Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane Climber
hello
I'm new to these ideas so please just shoot me down if im on the wrong track. Doesn't this idea get even more complicated when you consider the rather large redshift cause by objects with a massive gravity, such as light from near a black hole? and as light travels through the universe to us how can we be sure of an objects distance or location or velocity considering all the factors that can warp it on its way. It seems to me your sugesting there might be something wrong with the cosmological model ,but i thought we already knew that?
Cheers
 |
Yes, it does get more complicated to take 'gravitational lensing' into account. This is what happens when light has to pass close to a large gravitational object before we see it. Among other effects, the light intensity patterns can shift in time and we can see the same signal (object image) repeated multiple times in the same image, for example.
This phenomenon can actually tell us lots about the physical properties of the intervening object and thus can reveal more information, had it not occurred. Some of this information is being used in the chase to ascertain the nature of some of the more mysterious stuff in the Universe.
The scientists doing research are very meticulous about which objects they choose to base their cosmological models on. Whilst the papers I am adding to this board, seemingly challenge some of the tenets of cosmology, they are part of the normal scientific process and really serve as a double check to ensure that cosmological models are 'on track'.
I, for one, am glad that this process occurs. It re-assures me that the basis of the cosmological models we hear about aren't just based on 'wobbly science'.
Cheers & Rgds.