How does the EU explain this picture of "Lensing"?

[nick c]

For me this implies:

1) if "lensing" occurs in the cosmos then it is due to a phenomenon of photons through a medium and is a geometric optical effect due to diffraction.
2) grav-lensing is not actually happening as it is described, else it must happen at every point of light (a star), and at every massive region of observable matter --this isn't happening however.
3) GL is total fabricated <moderator edit>.

[Native]

@viscount aero,

Gravitational lensing is simply ripping off light diffraction through a medium:
http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/physics1 ... ers%20(old)/13-Slow_Light.html

Exactly so indeed! There is no “time/space warping” in play at all but just natural diffraction of light in the magnetic/atmospheric surroundings of the lensing object.

NB: The posted link is broken. Should be: http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/physics10/old%20physics%2010/chapters%20%28old%29/13-Slow_Light.html

[D_Archer]

Could the prism effect be because of (dark/not visible range) clouds of hydrogen gas (H II regions)? Maybe that is why the image the OP alluded to looks that way?

Regards,
Daniel

[viscount aero]

@viscount aero,

Gravitational lensing is simply ripping off light diffraction through a medium:
http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/physics1 ... ers%20(old)/13-Slow_Light.html

Exactly so indeed! There is no “time/space warping” in play at all but just natural diffraction of light in the magnetic/atmospheric surroundings of the lensing object.

NB: The posted link is broken. Should be: http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/physics10/old%20physics%2010/chapters%20%28old%29/13-Slow_Light.html

thanks, and thanks for correcting the link

[celeste]

From D. E. Scott Rebuts T. Bridgman

GRAVITATIONAL LENSING
TB says I "describe gravitational lensing (GL) as untested." This is a total fabrication. I resent it.
A complete reading of that section of TES will reveal that, in my opinion, it is not that GL is
untested but rather that it has been misapplied in ways that Einstein never intended. He
described it as being an effect between two stellar (point) sources. In order to interpret it as
being an effect observable between a galaxy and a distant QSO, the galaxy would have to
behave in a way such that all its mass is acting at a point, a so-called 'point-mass singularity'.
There is no astronomical (or laboratory) evidence of infinitely dense point-masses. When
relativists discuss 'point-masses' what they mean is a mathematical abstraction - the center of
mass - which is not a physical object.
So my opinion is that the original Einstein prediction has been hijacked for purposes of
explaining away enigmatic observations to which its application is inappropriate.

Nick,
Not only is the center of mass not an object,but it does not even have to lie inside an object. Notice that the center of mass for the solar system is not always inside the sun. It isn't now. So what that means, is that right now, the sun is curving around a point,outside of itself. In the curved space-time model, this orbit of the sun is caused by space being curved around the center of mass. But is space curved one way for mass, and another for light? No. So if Einstein was right, shouldn't light we see passing between the sun and center of mass, actually be bent towards the center of mass, and away from the sun. If I have not made a mistake here, this seems like more evidence for Dowdye's work. At least in his model, we should always have light bent towards the sun.

[quantauniverse]

Quasar J1029+2623 is the latest gravitational lens 3D map. Grav lens photos look like the trails left behind by asteroids moving by earth. Scientists have a second scenario they of course reject, as to explain it, by saying that large scale quasar structures cannot be moving faster across the sky than closer nearby foreground galaxies. A third simple explanation, presented by Halton Arp, they ignore, which is that quasars are closer to earth than these galaxies, and these are their motions with respect to the background galaxies.
Story at http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2013/02/3d-quasar-j10292623-map-shows-faster.html

[jacmac]

I find this thread hard to follow.

The labels in the picture don't seem to go with the text.
Which is the galaxy being lensed?
There is talk of quasars but nothing is labeled Q.

I thought lensed light showed up as two or more images of one object.
But now we have a large curve of light? Is this in addition to multiple images or what?

Any help would be appreciated.

Jack