James Webb Just Broke the Universe .... Again !

a reply to: gortex

One wonders if that is where the "great black hole" that has been described to be drawing the most matter in? If not then it should be damn close. Relatively speaking.

originally posted by: theatreboy
a reply to: gortex

I love these posts, S&F.

These new discoveries are the oldest Galaxies in the Universe known to us and so further compound the problem created by Webb's earlier discoveries , if our understanding of the Universe is correct these fully fledged Galaxies shouldn't exist after only 300 million years there simply wasn't enough time for them to form.

Our scientists always are wrong. Something, like the beginning of our universe, is taught as fact, when it is a theory. every decade or so, someone comes out and changes it.

The covid vaccine and MRNA tech was promoted as safe and effective. 3 years later, and the pharmaceutical companies are admitting this is false, however quietly.

While I am not a 6000 year old universe believer, I do believe in a version of the young earth theory. Rocks that formed after Mt St Helens erupted in 80 or 81, have been dated to millions of years old. Our test procedures are flawed.

This does not take the findings away, they are astounding.

I have always wanted, and still do, to go to space and see this beauty sans atmosphere. I just think our scientists have it wrong. Again.

ETA: DM sent.

They are flawed. BUT

I studied a course in college many moons ago under one of the explorers who uncovered a stash of the Dead Sea Scrolls. According to those interpretations of the Bible on the scrolls and the work of other Christian Scholars, the 1st verses of Genesis reads more like the " 7 days" were like 7 Epochs of the Earth.

Gods works are in those Webb pics folks. Proof something greater than we are works in wonderous ways.

Our scientists always are wrong. Something, like the beginning of our universe, is taught as fact, when it is a theory. every decade or so, someone comes out and changes it.

One might say this but it is not what science really is. The job of science is not to find what is true but rather what is NOT true. Upon this process of elimination guesses are made as to what else might not be true. This is all. Real science never believed in the Big Bang, only people who wanted to believe it, it was never more than a theory, though the need for some to pin their hats of existential being on some grand ''truth'' thought of it that way.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

I think you pointed out one of humans greatest weakness that has been used against them since forever. Their hat of existential being.
For a long time it was only religious doctrines, until recently when scientific doctrines became a thing. They have been at odds ever since...

a reply to: Terpene

To me,science is a process of investigation of our being and not statement of absolute truth. How it is taken by so many though is a different story. I think religions can be understood in the same light.People, making guesses about reality and offering them to others which then,over time, are turned from guesses to final truths.

I recall reading one about how all those old Greek Gods were, at first, written about as a work of fiction, then after time just came to be accepted as real. Then of course the Romans just adopted the entire structure and just changed the names. What a group we are, huh?

Socrates - "The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing".

This quote is never more appropriate than when the JWST finds something new.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
One of these days, the Webb platform or some other platfor will make another ground breaking discovery.

It will discover a giant 'eyeball' staring back through a telescope on the other end. And this (metaphorical) eyeball will be that of the observer themself. Now, you may think this post is in jest, but it is not at all. The point being, the Universe has circled back on itself. Anyone want to place money on the next, even more distant, galaxy being even younger than JADES-GS-z14-0? Furthermore, as technology improves our ability to categorize the heavens even better than ever before, it is my suspicion that we will find what initially appears to be a twin of JADES-GS-z14-0 in our near-field observations. It will not really be a twin, but rather the same galaxy from a different perspective.

I believe we have crossed the mid-point threshold in our search for the "edge" or most distant point. From this point we will get ever more close to the point of beginning of our perspective.

Would be pretty wild if we get to the “earliest” part of the universe and we find the milky way.

The deeper I have looked into science and life, the deeper it gets. Amazing achievement to be able to find such distant things. A lot has been defined and accounted for to make it this far. A long way still to go to get a clear and accurate picture of the full nature of god.

In reality, we can only guess if they are old. Just because some people who have degrees in a subject are saying things based on consensus of the time, it does not mean it is true. Does it matter? Not really. If they want to believe in what they believe in I suppose it is their right. Me....I will believe they just discovered some galaxy far away. I also am not a believer in the big bang theory because there is no way in hell we could conclude it happened that way from this point in the Universe.

Interpretation of evidence in sciences is based on beliefs related to consensus of the time. It does not stop people from saying their beliefs are real though...to me...I think it is just interesting and understand that man is not really smart.

Maybe the aliens who fly around in space ships people see know more than we do about this....then again maybe they know they cannot possibly figure it out and just spend their money and time creating things they really need.

Does it matter if this area is supposedly in the early universe? Not really, I would never waste my life getting OCD about researching that kind of stuff, I would rather go fishing or work in the garden....getting too old to desire to swim anymore or hunt. I am much more interested in seeing the fawn the doe we were feeding for months had. We saw it a few days back but never got a picture of it to share with the kids.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: theatreboy
a reply to: gortex

I love these posts, S&F.

These new discoveries are the oldest Galaxies in the Universe known to us and so further compound the problem created by Webb's earlier discoveries , if our understanding of the Universe is correct these fully fledged Galaxies shouldn't exist after only 300 million years there simply wasn't enough time for them to form.

Our scientists always are wrong. Something, like the beginning of our universe, is taught as fact, when it is a theory. every decade or so, someone comes out and changes it.

The covid vaccine and MRNA tech was promoted as safe and effective. 3 years later, and the pharmaceutical companies are admitting this is false, however quietly.

While I am not a 6000 year old universe believer, I do believe in a version of the young earth theory. Rocks that formed after Mt St Helens erupted in 80 or 81, have been dated to millions of years old. Our test procedures are flawed.

This does not take the findings away, they are astounding.

I have always wanted, and still do, to go to space and see this beauty sans atmosphere. I just think our scientists have it wrong. Again.

ETA: DM sent.

They are flawed. BUT

I studied a course in college many moons ago under one of the explorers who uncovered a stash of the Dead Sea Scrolls. According to those interpretations of the Bible on the scrolls and the work of other Christian Scholars, the 1st verses of Genesis reads more like the " 7 days" were like 7 Epochs of the Earth.

Gods works are in those Webb pics folks. Proof something greater than we are works in wonderous ways.

TBH, I believe science is the study of The Creator's mind.

a reply to: gortex

You’re right that the discovery casts doubt on our ideas about either the evolution of galaxies or that of the early universe, but I think we already had quite a few doubts about those things based on earlier telescopic findings.

It’s important to remember that, awe-inspiring as its capabilities are, JWST is a device that pushes up against the outer limits of human technological capability; many of its observations are also of the outer limits of the physical universe. However clever astronomers and cosmologists may be, these data are intrinsically questionable. Any statement we can make based on them has to be provisional.

Often these postulates are later disproven, like the recent paper based on observations of stellar orbits about galactic centres that suggested, according to the author, that dark matter needn’t exist. Further analysis of the numbers using a different method gave different results, though, and the conclusions of the earlier paper seem to have been largely abandoned.

However this new finding plays out, our understanding of nature will be enhanced by it, and new cosmological models will emerge taking the surprising age and structure of this and other very distant galaxies into account.

Thank you, by the way, for the value you bring to this board. You are perhaps the last person here still regularly posting substantive topics not connected with American politics.

a reply to: gortex

Another superb thread Gortex! Once we "find" a 1 Billion year old galaxy, these 300 million year old galaxies won't seem so mysterious. Maybe a telescope launched 50 years from now will be the one that finds the galaxy(ies) that are 1 Billion, or more, years old.

Maybe at some point, scientists should re-evaluate how they determine the age of objects, and even their belief of how a galaxy forms? Maybe they are generated relatively quickly by God, instead of taking their sweet time to "form".

a reply to: WeMustCare

You are misunderstanding the numbers. These three galaxies are 300 million years from the begining of time. Also known as the big bang if you go by that theory. That was 13.7 billion years ago. Most of the galaxies seen in the sky are over a billion light-years away and that makes the images over a billion years ago.

Theoretically, the universe is 27.4 billion light-years across, at least what we might be able to see. For every light-year out, it is one year back in time that we see everything. Even the closest star is roughly 4 light-years away and seen where it was and how it was 4 years ago.

Edit: Update: A theory of the age of the universe is now calculated to be 26.7 billion years old based on the observations of these galaxies. That would make the universe 53.4 billion light-years across.

cosmosmagazine.com...#:~:text=Current%20estimates%20place%20the%20Big,as%20the%20current%2 0accepted%20model.

When I think of space, it reminds me of that movie Being John Malkovich

Dark matter is thought, maybe even consciousness, space is everywhere. Start shaping.

a reply to: whereisdagan

Dark matter is thought

Thoughts have mass? No wonder my head feels heavy.

maybe even consciousness

Gosh, how interesting. What signs of consciousness does dark matter show?

a reply to: gortex

Excellent thread as usual, please keep them coming.

I read about this yesterday on the BBC new website.
Its written in straight forward laymans terms so that even simpletons like myself can understand.
www.bbc.co.uk...

When trying to imagine the shear size and volume of the universe, its age and everything within it, it simply blows my mind.

Some people think that we may soon be able to view the Big Bang itself, but that's based on a bit of a misconception.

The Big Bang is a really misleading name for the expanding universe that we see. We see an infinite universe expanding into itself. The name Big Bang conveys the idea of a firecracker exploding at a time and a place - with a center. The universe doesn't have a center. The Big Bang happened everywhere at once and was a process happening in time, not a point in time. We know this because 1) we see galaxies rushing away from each other, not from a central point and 2) we see the heat that was left over from early times, and that heat uniformly fills the universe.

Another interesting article that explained The Big Bang - in really basic terms - and the purpose of James Watt.
webb.nasa.gov...#:~:text=No%2C%20the%20Big%20Bang%20itself%20is%20not%20something%20we%20can%20see.

1) yes, thoughts have mass
2) your sarcasm is funny
4) I skipped 3
5) If you put enough energy into a point in space it expands and becomes malleable, I assumed it's dark matter to be honest but it's probably a better thought than you can come up with because you don't have an answer for what it is do you? It also fits with the contracting theory and and any wave theory and one day it's going to be funny when it's proven true and you saw it here first xD
a reply to: Astyanax

Does energy not have mass all of a sudden? Did I miss something? Are my thoughts not carried on waves or frequency? Maybe I'm mad. What if I was right.