Skip to content
Back to the collection

Mission to the Gravitational Focus of the Sun: A Critical Analysis

Geoffrey A. Landis

2016 · arXiv

Read the paper
HN score
1
Mentions
7
Readers
6
Months
7
What’s in a score?

From the abstract

The gravitational field of the sun will focus light from a distant source to a focal point at a minimal distance of 550 Astronomical Units from the sun. A proposed mission to this gravitational focus could use the sun as a very large lens, allowing (in principle) a large amplification of signal from the target, and a very high magnification. This article discusses some of the difficulties involved in using the sun as such a gravitational telescope for a candidate mission, that of imaging the surface of a previously-detected exoplanet. These difficulties include the pointing and focal length, and associated high magnification; the signal to noise ratio associated with the solar corona, and the focal blur. In addition, a method to calculate the signal gain and magnification is derived using the first-order deflection calculation and classical optics, showing that the gain is finite for an on-axis source of non-zero area.

Metadata: arXiv. Abstracts retain their original authors’ rights.

In the conversation

Original HN comments, with labels from simple text rules. A label describes the whole comment and may miss context or irony. Read the discussion to make up your own mind. About the labels

7 selected excerpts · 7 total mentions

skykooler
Neutral mention · rule
Yes, you'd need to get quite far from the Sun to use it as a lens - about 650 AU is where it starts becoming practical. It would also not be re-orientable, so any "telescope" launched to that location would only be able to observe a single target. (But, notably, it is far easier to send a probe to a far point in our own solar system than it is to send it to another star entirely.) There's a paper that goes into much more detail at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1604.06351 So why not use interferometry instead? Well, it has some significant drawbacks. For example: the Event Horizon Telescope used radio telescopes - and pretty much had to, due to how interferometry works: you need…
Read the full comment
to be able to compare the phase shifts between the multiple telescopes, which means you need to be able to sample the signal faster than the radio frequency you're using and record it. The EHT records 64 gigabits per second for each telescope, and then all this data needs to be combined to compute the resolved image. This amount of data would be problematic for space-based telescopes - even on Earth, it was not practical to send multiple petabytes over the internet, so it was saved to hard drives which were shipped by truck instead. This isn't practical in space, so you would need to transmit the data by radio, which means you'd end up with some crazy ratio of thousands of hours of transmitting for every one hour you spend recording.
shagie
Neutral mention · rule
https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2020/12/10/developing-focal-... (and its critical analysis) https://arxiv.org/pdf/1604.06351 I believe that work on such a project would be interesting, even if it isn't ever done. It is something that if you worked on it as a grad student, and then became a professor and your grad students worked on it ... and they became professors and their grad students worked on it - they'd be the ones seeing the results. Not so much a "this is a way to do things..." but rather a "thinking about research that spans generations and the problems that they solve in the process of doing that great project has useful spinoffs." A mission out to 550 AU at New Horizons speed of 2.9 AU / year (it still boggles the mind of talking about those speeds and distances) is nearly 200 years from launch to primary science objective. It's "only" been 45 years since Mariner 2 to New Horizons.
aruggirello
Neutral mention · rule
So if this probe is bound to venture into the distance range useful for a solar gravitational lensing telescope, why not use it to deploy one? That would really be a major breakthrough IMHO. https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.06351 "The minimum distance for a solar lensing telescope is 547 astronomical units (AU). And in reality, proper positioning would likely require the telescope to be placed even farther out — perhaps as far as 2,000 AU or more."
tobmlt
Neutral mention · rule
In principle, I am right with ya. We need ways of beating (or at least coping with), the diffraction limit. It's fun to think of, say, stuff like this: https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.06351 (as far as big lenses go) Using the sun as a gravitational lens would be pretty sweet. I have a feeling we will have some more tricks to play with E&M locally before we can go to space on that scale though. edit: My own semi-blind musing has made me curious: metamaterials for super-lensing: https://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.0263.pdf entanglment enhanced microscopes?!: https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.8075 (@shpx linked to this quantum stuff before me, by the way)
JPLeRouzic
Neutral mention · rule
Actually the proposal is a bit more complicated than using a 12 meter large antenna, it is sending this antenna at 550 AU (the FOCAL in "FOCAL antenna"). Geoffrey A. Landis wrote: "The gravitational field of the sun will focus light from a distant source to a focal point at a minimal distance of 550 Astronomical Units from the sun. A proposed mission to this gravitational focus could use the sun as a very large lens, allowing (in principle) a large amplification of signal from the target, and a very high magnification." https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.06351
shagie
Neutral mention · rule
If you're interested in a critical review of FOCAL (which is also rather interesting) - https://arxiv.org/pdf/1604.06351.pdf I am on the "this is a really hard problem - but an interesting one" category. It seems like it will take a number of significant improvements on top of current technology - but it seems like it would be doable in another few decades if we continue to improve (the difference between Pioneer and New Horizons is 35 years... if we can do that much improvement again we might have something). It is still something that if you are a grad student working on it now, it would launch when you retire, and your grad students when you retire - when they retire, it is their grad students who would be doing analysis of the data. I tend to believe this would be a good thing to do because it would be working on that time frame and getting us to think about projects that will run for a century rather than a budget cycle.

Keep following the thread.

More in Physics

More from the same topics.