I think it is only fitting to point out that when gazing into the heavens through a telescope lens, it is the refraction of light that makes everything seem so much larger and clearer. Refraction occurs anytime light passes from a medium to another another medium of differing density. Space is filled with ionised plasma filaments, galaxies and other assortments of dust, matter and charged particles contained in defined shapes by magnetic fields. IE space is more than just space, it's an environment with potential to refract light when the conditions are right.
Do not let the irony escape you, it is a lesson waiting to be learned.
Note too that the various rings, crosses and supposed mirrored deep field galaxies are prone to prisming of light at times, and there is no given reason put forward by proponents of gravitational Lensing to account for any part of the spectrum to be affected differently to the rest of the spectrum. All frequencies should be equally affected.
Bear in mind that there are now too many examples to count with my fingers of instances where we are told that supermassive black holes interact with each other, neutron stars, their own jets, wandering gas clouds etc where no lensing whatsoever is observed. Sagittarius A is a notable example of this. All I will say on that is "black swans are quite trendy pets to own these days.
But let's take a deeper dive. Thanks to Taking Fukatsu for pointing out the problems that are to follow. You can find more of his important articles at his blog xxx in both English and Japanese.
By Takaaki Fukatu
In correct optical lens theory, all gravitational lenses are concave lenses.
The mistake made by Einstein and Lord Eddington was that they misunderstood gravitational lenses to be convex lenses in the first place.
My conclusion is the following:
"Gravitational lenses are biconcave lenses that gradually increases in curvature toward the center, and Einstein rings do not form. And gravitational lenses only form blurred images.
In this case, an electromagnetic lens is more likely, since the electromagnetic force is 39 orders of magnitude stronger than gravity. A gravitational field that is 39 orders of magnitude weaker has almost no ability to bend light rays.
This means that Lord Eddington's prediction that light rays would bend due to a gravitational field is invalid, since light rays would be scattered in a gravitational field and would not form an image.
However, such a phenomenon is actually hypothetical, and as Dr. Dowdye pointed out and as observed by the Japanese artificial satellite Akatsuki, light rays are observed to be refracted by the atmospheric medium or diffraction by the edge of the atmosphere layers, or the edge of a rocky surface.
The reason is that light rays hardly ever slow down, whether by gravitational lensing or electromagnetic lensing."
These conclusions obviously have stunning implications for Cosmology and even for the broader field of physics in general.
Takaaki cites the following as most noteworthy in particular:
The motion of the stars that Arthur Eddington observed during a solar eclipse☆ could not have been observed with gravitational lensing. A faint ring-shaped virtual image of a halo would be observed. If a shift in the position of the stars were observed, it would be due to another optical cause. All that would be expected from gravitational lensing from the star behind during a solar eclipse is a slight increase in brightness around the Sun. If gravitational lensing exists, the star should "disappear before and after" being hidden by the Sun. Electromagnetic lensing is much stronger than gravitational lensing, and the effect of gravitational lensing would be almost invisible.
The prediction of the entire scientific community at the time about gravitational lensing, "a shift in the position of the stars," is itself incorrect.
