Very good. And I know that light bends around a massive object (please don't expect me to explain why, I could never do the math).
I called upon Physicist because he has a real ability to explain these things to a poor barbaric SOB like me.
While Physicist is explaining things to us less experienced, he could also explain the accuracy of these findings. Since, as I understand it, the satellite detects something, converts it to a digital (programmer dictated) equivalent,which is then transmitted to earth and displayed (to the programmers dictates) graphicly.
It seems to all depend on what the programmer expects and programs for, not what may actually be detected.
Just like tomographs are only as good as the base data the programmer works with.
Have I confused everybody as bad as I confused myself ?
The point I'm trying to make is: How good is the interpetive data ?
Light bend around it because photons of energy are pulled in by the gravitational pull...or in another way to explain it...take a water mellon and put in on a soft mattress...then roll a marble by it. The marble will roll into the indented area around the mellon....that's what mass does to the space...it bends it...pulling lighter objects into its orbit/self.
Light bend around it because photons of energy are pulled in by the gravitational pull...or in another way to explain it...take a water mellon and put in on a soft mattress...then roll a marble by it. The marble will roll into the indented area around the mellon....that's what mass does to the space...it bends it...pulling lighter objects into its orbit/self.