Gravitational Lensing

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />BB claims GL is caused by Dark Matter. Is it possible that GL is caused by a "wake" of gravity created by the movement of a passing galaxy or galaxy cluster,etc. or in MM a wake in the elysium created by the same?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I would say no because a galaxy consists of individual stars and lots of space. Any such "wake" would have to be left behind the individual stars as they move. But we detect no such wake in any direction left by the Sun. -|Tom|-

Tom,

In MM you proposed that there are scales that are both quantum and Macro level. Would it not be safe to assume that a rock, moon, star, solar system, galaxy, galaxy cluster, etc. would not only have gravitational effects within each scale, but also have an aggragate level gravitational effect as well on each system. How would this not cause such a "wake" given the movement of galaxy and galaxy clusters whether that movement is orbital or expansion based (inward naturally)?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />In MM you proposed that there are scales that are both quantum and Macro level.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">This must refer to some other context. The quantum world is on one scale, the macro world on another.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Would it not be safe to assume that a rock, moon, star, solar system, galaxy, galaxy cluster, etc. would not only have gravitational effects within each scale,...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I don't know what that means. There is only one graviton medium, and it affects a certain limited range of scale.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">... but also have an aggragate level gravitational effect as well on each system. How would this not cause such a "wake" given the movement of galaxy and galaxy clusters whether that movement is orbital or expansion based (inward naturally)?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You completely lost me. I don't have a clue what this means. Perhaps you are thinking of elysium, not gravitons? Even so, I don't know what you are asking. Elysium would fill any "wake" at the speed of light as any mass moved by, so it would extend out to only a fraction of a light-second at most. -|Tom|-

Tom,

Ok so the disturbance would be in the elysium. You say that the void would be filled at the speed of light. But would not the rush to fill this void cause a lingering effect on the elysium. Would there not be collisions, bouncing and general disturbance in the "sea" of elysium rushing in to fill the void for quite a time afterwards. Perhaps this is what causes gravitational lensing is my point. If you could prove this, you could prove your elysium.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />would not the rush to fill this void cause a lingering effect on the elysium.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">No more so than a thrown baseball leaves a lingering effect on the air in its path.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Would there not be collisions, bouncing and general disturbance in the "sea" of elysium rushing in to fill the void for quite a time afterwards.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">There would be no disturbance in the sea of gravitons (too small, too fast). But there would be in the light-carrying medium (elysium). That is what I meant when I said it would be filled in at the speed of light, leaving no detectable effects even one second after the passing of any star.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Perhaps this is what causes gravitational lensing is my point.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Gravity causes gravitational lensing when galaxy arcs are seen. Multiple quasar images are more likely to be a refraction effect.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If you could prove this, you could prove your elysium.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You may have the kernal of a good idea there, in that entrainment of elysium by masses would create currents in it. But we ignore those in the solar system, so currents from galaxies would be even more ignorable until that mindset changes. -|Tom|-

I see your point about the baseball, but a galaxy would be an awfully big ball. To the molecule of air the baseball's effect may have a substantial impact, you know the quantum science concept of the wing flap of a butterfly ultimately forming a hurricane.

I do like your idea of currents, I still think in terms of Spacetime when thinking of such matters and thought that such would be self evident. For goodness sake look at our own atmosphere, it is probable the best model for the behavior of cosmic gases and celestial bodies. Does elysium replace the ideas of spacetime, for some reason I have concluded that it does. But I am probable missing something.