3.3 Gravitational Lensing: A Natural Outcome of the Tensional Potential

Home ／ Chapter 3: Macroscopic Universe

Terminology. In this section, the additional “pull” required by lensing is attributed to two medium effects: (1) cumulative traction during the lifetime of Generalized Unstable Particles (GUP) that averages into Statistical Tensional Gravity (STG), and (2) energy injected at disassembly/annihilation that manifests as Tensional Background Noise (TBN). Below, “unstable particles” refers to Generalized Unstable Particles. After first mention, we use the full terms Statistical Tensional Gravity and Tensional Background Noise.

I. Phenomena and Challenges

• From arcs to multiple images. Light from distant sources is deflected by foreground galaxies or clusters, producing arcs, Einstein rings, and multiple images. On larger scales, coherent weak shear gently stretches the shapes of thousands of background galaxies in preferred directions.
• Time is stretched as well. Different light paths from the same source arrive days to weeks apart. These delays are robustly measured and are nearly achromatic.
• Awkward details. Flux ratios often deviate from smooth-model expectations; saddle images dim or disappear more readily; central images are suppressed; and lensing mass estimates exceed dynamical masses in ways that vary with environment. These patterns suggest the lens reads not only visible matter but also structure intrinsic to the medium.

II. Physical Mechanism

1. Landscape view: steering by the tensional potential.
2. The universe behaves like an “energy sea” that can be tightened or relaxed. Foreground matter sculpts an inward “tensional potential landscape” (basins and slopes). Light—directed wave packets in this sea—follows “the path that costs less” (Fermat’s principle): wavefronts twist toward basin sides, paths are re-directed, and deflection, magnification, and multipath imaging result. In vacuum within the geometric-optics limit, this re-direction is nearly achromatic; measurable frequency dependence appears mainly in plasma or when wave-optics effects (diffraction/interference) become relevant.
3. A smooth add-on slope: Statistical Tensional Gravity.
4. Beyond the inner slope carved by visible matter, the small, transient pulls from many unstable particles accumulate into a smooth, persistent “add-on slope”:
   • Strong enough to support lensing. Combined with the inner slope, it strengthens focusing, yielding longer arcs and more complete rings.
   • Co-tuned with environment. Regions with frequent mergers, active jets, or strong shear build a thicker add-on slope and lens more strongly; quieter regions lens more weakly.
   • Line-of-sight integration. Lensing “sees” the entire path’s landscape. As a result, lensing masses tend to exceed nearby dynamical masses, with larger differences along directions rich in large-scale structure.
5. Fine dark ripples: Tensional Background Noise.
6. When unstable particles disassemble or annihilate, they inject broadband, low-coherence, weak wave packets. The superposition of many packets forms diffuse fine texture—dark ripples—that gently perturbs light paths:
   • Selective nudge. Saddle images are most sensitive and therefore more prone to dimming, distortion, or disappearance.
   • Flux redistribution. Magnification ratios are re-written with little frequency dependence, consistent with observations.
   • The substructure “illusion.” This fine texture is not a cloud of extra small masses, yet it can imprint image-plane signatures that resemble “too many/too few subhalos,” unifying contradictory cases.
7. The time ledger: geometry + potential.
8. Inter-image delays equal extra path length (geometric term) plus slower passage on slopes (potential term, i.e., an elevated optical time). Both terms are frequency-independent, hence delays are nearly achromatic. Slow evolution of the landscape during monitoring (cluster growth, void rebound) adds weak, achromatic drifts in arrival times.
9. One shared map: lensing–rotation–polarization.
10. Lensing reads 2-D path re-direction; rotation curves read 3-D orbital tightening; polarization and gas textures trace ridge lines and banded corridors of the slope. These should align spatially: where the slope deepens and corridors sharpen, the independent diagnostics ought to point the same way.

III. Testable Predictions and Cross-Checks (Operationalized)

• P1 | Achromaticity. After removing plasma dispersion, strong/weak lensing deflections and time delays should maintain consistent directions and amplitudes across bands. If prominent chromaticity appears, first suspect medium or wave-optics effects, not the underlying landscape.
• P2 | Saddle-image bias in anomalies. Flux-ratio anomalies should preferentially affect saddle images and correlate positively with the strength of fine texture (proxies include radio scattering, merger axes, and shock fronts).
• P3 | Lensing–environment correlation. The excess of lensing mass over dynamical mass should grow with line-of-sight large-scale convergence/shear (e.g., κ/ϕ, cosmic shear), reflecting the path-integrated contribution of Statistical Tensional Gravity.
• P4 | Multi-epoch micro-drift. In systems with strong mergers or jets, image positions and delays may exhibit tiny year-to-decade drifts as the landscape evolves, with slow radio-scattering changes drifting in the same direction.
• P5 | Multi-map reconciliation. Within a single field, arcs/images, κ-contours, rotation-curve residuals, radio scattering, and polarization axes should be co-located and co-aligned. If not, first re-examine foreground subtraction and astrometric registration.
• P6 | Parameter-economical fitting. A three-layer model—visible inner slope + Statistical Tensional Gravity add-on slope + Tensional Background Noise fine texture—should jointly fit positions/shapes/magnifications/delays with a small shared parameter set and cross-validate against dynamics and radio scattering.

IV. Comparison with Traditional Explanations

1. Common ground. Both approaches account for arcs, rings, multiple images, and time delays, and both predict near-achromatic behavior under dominant conditions.
2. Differences (advantages here).
   • Fewer parameters. No bespoke catalog of invisible clumps per system; the add-on slope and fine texture arise from unified statistical processes.
   • Multi-observable coherence. Lensing, rotation, polarization, and velocity fields are constrained on the same tensional map.
   • Natural treatment of details. Flux-ratio anomalies, saddle-image fragility, and the environment-dependent lens–dynamics gap follow directly from the slope-plus-texture sensitivity.
3. Inclusiveness. If future work confirms new micro-components, they can serve as microscopic sources of the add-on slope. Even without new matter, Statistical Tensional Gravity plus Tensional Background Noise jointly explain the principal lensing phenomena.

V. Analogy: Valleys and Dark Ripples on Water

Valleys and slopes mirror the tensional potential landscape that guides travelers (light) along easier routes. Dark ripples—whose sources are unseen—mirror Tensional Background Noise, subtly jittering images and redistributing brightness. Macroscopically, valleys set direction; microscopically, ripples fine-tune.

VI. Conclusion

• The smooth add-on slope from Statistical Tensional Gravity focuses light more strongly, explaining arcs, rings, multiple images, and overall magnification.
• Geometric and potential terms together produce nearly achromatic time delays.
• Fine texture from Tensional Background Noise perturbs image positions and flux, explaining flux-ratio anomalies, saddle-image instability, and the appearance of “too much or too little” substructure.
• Elevated lensing masses arise because lensing integrates the landscape along the entire line of sight, whereas dynamics reads only the local neighborhood.

By reducing lensing to medium effects—slope (Statistical Tensional Gravity) plus fine texture (Tensional Background Noise)—the arcs, rings, delays, flux patterns, environmental dependencies, and the spatial correspondence with rotation and polarization all live on the same tensional map. With fewer assumptions and stronger cross-map constraints, this yields a unified and testable explanation.