Telescopic

[walterpthefirst]

22 minutes ago, pantheory said:

 

They didn't say they thought the observation was an anomaly: that was my take oh it.  Astronomers seldom use the word 'anomaly'.  But descriptions of observations by others use the word anomaly since it's more interesting to most readers than technical jargon concerning press releases. But they explain some of its unexpected galaxy characteristics such as being very large and overly red appearing. And of course larger galaxies usually have more energetic central black holes than smaller ones, regarding the production of UV light. Again we will have to wait for JWST observations for them to get a better look with greater clarity. Their next observations could likely be one of the very first concerning the JWST looking out at the furthest distances.

 

From the Science Daily page.

 

"It was very hard work to find HD1 out of more than 700,000 objects," says Yuichi Harikane, an astronomer at the University of Tokyo who discovered the galaxy. "HD1's red color matched the expected characteristics of a galaxy 13.5 billion light-years away surprisingly well, giving me a little bit of goosebumps when I found it."

 

So their mention of redness is as purely a function of redshift and not intrinsic redness.

There is no mention of HD1 being overly red in Scientific American article you cited.

The BigThink article says this about HD1's redness.

 

Although there are magnified, ultra-distant, very red and even infrared galaxies like the ones identified here in the Hubble eXtreme Deep Field, many of these candidate galaxies have turned out to be either intrinsically red and/or closer interlopers, not the ultra-distant objects we hoped they were. Without spectroscopic confirmation, fooling ourselves as to an object’s cosmic distance is an unfortunate, but commonplace occurrence.

 

Yes, it’s extremely red in color, missing all of its short-wavelength light.

 

Of your three cited articles Pantheory, one doesn't mention redness at all, one only does so in the context of redshift and the third leaves its options open, not committing itself on whether HD1's redness is a function of distance or of age.

 

None of your three cited articles have anything to say about HD1 being very large.  So, unless I've missed that and you can cite it, I dismiss your claim about HD1's large size with a Hitchslap.  

 

"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[pantheory]

1 hour ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

From the Science Daily page.

 

"It was very hard work to find HD1 out of more than 700,000 objects," says Yuichi Harikane, an astronomer at the University of Tokyo who discovered the galaxy. "HD1's red color matched the expected characteristics of a galaxy 13.5 billion light-years away surprisingly well, giving me a little bit of goosebumps when I found it."

 

So their mention of redness is as purely a function of redshift and not intrinsic redness.

There is no mention of HD1 being overly red in Scientific American article you cited.

The BigThink article says this about HD1's redness.

 

Although there are magnified, ultra-distant, very red and even infrared galaxies like the ones identified here in the Hubble eXtreme Deep Field, many of these candidate galaxies have turned out to be either intrinsically red and/or closer interlopers, not the ultra-distant objects we hoped they were. Without spectroscopic confirmation, fooling ourselves as to an object’s cosmic distance is an unfortunate, but commonplace occurrence.

 

Yes, it’s extremely red in color, missing all of its short-wavelength light.

 

Of your three cited articles Pantheory, one doesn't mention redness at all, one only does so in the context of redshift and the third leaves its options open, not committing itself on whether HD1's redness is a function of distance or of age.

 

None of your three cited articles have anything to say about HD1 being very large.  So, unless I've missed that and you can cite it, I dismiss your claim about HD1's large size with a Hitchslap.  

 

"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

 

 

 

 If the galaxy's central black hole were 4 times bigger than the Milky Way's central black hole, as they speculated,  it would have to be a very large galaxy. Almost always a galaxy's central black hole is proportional to the galaxy's size and mass.

 

Galactic redness is always a function of distance but it also can be a function of age, having many red stars, and also can be caused by dustiness. The JWST should be able to better distinguish some of these possibilities, especially the infrared spectrum which can penetrate dust clouds, penetrate to the galactic core, better perpetrate the galactic exterior to better distinguish the galaxy's  form, which can also be another age indicator if its form, or lack thereof, is distinguishable.

[pantheory]

If I'm right, galaxies of all ages will be found everywhere near and far. But according to most mainstream theory, it takes a long time for large galaxies to develop So both newly forming galaxies, and the oldest galaxies should be rare everywhere.

 

Here is an example of a very young appearing galaxy close to us, which is also rare. If I'm right, very few  of such very young and very old appearing galaxies will be observable in the most distant universe also. And below is a link to another huge galactic anomaly in the distant universe, of the countless to come with the JWST  IMO.

 

https://earthsky.org/science-wire/a-young-galaxy-in-the-local-universe/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/giant-galaxies-from-the-universes-childhood-challenge-cosmic-origin-stories/

[walterpthefirst]

4 hours ago, pantheory said:

 If the galaxy's central black hole were 4 times bigger than the Milky Way's central black hole, as they speculated,  it would have to be a very large galaxy. Almost always a galaxy's central black hole is proportional to the galaxy's size and mass.

 

Galactic redness is always a function of distance but it also can be a function of age, having many red stars, and also can be caused by dustiness. The JWST should be able to better distinguish some of these possibilities, especially the infrared spectrum which can penetrate dust clouds, penetrate to the galactic core, better perpetrate the galactic exterior to better distinguish the galaxy's  form, which can also be another age indicator if its form, or lack thereof, is distinguishable.

 

But in the absence of JWST data your argument about redness in this thread is weak.  Scientific American say nothing about it, Science Daily only mention redness in the context of distance and Ethan Siegel doesn't commit himself one way or the other.  One no-show, one definite no-no and one noncommittal do not make for a persuasive argument.

 

Their ballpark figure of the mass of HD1's possible central black hole is, as you correctly point out, a speculation.  And so your conclusion is based upon possibility and speculation.  Again, a weak argument and not persuasive.

[walterpthefirst]

4 hours ago, pantheory said:

If I'm right, galaxies of all ages will be found everywhere near and far. But according to most mainstream theory, it takes a long time for large galaxies to develop So both newly forming galaxies, and the oldest galaxies should be rare everywhere.

 

Here is an example of a very young appearing galaxy close to us, which is also rare. If I'm right, very few  of such very young and very old appearing galaxies will be observable in the most distant universe also. And below is a link to another huge galactic anomaly in the distant universe, of the countless to come with the JWST  IMO.

 

https://earthsky.org/science-wire/a-young-galaxy-in-the-local-universe/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/giant-galaxies-from-the-universes-childhood-challenge-cosmic-origin-stories/

 

No, you are overstating the case about the EarthSky article, Pantheory.  The title of the article is qualified with a question mark.  Like this.

A young galaxy in the local universe?

They also ask, Is it really as young as it looks?  The jury is still out when it comes to DDO68 and as such this does not go very far in supporting your argument.

 

 

 

The same is also true for the Scientific American article.  Forty anomalous galaxies out of a total of two trillion in the observable universe doesn't constitute much evidence in support of your argument, Pantheory.  

[pantheory]

1 hour ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

No, you are overstating the case about the EarthSky article, Pantheory.  The title of the article is qualified with a question mark.  Like this.

A young galaxy in the local universe?

They also ask, Is it really as young as it looks?  The jury is still out when it comes to DDO68 and as such this does not go very far in supporting your argument.

 

 

 

The same is also true for the Scientific American article.  Forty anomalous galaxies out of a total of two trillion in the observable universe doesn't constitute much evidence in support of your argument, Pantheory.  

 

Of course they'll endlessly question anything that seems contrary to mainstream theory. This local young galaxy, however,  is not too bad, Theory can readily recover from that. But a very old galaxy in the distant universe blows mainstream theory away. They would have to modify the Hubble distance formula to allow for a much older universe, which certainly is possible. But with all the modifying hypotheses, Inflation, dark matter, and dark energy, none of which can be demonstrated, plus an additio9nal amendment would leave the BB model on a collapsing foundation.

[walterpthefirst]

26 minutes ago, pantheory said:

 

Of course they'll endlessly question anything that seems contrary to mainstream theory. This local young galaxy, however,  is not too bad, Theory can recover from that. But a very old galaxy in the distant universe blows mainstream theory away. They would have to modify the Hubble distance formula to allow for a much older universe, which certainly is possible. But with all the modifying hypotheses, Inflation, dark matter, and dark energy, none of which can be demonstrated, plus and additio9nal amendment would leave the BB model on a collapsing foundation.

 

I happen to agree about old, dead-and-red mature galaxies appearing at extreme redshifts, Pantheory.

 

But on the basis of what you've presented in this thread, I'm not currently persuaded and I've given my reasons why.

 

As I mentioned a while back, I'm quite happy to accept the overthrow of Big Bang cosmology and the LCDM model - provided that the JWST data warrants it.

 

But what you've said in this thread doesn't warrant me doing that.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[pantheory]

10 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

I happen to agree about old, dead-and-red mature galaxies appearing at extreme redshifts, Pantheory.

 

But on the basis of what you've presented in this thread, I'm not currently persuaded and I've given my reasons why.

 

As I mentioned a while back, I'm quite happy to accept the overthrow of Big Bang cosmology and the LCDM model - provided that the JWST data warrants it.

 

But what you've said in this thread doesn't warrant me doing that.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

That's all good. I don't think the astronomers or any of the links were convinced about anything. It will take many years of JWST observations, but hopefully not as long as 4 years to figure it out, which was my guess. My guess 30 years ago was that they'd eventually figure out with the Hubble that the universe was far older, but I was wrong then.

[pantheory]

On 6/27/2022 at 4:43 PM, walterpthefirst said:

 

I happen to agree about old, dead-and-red mature galaxies appearing at extreme redshifts, Pantheory.

 

But on the basis of what you've presented in this thread, I'm not currently persuaded and I've given my reasons why.

 

As I mentioned a while back, I'm quite happy to accept the overthrow of Big Bang cosmology and the LCDM model - provided that the JWST data warrants it.

 

But what you've said in this thread doesn't warrant me doing that.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

Thought you might be interested in this link which is a "preprint" concerning my research and JWST predictions:

 

https://acrobat.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:4d3bdd89-cdfe-4171-a91b-f5788f7839d7

 

 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

Thank you, Pantheory.

[walterpthefirst]

Not long to wait now.

 

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/06/nasa-teases-extraordinary-images-captured-by-its-webb-telescope/

 

NASA said it plans to release several images beginning at 10:30 am ET (14:30 UTC) on July 12, the result of Webb's "first light" observations. On Wednesday, space agency officials said the images and other data would include the deepest-field image of the universe ever taken—looking further into the cosmos than humans ever have before—as well as the spectrum of an atmosphere around an exoplanet. 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[pantheory]

17 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

Not long to wait now.

 

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/06/nasa-teases-extraordinary-images-captured-by-its-webb-telescope/

 

NASA said it plans to release several images beginning at 10:30 am ET (14:30 UTC) on July 12, the result of Webb's "first light" observations. On Wednesday, space agency officials said the images and other data would include the deepest-field image of the universe ever taken—looking further into the cosmos than humans ever have before—as well as the spectrum of an atmosphere around an exoplanet. 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Good link.

[walterpthefirst]

Here's what's coming today.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/space/first-james-webb-telescope-photo-unveiled-biden-rcna37549

 

 

 

 

Here's what's coming up tomorrow.

 

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/nasa-shares-list-of-cosmic-targets-for-webb-telescopes-first-images

 

• Carina Nebula: The Carina Nebula is one of the largest and brightest nebulae in the sky, located approximately 7,600 light-years away in the southern constellation Carina. Nebulae are stellar nurseries where stars form. The Carina Nebula is home to many massive stars several times larger than the Sun.
• WASP-96b (spectrum): WASP-96b is a giant planet outside our solar system, composed mainly of gas. The planet, located nearly 1,150 light-years from Earth, orbits its star every 3.4 days. It has about half the mass of Jupiter, and its discovery was announced in 2014.
• Southern Ring Nebula: The Southern Ring, or “Eight-Burst” nebula, is a planetary nebula – an expanding cloud of gas surrounding a dying star. It is nearly half a light-year in diameter and is located approximately 2,000 light-years away from Earth.
• Stephan’s Quintet: About 290 million light-years away, Stephan’s Quintet is located in the constellation Pegasus. It is notable for being the first compact galaxy group ever discovered in 1787. Four of the five galaxies within the quintet are locked in a cosmic dance of repeated close encounters.
• SMACS 0723: Massive foreground galaxy clusters magnify and distort the light of objects behind them, permitting a deep field view into both the extremely distant and intrinsically faint galaxy populations.

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

13 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

Here's what's coming today.

Keep in mind, as you look at those pictures, that same god who created all those galaxies and nebulae has very serious concerns about you not playing with your peepee.

[pantheory]

These are the very first photos released by James Webb management and NASA. These photos are very similar to Hubble deep field photos as would be predicted by any steady-state cosmologt. The question remains as to whether the James Webb will ever see anything that could confirm BB cosmology as predicted. 

 

https://mashable.com/article/james-webb-space-telescope-first-image-biden-surprise

[walterpthefirst]

I wondered if you would lunge at this, Pantheory.

 

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-delivers-deepest-infrared-image-of-universe-yet

 

This image shows the galaxy cluster SMACS 0723 as it appeared 4.6 billion years ago, with many more galaxies in front of and behind the cluster. Much more about this cluster will be revealed as researchers begin digging into Webb’s data. This field was also imaged by Webb’s Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI), which observes mid-infrared light.

 

There is nothing in the image that can (currently) be reliably dated to periods beyond 12 billion years ago, which was the limit of the Hubble Extreme Deep Field.

 

Yes, there galaxies behind the SMACS 0723 cluster, but so far no distances or ages for these galaxies have been announced.

 

Also, the distorted arcs of galaxies lying directly behind the cluster would need to 'de-warped' and spectroscopically studied to discover their ages and distances.

 

None of that has yet happened.

 

So, as I mentioned a few days ago... 'We're going to have to wait.'

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-reveals-steamy-atmosphere-of-distant-planet-in-detail

 

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-captures-dying-star-s-final-performance-in-fine-detail

 

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-reveals-cosmic-cliffs-glittering-landscape-of-star-birth

 

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-sheds-light-on-galaxy-evolution-black-holes

 

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-reveals-webb-telescope-s-first-images-of-unseen-universe

 

The other Webb images revealed today.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[walterpthefirst]

This article says it best, Pantheory.

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/breaking-the-deepest-view-of-the-universe-ever-is-here-and-it-s-breathtaking

 

"This image captures the starlight from the earliest objects to have formed in the first few hundred million years after the Big Bang. This starlight is more than 13 billion years old, focussed toward JWST by the incredible bending power of a massive cluster of younger galaxies."

 

The starlight of the arcs that have been magnified and distorted by SMACS 0723 hold the answers we are waiting for.

 

The shapes, sizes and colours of the undistorted and unmagnified galaxies in the rest of the Webb image are of no help in telling us much about the very early universe.

 

Until a proper analysis of the arcs is performed we are none the wiser about what lies over 12 billion light years away.

 

You've jumped the gun.

 

We still have to wait.

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

This is for your attention, Pantheory.

 

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2207.09428.pdf

 

I am not wedded to any particular model of cosmic origins and am not afraid or bothered by new data.

 

I tentatively accept this and look forward to further developments.

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[pantheory]

19 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

This is for your attention, Pantheory.

 

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2207.09428.pdf

 

I am not wedded to any particular model of cosmic origins and am not afraid or bothered by new data.

 

I tentatively accept this and look forward to further developments.

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

This is a well-written paper. It is called a "draft version" or "preprint." It was not peer reviewed probably because of its preliminary nature.  As I guessed and said before, it will likely take then 3 years or longer to figure out JWST observations correctly IMHO.

 

Here is another link that I found recently that I think will come to play and question concerning JWST future observations.

 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/02/220204123542.htm

[walterpthefirst]

I find these new results fascinating, Pantheory.

 

As far as I understand one of the main motivations for the JWST imaging the SMACS 0723 cluster was that it had already been imaged by the Hubble space telescope.  By doing this the scientists could make a comparison between the earlier Hubble and the up-to-date JWST images.  Apparently this kind of comparison provides useful data in a number of different fields.

 

On the back of this, what I'd really like to see the JWST scientists do next is to revisit the Deep Field images that Hubble took in the constellations of Fornax and Tucana.  That is, the Deep Fields North and South.  That should be really interesting!

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

[pantheory]

1 hour ago, walterpthefirst said:

I find these new results fascinating, Pantheory...................

 

..... what I'd really like to see the JWST scientists do next is to revisit the Deep Field images that Hubble took in the constellations of Fornax and Tucana.  That is, the Deep Fields North and South.  That should be really interesting!

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

Good idea. A big advantage of looking at the Hubble Deep field again is that there would be few foreground galaxies to distort background images.  I feel certain it will be done sooner rather than later. 

[walterpthefirst]

Here you are Pantheory.

 

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/why-is-this-jwst-paper-a-cause-for-panic.1017069/#post-6655241

 

My name in physicsforums is Cerenkov and I started a thread there about the JWST.

 

As you'll see, the member called ohwilleke provided plenty of relevant material.

 

I'll begin looking into it soon.

 

In the meantime, please take a look.

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[pantheory]

On 8/3/2022 at 11:13 AM, walterpthefirst said:

Here you are Pantheory.

 

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/why-is-this-jwst-paper-a-cause-for-panic.1017069/#post-6655241

 

My name in physicsforums is Cerenkov and I started a thread there about the JWST.

 

As you'll see, the member called ohwilleke provided plenty of relevant material.

 

I'll begin looking into it soon.

 

In the meantime, please take a look.

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

It's great IMO that some are already realizing the big theoretical problems that could be involved so quickly via James Webb observations . But I thought similar things when the Hubble first went up -- that they would realize observations were contradicting theory. But after decades, they never came to such a realization. My prediction for the James Webb is that it will take them 3-4 years to figure it out since BB cosmology is so deeply entrenched. But I do know of ways BB theory can be changed to allow for a much older universe, but upon such ad hoc changes I would expect others will be looking for alternative theory. But nearly any steady-state theory would predict what the James Webb will be observing IMO.

 

Thanks for the heads-up advisory Walter

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Hey, Walt, I heard that space smells like seared beef and welding spatter.  Astronauts obviously cannot smell it during space walks; but it lingers in their space suits and they can smell it when they reenter the space station.

 

Is this true?  And, if so, what causes space to have that particular odor (or odour, if that makes more sense)?