The latest James Webb studies

[pantheory]

Cosmological Model Tests with JWST

[accessed Jun 11 2023]. Cosmological Model Tests with JWST. Available from MDPI

 

It is noticeable that most of these studies of the first JWST data released have something in common,

Namely:

1)There is an excessively large number of galaxies at very high redshifts which was not foreseen by the Standard Cosmological Model.

2) Galaxies at these redshifts have disks and bulges, which indicates that they have passed through a long period of evolution.

3) Spectroscopically, these galaxies resemble their counterparts in the local Universe.

4) Smaller galaxies are more massive than larger ones, which is quite the opposite of the common view.

5) These issues indicate that the galaxies at redshifts z > 15 discovered by JWST did not have enough time within the framework of the standard cosmological model to have evolved into what is being observed.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365957015_Cosmological_Model_Tests_with_JWST

[walterpthefirst]

ResearchGate - Wikipedia

 

Nature also reported that "Some of the apparent profiles on the site are not owned by real people, but are created automatically – and incompletely – by scraping details of people's affiliations, publication records and PDFs, if available, from around the web. That annoys researchers who do not want to be on the site, and who feel that the pages misrepresent them – especially when they discover that ResearchGate will not take down the pages when asked."

 

 

ResearchGate's continuing practice of 'manufacturing' false profiles of people who do not exist is highly unethical.

 

 

Given this, how do we know...

 

 

A )  that the authors of this paper actually exist?

 

and...

 

B )  that ResearchGate has published this paper with their permission?

 

 

 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

A bit of digging reveals that this paper also appears on Arxiv.

 

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.06575.pdf

 

So the doubts over the trust issue re: the paper and its authors have been settled.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[pantheory]

6 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

ResearchGate - Wikipedia

 

Nature also reported that "Some of the apparent profiles on the site are not owned by real people, but are created automatically – and incompletely – by scraping details of people's affiliations, publication records and PDFs, if available, from around the web. That annoys researchers who do not want to be on the site, and who feel that the pages misrepresent them – especially when they discover that ResearchGate will not take down the pages when asked."

 

 

ResearchGate's continuing practice of 'manufacturing' false profiles of people who do not exist is highly unethical.

 

 

Given this, how do we know...

 

 

A )  that the authors of this paper actually exist?

 

and...

 

B )  that ResearchGate has published this paper with their permission?

 

 

 

I believe the answer is to simply read the James Webb observations being discussed. A few have been published and many related comments by the authors in quotes, have been made.

[walterpthefirst]

The conclusions of the paper make for interesting and pertinent reading.

 

5 Conclusions We conclude that the first JWST observations of high-redshift objects cannot be explained by the expanding-Universe model. Everything points to the possibility that the actual age of the objects in the Universe is far larger than predicted by ΛCDM cosmology. Of course, we should be cautious about such a conclusion.

 

Thus, before dismissing the expanding-Universe paradigm, it is important to robustly confirm the new findings.

 

No doubt, much longer exposures and much deeper fields will be acquired in the forthcoming years by the JWST. These longer exposures would likely result in new galaxies discovered at z ≈ 20 or more. Based on our conclusion, we predict that the JWST should discover even smaller galaxies (in terms of their angular-sizes) and that those smaller galaxies would be observed as very luminous, with well-developed morphology. They would be approximately the same (perhaps, slightly less-evolved) as the galaxies of the late Universe. In such a case, the expanding-Universe paradigm would require correction and modification, in line with the discussion presented here.