Does space bend In a pure vacuum ?

We should be unambiguous with our terms.

Gravitational lensing and refraction of light are not the same thing. (I wasn't positive myself, but I had enough suspicion to make me check.)

In case there's any doubt:
Refraction of light through an optical medium is chromatic - different wavelengths refract at different angles.
Gravitational lensing of light is achromatic - all wavelengths are bent to the same degree.

So, we should stop using the term refraction.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yet gravitational lensing occurs because of the gravitational pull that dark matter exerts .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

??? Gravitational lensing occurs because of the warping/curving of spacetime by Baryonic matter and DM.
But how does that have anything to do with your monstrous wrong claims re refraction?
Like I said a few posts back, you did not know what refraction was.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Gravity does not exert a pull. Not in the 20th/21st century.
Gravity is the manifestation of curved spacetime.

Gravitational lensing occurs because of the mass of a galaxy (normal matter and dark matter) curves spacetime and light follows that curve.

 

I knew , and know you know .

 

Dark matter exerts this pull . That is the Main theory .

 

No, DM like Baryonic matter, warps spacetime. Light follows geodesics in this warped spacetime.

 

DM is not like Baryonic matter , otherwise they would call it , Baryonic matter , not DM .

Logically .

 

Wrong again river. Logic and you are actually diametrically opposite.
DM is different to Baryonic matter in that it only can interact " gravitationally"
That means it warps/curves spacetime just like Baryonic matter, but while Baryonic matter also interacts electromagnetically we can see it while we don't see DM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
Dark matter is a form of matter thought to account for approximately 85% of the matter in the universe and about a quarter of its total energy density. Its presence is implied in a variety of astrophysical observations, including gravitational effects that cannot be explained by accepted theories of gravity unless more matter is present than can be seen. For this reason, most experts think that dark matter is abundant in the universe and that it has had a strong influence on its structure and evolution. Dark matter is called dark because it does not appear to interact with observable electromagnetic radiation, such as light, and so it is undetectable by existing astronomical instruments

 

Because dark matter has not yet formed enough to give off light . DM has not yet evolved or formed to the point of being able to give off electromagnetic radiation .

I mentioned this in my theory over a year ago .

Only matter gives off light , such as Galaxies , Quasars , Stars can give off light energy .

Light energy is actually the lowest form of energy in the Universe .

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

There we have it Ladies and Gentleman!! river's new theory about DM not yet fully formed, despite the 13.83 billion years.
Ahh well, we are in pseudoscience!

 

Well DM does not give off EMR does it .

I have explained why .

 

It doesn't reflect it either...or refract it either....
Keep explaining, I'm not sure who is listening and taking in your words of stupidity...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

All EMR needs an object in which the magnetic field can manifest to the point of manifestation .

No magnetic field exists without a physical object . A core from which it eminates . From the sub-quantum , quantum , to Galaxies , Quasars , Stars etc.

 

There we have that same lack of comprehension by river again. Or just the usual trolling and avoiding the scientific facts that spacetime geometry is gravity and light follows geodesics in that curved spacetime.
Spacetime warping/curving/twisting and waving, have all been observationally and experimentally observed and verified...Gravitational lensing is just one form and cause of this geometry.

But we are in pseudoscience so river can spout more of his unsupported, unevidenced fairy tales, in opposition to anything he sees as mainstream....quite a fanatical, medical phobia in that regards.
Over to you river, for more laughs...not quite as funny as your ignorance in the Earth/Moon thread, but getting there!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Spacetime has nothing to do with real physical objects .

 

Sorry river, been neglecting your education again...good excuse though...I do some meal deliveries for " meals on wheels" for our local indigenous and aged community.

No, just more pseudoscience crap river. Spacetime is what evolved from the BB, and everything arose from that.
Of course if you have a reputable reference to support your nonsense, then I'll withdraw. But seeing the wholesale ignorance with regards to the Moon, I think we can put this down to more " river-factual" bullshit.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Highlighted

So BB came Before spacetime .

 

Spacetime evolved at the BB.
What's up river? backed yourself into a corner again?
Anyway enough of this with Bozo. There's plenty of articles in the sciences section river....You may be banned from participating, but you can read....well OK, poorly, but you can read basics.

 

You backed yourself into your own corner . pad.

You have no idea what you said . In your post #417 .