It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
reply to post by CLPrime
Another good answer. Thanks for the input. Don't mean to hijack the thread.
Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by CLPrime
could the "holes" be from star formation prior to ignition?
Originally posted by kwakakev
One problem with the term 'Caustic'. As I currently understand it a caustic is a combination of refraction (bend) and reflection (bounce).
The idea of using the sun as a lens just made my head explode, is that why it is so bright to look at? It is drawing and focusing the combined light / energy of the universe?
Any focal lensing by the Sun is counteracted by multiple factors - all of which have already been discussed.
The Sun is bright because it's an active star.
i beleive we will find these focal points in optical and or irfra red/sub mm depending on distences of objects ect its possable that the easyest way to find these focal points is with infra red space telescopes as it is my opinion that the heat signature from the foci may be detectable over great distences.
each sun micro lens is refracting and reflecting light creating the milky look.
Another problem is how does gravity affect light if a photon has no mass? I know it is commonly accepted for black holes to attract and bend light but how does it do it?
Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by CLPrime
If we did hit the delete button on everything else in the universe outside of our solar system, would our sun still work as it is designed?
I just had an idea about why gravity can bend light when photons have no mass. Gravity bends space. I see this theory of gravitational lensing as a tool to map the gravity distribution of space.
I am starting to get a little confused here, does light have mass or not?
If we did hit the delete button on everything else in the universe outside of our solar system, would our sun still work as it is designed?
Yes, it would. Our Sun depends only on its own internal nuclear fusion.
When travelling at the speed of light (which it always does), light gains relativistic mass.
what truly comes of this is the fact that photons have momentum: p = mc = E/c.
The concept of solar sails relies on the pressure light exerts on objects. That pressure is from the photon's momentum.
Originally posted by kwakakev
So what is to stop our sun and solar system from spreading its guts out all over the place once all the external mass and energy is removed? There are some technical and ethical concerns in performing such an experiment so we do need to look for other ways to resolve this. As a thought experiment I see the result would be like placing a person into the vacuum of space when use to the pressure on earth, blood will start flowing out everywhere.
This is interesting, apparently we cannot travel at the speed of light because our mass would be infinite. So a photon with no mass does not have this problem as any multiplying factors to 0 still equal 0, even infinity x 0 still equals 0. As the speed of light changes through different mediums is there a change in the value of this relativistic mass?
My current understanding of the propagation of light is that it is constant, not relative through space. Like in the same way sound waves travel through water but instead of each molecule bumping into the next molecule to send the sound wave, each electron bumps into the next electron through the photon to send the light wave.
By calling light relative I am getting the picture that if we turn the head lights on in our spaceship as we are travelling near the speed of light, this light beam would go faster than if we had our spaceship stopped. Is this right or wrong?
what truly comes of this is the fact that photons have momentum: p = mc = E/c.
Do you have any number value of the momentum in relation to a single photon? Does the frequency of the photon make a difference to this?
The concept of solar sails is based on the atomic and sub atomic composition of the solar winds, there is a lot more thrown out of the sun than photons. The light can cause the electrons and atoms to excite, but not yet convinced of the push.
Originally posted by CLPrime
Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by CLPrime
could the "holes" be from star formation prior to ignition?
That could certainly be the case, as well.
I think the general conclusion we can draw is that it's hard to know what we're looking at from a single image alone. As far as the entire observable universe is concerned: a picture may be worth a thousand words, but an extended study by multiple observatories and independent teams of cosmologists, astronomers, and astrophysicists is worth a thousand pictures.
Originally posted by kwakakev
One problem with the term 'Caustic'. As I currently understand it a caustic is a combination of refraction (bend) and reflection (bounce). I do accept that light is being refracted through the matter and gravity of space but do not see how it is being reflected. Here is a paper that links refraction with specific gravity to help with the equations involved www.minsocam.org...
Another problem is how does gravity affect light if a photon has no mass? I know it is commonly accepted for black holes to attract and bend light but how does it do it?
As I see it, gravity is not constant in space. The closer the light gets to suns, black holes, galaxies and such the more it bends. The elemental composition of the space will also affect the refractive index. To build a map of all the gravity and matter refractions I recommend to start local and work your way out.
For these hot spots there needs to be a strong gravitational sink to focus all the light into one point, a black hole is the only shape that currently makes sense to me as it is able to suck in light that has been polarized for other directions if they get too close. This expands the energy potential from the insignificant number CLPrime came up with in his first calculations by 360 degrees x 360 degrees x 360 degrees.
The idea of using the sun as a lens just made my head explode, is that why it is so bright to look at? It is drawing and focusing the combined light / energy of the universe?
Originally posted by kwakakev
I am starting to get a little confused here, does light have mass or not? Understanding the core fundamentals of light is going to make a big difference in building a strong foundation to get accurate results.
The photon is generally considered to have no mass, maybe we do not have scales sensitive enough to measure it yet or maybe it does not. At the moment I see the photon as a representation of a wave propagating through electrons, which do have mass. Light does act as a particle and a wave.
The Nichols Radiometer is one device that can measure the pressure of light or other electromagnetic radiation. This device is an upgrade of the Crookes Radiometer which appears to operate on convection currents and heat transfer as it does not work in a pure vacuum. The Nichols Radiometer also requires some slight air pressure to operate so it is still feasible that photons are massless entities that facilitate electromagnetic wave propagation through electrons.
I am not sure about the reflecting part, it give the impression that there is gravitational focusing of stars onto other stars to produce any slightly significant readings of this affect. After looking into this more I am on the fence about this one at the moment.
Why would the external mass and energy keep the guts of the solar system contained? Remember, the solar system is already in the vacuum of space.
Well, actually, E^2 = (m^2)(c^4) + (p^2)(c^2). For a photon, E = hf. The photon's rest mass, m, is 0, so that leaves the right side of the first equation, or E = pc. So, hf = pc, and p = hf/c. This is the momentum of the photon.
I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate with "each electron bumps into the next electron through the photon."
Wrong. The speed of light is always constant in all reference frames.
Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by CLPrime
In removing the rest of the universe apart from our solar system this is what I imagine. The heliosphere is the first to crack and dissipated exploding out into this new absolute void. The planetary orbits will wildly expand as the momentum of their movement sends them on a straight instead of a curved path through space. The gravity on these planets will also breakdown flinging everything off due to the centrifugal force of their spin. The sun will explode, maybe not instantly or quickly but it would not be able to sustain the gravitational breakdown as it spreads. After time the solar system will spread out in all directions into this new void due to diffusion. Once things can no longer breakdown any more the life will start to rebuild.
does p = density and hf = magnetic field strength?
I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate with "each electron bumps into the next electron through the photon."
Just trying to picture exactly what happens on the quantum level. A strong foundation on the principles and operation of light helps when multiplying this factor onto the cosmic stage.
No. Not even a little bit. This isn't how things work at that level. If everything external to the solar system was removed, the solar system would continue on as normal, because its stability doesn't depend on anything outside it. It's stability depends only on its own internal gravity.
Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by CLPrime
I admit I may be way off in my imagination of the repercussions, but to say there is no effect is wrong as well. The solar system can be viewed like a cell, the heliosphere is the cell wall, the sun is the nucleus and the planets are its functions in a very rough analogy. If you take that cell out of its environment it will die as it can no longer feed and dispose of its waste in the way it is designed. When looking inside the cell it is easy to say that it is the RNA and other proteins doing all the work, but there are greater dependencies going on with energy transfer.
Let's try this another way, what would happen to the galaxy if we where to delete this solar system? The nearby solar systems would move in to fill up the gap and find gravitational equilibrium with their neighbours again. This adjustment in solar positions will extend throughout the whole galaxy and get smaller the further away it goes. I would not be surprised for the whole universe to feel this effect in at least some very minor way.
I do agree with your explanation of light. Now for the other basic fundamental related to this lensing theory, gravity. There is a direct relationship with mass, but unfortunately Einstein never go to publish his unified theory. Any ideas?