<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The post about black holes reminds me of a question I've been meaning to ask.How well would a black hole (assuming you had access to one which wasn't obscured by a dazzlingly bright accretion disk) work as a primary lens for a telescope? It seems to me that you could have a very large aperture with very little distortion because the light would not actually be passing through or reflecting off anything. Could you get a decent image? If not the what distortions might you get? <br />Posted by kg</DIV><br /><br />Gravitational lenses have very high distortions due to the alignment not being perfect between the lens and the target object. Often there are multiple smeared images around the lens.</p><p>Now if you could move the black hole wherever you wanted.... <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>