Distance to "Dark Bodies" in our galaxy?

[MGmirkin]

(Distance to Dark Bodies)
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegal ... _1079.html

Using the unique orbit of NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope and a depth-perceiving trick called parallax, astronomers have determined the distance to an invisible Milky Way object called OGLE-2005-SMC-001. This artist's concept illustrates how this trick works: different views from both Spitzer and telescopes on Earth are combined to give depth perception.

[...]

Although astronomers cannot see a dark body, they can infer its presence from the way light acts around it. When a dark body like OGLE-2005-SMC-001 passes in front of a bright star, its gravity causes the background starlight to bend and brighten, a process called gravitational microlensing. When the observing telescope, dark body, and star system are closely aligned, the microlensing event reaches maximum, or peak, brightness.

[...]

Because astronomers knew the exact distance between Earth and Spitzer and the time lag between the peak-observed brightness, they could determine OGLE-2005-SMC-001's speed. Using trigonometric equations and graphs to do the "brain's" job, scientists then inferred the dark body's location to be in the outer portion, or halo, of our galaxy.

Sounds interesting. Still not sold on "lensing" or "micro-lensing," as "lensing" seems to have been used inconsistently, and in several cases as a kludge to avoid dealing with the implications of several redshifted objects adjacent to a much less redshifted central object. So, it seems like the basis is perhaps shaky.

BUT, I've said for a while that if we can use something OTHER than redshift (IE, parallax) to determine distances we darn well should. Now, if we could do the same thing for the redshifted objects to find out whether they're more local or at the edge of the known universe (according to the Hubble relation), that would be awesome. I tend to think the former will be true, a la Arp. But we'll see.

So, it should be interesting to see what comes of this new technique & what, if anything, it tells us with any certainty.

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin

[webolife]

I posted recently [COBE Dipole thread] that a reasonable option for redshift is a field pressure effect of movement toward or away from the object with respect to the local cosmic centroid, be it the galactic core, Sol, or even the universal centroid. Speed and distance have little if any effect, since we are moving through a pressure gradient, but the vectors will be increased or decreased based on our direction of travel.
In the same vein, "microlensing" is easily explained [sans Doppler] based on the fact that vectors are combinable "around" objects... the gradient aspect will be decreased somewhat as the direction of the vector is to the side[s] of the "central line" of intervening material.

[MGmirkin]

I posted recently [COBE Dipole thread] that a reasonable option for redshift is a field pressure effect of movement toward or away from the object with respect to the local cosmic centroid, be it the galactic core, Sol, or even the universal centroid. Speed and distance have little if any effect, since we are moving through a pressure gradient, but the vectors will be increased or decreased based on our direction of travel.
In the same vein, "microlensing" is easily explained [sans Doppler] based on the fact that vectors are combinable "around" objects... the gradient aspect will be decreased somewhat as the direction of the vector is to the side[s] of the "central line" of intervening material.

Don't know whether that works for the redshift of quasars (in general?), which were the subtle point of mentioning the variously grouped redshifted objects clustered around certain blueshifted or lower-redshifted objects... Or for the quantization of redshift of quasars?

Just a thought,
~Michael

[webolife]

The Arp redshift is admittedly not the same as the optical/directional/pressure-based shift... at least I haven't yet fully worked out the relationship. The "recent ejection" redshift model speaks to an aspect of field geometry I haven't studied enough, except to appreciate and admire. Perhaps the redshift of the quasars is modified by their proximity to, and therefore entrenchment in the higher pressure core of the host galaxy field? Well, that's my model and I'm sticking to it! ............. for now!