Gravitational Lensing Helps Redraw the Map of Space

[szh]

Gravitational Lensing Helps Redraw the Map of Space

A really neat article that extends concepts first brought up by Mandl and validated later by Einstein, about how light bending by stars is analogous to light bending in lenses. It has been used to estimate that there may be more than 100 billion planets in our Milky Way alone.

And, it may provide indirect evidence of the existence of Dark Matter and finding it!

http://www.time.com/time/health/article ... 25,00.html

Z

[alms24sebring]

I was ganna say they can see dark matter from gravatational lensing. There was a clear and awesome example I'll have to find again. It still baffles my mind of what it could actually be.

[alms24sebring]

dark matter gravitaional lensing

[bigbadberry3]

Dark whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaattttttttttttt. Dark matter & dark energy are such big fudge factors...... for being 70% of the universe......

[alms24sebring]

Its true. There is strong and direct evidence of both, but more of dark matter. Look at the link I posted.

The best evidence for DM is in all spiral galaxies. The very outside of the galaxies spin almost as fast as it does on the inner orbits like a wheel, meaning the outer orbits spin faster to equal the orbit of the inner instead os like the solar system where the inner planets spin faster. The math (probly some god awful equation) shows that the only explanation is more mass to induce gravity, alot more mass. It may not be 70% but its close to. Dark energy is the force believed to be pushing the expansion of the Universe.

[bigbadberry3]

Its true. There is strong and direct evidence of both, but more of dark matter. Look at the link I posted.

The best evidence for DM is in all spiral galaxies. The very outside of the galaxies spin almost as fast as it does on the inner orbits like a wheel, meaning the outer orbits spin faster to equal the orbit of the inner instead os like the solar system where the inner planets spin faster. The math (probly some god awful equation) shows that the only explanation is more mass to induce gravity, alot more mass. It may not be 70% but its close to. Dark energy is the force believed to be pushing the expansion of the Universe.

Oh no. I get the physics and most of the math behind all the darkness but I hate the large uncertainty. Science + uncertainty = disaster sometimes.

[alms24sebring]

Oh gotchya, I misunderstood. Umm agreeable but only time and an instantly famous scientist will tell us what it is. It is a major uncertainty, but seeing it indirectly gives some science fact to it too.

[carloslebaron]

The fraud of Einstein and Eddington about gravitational lenses is obvious.

Lets do the practical view of the famous displacement of the star selected in 1919 by the Brittish expeditions.

The assumed displacement given by Newton was 0.8 second and the displacement given by Einstein was 1.76 second.

This is to say, that you fold a dollar bill in half three times, you will have 1/8th of the bill facing you.



You unfold the bill up to see 3/8th part of the bill and that is the prediction of Newton.



You fold the bill up to see the 6/8th part of the bill, and that is the prediction of Einstein.



But...this is the funny part: you must put the folded bill ONE MILE AWAY FROM YOU and watch it with YOUR NAKED EYES, and that...that is the famous DISPLACEMENT OF THE IMAGE OF THE STAR seeing from earth.

What a difference with the caricature made by Hawkin in his comic book A Brief Story of Time...where you see the displacement of the image of the star practically hours from its assumed real location...

Now, if one takes the time to read the original writings of Einstein about his fantasies...oops, excuse me, his hallucinations...damn!...sorry, I mean...his theories, he himself recognized that such displacement of the image of the star caused by the gravity of the Sun should be the least, barely noticeable. This is to say, the pictures must be amplified several times (today using the Zoom tool) in order to detect such a displacement.

But wait, somethging more, the Sun has an atmosphere, this is to say, gases surround the Sun, and besides the gases there is heat, and you know that heat and gases together cause the famous mirages (A mirage is a naturally occurring optical phenomenon in which light rays are bent to produce a displaced image of distant objects or the sky).

The presence of the plasma surrounding the Sun is enough to create the optical illusion with objects located behind the Sun and their images around this star are located in a different location.

In Einstein years, he and the scientists were IGNORANT about cosmic dust, gases, etc, causing the optical illusion of seeing such a displacement of the image of celestial bodies. He even believed that space was a "perfect vacuum" and invented his idea that nothing is faster than "c". The exxagerate displacement seeing today in several pictures took by the Hubble contradicts the words of Einstein plus never agrees with the calculated displacement using -from our point of view with our feet on earth- the visible cosmos as a 24 hours or 360 grades (or better to say, 12 hours and 180 grades from horizon to horizon).

Ladies cand Gentlemen, if you still believing in the fantasies of such Relativity, then you are on your own, but remember to make the practical experiment of the folding dollar seeing it at a mile of distance with your naked eyes...and if this practical experiment can't wake you up to reality...well...

[szh]

You do realize that this effect has been measured, accurately, and with far more accuracy with the tools available today? These measure angles with accuracies far better than that earlier study.

You can choose to ignore hard science, of course, but science can make progress without you too.

Z

[carloslebaron]

Fold your dollar...and look at it a mile of distance away...gravitational lenses is not hard science...is stupidty to the square...

[szh]

Fold your dollar...and look at it a mile of distance away...gravitational lenses is not hard science...is stupidty to the square...

Remember that Eddington did not use naked eyes either - he photographed the stars and their shifts.

Again, you can choose to ignore reality all you want.

Z

[carloslebaron]

No difference, the folded dollar bill applies to anyone watching the phenomenon without the use of a telescope, and still demonstrating that Hawking's book is full of exaggerate caricatures made in order to trick the ignorant. By the way, read the book written by the science historian John Waller, Einstein's Luck, where he exposes Eddington making make ups to the plaques in order to validate Relativity, in other words: FRAUD!

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

Like szh said...this has been confirmed multiple times. DO you have something against the modern scientific community mr. lebaron? That's a very cynical view you have there to discount years of scientific reasoning. I'd like to know your background a little more, because you sure are a curiosity of this forum.

[szh]

Like szh said...this has been confirmed multiple times.

Including the dual plane trip experiment to show identical atomic clocks differing in time with relative motion exactly how Einstein predicted.

And, the fundamental operation of the GPS satellites ... since they are in orbit above the gravitational field of the earth, they actually have to take Einstein's laws into account to compensate for the difference in time at that altitude. Else the location accuracy on the surface of the Earth would be off!

DO you have something against the modern scientific community mr. lebaron? That's a very cynical view you have there to discount years of scientific reasoning. I'd like to know your background a little more, because you sure are a curiosity of this forum.

He is demonstrating all the classic symptoms of a Troll. Which I why I am stopping my responses to his posts.

Z

[alms24sebring]

Yes I remember Mr. Lebaron from a while ago. Trollage at the max. Even if you have one atomic clock on the floor and another 10 feet up, the higher one is ever so slightly slower.

[carloslebaron]

(I wonder if some dudes are getting paid to wite so many nonsenses here as if they were real science)

Mr Essen -the inventor of the atomic clock- laughed of Einstein and his followers, and he wrote that Einstein and the relativists are not only lying to themselves but are mesing up physics as nobody did it before: "Einstein's ignorance of experimental techniques, gave a result which fooled himself and generations of scientists"...no wonder why relativists claim such variations of time between clocks located barely 10 feet one over another as time dilatation...these lunatics might also claim that the difference of the waiting period for water to boil at the sea level and high in the mountain is due to slowing of time instead of gravity influence on matter...a proved fact...basic science...

Listen, gravity does affect matter, this is to say, the clocks are the affected ones, gravity will affect their functional work...there is not such a thing as dilatation of time...wake up guys....return back to reality...stop spreading fantasies around...stop doing the ridiculous...please...

Cheers.

[szh]

Sigh ...

Z

[alms24sebring]

OMFG..... I mean really. O... M... F... G....

[szh]

OMFG..... I mean really. O... M... F... G....

Yet, if he drives a car with GPS in it, then the relativity equations that are programmed in the software of the satellites and the GPS in the car prove the point - with complete basis in reality how time and gravity are related!

No "experimentation" to prove anything is needed - the reality of the GPS device is proof indeed.

Ignore the troll.

Z

[carloslebaron]

OMFG..... I mean really. O... M... F... G....

Yet, if he drives a car with GPS in it, then the relativity equations that are programmed in the software of the satellites and the GPS in the car prove the point - with complete basis in reality how time and gravity are related!

No "experimentation" to prove anything is needed - the reality of the GPS device is proof indeed.

Ignore the troll.

Z

Oh, come on, now you come out with silly propaganda.

For to start: the calculations made "to correct" the malfunction of the atomic clocks in outer space were made in a basic trial and error method.

There is not a single formula made before the sending of the atomic clocks to outer space, that were made to manufacture the earth's receivers with the corrective device, this is to say, that only after the difference of data between the atomic clocks in space compared with the data of the atomic clocks on earth was calculated, if when the corrective device inside the earth's receivers was manufactured. The calculations weren't made in base of Relativity but in base of the observed difference between datas from the clocks.

Of course, relativists pretend to impose the farse that Relativity's calculations had to be made to find out such a difference, but such is pure crap, the truth is that such calculations to update the different data received from the clocks in space were made in base of experience...not so of predictions.

So, the GPS has never been based in any Relativity, and the calculations have been always been made in base of experience.

Relativity never predicted anything valuable, for example, the famous lie that Relativity predicted the increase of mass because the speed of bodies...such increasing of mass was already an observed fact before Einstein's theories...

I surely will encourage to any poster to stop spreading out lies, come on, just because you are a fanatic of Relativity you don't have to use lies to appear right in front of the rest. Remember that this is not about winning in an argument but to find the truth about the universe, the physical universe...and Relativity surely is doing the contrary, because believing in Relativity is retrurning back to eras when magic ruled, when superstitions were taught in schools, when the imagination of a few men were imposed to the masses.

Fortunately, this is a place in these forums where we can ask for evidence, because science without evidence is void.

So, as you have never presented here time as a physical entity, we have no other choice but to discard any theory which implies it as something that exist in the universe, and we can lean on more accurate explanations which can be perceived with our instruments, that can be even tested, felt, measured, etc, etc...

By empirical and mathematical support, there is not such an extraordinary gravitational lensing but that cosmic dust, variations of temperature, and gases surrounding planets, stars and even galaxies. are the cause of the displacement of the images of bodies located beyond those planets, stars, and galaxies, from our point of view.

Facts rule in science, and cosmic dust, variations of temperature, radiation, gases. etc, etc, have been indeed detected "physically" by our telescopes and instruments...but nobody has ever detected by any means the assumed existence of time.

Science rules, and Relativity IS NOT SCIENCE.

Cheers.

[szh]

For to start: the calculations made "to correct" the malfunction of the atomic clocks in outer space were made in a basic trial and error method.

And what is your reference for this bs statement? Or do you make up these stupid responses as you go?

Obviously, unlike you, I have studied the code and the math involved in GPS calculations.

And the coding to compensate for the Relativity equations was done before the satellites were launched ... no "trial and error" stuff with regard to sending code to satellites already in space.

Plenty of write-ups about this ... here is just one: http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~po ... 5/gps.html

And here, by the way, is a description of the math: http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/1996/Vol%2028_16.pdf ... the paper is entitled: " GPS And Relativity: An Engineering Overview".

Note the word "engineering" ... not "fantasy" as you would like it to be. It is a practical demonstration of how Relativity is an integral part of a physical system like GPS.

There is not a single formula made before the sending of the atomic clocks to outer space, that were made to manufacture the earth's receivers with the corrective device, this is to say, that only after the difference of data between the atomic clocks in space compared with the data of the atomic clocks on earth was calculated, if when the corrective device inside the earth's receivers was manufactured. The calculations weren't made in base of Relativity but in base of the observed difference between datas from the clocks.

You still don't get it.

Time is an essential part of the location calculations - since it is the time measurements that GPS devices use to calculate their position.

Multiple atomic clocks that are in motion and above the earth gravity field will send the wrong time information, and hence the GPS location calculation would be incorrect if the time were not correct - fact of reality. With Relativity taken into account precisely as required, the calculations are exact.

There is tons of real hard visible evidence that proves Relativity. Without any counter proofs. But, you can live in fantasy land all you want, I guess.

Z

[alms24sebring]

Thank you Z, I was hoping you would pull through. Great links too

[AppleBonker]

the calculations made "to correct" the malfunction of the atomic clocks in outer space were made in a basic trial and error method.

For giggles, what is the cause of the "malfunction" you speak? If the theory of relativity is a farce, as you claim, it should be easily provable what is causing the "malfunction" since it appears to occur on all time-keeping devices, no?

[szh]

the calculations made "to correct" the malfunction of the atomic clocks in outer space were made in a basic trial and error method.

For giggles, what is the cause of the "malfunction" you speak? If the theory of relativity is a farce, as you claim, it should be easily provable what is causing the "malfunction" since it appears to occur on all time-keeping devices, no?

As a BTW, the Special Relativity error would be about -7 microseconds per day due to the motion and the General Relativity error would be about 45 microseconds / day due to the gravitational difference.

As a result, the net error without any Relativity compensation would be about 38 microseconds per day too fast. But the clocks themselves were designed accurate to 1 nanoseconds per day (about 38,000 times more accurate than the error introduced by Relativity).

If this 39 microseconds were not corrected, the measurement of location would move about 10 to 11 km per day or 6 miles per day! That would have made the entire system useless - within a few hours of their launch!

To compensate for this, as I recall reading a long time back, the clocks on the satellites were deliberately slowed by about 38 microseconds before launch - people knew of the effect of Relativity ... without having to do any trial and error later!

Needless to say, there are second order effects - such as not being actually at the exact orbit height that they were designed to go to (space rocket science is not perfect). And third order effects - such as when the satellites cross over larger land masses and mountains which can change the local gravity at the satellite by minute amounts.

The second and third order effects are not significant enough to matter (the location precision would not change very much really) so they are not used in the Relativity compensation calculations since these would be quite complex - like calculating the position over the earth and what land masses (or density) might be underneath and affecting the local gravity at the satellite.

And, as another BTW, the GPS receiver systems designed for aircraft (whether commercial or military) are different from the typical ones you can get for your car or consumer usage.

Since planes travel much faster than the average car, biker, hiker, etc., (and sometimes in quite different directions than the satellite motion), and at a height very different from the average consumer location, the expensive aircraft GPS-based navigation systems adjust the time calculations (using the same Relativity equations) by taking their own speed, direction and height into account as well!

This is particularly critical if the aircraft is to be controlled and guided by the on-board GPS to do automated take-off and landings!

Relativity has a totally practical impact on our lives.

Z

[szh]

the calculations made "to correct" the malfunction of the atomic clocks in outer space were made in a basic trial and error method.

For giggles, what is the cause of the "malfunction" you speak? If the theory of relativity is a farce, as you claim, it should be easily provable what is causing the "malfunction" since it appears to occur on all time-keeping devices, no?

Plus, 24 different GPS satellites "malfunctioned" in exactly the same way, eh?

Z

[szh]

Here is another brilliant article on the topic of GPS and Relativity entitled "Relativity in the Global Positioning System" - the equations are tough to follow if you are not facile with math, but very clearly show the calculations. :

http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Art ... rr-2003-1/

Specifically, sections 5 and 6 talk about the Relativity compensation. Section 10 talks about the second-order effects (including other examples like the effect of other planetary bodies - like the moon).

BTW, stationary ground clocks also differ in their time measurement in certain interesting ways. If the atomic clock is at the Equator, it is moving faster than a clock in the northern or southern areas (so it "ticks" slower due to Relativity!). Plus, the earth is not a perfect sphere, so a clock farther away from the Equator is closer to the center of the earth and "ticks" faster due to the increased gravity (another Relativity issue)!

And thus, not particularly surprisingly, for ultimate precision comparisons of atomic clock time, these effects (latitude location, etc.) must be taken into account. The committee that defined the second - many decades ago - worried about this problem and provided guidelines for how to do the comparisons!

Am I being too geeky for folks here?

Z

[szh]

One final geeky post from me - sorry!

This from HP/Agilent (who makes many of the Caesium time references sold in the world today!) is an Application Note from HP - which is famous for producing these technical papers, btw: http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/pdf/AN1289.pdf

In this HP Application Note number 1289, titled "The Science of Timekeeping", they state the following on page 36 (my bolding and underlining in the quote here), and provide a discussion of the Relativity effect on the GPS:

Einstein’s Relativity and Precise Timekeeping
The high level of accuracy now being attained with clocks requires that relativity be included in the comparisons and computations of time and frequency relationships. For example, relativity is an engineering reality in the design and operation of GPS: GPS would not work without its inclusion [20, 21].

The phrase "... relativity is an engineering reality ..." should stand out ... it isn't just science and physics anymore.

By the way, one of the authors of this app note is Professor Neil Ashby. His biography reads (with my italicized bolding shown below):

Neil Ashby was born in Dalhart, Texas on March 5, 1934. He received the B.A. degree (Summa Cum Laude) in physics from the University of Colorado, Boulder, in 1955, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1956 and 1961, respectively. After spending a year in Europe as a postdoctoral fellow, he joined the faculty of the Department of Physics at the University of Colorado in 1962. He has been a Professor of Physics there since 1970, and was Department Chair from 1984–1988. He consults for the Time and Frequency Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, working on relativistic effects on clocks and global time synchronization. His work was the basis of general relativistic correction being properly included in the Global Positioning System. He has been a member of the International Committee on General Relativity and Gravitation from 1989–1995. He serves on several international working groups on relativistic effects in geodesy and in metrology.

I hope, by now, there can be no question whatsoever about the effects of Relativity as practical reality!

Z

[carloslebaron]

The first one of your links, nobody signs it, so this means nobody wants to take responsability of such lies.

Your second link starts as it follows:

INTRODUCTION
The Operational Control System (OCS) of the Global Positioning System (GPS) does not include the rigorous transformations between coordinate systems that Einstein's general theory of relativity would seem to require - transformations to and from the individual space vehicles (SVs), the Monitor Stations (MSs), and the users on the surface of the rotating earth, and the geocentric Earth Centered Inertial System (ECI) in which the SV orbits are calculated. There is a very good reason for the omission: the effects of relativity, where they are different from the effects predicted by classical mechanics and electromagnetic theory, are too small to matter - less than one centimeter, for users on or near the earth.

Case closed!

Please read carefully, without proving the existence of time as something physical all those links are nothing but pure crap. Period.

You can't, by any means, say that I'm incorrect when all your links are based in conjetures, assuming the existence of time as something flowing or whatever.

On the other hand, I have based my statements on real events, real examples, this is to say, on physical reality. Does gravity affects matter? Yes. Does acceleration affects matter? Yes.

There you have it, evidence by lots, evidence that can be tested observing how matter suffers changes with the changes of the environment.

Now, what are you trying to say is that the vibration frequency of the atom of caesium can't be affected by gravity, and such your position is ridiculous...one hundred percent ridiculous. Of course the atoms are affected by gravity, is such a fact and in such a level that liquid metals that can't be mixed on ground can be mixed in outer space. Do you get it now?

With this fact/evidence in my hand, I can state without any doubt that the atomic clocks will suffer malfunction in outer space and that such dilatation of time is nothing but pure imaginations. You have nothing to show here, because you can't show time, so, regardless of the majestic propaganda found in your links, a simple review in all of them reveals that they are nothing but pure babbling without a solid foundation, without a physically real foundation.

In other words, you are "believing" in Relativity, you are implying "magic" when you say that time dilates because time is just a measure, and you are concluding that the standard measure of time dilates when objects are in outer space...come on, wake up to reality.

If you think or state that time is other than just a measure, show it, otherwise just accept that Relativity is as false as a thirteen dollars bill.

Cheers.

[carloslebaron]

the calculations made "to correct" the malfunction of the atomic clocks in outer space were made in a basic trial and error method.

For giggles, what is the cause of the "malfunction" you speak? If the theory of relativity is a farce, as you claim, it should be easily provable what is causing the "malfunction" since it appears to occur on all time-keeping devices, no?

About malfunction of clocks. Do this simple experiment. Buy the cheaper watches you can find in the store. Those Chinese watches that might cost about five bucks. Buy about five or more. Set their calibration at the same hour, minute and second. Keep their records for a week, be sure that they have a same new battery installed in them, and that they still in aggrement with their timing.

After a week, choose two watches and put them inside the freezer compartment of your refrigerator. Keep the record of the difference of seconds between the watches, the ones outside and the ones inside the refrigerator.

You will notice that the "delay" of the functional work on the watches inside the freezer compartment is "regular", this is to say, the same -lets say- six seconds a day.

Now, remove those watches after a week and replasce them by another two and return the affected watches back to normal temperature, you will notice that the returned back to normal temperature won't have the delay anymore while the other two will swart to show it at a regular rate.

This is how temperature affects the functional work on cheap watches.

You must know that there is not such a thing as the "immaculate clock" that is never affected by gravity, acceleration, solar radiation, etc etc...because to believe in such a thing should be a religious stuff, then, having that the atomic clocks are made of matter, and that matter suffers changes wihen is exposed to different environments, it is expected that the clocks -atomic or not- functional work will suffer changes.

You can't go against facts, and fact is that it is a malfunction in the atomic clocks exposed to outer space or acceleration or any other change in their environment.

Cheers.

[alms24sebring]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CW_fc7A06E[/youtube]