<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">Many of the members of this group seem to like
astrophysics issues. I have a logical question for the members of this group,
about the so-called Einstein Cross.</P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in"><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT><BR></P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">Just a few decades ago, a few astronomers saw some
unexpected patterns of stars, generally cross-shaped patterns of four stars. A
speculation was made that what was seen was the effect of a Gravitational Lens,
and it was called an Einstein Cross. Very quickly, the Physics Community totally
accepted the idea. More than a hundred (alleged) Einstein Crosses have been
found so far.</P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in"><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT><BR></P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">However, it seems to me that the reasoning has
been amazingly weak. IF such a Gravitation al Lens phenomenon exists, WHY would
a distant star ONLY be seen by us as FOUR images? Shouldn’t six or ten or a
hundred images sometimes be seen from Earth? Worse, careful examination of the
alleged Einstein Crosses do NOT show the “perfect symmetry” that a gravitational
lens should necessary create. Instead, even the four images seen are NOT
precisely equally spaced, and the (alleged) images are often of different
optical Magnitude, where a gravitational lens would create EXACTLY identical
images, whether there are four or ten or a hundred images. It also turns out
that the spectrum of the different images are not even identical. </P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in"><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT><BR></P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">Optimistically, I hope we DO find a true Einstein
Cross, but people need to do far more careful analysis of the brightness and
spectrum and spacing of all the (alleged) images of Gravitational Lenses.</P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in"><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT><BR></P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">I see many similar logical sloppiness issues in
modern Physics. Impressively optimistic reasoning is applied to Exoplanet
claims. No one seems to have considered what the effects for even Proxima
Centauri would be when Venus happens to Transit our Sun. Even with the Earth and
Venus having very low orbital inclination, WE only witness Venus Transits twice
every 120 years. Did you sense any darkness in 2004 or in 2012 for a few hours
when Venus covered over about 1/13,000 of the Sun’s brightness? That effect only
reduced the brightness of the Sun for us by less than 1/10 optical magnitude, an
extremely minimal effect. From Proxima Centauri, even very sensitive optical
instruments would not detect the Sun dimming by less than 1/10 optical
magnitude, especially since the Sun regularly has far more brightness variations
due to Sunspots. Similarly, the gravitational “wobbling” effects of the Sun due
to Venus pulling the Sun sideways (being a pulling mass which is only around
1/400,000 that of the Sun) would cause impressively tiny spectral oscillations,
every eight months or so.</P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in"><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT><BR></P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">I have no problem with scientists being
“optimistic” but I expect that extreme care must always be applied in solid
analysis.</P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in"><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT><BR></P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">Carl Johnson</P>
<P style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in"><FONT size=2
face=Arial></FONT><BR></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>