• See the Oldest View of Our Known Universe, Just Revealed by the James W

    From Internetado@21:1/5 to All on Tue Aug 2 10:45:05 2022
    Decades of work, $10 billion in spending and nearly 14 billion years of
    cosmic history have brought us to this moment: the first science from
    the largest and most powerful observatory ever built.

    Lee Billings: This is the picture we've all been waiting for the
    deepest image of the cosmos ever captured. Humanity has never seen so
    far back and so clearly into the depths of the universe's history. The multitudes of nameless galaxies you see here emitted their light more
    than 13 billion years ago, mere cosmic moments after the Big Bang. This
    one image and the countless others that come has been the result of
    more than two decades of focused efforts by some of the world's
    greatest scientists and engineers.
    (continue)...

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/video/see-the-oldest-view-of-our-known-universe-just-revealed-by-the-james-webb-space-telescope/
    --
    Internetado
    Brasil <-- Portugal

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lou@21:1/5 to Internetado on Thu Aug 4 05:35:49 2022
    On Tuesday, 2 August 2022 at 16:01:04 UTC+1, Internetado wrote:
    Decades of work, $10 billion in spending and nearly 14 billion years of cosmic history have brought us to this moment: the first science from
    the largest and most powerful observatory ever built.

    Lee Billings: This is the picture we've all been waiting for the
    deepest image of the cosmos ever captured. Humanity has never seen so
    far back and so clearly into the depths of the universe's history. The multitudes of nameless galaxies you see here emitted their light more
    than 13 billion years ago, mere cosmic moments after the Big Bang. This
    one image and the countless others that come has been the result of
    more than two decades of focused efforts by some of the world's
    greatest scientists and engineers.
    (continue)...

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/video/see-the-oldest-view-of-our-known-universe-just-revealed-by-the-james-webb-space-telescope/
    --
    Internetado
    Brasil <-- Portugal
    When will the BB theorists admit their theory keeps on being ruled out by observations.
    A few decades ago Gamow said the temp of the CMBR was 15K Eventually it was measured as 3.8
    Then BBT supporters told us the universe was 3.8 billion years old. That prediction failed
    and as recently as 1990 the BB was supposed to be up to 20 Billion years old . Total nonsense
    of course as that prediction failed. Currently the BBT is not supposed to allow luminous
    metal rich oldest galaxies in the “ early epoch” . Yet as even the very first JWST
    data shows...this prediction has failed. As the first preprint paper to be released on arxiv
    by Rohan Naidu et al and the following quote shows.( The “trend” in the following quote
    refers to predictions by the that there should be very few if any old bright large
    metal rich galaxies 😂)

    “ However, the handful of bright galaxies that have been
    found at z ∼ 10 − 13 to date appear to oppose this trend. It is still unclear what the
    physical reason for this might be. Evidence is mounting that the star-formation
    efficiency in the early Universe may be very high in a few sources, (😂) thus resulting
    in the early appearance of UV-luminous galaxies with stellar masses as high as 109 M⊙ already a few hundred Myr after the Big Bang. Wider area datasets will
    be required to increase the search volume,”

    In other words the universe isn’t expanding, and there are old metal rich galaxies
    where the BBT predicts none.
    Unfortunately as Naidu et al show. They just won’t give up on their BBT fantasy
    and to cover the consistent failings of the BBT they say:
    “Well the theory ain’t wrong...it must be a new form of gravity in the early
    universe caused by little magical Albert type Gremlins”

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lou@21:1/5 to Lou on Wed Aug 10 06:20:51 2022
    On Thursday, 4 August 2022 at 13:35:51 UTC+1, Lou wrote:
    On Tuesday, 2 August 2022 at 16:01:04 UTC+1, Internetado wrote:
    Decades of work, $10 billion in spending and nearly 14 billion years of cosmic history have brought us to this moment: the first science from
    the largest and most powerful observatory ever built.

    Lee Billings: This is the picture we've all been waiting for the
    deepest image of the cosmos ever captured. Humanity has never seen so
    far back and so clearly into the depths of the universe's history. The multitudes of nameless galaxies you see here emitted their light more
    than 13 billion years ago, mere cosmic moments after the Big Bang. This one image and the countless others that come has been the result of
    more than two decades of focused efforts by some of the world's
    greatest scientists and engineers.
    (continue)...

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/video/see-the-oldest-view-of-our-known-universe-just-revealed-by-the-james-webb-space-telescope/
    --
    Internetado
    Brasil <-- Portugal
    When will the BB theorists admit their theory keeps on being ruled out by observations.
    A few decades ago Gamow said the temp of the CMBR was 15K Eventually it was measured as 3.8
    Then BBT supporters told us the universe was 3.8 billion years old. That prediction failed
    and as recently as 1990 the BB was supposed to be up to 20 Billion years old . Total nonsense
    of course as that prediction failed. Currently the BBT is not supposed to allow luminous
    metal rich oldest galaxies in the “ early epoch” . Yet as even the very first JWST
    data shows...this prediction has failed. As the first preprint paper to be released on arxiv
    by Rohan Naidu et al and the following quote shows.( The “trend” in the following quote
    refers to predictions by the that there should be very few if any old bright large
    metal rich galaxies 😂)

    “ However, the handful of bright galaxies that have been
    found at z ∼ 10 − 13 to date appear to oppose this trend. It is still unclear what the
    physical reason for this might be. Evidence is mounting that the star-formation
    efficiency in the early Universe may be very high in a few sources, (😂) thus resulting
    in the early appearance of UV-luminous galaxies with stellar masses as high as
    109 M⊙ already a few hundred Myr after the Big Bang. Wider area datasets will
    be required to increase the search volume,”

    In other words the universe isn’t expanding, and there are old metal rich galaxies
    where the BBT predicts none.
    Unfortunately as Naidu et al show. They just won’t give up on their BBT fantasy
    and to cover the consistent failings of the BBT they say:
    “Well the theory ain’t wrong...it must be a new form of gravity in the early
    universe caused by little magical Albert type Gremlins”
    Interesting to see Jacob Navia posting to the precopernican moderated sci.Astro.research the *day after* my post above with quotes from what looks like the same paper I quoted from. Obviously I inspired Jacob to try to
    out Helbigner et al as deniers of the latest data.
    Which show exactly what Phil and the rest of the BBT fanatics do not want
    to hear. Which is that all the data from JWST so far rules out ANY Big Bang. Sadly moderator Phil, desperately making up a nonsense reply to Jacobs
    points, was pathetic. Phil tries to pretend the ‘Lyman break’ somehow proves
    that the rest of the JWST data can be ignored 😂😂
    That is Phil desperately wants to ignore JWST DATA showing mature metal
    rich galaxies at too early an epoch allowed by the nutty BBT.
    AMEN phil.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)