the geometrical weak equivalence principle because interference effects in quantum mechanics depend on the mass. This is because the wave nature of the neutron depends on the momentum of the neutron, which is mass times velocity. So all phase-dependent phenomena depend on the mass through the wavelength, a feature intrinsic to quantum mechanics.
Since the experiment confirms the applicability of quantum mechanics even in the presence of gravity, including this non-geometrical mass dependence, the experiment seems to be a step in the undermining of the purely geometrical point of view, and “tends to bother theorists who prefer to think of gravity as being intrinsically related to geometry”, according to the authors.
While relativists have always been partial to the curved space-time explanation of gravity, it is not an essential feature of GR. Eddington (1920, p. 109) was already aware of the mostly equivalent “refracting medium” explanation for GR features, which retains Euclidean space and time in the same mathematical formalism. In essence, the bending of light, gravitational redshift, Mercury perihelion advance, and radar time delay can all be consequences of electromagnetic wave motion through an underlying refracting medium that is made denser in proportion to the nearness of a source of gravity. (Van Flandern, 1993, pp. 62-67 and Van Flandern, 1994) And it is now known that even ordinary matter has certain electromagnetic-wave-like characteristics. The principal objection to this conceptually simpler refraction interpretation of GR is that a faster-than-light propagation speed for gravity itself is required. In the context of this paper, that cannot be considered as a fatal objection.
The Speed of Gravity is ³ 2x1010
A gravitational lens not only distorts the image of a distant object, it can also act like an optical lens, collecting and refocusing the light to make it appear brighter. Wondering if gravitational lensing might be responsible for the unusual brightness of these objects, the Herschel scientists teamed up with CfA astronomers Mark Gurwell and Ray Blundell to use the Submillimeter Array (SMA) to help resolve the question through its superb spatial resolution.
The SMA found that indeed the bright objects were distorted images of distant galaxies. Optical follow-ups helped to solidify the conclusion
A false-color image of a galaxy in the distant universe as seen by the Submillimeter Array (SMA). The four knots in the image are all the same galaxy; it appears multiple and distorted because of an intervening galaxy (not visible to the SMA) that magnifies and deforms it. Credit: M. Negrello et al.
A gravitational lens not only distorts the image of a distant object, it can also act like an optical lens, collecting and refocusing the light to make it appear brighter.