Yeah if he wasnt a professor of astrophysics, I would have predicted a successful career as a standup comedian for him. And I dont mean that as pejorative in any way.
I wasn't impressed with him at all, he literally just repeated himself over and over leaving very little new information or even detail on the subject matter of the interview.
Loved this interview. He's nice to listen to and seems to be brimming with passion for what he does. Would love a follow up interview in the future based on the results of their research.
Dr. Joel Leja makes the understanding of the early Universe an approachable subject for your viewers. Well done, Dr. Joel. (...you too, Fraser ;) Cheers!
This is a great interview. Fraser got the interviewee to reveal some of his initial findings. The questions were pointed but not aggressive and he gently coaxed the answers out.
Just as a side note, Sabine listed finding huge galaxies early on as a likely discovery of JWST back in 2021. She did many videos on the inconsistencies of lambda-CDM and how "einstein is right" is a terrible oversimplification of recent astronomical results like the black hole pictures. While space curvature theory is solid, its extension to large scale has gaping holes in it, it is leaking water from every possible direction and bandaids are almost as big as the theory itself
Fraser, I admire your humble approach. You clearly were able to consistently hit some tender spots that are on the minds of those that we consider the masters of the art/science of astronomy. I loved the speakers frankness and willingness to share his intuitive sense of where this is going. I am provided with many opportunities to scoff at the arrogance of what I refer to as institutional science. Your speaker demonstrated a refreshing skepticism about many of the factors that can be mis-represented by the opportunistic click bait fuckers, I so despise. In a world where the very people that initiate such projects, go thru the bureaucratic hurdles that actually got JWST up and running, are the subjects of conspiracy theory and exploitation, it is difficult to trust any point of view. I have a new found confidence of the people directly involved and a greater appreciation of the barriers in the way of those who are real thinkers. Collectively, its great to know this community is on the same page, for a change, and we are not "one of them". A year to get a proposal to the decision makers? Ouch!
As a layperson I might theorize that since the pre-expansion universe was much smaller when these galaxies formed there may be a way they accreted more quickly than our current expectations.
Great interview, Fraser! Pouring some water on all the hype until there’s stronger confirmation of what we’re seeing is refreshing. I love getting excited over unexpected results as much as everyone else but getting your hopes up for new science prematurely is the worst for people who genuinely care about gaining a better understanding of our universe.
What if the universe is older than we think it is? Maybe over those distances and "time" there is some other phenomenon that affects the red shift throwing off our models of the age of the universe.
The comment near the end about lambda-CDM being an "ancient" theory is amazing to me. It was proposed in 1982. I was a physics student in the early 1970s. I worked in the High Energy Physics department at a large university. The department had a small library and there was a bookshelf, about three feet wide, of cosmology books. I spent a little time looking through these. Of course, back then the big bang was not universally accepted and there were several models still considered current. So to say that it is ancient makes me feel ancient. It also shows a little hubris on the part of Leja.
I doubt that the big bang theory is universally accepted now. Maybe mostly on Earth, but ... I know, I know, quit screwing around. I've been told that before.
The further out we look, the further back we see in time, the closer to the singularity, the more dense the matter & energy... like approaching the limits of the singularity from tne inside and getting a view of "the way it was"!
Awesome interview. Way to cut through all the b.s. and get bact to the truth and reality of this discovery. It's still super exciting. Love new discoveries.
"Thats a great question". I must have heard that countless times from your guests, and its something you rarely hear anywhere else. Your content really deserves a larger audience, Im sure this appeals to more than just space nerds.
That young man almost seemed toooooo enthusiastic! I loved it though! His eyes were bright with excitement it appeared to me and it made me smile. Plus hearing the gentleman talk was great! Good stuff!! 🍻❤️🌎🌠🌌🚀
So even though they were expecting to find what they didn't expect they didn't expect to find what they found. Even though that is what they were expecting... Is that right?
Hi Fraser thank you for an interesting interview. I have a question regarding the early formation of galaxies as possibly JWT (if it now turns out to be galaxies), would it be possible that pressures from the early universe, which must have been much smaller then, caused early galaxies to be able to formed much faster? grateful for an explanation Twana Sweden
Awesome question , I was mulling the same thought over . The involved variables would be gas-pressure, photon-pressure, the gravitational environment, the Dark-Matter mass/density distribution, the Dark-Energy/Cosmic-Inflation regime, and even possible MOND implications . As you can see , there are a bunch of imprecise and competing variables involved . Deducing quantitative values here is essentially impossible , barring far more precise measurements of the stellar environments of that epoch . **Answer for the lady here , Mr. Host ?
How far back into the early Universe will JWST ultimately be able to see and is there a point in which longer and longer observation time (in a particular spot) will start to taper off with regard the most distant objects that Web will ever see?
We have proven factually, without a shadow of a doubt that electrons act differently while under observation. I genuinely wonder at the consequences of deep space observation on the greater mechanisms of the universe. We could be unraveling the fabric of reality unknowingly. Truly this is the most interesting time to be alive.
It feels like we are in the final days of the geocentric model. Evidence is starting to pile up. No doubt it will be explained away for now, but current cosmology is on borrowed time. Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler have their popcorn ready.
Would the higher density of the early universe effect the rate of star formation and the sizes of the first stars? Or was it not dense enough to make a difference?
Yes. The issue is the current models for how density affects star formation may not hold up when extrapolated to those densities. This is a very common issue. Models do a good job of fitting data within the range for which there is good data. There are lots of different models that fit over that range, but behave very differently when well outside of that range. Scientists tend to pick the simplest model that matches the data. If the range of data measured changes dramatically (such as a new tool allowing measurements beyond what was possible before), it may turn out that the simplest model doesn't fit the new data as well. In that case, a new, more-complicated model needs to be developed that fits the new data better, while still fitting the old data as least as well as the previous model.
Great interview! Subscribed! These are huge discoveries. Kinda like finding the pyramids for the first time and being like, "uhhhh *checks notes*… this doesn't fit our evolutionary models...." When the dust settles I think we'll find the cosmos is far older and larger than previously thought possible as well as we currently have zero hard ideas about how galaxies are formed let alone anything else. If the JWST has proved anything about humanity's priorities, it's that we need more gigantic telescopes and a whole lot less of everything else we're blowing the budget on.
Great interview and such a nice handsome young man. Frasier, it would be great if you could summarize all of the galaxy breaking JWST observations to date. Are the observations all finding something similar? If so, what is the data telling us? Is it saying that processes moved faster than we thought they could? Thanks for the interview.
Great interview. A ??? Once light is red shifted by expansion, and say expansion stopped, would the red shift still be observed when said light is seen a few billion years later? Is it possible that expansion has steadily slowed over time, so that the further back in time we look, it only appears to be accelerating expansion?
Love your channel, thanks for the hard work! I always had the "impression" that more or less "now" is when the Universe is ready to host life on it, that before it was too violent and not enough nucleosynthesis rubbish material around (oxygen, carbon, phosphorus, etc) to form life, but hey....if galaxies were formed so quickly that means material compounds able to sustain life must have been available billion and billion of years ago, right? There could have been civilizations that were tender by the father or even grandfather of our Sun!
Well... I do think something is wrong with the Lambda CDM model, but I don't think it's going to be rewritten, let's say. We're probably going to fix what's wrong and keep going. At the same time, it could happen, but we would need a MUCH better theory first. One that not only explains the evidence we already have, but that would also make testable predictions. Without that... No way. Anyway, thanks for the interview, Fraser! 😊 Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
If we see light from something a thousand or more light years ago, what is there now and what does it matter and how do we know what is happening there now? Just our best guess, or what?
@@bugsmousey9183 we are the center of the visible universe. It all probably boils down to the Pope not wanting to lose face with the 12 y.o. girls who he whispers that he is the center of the universe to, in their ears. He probably has some connections in academia.
Could this not indicate that our understanding of the big bang may be wrong. Perhaps the big bang is just one of many big bangs. This would explain why some of these galaxies are so large simply because they were there before the big bang which formed our local neighborhood. When we are able to see beyond these galaxies, I think we will see galaxies which much older than these, as well as much younger galaxies. Consistent with multiple big bangs.
We only have these theories based on the distance from us. We are naming these as early galaxies but there is a very important measurement of how big the universe is that is missing. Cuz we don't know. The age could still be the same as confirmed but the size of the universe could be much bigger than we thought in order for these galaxies to exist in the way they do.
We assume time progresses at similar rates with mild influences of gravity or visible mass, but in a model of super-fluid quantum mass(dark matter) that density might vary significantly over vast distances and thus the progress of time might vary significantly. Yet red shift appears to have intervals as if having passed though shells of time flow rates or quantum densities of intra-space.
instead of forcing these distant galaxies to fit out current understanding which is a single big bang. i think there were/are other big bangs before ours
NEW DATA is always welcome for the progress of our knowledge. (Sometimes instrumentation should be rechecked and observations should be repeated too.) Despite human foibles, including emotional and professional commitments to existing models, it's the group commitment to discovering what's actually true about the natural world that makes science worthwhile and productive. When scientists can value the search for truth above other considerations the joy of the search itself can be maximized.
Aloha. The Expansion rate defines how cool the universe is at a certain Point. To Form Stars the gas must be able to radiate friction heat away and then Gravity can do ITS magic condensing all to Stars and galaxies. So If webb shows all to have been faster then expected the solution may be that the universe expanded faster and cooled faster then our Models projected too. Maybe Inflation was stronger and maybe the Expansion Speed varied in certain areas. regardless i will Love the new Data!
@@thorstenkrug144 Once light is red shifted by expansion, and say expansion stopped, would the red shift still be observed when said light is seen a few billion years later? Is it possible that expansion has steadily slowed over time, so that the further back in time we look, it only appears to be accelerating expansion?
If you are going to assume everything came from a single point resulting in an outward progression of matter, ( instead of the other hypothesis that the BB happened everywhere at the same time ), then it would seem to me that for the first large stars that go supernovae , a large part of their ejecta would go back into that central area. That ejecta would be more dense in the center than the other outer directions. It would seem to me that these galaxies could still be created and formed at a much later point in time and still be just as large, and older, than the Milky Way or other galaxies at this distance away, (where there would be less matter to work with), from the origin.
The earlies stars had to be more massive and brighter than the later ones, I quess. That's because fusion, with basically only hydrogen without heaviern elements working as catalyst, doesn't star as easily as when those elements are present. So the radiation emitted by a lesser amount of huge bright starts in an early small galaxy might be interpreted as coming from a much bigger galaxy with smaller and dimmer stars.
How did they come to the conclusion that these are the "earliest" galaxies? Is it the color? According to Halton Arp's research red shift is intrinsic not a result of doppler effect. It boggles my mind how they always frame that reality seem to always be wrong, but their hypothesis are as close to infallible as it could be. It would be a huge leap of advancement when the next generation of scientists decides to reject big bang, black hole and dark matter hypothesis. The question is when and what instrumentation or observations it would take to convince them.
Great interview, Dr. Leja seems to be the guy to ask where in the night sky should I be looking for where the Big Bang happened. I know I can't see it, but it would be nice to point to a place in the sky and say to the kids, "This is where it all began."
@@frasercain That was extremely interesting. Your answer brings me to the following idea: do these early galaxies look so HUGE, because they are in a much smaller universe? I mean, they were then relatively large. Okay, just an idea..
We learn about hyper inflation, how the universe expanded at an extreme speed, we also learn how weak force gravity are, now we learn stars formed earlier than expected, what I do not quite get is how single atoms moving at extreme speeds suddenly find out they should find together to create stars, galaxies and black holes, not that I complain, but I am not quite understand how that process worked
I like the analogy of the two year old toddler- You've been married 2 years and your wife reveals she has a fully grown adult son with a high school education, your wife tells you she has never slept with anyone but you, and she claims this is your son, she claims he is a two year old toddler but he has this new rare accelerated aging disease and a rare condition that accelerates his intelligence. Do you have a rare toddler-man son that grew up faster than all other humans, or did your wife sleep with someone else in the past? If you want to remain married, you better answer very carefully!
It is interesting how; based on comments within the vids involving JWST makes some people nervous! 😊 remember science is true if you believe in it or not!
i see a gap in the info i am getting, we are not in the center where the big bang originated for sure, so why no one ever mentions that and where is that and where are we from that and so on, so we could understand what they saw more clearly.
Well, if galaxies formed even sooner, then I guess this deepens the Fermi Paradox. I'm not saying those early galaxies had enough higher level atoms yet to host life, but it would push the date back even further that higher level elements would have come about.
If the young galaxies look like old galaxies, maybe they are old galaxies. New theory has to contain and encompass the old theory. Some modification of General Relativity like Modified Newtonian Dynamics, applying only to very weak gravity at long distances is likely correct, IMO. I keep wondering if the Feynman Path Integral sum over histories approach to QM. Could some of the possible high energy interactions drop out of the sum over histories, giving rise to a spontaneous redshift?
So, the research could be thrown off by really a disproportionate number of really bright stars in the early universe when metallicity was much lower? Is it just me or does this sound like Population III stars? We don't really have a good understanding of the very first stars in the universe (since we haven't observed any yet because they only existed in the era JWST can just now barely reach) but they would all be extremely large and bright with almost no smaller stars. If we were even a little off on the timeline for when these stars existed, it seems like it would do a lot of explain this result.
If you toss out the idea that the universe came into being at a specific time in the past (i.e. has a specific age) new observations might lead to some quite different conclusions about how the universe came about (if indeed it did have a specific beginning).
To me it makes more sense there would be giant galaxies. I feel very confident super massive black holes or very very stars were quickly made and with entropy being high, the mass is easier to collect. So either super massive stars were created quickly turning into black holes and these stars would gather dust far easier as the matter is more compact.
![Infrared Earth-like Planet Hunter Telescope [NIAC 2023]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VLsWeMYh7fQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![Infrared Earth-like Planet Hunter Telescope [NIAC 2023]](/img/tr.png)
Joel is so genuine and pleasant, he really is. Such a nice interview.
Yeah if he wasnt a professor of astrophysics, I would have predicted a successful career as a standup comedian for him. And I dont mean that as pejorative in any way.
I wasn't impressed with him at all, he literally just repeated himself over and over leaving very little new information or even detail on the subject matter of the interview.
I dunno.... "Genuine" isn't the vibe I got from him.
@@PoleTooke Creepy springs to mind.
@Quadplay exactly, he clearly is enjoying every bit of his work.
Loved this interview. He's nice to listen to and seems to be brimming with passion for what he does. Would love a follow up interview in the future based on the results of their research.
Dr. Joel Leja makes the understanding of the early Universe an approachable subject for your viewers.
Well done, Dr. Joel. (...you too, Fraser ;)
Cheers!
This is a great interview. Fraser got the interviewee to reveal some of his initial findings. The questions were pointed but not aggressive and he gently coaxed the answers out.
Your questions are always on point and really drive the interviews.
I hope that is just the first of many interviews with this man. It was a really good one
Great interview, Fraser . This topic is the one that has interested
me the most, since JWST has been looking as far back ,as it can.
Why?
What a great interview! You really know how to shatter the coarse and clickbaity headlines, and give us real food!
Great interview!! And great questions like “tell me how your wrong”. Frazier you were born for this.
I ask a lot of people that question. :-)
Observation match chapter 1 in "Time Matters: 3rd edition" (1st edition has it too).
Like a policeman report - laws are made by others.
Just as a side note, Sabine listed finding huge galaxies early on as a likely discovery of JWST back in 2021. She did many videos on the inconsistencies of lambda-CDM and how "einstein is right" is a terrible oversimplification of recent astronomical results like the black hole pictures. While space curvature theory is solid, its extension to large scale has gaping holes in it, it is leaking water from every possible direction and bandaids are almost as big as the theory itself
You Sir are refreshing change of pace! Thank you for the lack of commercials!
I really appreciate how careful Universe Today is
Thanks!
Fraser, I admire your humble approach. You clearly were able to consistently hit some tender spots that are on the minds of those that we consider the masters of the art/science of astronomy. I loved the speakers frankness and willingness to share his intuitive sense of where this is going. I am provided with many opportunities to scoff at the arrogance of what I refer to as institutional science. Your speaker demonstrated a refreshing skepticism about many of the factors that can be mis-represented by the opportunistic click bait fuckers, I so despise. In a world where the very people that initiate such projects, go thru the bureaucratic hurdles that actually got JWST up and running, are the subjects of conspiracy theory and exploitation, it is difficult to trust any point of view. I have a new found confidence of the people directly involved and a greater appreciation of the barriers in the way of those who are real thinkers. Collectively, its great to know this community is on the same page, for a change, and we are not "one of them". A year to get a proposal to the decision makers? Ouch!
This dude complimented every question, lol.
"That's a really good question, i appreciate that."
great interview, exciting but very level-headed!
I love it that we didn't find what we expected...that's what makes science so interesting
What a fantastic guest. He interviewed well.
Dr. Leja loves every single question so much
As a layperson I might theorize that since the pre-expansion universe was much smaller when these galaxies formed there may be a way they accreted more quickly than our current expectations.
As a lay person I think it would indicate that galaxies shrink with the passage of time.
"It's like going to check on your two year old toddler and finding a fully grown adult." I loved that.
This guy is an excellent, very fun presenter. Great sense of humor!
Great interview, Fraser! Pouring some water on all the hype until there’s stronger confirmation of what we’re seeing is refreshing. I love getting excited over unexpected results as much as everyone else but getting your hopes up for new science prematurely is the worst for people who genuinely care about gaining a better understanding of our universe.
This interview was unusually good. Good combination of personalities.
What if the universe is older than we think it is? Maybe over those distances and "time" there is some other phenomenon that affects the red shift throwing off our models of the age of the universe.
The comment near the end about lambda-CDM being an "ancient" theory is amazing to me. It was proposed in 1982. I was a physics student in the early 1970s. I worked in the High Energy Physics department at a large university. The department had a small library and there was a bookshelf, about three feet wide, of cosmology books. I spent a little time looking through these. Of course, back then the big bang was not universally accepted and there were several models still considered current. So to say that it is ancient makes me feel ancient. It also shows a little hubris on the part of Leja.
I doubt that the big bang theory is universally accepted now. Maybe mostly on Earth, but ...
I know, I know, quit screwing around. I've been told that before.
The further out we look, the further back we see in time, the closer to the singularity, the more dense the matter & energy... like approaching the limits of the singularity from tne inside and getting a view of "the way it was"!
This was a great interview 👏
Awesome interview. Way to cut through all the b.s. and get bact to the truth and reality of this discovery. It's still super exciting. Love new discoveries.
That was a fantastic interview!!! 🎉❤
"Thats a great question". I must have heard that countless times from your guests, and its something you rarely hear anywhere else. Your content really deserves a larger audience, Im sure this appeals to more than just space nerds.
Thank you! Very interesting!
That young man almost seemed toooooo enthusiastic! I loved it though! His eyes were bright with excitement it appeared to me and it made me smile. Plus hearing the gentleman talk was great! Good stuff!! 🍻❤️🌎🌠🌌🚀
Nice interview!!! You should get this young man back on in a few months for an update
Fascinating topic and discussion ~ subscribed. 👍👍
So even though they were expecting to find what they didn't expect they didn't expect to find what they found. Even though that is what they were expecting...
Is that right?
Thank you for this interview.
Hi Fraser
thank you for an interesting interview.
I have a question regarding the early formation of galaxies as possibly JWT (if it now turns out to be galaxies), would it be possible that pressures from the early universe, which must have been much smaller then, caused early galaxies to be able to formed much faster?
grateful for an explanation
Twana
Sweden
Awesome question , I was mulling the same thought over .
The involved variables would be gas-pressure, photon-pressure, the gravitational environment, the Dark-Matter mass/density distribution, the Dark-Energy/Cosmic-Inflation regime, and even possible MOND implications .
As you can see , there are a bunch of imprecise and competing variables involved .
Deducing quantitative values here is essentially impossible , barring far more precise measurements of the stellar environments of that epoch .
**Answer for the lady here , Mr. Host ?
Still waiting when JWST will find the Russel's teapot.
How far back into the early Universe will JWST ultimately be able to see and is there a point in which longer and longer observation time (in a particular spot) will start to taper off with regard the most distant objects that Web will ever see?
I love how this guy is so happy about his job. His smile 😊
You can tell Dr Joel Leja loves his job. I like that guy.
This scientist is very humble and genuine.
Yet Another Cool Interview (Y.A.C.I.) Thank you Fraser.
We have proven factually, without a shadow of a doubt that electrons act differently while under observation. I genuinely wonder at the consequences of deep space observation on the greater mechanisms of the universe. We could be unraveling the fabric of reality unknowingly. Truly this is the most interesting time to be alive.
Neat comment!
I Like Joel. Great interview Fraser!
Measured and consequentially more exiting thanks
It feels like we are in the final days of the geocentric model. Evidence is starting to pile up. No doubt it will be explained away for now, but current cosmology is on borrowed time. Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler have their popcorn ready.
I'm convinced that the "expanding universe " theory is missing something
Would the higher density of the early universe effect the rate of star formation and the sizes of the first stars? Or was it not dense enough to make a difference?
Yes it surprises me that more of these people hadn't thought of that. Makes total sense
Yes. The issue is the current models for how density affects star formation may not hold up when extrapolated to those densities.
This is a very common issue. Models do a good job of fitting data within the range for which there is good data. There are lots of different models that fit over that range, but behave very differently when well outside of that range. Scientists tend to pick the simplest model that matches the data. If the range of data measured changes dramatically (such as a new tool allowing measurements beyond what was possible before), it may turn out that the simplest model doesn't fit the new data as well. In that case, a new, more-complicated model needs to be developed that fits the new data better, while still fitting the old data as least as well as the previous model.
@@charleslivingston2256 Thank-you!
Great interview! Subscribed! These are huge discoveries. Kinda like finding the pyramids for the first time and being like, "uhhhh *checks notes*… this doesn't fit our evolutionary models...." When the dust settles I think we'll find the cosmos is far older and larger than previously thought possible as well as we currently have zero hard ideas about how galaxies are formed let alone anything else. If the JWST has proved anything about humanity's priorities, it's that we need more gigantic telescopes and a whole lot less of everything else we're blowing the budget on.
Dr Leja was just plain giddy about his work!
Great interview and such a nice handsome young man. Frasier, it would be great if you could summarize all of the galaxy breaking JWST observations to date. Are the observations all finding something similar? If so, what is the data telling us? Is it saying that processes moved faster than we thought they could? Thanks for the interview.
Great interview. A ???
Once light is red shifted by expansion, and say expansion stopped, would the red shift still be observed when said light is seen a few billion years later?
Is it possible that expansion has steadily slowed over time, so that the further back in time we look, it only appears to be accelerating expansion?
Love your channel, thanks for the hard work! I always had the "impression" that more or less "now" is when the Universe is ready to host life on it, that before it was too violent and not enough nucleosynthesis rubbish material around (oxygen, carbon, phosphorus, etc) to form life, but hey....if galaxies were formed so quickly that means material compounds able to sustain life must have been available billion and billion of years ago, right? There could have been civilizations that were tender by the father or even grandfather of our Sun!
Low quality comments.
:-(
Well... I do think something is wrong with the Lambda CDM model, but I don't think it's going to be rewritten, let's say. We're probably going to fix what's wrong and keep going.
At the same time, it could happen, but we would need a MUCH better theory first. One that not only explains the evidence we already have, but that would also make testable predictions. Without that... No way.
Anyway, thanks for the interview, Fraser! 😊
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
Fascinating about the early galaxies that formed drastically and thank you both for sharing with the world. 👀💯👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
If we see light from something a thousand or more light years ago, what is there now and what does it matter and how do we know what is happening there now? Just our best guess, or what?
Fantastic interview. 👍🇨🇦
I love how careful the guy is with his words, as to not upset the scientific consensus clergy who think they have a lock on reality and the truth
The best interview. Thanks
What if they discover that the stars in those massive Galaxies do contain a lot of heavy metals?
Then they'll bend and stretch current theories to fit accepted dogma as best as they can, and backpedal / act defensively if confronted about it.
That will be another nail in the coffin of Big Bang Cosmology.
Lemme get this straight, are we or are we not, the center of the universe?
@@bugsmousey9183 we are the center of the visible universe. It all probably boils down to the Pope not wanting to lose face with the 12 y.o. girls who he whispers that he is the center of the universe to, in their ears. He probably has some connections in academia.
Loved the interview glad I thought though it was hidden.
Could this not indicate that our understanding of the big bang may be wrong. Perhaps the big bang is just one of many big bangs. This would explain why some of these galaxies are so large simply because they were there before the big bang which formed our local neighborhood. When we are able to see beyond these galaxies, I think we will see galaxies which much older than these, as well as much younger galaxies. Consistent with multiple big bangs.
yup
Or maybe there was no Big Bang.
I want to listen to Dr Joel talk for like 2 hours.
We only have these theories based on the distance from us. We are naming these as early galaxies but there is a very important measurement of how big the universe is that is missing. Cuz we don't know. The age could still be the same as confirmed but the size of the universe could be much bigger than we thought in order for these galaxies to exist in the way they do.
Awsome job!
Thoroughly enjoyed this interview. Josh is a fantastic guest!
...I meant Joel. Sorry bout that!
Very interesting !
How do you know where to point JWST?
I this case they're just pointing it anywhere, places that seem empty.
My wallet is empty! Maybe JWST can find something of value in there... besides clumps of lint perhaps?
We assume time progresses at similar rates with mild influences of gravity or visible mass, but in a model of super-fluid quantum mass(dark matter) that density might vary significantly over vast distances and thus the progress of time might vary significantly. Yet red shift appears to have intervals as if having passed though shells of time flow rates or quantum densities of intra-space.
instead of forcing these distant galaxies to fit out current understanding which is a single big bang. i think there were/are other big bangs before ours
Ryan from the office started taking that super drug from limitless and became a genius
Scientist 2032: you guys remember those chill nice times, BEFORE we launched that fucking James Webb Telescope? Ah, those were the days....
NEW DATA is always welcome for the progress of our knowledge. (Sometimes instrumentation should be rechecked and observations should be repeated too.) Despite human foibles, including emotional and professional commitments to existing models, it's the group commitment to discovering what's actually true about the natural world that makes science worthwhile and productive. When scientists can value the search for truth above other considerations the joy of the search itself can be maximized.
If the universe was infinitely more dense and hot in the beginning, isn't it logical that clouds of gas would have condensed more quickly into stars?
Aloha. The Expansion rate defines how cool the universe is at a certain Point. To Form Stars the gas must be able to radiate friction heat away and then Gravity can do ITS magic condensing all to Stars and galaxies. So If webb shows all to have been faster then expected the solution may be that the universe expanded faster and cooled faster then our Models projected too. Maybe Inflation was stronger and maybe the Expansion Speed varied in certain areas. regardless i will Love the new Data!
@@thorstenkrug144 What a based answer!
@@thorstenkrug144 wouldn't the material on the edge be much cooler than the inner
There isn't an edge we can see. It is pretty clear that if the universe is not infinite, it has to be way bigger than the observable universe.
@@thorstenkrug144 Once light is red shifted by expansion, and say expansion stopped, would the red shift still be observed when said light is seen a few billion years later?
Is it possible that expansion has steadily slowed over time, so that the further back in time we look, it only appears to be accelerating expansion?
16:34 they have 3 spectras, 1 black hole and two are confirmed galaxies. Isn't that information embargoed? That's a big revelation!
Not embargoed, but a work in progress. Yeah, it's a bit of a sneak peak for the next paper.
@@frasercain can't wait!
Good stuff.
If you are going to assume everything came from a single point resulting in an outward progression of matter, ( instead of the other hypothesis that the BB happened everywhere at the same time ), then it would seem to me that for the first large stars that go supernovae , a large part of their ejecta would go back into that central area. That ejecta would be more dense in the center than the other outer directions. It would seem to me that these galaxies could still be created and formed at a much later point in time and still be just as large, and older, than the Milky Way or other galaxies at this distance away, (where there would be less matter to work with), from the origin.
perhaps massive red giant stars can collapse into galaxies.. that would be rad... excited to learn more.
There are a lot of allegations against science that are ridiculous, and I'm glad to hear Fraser bring it up.
The earlies stars had to be more massive and brighter than the later ones, I quess. That's because fusion, with basically only hydrogen without heaviern elements working as catalyst, doesn't star as easily as when those elements are present. So the radiation emitted by a lesser amount of huge bright starts in an early small galaxy might be interpreted as coming from a much bigger galaxy with smaller and dimmer stars.
Not sure if it just me but the audio was slightly off from the video
How did they come to the conclusion that these are the "earliest" galaxies? Is it the color? According to Halton Arp's research red shift is intrinsic not a result of doppler effect.
It boggles my mind how they always frame that reality seem to always be wrong, but their hypothesis are as close to infallible as it could be.
It would be a huge leap of advancement when the next generation of scientists decides to reject big bang, black hole and dark matter hypothesis. The question is when and what instrumentation or observations it would take to convince them.
Great interview, Dr. Leja seems to be the guy to ask where in the night sky should I be looking for where the Big Bang happened. I know I can't see it, but it would be nice to point to a place in the sky and say to the kids, "This is where it all began."
It happened everywhere. Look down at your feet, it happened there.
@@frasercain That was extremely interesting. Your answer brings me to the following idea: do these early galaxies look so HUGE, because they are in a much smaller universe?
I mean, they were then relatively large.
Okay, just an idea..
I think astronomy is much more open to change than maybe archaeology or something in the energy sector..
We learn about hyper inflation, how the universe expanded at an extreme speed, we also learn how weak force gravity are, now we learn stars formed earlier than expected, what I do not quite get is how single atoms moving at extreme speeds suddenly find out they should find together to create stars, galaxies and black holes, not that I complain, but I am not quite understand how that process worked
I like the analogy of the two year old toddler- You've been married 2 years and your wife reveals she has a fully grown adult son with a high school education, your wife tells you she has never slept with anyone but you, and she claims this is your son, she claims he is a two year old toddler but he has this new rare accelerated aging disease and a rare condition that accelerates his intelligence. Do you have a rare toddler-man son that grew up faster than all other humans, or did your wife sleep with someone else in the past? If you want to remain married, you better answer very carefully!
It is interesting how; based on comments within the vids involving JWST makes some people nervous! 😊 remember science is true if you believe in it or not!
i see a gap in the info i am getting, we are not in the center where the big bang originated for sure, so why no one ever mentions that and where is that and where are we from that and so on, so we could understand what they saw more clearly.
Great and fascinating interview thank you! Genesis 1:3
Glad you enjoyed it!
Well, if galaxies formed even sooner, then I guess this deepens the Fermi Paradox. I'm not saying those early galaxies had enough higher level atoms yet to host life, but it would push the date back even further that higher level elements would have come about.
If the young galaxies look like old galaxies, maybe they are old galaxies. New theory has to contain and encompass the old theory. Some modification of General Relativity like Modified Newtonian Dynamics, applying only to very weak gravity at long distances is likely correct, IMO. I keep wondering if the Feynman Path Integral sum over histories approach to QM. Could some of the possible high energy interactions drop out of the sum over histories, giving rise to a spontaneous redshift?
Wal Thornhill would have LOVED this. I guarantee he would have plenty of things to say about these data.
RIP, big fella. We miss you!
In science, when validated information does not fit old theories,,,, the theory changes.
So, the research could be thrown off by really a disproportionate number of really bright stars in the early universe when metallicity was much lower? Is it just me or does this sound like Population III stars? We don't really have a good understanding of the very first stars in the universe (since we haven't observed any yet because they only existed in the era JWST can just now barely reach) but they would all be extremely large and bright with almost no smaller stars. If we were even a little off on the timeline for when these stars existed, it seems like it would do a lot of explain this result.
If you toss out the idea that the universe came into being at a specific time in the past (i.e. has a specific age) new observations might lead to some quite different conclusions about how the universe came about (if indeed it did have a specific beginning).
Is it possible light energy reaches a transition stage when accelerated beyond its limit with the expansion of the universe, dark energy?.
To me it makes more sense there would be giant galaxies. I feel very confident super massive black holes or very very stars were quickly made and with entropy being high, the mass is easier to collect. So either super massive stars were created quickly turning into black holes and these stars would gather dust far easier as the matter is more compact.