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 XPLodER
reply to post by Gemini67
you know if giant space ants attack from the other side of the galaxy
we could defend ourselves
xploder
Originally posted by davidgrouchy
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/00fad0432173.png[/atsimg]
I see it too.
It remains to be determined if the optical distortion is due to the object being photographed or the limitations of the telescope used to take the picture. For instance if taken by hubble, we could be seeing brush strokes on the polymer finish of the lense itself. But either way. The distribution of focal points is similar.
David Grouchy
In general, in order to have a focal point at the center of mass, the mass would have to bend light into itself...which would make it a black hole.
To the question about the focal points...while I'm sure you could make one that would vaporize rock using the Sun, you have to keep in mind that the amount of light we get from these galaxies is no where even in the ballpark of that. Most images of distant galaxies are made from fairly long exposures in order to collect enough light to be able to actually see something. I don't even think you could focus the light from the full Moon to accomplish much, and it's probably the 2nd brightest celestial object next to the Sun on Earth(and is really just reflected light from the Sun anyway.)
What gravitational lensing is really good for is to get a better view of some things that would otherwise be too distant to see much with our current telescopes, though it would be interesting to be wrong.
Originally posted by tomten
reply to post by XPLodER
Some more info here.
About Graviational Lensing
Originally posted by Dashdragon
Originally posted by davidgrouchy
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/00fad0432173.png[/atsimg]
I see it too.
It remains to be determined if the optical distortion is due to the object being photographed or the limitations of the telescope used to take the picture. For instance if taken by hubble, we could be seeing brush strokes on the polymer finish of the lense itself. But either way. The distribution of focal points is similar.
David Grouchy
There's not really a distortion in that image unless I'm missing what you're referring to. It's 2 galaxies with one that blasted through the middle of the other at a nearly perpendicular angle.
I would post a link to a recent UniverseToday article where they actually use this picture when talking about how it could represent how ring galaxies are formed from specific gravitational interaction on a spiral galaxy, but UT is currently down as far as I can tell and I don't remember the article they used as their source. The effect I believe you guys are pointing to as an example is just the spiral galaxy the other crossed through. I believe the person who posted the pic was aware of that though as they said it is a gravitational example.
To the question about the focal points...while I'm sure you could make one that would vaporize rock using the Sun, you have to keep in mind that the amount of light we get from these galaxies is no where even in the ballpark of that. Most images of distant galaxies are made from fairly long exposures in order to collect enough light to be able to actually see something. I don't even think you could focus the light from the full Moon to accomplish much, and it's probably the 2nd brightest celestial object next to the Sun on Earth(and is really just reflected light from the Sun anyway.)
What gravitational lensing is really good for is to get a better view of some things that would otherwise be too distant to see much with our current telescopes, though it would be interesting to be wrong.
WOW! Did an eagle just fly in the room? Because something just went waaay over my head. I can feel the shape of my forehead changing as I read.
Thanks for all this, I'm going to slowly, over several days, pour through this info and your links and threads. Hopefully I'll have focused dreams about seeing through the lens of a galaxy, peering into the lives of my alien counterparts. Or, I'll dream of an invention of free energy using the infinite universal light! I'm gonna be a millionaire! HEHE
All thanks to ATS. I love this place.
Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to post by XPLodER
I went back and read your thread from last year on gravitational microscoping, and I'd love to see more observational examples of the effect, to see what sort of merit it truly has. You have at least two examples, but all galaxies have observationally hidden mass. Can gravitational microscoping be applied to all galaxies under all circumstances? And are there more than two cases where the proposed phenomenon is demonstrated more explicitly (as is the case with Hoag's object)?
Of course, I know the answer to both of those questions. I just want to be fair and see how you answer them.