Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

So, would that mean that the gravitational lensing over how-ever-many-light-years is ALSO coupled with the convex/cave aspect of the pico-adjusting of the JWT 'lens' such that even our JWT's pico-adjustments affect the NORMAL of the photons to the image?

Can this be adjusted for?

Wouldnt the pico-arc of the overall array affect the image output due to the distances involved such that we receive "false gravitational lensing, simply based on distance from the sensor"

?

I wonder if a more precise version(s) of the hex lenses could be made such that they can 'normal-ize' on a much more refined basis.

I know that each JWT is already capable of mico-flexes to each cell... but if we can develope an even further refinement (Moores law on the JWTs hex lenses resolution) we will be able to make thousands of images with varying the the normalization to each receiving area and comparing image quality.

Also, I am sure there are folks who know the reflective characteristics of photons from each wavelength that would allow for orientations for each wavelength.

--

Do ALL 'light' wavelengths, particles bounce off the reflector materials in the same way? - meaning do infra waves/photons bounce in the exact same way as some other wavelength with the exact same orientation of the sensor?

---

Do they do any 'anti-gravitational-lensing' correction calcs to 'anti-bend' a photons path to us to 're-normalize' the path that we should have seen?

Whats the current science behind such?



The gravitational lensing matches exactly how it looked in Hubble's deep field overlay, so I would guess no the JWST lens is not causing any "false" gravitational lensing? If that's what you are asking.


Thanks!

I worded that poorly ;

Wouldn't one be able to adjust the perceived path of the photon after time, to adjust for re-normalizing the path of the photon based on the understanding of the gravitational arc imposed on such -- meaning the astro equivalent of "ZOOM. ENHANCE!" :-)


Depending on the orientation, you wouldn't have the right pixels to put for the angle of view from straight on.

Eg, you'd normally see the side view of an object, but the lensing gets you the top and bottom views


Ah right, good question yes it seems like it could be possible..


The normalization I was thinking of was :

Lets assume you have a 'straight' vector of line of sight pointing your Earthly-Bound-Lens [hubble/jswt/whatever] at the object of interest.

you also have an idea through previous observations of gallaxies on the line of sight, which will have gravitational impact on the trajectory of the photons of interest...

the arrival photon's wiggle represents a wobble in time to get to earth. Meaning it changed phase multiple times between our sensor receiving it, and its origin.

If one could look at the path and the grav-lenses it went through, one may be able to extrapolate a more clear picture at various distances(times)....??? /r/NoStupidQuestions

( I am picturing a straight shot - but the photon traveled between many other celstials - and those


I'm convinced we are receiving "Wobbly Photons"

Meaning that no matter waht, when we speak of gravitational lenses, we could, usting JWST account for the "wobble" of a photon, nased on the accurate knowledge of where a body was, via measuring through multiples of JSWT observations... (ideally through actually multiple JWSTs, in differnt locations)

The idea being that if we can triangulate a more precice location between earth [A] and galaxy [N] - set of all galaxies/bodies/whatever,

We may be able to calculate the influence of gravity lens upon phont differentials based on when they came from and how far...

Ultimately making adjustments to the output of an image \based on super deep-field focus which is effectively selecting to the phtons of interest... and we can basically "carbon date" the accuracy of an image with a higher resolution?


We already calculated the gravity and mapped it out. Here is a paper on some of the research: https://www.kiss.caltech.edu/papers/darkmatter/papers/the_da...

What i think is pretty cool is that the gravity lens actually allowed hubble to see galaxies it may have not ever seen had there not been a gravity lens and now that we have JWST we see many more distant galaxies (and more of the same galaxy reflected in more positions)


Why have we not seen results of these scopes pointing at near bodies?

What does jupiter, PLUTO look like from these lenses???

THE FUCKING MOON

WE SPENT *BILLIONS* -- Why dont we have live streams?

GO FUCK YOUR NSA

--

WHO PAID FOR IT.

The data should be global. define a SINGLE national defense trope. and back it up.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: