Starburst galaxy M82 - Webb Vs Hubble

James Webb Telescope recently took a look at the Starburst galaxy and as shown by Hubble's 2006 image it's nothing new but the view of it given by Webb is absolutely incredible , 11 million light-years from Earth Hubble's view shows a pretty photogenic Spiral Galaxy as seen edge on but with Webb's image we get to see inside the Galaxy and see the Stars that hide within.

right click image and open in new tab for full picture.

The Webb image is from the telescope’s NIRCam (Near-Infrared Camera) instrument. The red filaments trace the shape of the cool component of the galactic wind via polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).

PAHs are very small dust grains that survive in cooler temperatures but are destroyed in hot conditions. The structure of the emission is similar to that of the ionized gas, suggesting PAHs may be replenished from cooler molecular material as it is ionized.
www.flickr.com...

Looking at them looking at us.

Resplendent

a reply to: gortex

I like this it's amazing how we can almost seemingly touch these stars from here.

There is a galactic current sheet that is something being proven by the Hubble data that are revealing. The accretion of matter and the uptick in the charged particles hitting a sun cause Nova to occur. It is a concern that Sol has been going into a 12,000 year cycle where the galactic current sheet is being pulled into cause our sun to Nova and alter the entire Solar system prior to the event. The signs are there now and these outstanding telescopes are making it more obvious.

originally posted by: Justoneman
There is a galactic current sheet that is something being proven by the Hubble data that are revealing. The accretion of matter and the uptick in the charged particles hitting a sun cause Nova to occur. It is a concern that Sol has been going into a 12,000 year cycle where the galactic current sheet is being pulled into cause our sun to Nova and alter the entire Solar system prior to the event. The signs are there now and these outstanding telescopes are making it more obvious.

I'm a little confused by your post. It's late so it may be just me.

Our sun doesn't nova every 12,000 years obviously. So what makes this cycle different so that it would cause our sun to Nova?

And what is a "galactic current sheet"? I've never seen that term before?

a reply to: SchrodingersRat

We are in a definite 12k cycle with our sun turning toward the incoming Galactic current sheet bringing a tidal wave of electromagnetic energy and charged particles that build up just like the Super Nova stars have with a binary only not just accretion materials from the star we get a charged field of particles that accumulate on the sun making it Black like the predictions of the Bible for instance. Just after it turns black Sol will errupt with a smaller Nova, we hope, but still devastating the Earth and causing the crust to break free from the mantle.

Here is a good starting point that contains the sources to the actual science papers to support the data. the link is too odd to add the normal way here.

www.youtube.com...
About an hour this is like part one. If you don't roll your eyes and give up too soon, you will see the data is there and it looks rough for this Solar System. The elite are building underground bunkers like mad now.

The galactic current sheet is like a remnant of some Galaxy at the center that basically causes chaos on every Solar system as it passes. The closest stars to the center of the galax that we can study have shown the affects in the data and the last few years the very closest stars to our system have had events suggesting the wave passed them recently. We are next.

originally posted by: gortex

right click image and open in new tab for full picture.

Thanks for sharing the awesome picture!

originally posted by: Justoneman
Here is a good starting point that contains the sources to the actual science papers to support the data. the link is too odd to add the normal way here.

www.youtube.com...
About an hour this is like part one. If you don't roll your eyes and give up too soon, you will see the data is there and it looks rough for this Solar System. The elite are building underground bunkers like mad now.

You are very gullible if you believe this pseudoscientific garbage. Ben Davidson likes to show us scientific papers and make claims about what the papers say, and his naive followers take his word for it instead of actually reading the papers. If you actually read the papers yourself and are able to understand them, they don't actually say what he claims they say, so he's just feeding us garbage. A lot of people who don't know how to read science papers, or else are too lazy to read them, fall for this stuff.

Suspicious0bservers is a Pseudoscientific Doomsday Cult


This video shows examples where Ben Davidson claims the papers say something, but then he shows where the papers actually say something else. The author of one of the papers your pseudoscience cult misrepresents commented on this video to thank Dave for pointing out the fraud and that Dave is correct that the paper does not say what the pseudoscience channel claims it says, it's the top comment when I see this video, pinned by Dave, the author of the video:

@yuanli3731

I am the second author of the paper you talked about at 7:10. When this was brought to my attention, I was shocked. We scientists tend to ignore all the pseudoscience stuff, but maybe we should pay more attention in the future. We work so hard to educate the public, but these conspiracy pseudoscientists are undoing our work. Thank you, Professor Dave, for taking your time to debunk the conspiracy theories. And just in case there is any confusion, our paper is about clouds in the interstellar medium, and has nothing to do with any of the doomsday BS.

So there you have it right from one of the authors of the papers your cult is misrepresenting, his paper in no way supports the doomsday claims Ben is making.

? um that zoom in pic is Not a zoom'd in of the left one????

You will fall for anything if you think I am gullible. I am merely presenting the actual current international opinions on this science.

You can ignore anything you wish to at your own will. I appreciate the freedom to think for ourselves. I don't mind the ridicule.

"1st they ridicule you......"

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: gortex

right click image and open in new tab for full picture.

Thanks for sharing the awesome picture!

originally posted by: Justoneman
Here is a good starting point that contains the sources to the actual science papers to support the data. the link is too odd to add the normal way here.

www.youtube.com...
About an hour this is like part one. If you don't roll your eyes and give up too soon, you will see the data is there and it looks rough for this Solar System. The elite are building underground bunkers like mad now.

You are very gullible if you believe this pseudoscientific garbage. Ben Davidson likes to show us scientific papers and make claims about what the papers say, and his naive followers take his word for it instead of actually reading the papers. If you actually read the papers yourself and are able to understand them, they don't actually say what he claims they say, so he's just feeding us garbage. A lot of people who don't know how to read science papers, or else are too lazy to read them, fall for this stuff.

Suspicious0bservers is a Pseudoscientific Doomsday Cult

This video shows examples where Ben Davidson claims the papers say something, but then he shows where the papers actually say something else. The author of one of the papers your pseudoscience cult misrepresents commented on this video to thank Dave for pointing out the fraud and that Dave is correct that the paper does not say what the pseudoscience channel claims it says, it's the top comment when I see this video, pinned by Dave, the author of the video:

@yuanli3731

I am the second author of the paper you talked about at 7:10. When this was brought to my attention, I was shocked. We scientists tend to ignore all the pseudoscience stuff, but maybe we should pay more attention in the future. We work so hard to educate the public, but these conspiracy pseudoscientists are undoing our work. Thank you, Professor Dave, for taking your time to debunk the conspiracy theories. And just in case there is any confusion, our paper is about clouds in the interstellar medium, and has nothing to do with any of the doomsday BS.

So there you have it right from one of the authors of the papers your cult is misrepresenting, his paper in no way supports the doomsday claims Ben is making.

a reply to: Justoneman
>believes pseudoscience
>Is shown proof it's pseudoscience
>still believes pseudoscience

Okaaaay!

a reply to: Arbitrageur

But you believe some anonymous poster on Youtube is legit. Come on dude.

a reply to: LSU2018
The poster yuanli3731?
I have no reason to doubt it because I read the paper and it's about exactly what she says! It's about "clouds in the interstellar medium, and has nothing to do with any of the doomsday BS". So if that really is the author, what she says in the post is absolutely correct, If that really is not the author as you seem to be implying, what she says in the post is still absolutely correct!

So do you want to debate the content of the paper and how it's misrepresented? Instead of bringing up a red herring about whether or not the author is really who she says she is? Because the post is exactly right whether it's the actual author or not.

If you have doubts, you can e-mail of the author, named Yuan Li, and ask her in the e-mail if she made that post to youtube. I really see no reason to doubt it, based on the post being absolutely correct. But if you have doubts, why don't you check it out? Here's the contact information for the author, why don't you send her an e-mail, or call her, and let me know if she's really the one who made that post to youtube?

Yuan Li, PhD

Skepticism is good, but it seems to me the guy saying all mainstream scientists are idiots or something like that is worthy of more skepticism than someone who claims to be an author of a paper who makes a post accurately describing the contents of the paper, wouldn't you agree?

originally posted by: Scratchpost
? um that zoom in pic is Not a zoom'd in of the left one????

2 different telescopes give 2 different views , the one on the left is from Hubble as seen in optical light the one on the right is James Webb's infrared view , infrared lets us see through the dust and gas allowing us to see what lies within.