Right again, Einstein! Scientists find where matter 'waterfalls' into black holes

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
If the space in a mass field were Euclidean normal to non-mass space due to time dilation it would take more time for light to transit it per the external viewer.

It would make light speed inconsistent depending on whether or not it had passed through one or more [of the 'molassas' of] mass fields.

Long time & long distance would be inconsistent.
Long ago and distance away per light would be inconsistent depending on intermediate mass fields it had to cross.

The light 'yardstick' we use would be[come] un predictable.

It would violate a fundamental tenant of relativity.
We are at a 'center' where all light that arrives is consistent in time & distance.

We don’t have to wait for later, slower arriving light that had to transit mass fields.

Slowed time must be paired with reduced space or light speed becomes inconsistent.

Lorentz contraction only shrinks an object in question not its vector path of travel.
Shrinking a photons size doesn't change the fact it travels slower through a mass field per the external viewer.
"We don’t have to wait for later, slower arriving light that had to transit mass fields." Q
Yes, we do. We have seen the same supernova explosion multiple times as we watch the light pass by lensing galaxies.

"The only way a photon transiting a mass field will synchronize with one not transiting is if it travels at superluminal speed to make up for slowed time." - Q
A photon does not have to synchronize with another photon that did not transit the mass field.
'Lensed' light entails triangulation because in the larger frame it is redirected, 'bent'. It's comprised of two angled vectors and not a straight line.

So when Eddington saw stars sooner than expected he might have noticed slower motions because of mass molassas time drag?
Because mass traversing light doesn't synch up with non-mass encountering light?
Yes, distances must be recalculated when the light has transited a strong gravitational field. If we see a lensing source with a halo of images of the same galaxy far behind it, we can sometimes see a supernova go off in one image and then watch the event again and again months or years later as the other images catch up. Lensing sources are the gift that keeps on giving.
  • Like
Reactions: Atlan0001
The [possibly irregular] 'lens' acts as the base of a triangle & if the source object is in a non-isocelese triangle with the 'lens'/base there will be different distances to the source. That could account for different time viewings because the different paths of light had different distances and therefore different timings.

The mass lens could also have another mass field in front or behind one side that could cause one side to have a different path and distance that creates differentiated timings.
  • Like
Reactions: billslugg
Even if a [single uniform] mass field slowed the arrival of light it would do it all at once.

For light to have different timings means there has to different paths.

Even if one were later purely because it went through a mass field and other didn't it has to be two [or more] separate paths.

It is not impossible to converge light from two separate paths to the same time & location,
But it's wildly improbable [unless engineered].

Latest posts