Hubble captures the first-ever multiple portait of a quasar.

[tom_hobbes]

I have to say, this must be one of Hubble's most elegant portraits.<br /><br /><br />"NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has captured the first-ever picture of a group of five star-like images of a single distant quasar.<br /><br />The multiple-image effect seen in the Hubble picture is produced by a process called gravitational lensing, in which the gravitational field of a massive object — in this case, a cluster of galaxies — bends and amplifies light from an object — in this case, a quasar — farther behind it.<br /><br />Although many examples of gravitational lensing have been observed, this "quintuple quasar" is the only case so far in which multiple quasar images are produced by an entire galaxy cluster acting as a gravitational lens.<br /><br />The background quasar is the brilliant core of a galaxy. It is powered by a black hole, which is devouring gas and dust and creating a gusher of light in the process. When the quasar's light passes through the gravity field of the galaxy cluster that lies between us and the quasar, the light is bent by the space-warping gravity field in such a way that five separate images of the object are produced surrounding the cluster's center. The fifth quasar image is embedded to the right of the core of the central galaxy in the cluster. The cluster also creates a cobweb of images of other distant galaxies gravitationally lensed into arcs.<br /><br />The galaxy cluster creating the lens is known as SDSS J1004+4112 and was discovered in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. It is one of the more distant clusters known (seven billion light-years away), and is seen as it appeared when the universe was half its present age.<br /><br />Spectral data taken with the Keck I 10-meter telescope show that these are images of the same galaxy. The spectral results match those inferred by a lens model based only on the image positions and measurements of the light emitted from the quasar.<br /><br />A gravitational lens will always produce an odd number of lensed imag <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#339966"> I wish I could remember<br /> But my selective memory<br /> Won't let me</font><font size="2" color="#99cc00"> </font><font size="3" color="#339966"><font size="2">- </font></font><font size="1" color="#339966">Mark Oliver Everett</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[vonster]

really great image<br /><br />however it again raises a thought that has occurred to me that ive never seen directly addressed via images:<br /><br />a. since we are seeing images of distant objects as they were when the light left (in this case estimate of 7 billion years) then<br /><br />b. everything we view, when far back enough in space and time, is NOT in the same location we are seeing it in anymore and therefore<br /><br />c. our "map" of the universe is obviously totally innaccurate, so:<br /><br />and in order to get an idea of the true locations of distant objects, we would need to determine thier vector and velcocity and make a physical projection "map" of where they really are, now<br /><br />has anybody done this? ie does a map like this exist or is one in progress<br /><br /><br />.