Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #865664

Re: Gravitational lensing is JUST diffraction.

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > Richard Hertz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Distant sources of light (starlight, galaxy light) comes radially toward us, here on Earth. It's a flat frontwave because it's far enough, so components of any
> > > > frequency travel at the same velocity.
> > > >
> > > > If a massive celestial object happens to be in the path of the source of light,
> > > > a classical phenomenon of DUAL DIFFRACTION COULD HAPPEN.
> > > >
> > > > For this to happen (and it's NOT gravitational lensing), the diffraction index of
> > > > the BOUNDARY of such celestial object HAS TO BE different of that of vacuum.
> > > >
> > > > Light pass TWICE through such BOUNDARY which, in the case of the Sun,
> > > > can be interpreted as a spherical SHELL that surrounds the object that
> > > > causes DIFFRACTION.
> > > >
> > > > As distant light ENTERS into such boundary, its components are affected
> > > > differently due to a lower speed of light (n > 1, c' = c/n), so wavelengths
> > > > are affected differently. BUT, when the light GETS OUT of the spherical shell,
> > > > every component of the distant source of light IS RESTORED to its original
> > > > wavelength.
> > > >
> > > > Meanwhile, in this DUAL DIFFRACTION EFFECT, frequency of light IS
> > > > PRESERVED all the time, because THE ENERGY OF LIGHT can't change.
> > > >
> > > > But light path is deflected a little bit, enough to EMERGE from the boundary
> > > > and keep moving TOWARD US, without any modification.
> > > >
> > > > As the DIFFRACTION EFFECT is completely dependent of the diffraction index
> > > > AND IF the path of light was coming toward us, different PHOTOS show
> > > > effects like: ring of light (the boundary n is constant for all the perimeter;
> > > > light comes through ONE or TWO spots in the boundary of the interfering
> > > > celestial body; many other effects, like the famous cross).
> > > >
> > > > CONCLUSION: Light diffraction by massive celestial bodies like the Sun (something that WORRIED Eddington enough to write an entire page on
> > > > his 1919 report, claiming that it was impossible "for him") and the famous
> > > > gravitational lensing ARE A GIANT LIE, an HOAX maintained for a century
> > > > just to justify Einstein's calculation of 1.75 arcsec deflection.
> > > >
> > > > Gravitational lensing doesn't exist. It's just a mere diffraction phenomenon.
> > > >
> > > > And some people, of course NOT A RELATIVIST, know enough to write a
> > > > paper about this. Of course, it's labeled as the work of a crank. But he's
> > > > right. Here is the link (enjoy it and choke on it, Dono the cretin).
> > > >
> > > > Deflection of Light by Refraction, Not Gravity (Curve Geometry of Spacetime)
> > > >
> > > > https://medium.com/@GatotSoedarto/the-deflection-of-light-by-refraction-not-gravity-49b9bd919aba
> > >
> > > fake stars is wat it is...
> >
> > i thought i explained dis before...
> >
> > If you take
> > one photo
> > from
> > dat
> > Webb's space photographs...
> > and remove/delete
> > ALL the stars (dat you call  Gravitational lensing)
> >
> > then you won't have anything left in the photo
> > to look at....just a couple of...puffs.
> 
> go ahead...remove all stars (dat you call  Gravitational lensing)
> https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/rockcms/2022-07/220711-james-webb-telescope-first-image-high-res-ew-628p-44ff0c.jpg
> 
> they are all...fake stars.

https://www.prodigitalsoftware.com/StarSpikesPro4.html


-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
 to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
 the unchallengeable.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Gravitational lensing is JUST diffraction. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-11-30 14:29 -0800
  Re: Gravitational lensing is JUST diffraction. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-11-30 14:32 -0800
    Re: Gravitational lensing is JUST diffraction. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-11-30 22:09 -0800
    Re: Gravitational lensing is JUST diffraction. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-06 23:33 -0800
  Re: Gravitational lensing is JUST diffraction. Sergi o <invalid@invalid.com> - 2022-11-30 17:01 -0600
  Re: Gravitational lensing is JUST diffraction. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-11-30 17:33 -0800

csiph-web