Outragiosly Bright Galaxies

[pantheory]

This is another group of observations, in a seemingly endless list of observations, that seem to contradict the Big Bang model (BB) at great distances.
 

 

"Astronomers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst report that they have observed the most luminous galaxies ever seen in the Universe, objects so bright that established descriptors such as "ultra-" and "hyper-luminous" used to describe previously brightest known galaxies don't even come close. Lead author and undergraduate Kevin Harrington says, "We've taken to calling them 'outrageously luminous' among ourselves, because there is no scientific term to apply."

 

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-03/uoma-uaa032216.php

http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.05622

 

Of course they could not directly say that these observations contradict the BB model, if they did their paper may not have been accepted for publication without requiring changes, IMO.

 

Other cosmological models have predicted such observations including my own model. Here is my related paper concerning our group's studies concerning such predicted observations as those in the above link, as well as listing a great many asserted problems with the BB model.

 

http://www.aijcrnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_9_September_2014/2.pdf

 

"Flabbergasted," might be an appropriate word explaining the author's (astronomers) surprise when agreeing on the conclusions of this paper.

 

How other astronomers might interpret these observations is unknown since it is not discussed within the paper. One possible explanation/ interpretation to explain these observations to be consistent with standard cosmology, would be a foreground magnifying source of some kind for all of these galaxies -- although no specific possible magnifying galaxy or cluster was mentioned or identified. Since there is a lot a stake, specifically the standard model of cosmology IMO, I expect new papers to be forthcoming giving alternative explanations once this study and related observations have been fully digested.

[bornagainathiest]

This is another group of observations, in a seemingly endless list of observations, that seem to contradict the Big Bang model (BB) at great distances.

 

 

"Astronomers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst report that they have observed the most luminous galaxies ever seen in the Universe, objects so bright that established descriptors such as "ultra-" and "hyper-luminous" used to describe previously brightest known galaxies don't even come close. Lead author and undergraduate Kevin Harrington says, "We've taken to calling them 'outrageously luminous' among ourselves, because there is no scientific term to apply."

 

 

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-03/uoma-uaa032216.php

http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.05622

 

Of course they could not directly say that these observations contradict the BB model, if they did their paper may not have been accepted for publication without requiring changes, IMO.

 

Other cosmological models have predicted such observations including my own model. Here is my related paper concerning our group's studies concerning such predicted observations as those in the above link, as well as listing a great many asserted problems with the BB model.

 

http://www.aijcrnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_9_September_2014/2.pdf

 

"Flabbergasted," might be an appropriate word explaining the author's (astronomers) surprise when agreeing on the conclusions of this paper.

 

How other astronomers might interpret these observations is unknown since it is not discussed within the paper. One possible explanation/ interpretation to explain these observations to be consistent with standard cosmology, would be a foreground magnifying source of some kind for all of these galaxies -- although no specific possible magnifying galaxy or cluster was mentioned or identified. Since there is a lot a stake, specifically the standard model of cosmology IMO, I expect new papers to be forthcoming giving alternative explanations once this study and related observations have been fully digested.

 

I read about this a few days ago, wondered if Pantheory would try and make some capital out of it and concluded that this finding wouldn't give him a means of doing so.

 

I stand by my conclusion because this new finding doesn't contradict the Big Bang cosmological model.

 

Which is the real reason why the scientists concerned didn't say that it did.

 

If it had, they would have said so.