Gravitational Lensing or Inferior Mirage?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the phenomenon of gravitational lensing and whether it can be explained by alternative means, specifically the refraction of light through heat gradients. Participants explore the distinctions between gravitational lensing and optical phenomena such as mirages, examining the principles and laws governing these effects.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if gravitational lensing could be explained by light refraction through a gradient of radiant heat and dense cool space, seeking to understand the differences between this and the explanation involving curved spacetime.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the concept of "dense cool space" and asserts that gravitational lensing aligns with Einstein's predictions and the principles of relativity.
  • A different participant proposes that both astronomical mirages and gravitational lensing exist and suggests that analyzing the light's frequency could help determine the cause of observed distortions, noting that mirages would split light into a spectrum while gravitational lensing would not.
  • One participant clarifies their earlier statement about "dense" space, acknowledging the inaccuracy and emphasizing a desire for constructive discussion rather than conflict.
  • Another participant defends their position by stating that their belief in relativity is based on principles and laws supported by evidence, rather than mere predictions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the explanations for gravitational lensing, with some supporting the relativistic perspective and others proposing alternative explanations. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus reached on the validity of the competing models.

Contextual Notes

Participants exhibit uncertainty regarding the terminology used, such as "dense cool space," and there are unresolved questions about the nature of light refraction versus gravitational effects. The discussion highlights the complexity of distinguishing between different optical phenomena.

6nqpnw
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Can gravitational lensing also be explained by the refraction of light from a more distant object through a gradient of radiant heat and dense cool space?

Same difference? Or completely separate and unrelated?

If unrelated, how can this optical phenomenon be determined as a result of light passing through curved spacetime -vs- heat distortion? (other than Einstein said so)
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I've never heard of "dense cool space". What exactly is that supposed to be?

I don't believe the phenomenon can be explained your way. Gravitational lensing behaves exactly as predicted by Einstein and Relativity.
 
I was looking for an explanation more along the lines of principles and laws, not "beliefs" and "predictions."

However, I do believe I've sorted it out. Astronomical Mirages exist as does Gravitational Lensing. And to determine which of the two is causing the distortion of a distant object, one would only need to analyze the light itself -- specifically, its frequency.

If heat / mirage were 'bending' the light, then it would be split into a spectrum since different frequencies refract by different amounts; whereas gravitational lensing acts on all frequencies evenly.

But I get your point: how can a vacuum be dense? I shouldn't have said 'dense.' Cool air is dense; space isn't air. *bonk* Just wish you would've overlooked that rather than trying to provoke an argument. Thanks anyway; maybe next time we can lock horns.
 
Wow, I think you took my post WAAY over the top lol. None of that was argumentative, but simply saying that I think relativity explains it perfectly. That isn't "prediction and beliefs" as you stated, but is in fact principles and laws that have been proven by evidence.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
606
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K