What Are These? Bizarre JWST Discovery Breaks Galactic Models Again...
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 июл 2024
- Get a Wonderful Person Tee: teespring.com/stores/whatdamath
More cool designs are on Amazon: amzn.to/3QFIrFX
Alternatively, PayPal donations can be sent here: paypal.me/whatdamath
Hello and welcome! My name is Anton and in this video, we will talk about a bizarre discovery of ancient star light in early galaxies that seem to be way too massive
Links:
iopscience.iop.org/article/10...
Previous videos: • Major Explanation For ...
• Did James Webb Prove B...
• Evidence That Some JWS...
#jwst #jameswebbspacetelescope #galaxy
0:00 JWST discoveries that raised eyebrows
1:45 The problem this presents
4:05 Unusual observations and confirmations
5:10 Potential explanations
6:40 Most bizarre discovery so far - size
8:00 Conclusions
Support this channel on Patreon to help me make this a full time job:
/ whatdamath
Bitcoin/Ethereum to spare? Donate them here to help this channel grow!
bc1qnkl3nk0zt7w0xzrgur9pnkcduj7a3xxllcn7d4
or ETH: 0x60f088B10b03115405d313f964BeA93eF0Bd3DbF
Space Engine is available for free here: spaceengine.org
Enjoy and please subscribe.
Twitter: / whatdamath
Facebook: / whatdamath
Twitch: / whatdamath
The hardware used to record these videos:
New Camera: amzn.to/34DUUlv
CPU: amzn.to/2LZFQCJ
Video Card: amzn.to/2M1W26C
Motherboard: amzn.to/2JYGiQQ
RAM: amzn.to/2Mwy2t4
PSU: amzn.to/2LZcrIH
Case: amzn.to/2MwJZz4
Microphone: amzn.to/2t5jTv0
Mixer: amzn.to/2JOL0oF
Recording and Editing: amzn.to/2LX6uvU
Some of the above are affiliate links, meaning I would get a (very small) percentage of the price paid.
Thank you to all Patreon supporters of this channel
Special thanks also goes to all the wonderful supporters of the channel through RUclips Memberships
Credit:
Illustris Project, TNG50
Licenses used:
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/... 
Наука
![Eminem - Tobey (feat. Big Sean & Babytron) [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9xn0OHEZZ8Q/mqdefault.jpg)
The way that JWST has proved itself as one of the most important scientific tools ever conceived by humanity... It just makes sense to build its successor... The Luvoir...
Sure but we don't have to wait that long for more cool astronomy. The Vera Rubin telescope is coming online next year, and it's going to reveal some awesome stuff too.
What's I supposed to be loong at , and do you know which frequencies , it will see in ? , @@joeyhoser
I just hoped a little cooler and catchier name than Luvoir. Sounds like some French toilet brand.
@joeyhoser 💯 and the LMT is not that far off, 5 years will go fast 👍
@@joeyhoser
That is going to be awesome and I am so looking forwards to it.
No matter how big the telescope, there's always small fuzzy red things that we can't resolve.
They should have put a microscope in the end to see the lil things. Maybe next time NASA.
Yes, at least until you reach around 370 thousand years when there will be no light yest to be seen.
the simulation needs time to resolve the resolution...
I hope my doctor say something else hggg lol 😅😅😅
If astronomers are correct that is...@@nichendrix
I always love how clean this channel and your format is. Clear information, no jumpy nonsense, a background I've started to find comforting and familiar like an old blanket..
I really appreciate the initial contextualization. This is a scientific approach to presenting information. I often despair at political news that announces some new bombshell information without really contextualizing it in the complex social maelstrom of information that preceded it. The contextualization takes basically 1/2 of the video and that's maybe a tough sell to the attention starved among us and probably why the ad-driven mainstream media won't do it. Nevertheless, it's the only kind of information I consume. Kudos for swimming upstream.
Anton puts the work in. That's why we love him. Journalism at its finest.
Anton ist a precious wonderful person indeed
there will be a Before JWST and After JWST eras
Just let with Hubble .
It's nerve wrecking.
I know, right?
Oh, there definitely is. Just like with the Hubble telescope before it.
that's ironic, ad we'll even find more iron!!! haha. Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love
This amazing instrument and it's amazing observations calls to mind a line from Hamlet: "There are more things between heaven and earth Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Exactly!
So heaven is just beyond our Hubble volume… noted
Beautiful words, amazingly beautiful.❤
Amazing as it is , it should have found life by now
@@user-vf2mi7sz5f I agree that there should be life out there but that does not mean there is but if the JWST can find evidence for or against life on other planets it would be...amazing.
JWST just keeps making it more and more clear we don't really know squat about the universe and I'm all here for it.
We know a lot and it is very dismissive of science to make it as though we know nothing.
@@Egalitarian917 We like to think we do but we really don't.
We have a lot of theories about the universe as a whole and we know a lot about our own world in it's current state along with a lot of math and simulations which we think checks out.
But at the end of the day we still haven't even worked out a unified model for making general relativity and quantum mechanics work together.
I'm not dismissing science because this is at its core the reason science exists at all.
Science is about asking questions and trying to find answers to those questions.
The first step to that is admitting that you don't know the answers and wanting to know those answers.
We are currently in the middle of finding out that we don't know what the answers are and that we may not have even been asking the right questions in the first place.
Which means that things are only going to get more interesting.
@@Egalitarian917 The goal of science is to build knowledge and understanding. Why put a cap on this? If we do we limit potential of knowledge to a finite point, which is something we cant really know we have found until it happens.
Its better to leave the "where does science stop being useful" out of the equation. It does not serve any purpose to science as to try and ascertain how much of it we currently hold. Its more than yesterday, that's all that matters.
So its not an insult to say we know little as of yet, but more encouragement to continue to strive.
We know plenty, and we keep learning more. That's why we're now theorizing about the origins of the universe 14 billion years ago, and not debating whether the planets orbit the Sun, or whether there's anything out there past Neptune.
@@Egalitarian917 who is we? What do YOU really know?
Hint: squat. You will find out when you die.
JWST seems like it's finally starting to show the world why we need it, and I'm all here for it.
JWST showed its worth just after first light.
As if “the world” gives a damn. People might find this interesting. Scientists find this interesting. But politicians and corporations don’t find this profitable. These programs are the politicians tossing the world a bone to keep them busy while they destroy humanity and the world in the name of profit. The only consolation is that when the world dies so will they.
Two major blunders in JWST mission: We waited too long to send it and we built too few of them (just one).
What the JWST has clearly demonstrated is that we have been so starved of data that we were forced to build systems of theories based on speculation, and now, finally we are just starting to undo our wrong guesses. Slowly we will develop new theories that are supported by real observations. Slowly, because the JWST instrument time is spread very thin.
JWST cost $10,000,000,000. New technology had to be invented during its construction to meet spec. This took time. If you want more telescopes then convince your congressman to vote for increased NASA funding.
10 billion is a fraction of the annual military budget. We could build 10 amd not even dent the military budget. @@douglaswilkinson5700
@@douglaswilkinson5700damn dog, NASA is wasting all their resources sending fleshy water bags back to the Moon, you know, for really good reasons. First time in my life I don't support increasing their budget until they drop the manned missions beyond LEO. Massive waste of money.
What a ludicrous observation
Theories based on speculation you say? Don't you know every pronouncement from the luminaries of Academia is come down from the mountain truth more sure than anything graven in stone? Until they are drug kicking and screaming to the fact, only when it is utterly inescapable, that they are wrong. Guesses?? Guesses you say? But we have been taught every pronouncement from Academia has been more sure than death and taxes.
Not until Copernicus and Galileo did any dare, DARE, to criticize Aristotle - even when they knew he was wrong. Copernicus died before he could be brought before an inquisition for what he wrote. The situation is only a little improved today.
If one assails The Paradigm, one is ruined. And Academia now administers the Inquisition.
Slowly we will develop new theories? There is no theory that can explain the creation of space, time, matter, and energy from nothing.
Shall we call them rubies?
Rubies Eggs?! 🥚
Rubies balls@@OctopusWithNoFriends
After Ruby Sunday?
Dr Who would be pleased!
Thank you for your videos, they are always cheery at the top of the day. As always informive and engaging.
like a parrot, and never critical
What I find amazing is how much information out of a couple of dozen red pixels.
It's not a lot of information - It's a lot of speculation.
It would be if that was all we got from JWST. Thankfully it can produce a lot of spectroscopic data too, which gives much more data to work with. The images are a tiny percentage of the total data.
my favourite thing about JWST is there's always these super groundbreaking things being found but all normal people see is just a red blob
The fact hat red blob is so red and so bright are the specific problem itself, so yes, the fact we can see little red blobs is entirely the problem. The only other data is the spectroscopy which isn't something people are necessarily familiar with.
I think often the publicized pics are just the eye catching colors to get the interest of the population.
The telescope captures a lot of data but visualising it is entirely to the public relations.
So the picture is only a fraction of the observation and often edited for *effect*
@@qa1e2r4 yeah it's mostly to justify the spending on it to the public, which isn't bad but sad it's kinda necessary.
I wonder how many lifeforms and civilations thats come and gone captured in these photos
3
Hahaha @@aaronlandis7929
If anything is possible to happen only once and be completely unique in our universe, I think Earth and life is it. The most precious thing in existence. But probably like 13 at least.
The thought that we are the only civilization to ever exist in the entire universe is both amazing and terrifying at the same time.
@@Broken_robot1986 Given life precursors exist throughout our galaxy, and should exist in all galaxies, I find the idea of life only existing on our planet utterly implausible. Amusingly, we've found nebulae with so much alcohol that it's just ridiculous and which form natural space lasers.
Those alcohol clouds probably played a part in the formation of life on Earth, too.
So the next time you wonder if life was drunk out of its mind . . .
Sometimes the topic is a little above my pay grade and I know I'm not really understanding everything, but these videos are always fun and I feel like I learn things! Rock n roll 🤙
many thanks for your clear explanations Sir.
Excellent work.
And mind bending in so many ways.
Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 🙂🙃😊
Just clicked to thank you for saying that models were broken and not physics itself. It always annoys me, perhaps unnecessarily so, when people say that something broke physics because physics cant break. So, ya, thank you for not saying physics was broken
It really is refreshing getting a break from the sensationalism, isn't it. Dr. Becky's channel is another one that is measured in its claims.
Anything that breaks with the dogmatic presumptions made by some jewish guy who insists he knows everything is a breakdown of all physical laws of the universe, because he simply cannot be wrong.
@@OrgusDin I'm not religious, but I'm pretty sure Jesus didn't speak to what you claim he was speaking to. The dogma stems from the Catholic Church and its derivatives, not Jesus, himself...
@@Geaxuce jewsus didn't even exist to begin with, all jews say is lie after lie, nothing good ever came out of their desert
@@Geaxuce Oh, is that what he was talking about. I was guessing Einstein and general relativity. Also, since what he was describing would be bad (if it was true, which I doubt) no matter who did it, but he still thought it was important to point out that the supposed offender is Jewish, I assumed he was being antisemitic. @OrgusDin, feel free to clarify, or not. Not is fine, too.
I love Anton! Awesome work as always brother.
With such a density of stars in a small area, it is not difficult to imagine them all collapsing to become a SMBH.
Beautiful video,very interesting content,thanks 👍😊
Seeing how the very early universe was hotter and much closer together than today wouldn’t it have been easier for early stars, galaxies and black holes to form faster and bigger?
The extreme temp of the early universe kept atoms from capturing electrons to form elements
@@apelincoln1616 that is only true for about 380,000 years after the Big Bang... not a million, let alone millions of years later.
it would have to have been "smaller"? space, as the universe has expanded for over 13 billion years... I agree, these are much less in years of expansion, only millions... so I would think they have to be closer together, and they've completely changed now in time...Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love
@@apelincoln1616yeah I know that but once it cooled down enough for atoms to form the atoms available would have been in much closer proximity to each other.
Cosmic inflation explains a situation of 100 doubling in “size”, in the blink of an eye, so by the time the cooling occurs for galaxy formation, no the physical “size” of the universe was not so small to have that closeness implied. Running the cosmic movie backwards the Universe stays pretty darn big. There was a “phase transition” as Guth called it such that the exponential expansion stopped, and a “normal” expansion speed takes over. We are still trying to pin down that speed based on the Hubble tension, yet to be resolved.
Nearly 4 minutes into the episode, and after giving tons of information about a topic, suddenly "...and so, hello wonderful person, this is Anton." 😆
Rubies are a great name
This was the most freaking fascinating thing I've heard about in a long time. Thanks Anton.
These videos are super informative for the layperson. It also helps with perspective. Our earthly problem and earthly achievements might be important; but they are just part of something so much larger.
Mass was much closer in the early days and this allowed massive structures and black holes to be built in relatively shorter periods of times. Quasars are a remnant of those good old days.
Thank you and love your videos.
Appreciate the honesty, makes science more meaningful especially nowadays
Cool blackhole finds 👍👍
Thanks for this.
Isn't it obvious that galaxies would form faster and larger back then when the expansion had only just started? More material for formation after all, right?
I don't understand why we don't _assume_ vast quantities of matter collapsed directly into black holes at the very beginning (i.e. Primordial Black Holes). We believe everything in the universe was compacted into a tiny space far beyond the density needed to form a black hole. It would seem intuitive that the ripples/waves within that primordial soup would collapse in some areas and expand in others, sort of like the crests and troughs of a wavy lake. With the amount of material available to feed on so soon after the Big Bang, PBHs would naturally grow extremely quickly.
My guess is that the SMBHs in the core of many/most galaxies are actually PBHs which were born in the universe's infancy and quickly became galactic seeds. That's why we're finding such surprisingly large galaxies so far back in time.
@Alex-js5lg was it crammed into a tint space? I thought the current theory has more to do with quantum foam and superimposition of states. If it was in one small space then there would be a center no?
The comment "Isn't it obvious that galaxies would form faster and larger back then when the expansion had only just started? More material for formation after all, right?" contains some misconceptions about the process of galaxy formation and the conditions of the early universe. Let's break down the key points:
Universe Expansion and Material Density:
Misconception: The comment suggests that because the universe was denser right after the Big Bang, galaxies would naturally form faster and larger.
Reality: While the universe was indeed denser shortly after the Big Bang, this increased density doesn't straightforwardly lead to faster or larger galaxy formation. The process of galaxy formation is influenced by complex factors, including dark matter, gas cooling rates, star formation efficiency, and feedback from stars and black holes (ScienceNews) (Space.com).
Galactic Formation Timeline:
Misconception: The comment assumes that the early universe's density would make galaxy formation quicker and result in larger galaxies.
Reality: The standard model of cosmology suggests that galaxies formed gradually over time. The discovery of massive galaxies in the early universe by the JWST is surprising because it contradicts the expected timeline of galaxy growth. According to existing theories, small galaxies should have merged over billions of years to form larger ones, rather than large galaxies forming rapidly soon after the Big Bang (Smithsonian Magazine) (SciTechDaily) (Space.com).
Material Availability:
Misconception: The comment implies that more material was available for galaxy formation right after the Big Bang.
Reality: Although the universe was denser in its early stages, the distribution and state of matter were different. Initially, the universe was a hot, dense plasma. It took several hundred million years for the universe to cool sufficiently for atoms to form and for the first stars and galaxies to begin forming. The processes of gas cooling, star formation, and feedback mechanisms are critical in determining how quickly galaxies can grow (ScienceNews) (Space.com) (euronews).
Current Understanding and Models:
Misconception: The comment overlooks why current scientific understanding finds the JWST discoveries surprising.
Reality: The discovery of massive, mature galaxies so soon after the Big Bang suggests that our models of galaxy formation may need revision. This doesn't align with the expectation that early galaxies should be smaller and less evolved. These findings challenge the conventional wisdom that significant structures took longer to develop in the universe's early history (Smithsonian Magazine) (Space.com) (euronews).
In summary, while the early universe was indeed denser, leading to some rapid formation of structures, the observed rapid and large galaxy formation contradicts existing models and expectations. The JWST findings highlight the need for a deeper understanding of the processes involved in early galaxy formation.
@@Alex-js5lg The comment about primordial black holes (PBHs) and their potential role in the formation of supermassive black holes (SMBHs) and early galaxies is an intriguing hypothesis. Let's break down and address the points raised:
Primordial Black Holes (PBHs):
Concept: PBHs are hypothetical black holes that could have formed in the very early universe, potentially from density fluctuations in the primordial "soup" shortly after the Big Bang.
Supporting Idea: The idea that the universe's extreme density at its inception could lead to the direct collapse of matter into black holes is plausible. In such a dense environment, regions of higher density (crests) could collapse into black holes, while lower density regions (troughs) would not (ScienceNews) (SciTechDaily).
Rapid Growth of PBHs:
Feasibility: Given the abundant material in the early universe, PBHs could indeed grow rapidly by accreting surrounding matter. This rapid growth could theoretically result in the formation of SMBHs relatively quickly (SciTechDaily) (euronews).
SMBH Formation: If these PBHs acted as seeds, they could explain the presence of SMBHs in the centers of early galaxies. This aligns with the observation that some galaxies have large black holes at their cores even in the early stages of the universe (Space.com) (euronews).
Current Evidence and Models:
Challenges: While PBHs are an interesting hypothesis, current cosmological models and observational data do not yet confirm their existence. The standard model of cosmology primarily explains SMBH formation through the collapse of massive stars and subsequent growth by accretion and mergers over time (Space.com) (euronews).
Alternative Explanations: Observations by the JWST showing massive galaxies in the early universe challenge existing models but do not necessarily confirm the presence of PBHs. These observations are leading scientists to explore various possibilities, including rapid star formation and efficient accretion processes that could account for these massive structures (Smithsonian Magazine) (ScienceNews) (Space.com).
Scientific Debate and Future Research:
Open Questions: The existence and role of PBHs remain speculative and a topic of active research. Future observations and data from telescopes like the JWST will help to either support or refute the PBH hypothesis. Spectral analysis and detailed study of the light from early galaxies will provide more insights into the nature of these massive objects (ScienceNews) (Space.com) (euronews).
In summary, while the hypothesis that PBHs could serve as seeds for SMBHs and early galaxies is plausible and worth exploring, it is not yet confirmed by current evidence. The surprising discoveries by the JWST are pushing the boundaries of our understanding and prompting scientists to consider various explanations, including but not limited to PBHs. Further research and observations will be crucial in resolving these questions.
@@bravadita well, we don't really "know" what the early universe was like, but yes, a fundamental part of the Big Bang was the universe being infinitely dense and hot. The quantum foam you mention is probably what caused the subtle variations in the CMB.
Universe was much smaller with same mass, black holes formed a nuclei around which other mass concentrated.
Slow down Hawking
Black holes form in areas of relatively high density
If everywhere is high density, nowhere is
@@oberonpanopticon yes at first, but we are talking about a billion year evolution here
@@Broken_robot1986 i find it fun to guess
Thank you Anton
Anton thank you for making the Universe easier to understand.
love when the observations mess with theory
thanks anton for the information
Surely in an early universe the entire 'space' available is quite small, yet still contains all the matter that the old universe contains? Therefore condensation and development of stars and black holes must have been at a pretty furious rate?
It was smaller, sure, but not by a large factor. Maybe half as big? And presumably less clumpy, so in theory it should have been harder to form stars and grow black holes than it is today, which is why it’s so weird that they obviously did form really rapidly.
Great JW update, thank you Anton
Anton, with all the recent discoveries we need a new timeline explanation of the formation of the universe
They probable started out as a compact globular galaxy then flattened out in to a spiral galaxy like we have today. Thanks Anton you Rock.
Space hadn't expanded much back during the time of these "galaxies", so wouldn't they have stars closer together anyways? Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love
Greetings from the BIG SKY. of Montana.
Damn, jealous. I have to drive a minute to get away from the city lights.
@@Broken_robot1986 Greetings from the BIG SKY. of Montana. Outside of town its wild. Clear sky, too.
Wow, very interesting
brilliant, fascinating
I wonder if because of their unusual size, emissions, and hints that these objects are no longer found in today's universe if they are related to Quasi-stars. In an early universe ruled by matter, I could see these objects forming fast and violently within concentrations of dark matter to funnel the baryonic matter in. Maybe we're looking at groups of Quasi-stars surrounded by halos of normal stars in a compact environment. Maybe some of these quasi stars are have already merged or are merging in this environment or there are direct-collapse supermassive black holes in play, which would help explain the brightness in tandem with the projected size of the black holes and could account for some of the confusion as to what we're looking at.
Thank you brother
Amazing!
You can only see light... That's moving towards us... You can't "see" light that is moving away from you!
Hi Anton, am so hoping that some people actually listen to your uploads and gain knowledge, rather than trolling your subscribers because they expect us to do the thinking for them as is their self entitled want.
Thanks again Mr. Petrov, much appreciated.
What is an Astronomical Unit ? 😁😆
My son was seven when he talked about the upcoming James Webb in a class project. A Professor working with the SALT telescope ( in Southern Africa) helped him while he was gathering information, he also gave him a CD with a video on how they assembled the SALT telescope. It took much longer than we thought for the James Web telescope plans to come into fruition. He is now 26. The footage comming back from the James Web is humbling. I've always been optimistic, I believe in the possibility of a Big crunch. Maybe the James Webb can proof this hypothesis. When I look at nature, "reset " is a commonality. Nature has a myriad of repetitive patterns. Am I insane for thinking that or do I just sound stupid?
Not at all. Many scientists have entertained the 'Big Crunch' idea, also the cyclical nature of many physical processes is undeniable.
all space videos :-
start --> We found something very intresting
20% into the video --> lets discuss what it is
80% into the video --> We don't know what it is
at the end --> will make another video when we know what it is
awesome!
Anton, one must admire the proponents of the standard model.
Doesn't matter how many times facts and new evidence smack you in the face almost daily but you all keep beating that drum no matter what :)
Happy Independence Day!!!🇺🇸
The Webb telescope is really paying dividends. These new objects are really upending our basic cosmological model-to put it mildly. More data has to be received and gleaned on these "things." Getting spectroscopic analysis of the light to determine what elements are present is critical to ascertain the age of these critters. What kind of radio emissions are present? Long term continuous observational data retrieval might point out additional weirdnesses. So, the Universe is increasing in it's expansion rate and now we have this. Makes one wonder if the early Universe might have had a physical connection to it's predecessor, a "doorway" perhaps. Maybe dark matter and dark energy are involved. Any way this is really, really exciting and it follows that something "rilly" unknown is in the offing. Nice job Anton!
This kind of makes sense to me if I'm not mistaken the universe was probably more compact and closer together in every way The black holes might just have huge accretion discs compared to nowadays since it's been sucking up stars by the hundreds much quicker than nowadays
Love you💜!
Those TNG simulations are awesome.
As gases start swirling, not only gravitation but magnetic fields also play a role in galaxy formation, as well as in the rapid development of supermassive black holes, suggests a Caltech simulation by Hopkins, Philip F., Michael Y. Grudic, Kung-Yi Su, Sarah Wellons, Daniel Angles-Alcazar, Ulrich P. Steinwandel, David Guszejnov, et al. 2024.
Possible new physics is always exciting
NiCe
The quest for answers will leave us with even more questions
i wonder if scientists have thought about the fact that the light coming from this extremely distant object has also been travelling in the opposite (and of course every other) direction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for 13 Billion years
If you can slow light down, does that mean it can be sped up, with gravity for instance?
@@cheebee2659 it's possible, but by how much is another question entirely, also the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, however this is because space is actually expanding, so light isn't actually going faster than the speed of light relative to the space its in.
@@gotblueslistentojazzvinyl2530 yeh I also think the speed of light is relative too
@@gotblueslistentojazzvinyl2530Wut no it's not o0
Anton please explore the electric universe concepts - many questions of cosmology are easily answered in the EU science.
astronomers sure are a judgmental bunch! "you're too massive" "you're moving too fast" "you're too old" i would hate to go on a first date with one.... 😛
We relax after the second one! 😉😁
Your statement is based on what Anton said and not on what the astrophysicists wrote in their research paper.
This seems to direct us toward the popcorn theory.
Perhaps these objects are the beginnings of the Globular Clusters, which circle our own and other galaxies today. As we know the stars that form the Globular Clusters of today are indeed very old. Some have these stars are as old as 13 billions years and older. I'd say they make good candidates for the objects discussed in this video. Thank for the video Anton.
I always figured that going back in time we have to consider reversing the expansion of the universe. I wonder if that has a significant affect on gravity and star formation.
Hi Anton, thanks again!
1:37 In light of the evidence that rolls in daily, we no longer think we know how old the milky way is or how many big bangs it took to get here. We may be one of those galaxies plus and minus many others. Sag A can only hold on to so much.
6:55 What Really Doesn't Make Sense is how we cling to wrong idea just because it's our first one. Precious indeed have your first idea, but tragic that we cannot move on and diminish with every breath for lack of courage to make the leap to the next more realistic idea.
If one big bang happened then what are the chances that it was a unique event? Where do we find Any such analogue Anywhere else in nature? None. Nowhere.
And yet we maintain our death grip out of pure cosmic existential terror.
Why!?!!
I wholesomely agree. There are unique anomalies but very rare. Nature tend to work with patterns. Isn't that how researchers reached conclusions?
I still have a hard time fathoming why those very early photons are still reaching us all these billions of years later and haven't passed us by ages ago.
Plus: I think Bela Bartok already covered this, almost 100 years ago, with Microkosmos. "The key is the key." - Jack.
Anton, I love you buddy.
Ah, James Webb... always manages to break our minds even more with each discovery after it broke our minds with the previous one...
3:53 Longest "Wonderful Person" time ever!
The astrophysicists missed the most obvious answer. What happened to Occam's Razor? It HAS to be Ancient Aliens! 👽👽👽
I can see why some would think they are black holes since so many are seen in the cluster.
Has James seen the restaurant at the end of the universe? Ford Prefect highly recommended it.
Time went faster at the beginning
After the Bang there was a soup of particles but as soon as they began to make hydrogen stuff would have begun sticking together. Because of the density of the soup this could have happened very quckly making huge stars which then exploded into black holes. These BH would have continued to suck up the ingredients becoming massive very quickly, but as all this "fuel" dissipated it was no longer possible for BH to form simply from elements and production stopped. They don't have a lot of stars because there wasn't enough left to form them.
Before the big bang, is it possible that there was one massive black hole that exploded and we (our universe) is the aftermath? I dont think it is to crazy of an idea.
Except for the part where black holes can't expand this is an excellent idea. Singularities and expansion are nice words but for now the are placeholders for knowledge.
could be
@@robertfontaine3650it's a rather common concept of the big bounce that it's actually quite possible that our universe is / was a black hole.
So yeah, to is totally on point with his idea.
MAN he really blew up ive been a follow since about 10k subs.
Not in these accs tho
I've wondered before if the Universe is 'vibrating' on some frequency, and that we exist at a time when the vibration cycle is going outwards, leading to us mistaking the outward motion of the cosmos as inflation. This wouldn't answer where we cane from, but it would solve the problem of a singularity by.
On the other hand, why shouldn't older galaxies be more massive in the first place? Over time no new mass is magically conjured out of the nowhere and with jets and nebulae and rogue planets (and perhaps "rogue stars" that get slung out of their clusters) mass can easily be pushed out of a galaxy.
In those times space was more dense. Those objects may look more compact, but universe was also more compact. But if we compare those objects with space in those times, those objects are super gigantic. Those stars and black holse are technicaly bilion times bigger than present time stars and black holes.
Every time we get one of these its like we are constantly in denial repeating the same sentence over and over again: "It doesn't break the model! It doesn't break the model!" Its becoming funny to watch.
How do you determine the mass of a very distant black hole at the end of the universe?
What they're saying is the continuing universe at that distance can seem singular
There is a supermassive black hole in the center of each galaxy. My theory is that it’s like a sink with a hole with running water: galaxies, matter etc. from previous universe leaked in pass the event horizon.
The JWST is a tool that humanity will use to discover what questions to ask based on what is found out there. We will then create new devices to help answer those questions.
That's essentially what technology is all about : building tools that let us build even better tools.
How about whatever instability exploded in the big bang didn't do it all at once but rather multiple times.
just waiting for the day when we see our galaxy staring back at us from the other side of the torus loop
JWST has turned out to be a very good investment. All the new anomalies being found have the potential to determine new science. At a minimum it gives current thinking a good shake.
I wonder if time dilation could have been different in the early universe with less space time expansion that speed things up in the very early universe.
My personal theory is that all the far distant observations passed through gravitational lenses one time or another, and every observations are distorted
Now we just need about 90~2000 more JWST's in a gigantic array that can simulate a HUGE mirror and collect several orders of magnitude more detail. That'd be fantastic. Imagine if we had a ring of JWST's orbiting the sun that all worked together to create a lense the size of that orbit essentially? Would that even work?
Its just mind-blowing there are actually people on earth "raising their eyebrows" at what goes on at the edge of the known universe🤨
We need a bigger scope.
We need more powerful telescope immediately.
Let's crowd fund the thing
Where can I find this nice background of start formation for my Zoom calls? :)