Im not sure where I read the exact statement that the light is older than the age of the universe but it was within the last month so I know my memory isnt that far off. Of course I easily could have misread it, but I dont think so.
Anyway here is something close:
In their quest for quick results, the researchers relied on redshift estimates derived from simple brightness-based measurements. These are easier to obtain but less precise than direct measurements of redshift, which require more dedicated observation time. Nevertheless, the simplified technique can be accurate, and here it suggested a galaxy that was unexpectedly bright and big, already bearing a mass of stars equivalent to a billion suns, just a few hundred times less than that of the Milky Way's stellar population, despite our own galaxy being billions of years more mature. “This was beyond our most optimistic expectations,” says Tommaso Treu, an astronomer at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the lead on GLASS.
The record didn't last long. In the following days, dozens of galaxy candidates from CEERS and GLASS sprang into view with estimated redshifts as high as 20—just 180 million years after the big bang—some with disklike structures that were not expected to manifest so early in cosmic history. Another team, meanwhile, found evidence for galaxies the size of our Milky Way at a redshift of 10, less than 500 million years after the big bang.
Such behemoths emerging so rapidly defies expectations set by cosmologists' standard model of the universe's evolution. Called Lambda CDM (LCDM), this model incorporates scientists' best estimates for the properties of dark energy and dark matter, which collectively act to dominate the emergence of large-scale cosmic structures. (“Lambda” refers to dark energy, and “CDM” refers to dark matter that is relatively sluggish, or “cold.”) “Even if you took everything that was available to form stars and snapped your fingers instantaneously, you still wouldn't be able to get that big that early,” says Michael Boylan-Kolchin, a cosmologist at the University of Texas at Austin. “It would be a real revolution.”
For those unaware, redshift is similar to the doppler effect.
And here is two preprint papers:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.09434
https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.09436
But by using deduction, if a galaxy is at redshift 20, just 180 million years after their big bang, and contains billions of stars already, there isnt enough time for this to have happened through the commonly accepted theories of the big bang and galaxy formation. If its found to have a few million sun strong black hole at its center then your are really going to have to rethink the 'science'.
Its really the study of black holes though that has me throwing the big bang out with the bathwater.
Im not sure where I read the exact statement that the light is older than the age of the universe but it was within the last month so I know my memory isnt that far off. Of course I easily could have misread it, but I dont think so.
Anyway here is something close:
In their quest for quick results, the researchers relied on redshift estimates derived from simple brightness-based measurements. These are easier to obtain but less precise than direct measurements of redshift, which require more dedicated observation time. Nevertheless, the simplified technique can be accurate, and here it suggested a galaxy that was unexpectedly bright and big, already bearing a mass of stars equivalent to a billion suns, just a few hundred times less than that of the Milky Way's stellar population, despite our own galaxy being billions of years more mature. “This was beyond our most optimistic expectations,” says Tommaso Treu, an astronomer at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the lead on GLASS.
The record didn't last long. In the following days, dozens of galaxy candidates from CEERS and GLASS sprang into view with estimated redshifts as high as 20—just 180 million years after the big bang—some with disklike structures that were not expected to manifest so early in cosmic history. Another team, meanwhile, found evidence for galaxies the size of our Milky Way at a redshift of 10, less than 500 million years after the big bang.
Such behemoths emerging so rapidly defies expectations set by cosmologists' standard model of the universe's evolution. Called Lambda CDM (LCDM), this model incorporates scientists' best estimates for the properties of dark energy and dark matter, which collectively act to dominate the emergence of large-scale cosmic structures. (“Lambda” refers to dark energy, and “CDM” refers to dark matter that is relatively sluggish, or “cold.”) “Even if you took everything that was available to form stars and snapped your fingers instantaneously, you still wouldn't be able to get that big that early,” says Michael Boylan-Kolchin, a cosmologist at the University of Texas at Austin. “It would be a real revolution.”
For those unaware, redshift is similar to the doppler effect.
And here is two preprint papers:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.09434
https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.09436
But by using deduction, if a galaxy is at redshift 20, just 180 million years after their big bang, and contains billions of stars already, there isnt enough time for this to have happened through the commonly accepted theories of the big bang and galaxy formation. If its found to have a few million sun strong black hole at its center then your are really going to have to rethink the 'science'.
Im not sure where I read the exact statement that the light is older than the age of the universe but it was within the last month so I know my memory isnt that far off. Of course I easily could have misread it, but I dont think so.
Anyway here is something close:
In their quest for quick results, the researchers relied on redshift estimates derived from simple brightness-based measurements. These are easier to obtain but less precise than direct measurements of redshift, which require more dedicated observation time. Nevertheless, the simplified technique can be accurate, and here it suggested a galaxy that was unexpectedly bright and big, already bearing a mass of stars equivalent to a billion suns, just a few hundred times less than that of the Milky Way's stellar population, despite our own galaxy being billions of years more mature. “This was beyond our most optimistic expectations,” says Tommaso Treu, an astronomer at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the lead on GLASS.
The record didn't last long. In the following days, dozens of galaxy candidates from CEERS and GLASS sprang into view with estimated redshifts as high as 20—just 180 million years after the big bang—some with disklike structures that were not expected to manifest so early in cosmic history. Another team, meanwhile, found evidence for galaxies the size of our Milky Way at a redshift of 10, less than 500 million years after the big bang.
Such behemoths emerging so rapidly defies expectations set by cosmologists' standard model of the universe's evolution. Called Lambda CDM (LCDM), this model incorporates scientists' best estimates for the properties of dark energy and dark matter, which collectively act to dominate the emergence of large-scale cosmic structures. (“Lambda” refers to dark energy, and “CDM” refers to dark matter that is relatively sluggish, or “cold.”) “Even if you took everything that was available to form stars and snapped your fingers instantaneously, you still wouldn't be able to get that big that early,” says Michael Boylan-Kolchin, a cosmologist at the University of Texas at Austin. “It would be a real revolution.”
For those unaware, redshift is similar to the doppler effect.
And here is two preprint papers:
Im not sure where I read the exact statement that the light is older than the age of the universe but it was within the last month so I know my memory isnt that far off. Of course I easily could have misread it, but I dont think so.
Anyway here is something close:
In their quest for quick results, the researchers relied on redshift estimates derived from simple brightness-based measurements. These are easier to obtain but less precise than direct measurements of redshift, which require more dedicated observation time. Nevertheless, the simplified technique can be accurate, and here it suggested a galaxy that was unexpectedly bright and big, already bearing a mass of stars equivalent to a billion suns, just a few hundred times less than that of the Milky Way's stellar population, despite our own galaxy being billions of years more mature. “This was beyond our most optimistic expectations,” says Tommaso Treu, an astronomer at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the lead on GLASS.
The record didn't last long. In the following days, dozens of galaxy candidates from CEERS and GLASS sprang into view with estimated redshifts as high as 20—just 180 million years after the big bang—some with disklike structures that were not expected to manifest so early in cosmic history. Another team, meanwhile, found evidence for galaxies the size of our Milky Way at a redshift of 10, less than 500 million years after the big bang.
Such behemoths emerging so rapidly defies expectations set by cosmologists' standard model of the universe's evolution. Called Lambda CDM (LCDM), this model incorporates scientists' best estimates for the properties of dark energy and dark matter, which collectively act to dominate the emergence of large-scale cosmic structures. (“Lambda” refers to dark energy, and “CDM” refers to dark matter that is relatively sluggish, or “cold.”) “Even if you took everything that was available to form stars and snapped your fingers instantaneously, you still wouldn't be able to get that big that early,” says Michael Boylan-Kolchin, a cosmologist at the University of Texas at Austin. “It would be a real revolution.”
And here is two preprint papers: