James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
1–10 of 59 posts
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#2This is breathtaking. I marvel at what we are able to see. Small quibble though: I wish they would say, '... finds galaxy with the highest known redshift.' Maybe not so pompous, but especially after all the recent news about the size and age of the universe due to JWST observations.
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#3This is breathtaking. I marvel at what we are able to see. Small quibble though: I wish they would say, '... finds galaxy with the highest known redshift.' Maybe not so pompous, but especially after all the recent news about the size and age of the universe due to JWST observations.
I'm not sure I understand your distinction, can you explain why you wish that?
My understanding is that there is a linear correlation between the redshift of a galaxy and the distance to the milky way (for distant galaxies where the peculiar velocity is negligible). So, the most redshifted galaxy is the most distant galaxy.
But, I'm just a layman who enjoys astronomy, so I'd appreciate an explanation on why the distinction is important.
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#4>The presence of oxygen so early in the life of this galaxy is a surprise and suggests that multiple generations of very massive stars had already lived their lives before we observed the galaxy.
For some reason this quote blew me away. It's just so hard to comprehend the timescales and vastness of the universe.
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#5I wonder if a galaxy like this could be so bright as to support life on rogue planets i.e. those not orbiting a star?
(If there would be any elements to create a rocky planet from. However the article states they were surprised to detect signs of dust and oxygen already in such an early galaxy.)
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#6This is breathtaking. I marvel at what we are able to see. Small quibble though: I wish they would say, '... finds galaxy with the highest known redshift.' Maybe not so pompous, but especially after all the recent news about the size and age of the universe due to JWST observations.
I'm not sure I understand your distinction, can you explain why you wish that? My understanding is that there is a linear correlation between the redshift of a galaxy and the distance to the milky way (for distant galaxies where the peculiar velocity is negligible). So, the most redshifted galaxy is the most distant galaxy. But, I'm just a layman who enjoys astronomy, so I'd appreciate an explanation on why the disti…
You are right, of course. But that is based on our standard cosmological model.
But there is some controversy in this respect. It is not as clear cut as the relationship with C14 and age, for instance. There are some recent discoveries of galaxies that if their age and distance are correct clearly contradicts the standard cosmological model. But, even if I am right, it is a small nitpick. I think from this news I rather just wonder.
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#7Is it cool or warm there?
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#8This is breathtaking. I marvel at what we are able to see. Small quibble though: I wish they would say, '... finds galaxy with the highest known redshift.' Maybe not so pompous, but especially after all the recent news about the size and age of the universe due to JWST observations.
I'm not sure I understand your distinction, can you explain why you wish that? My understanding is that there is a linear correlation between the redshift of a galaxy and the distance to the milky way (for distant galaxies where the peculiar velocity is negligible). So, the most redshifted galaxy is the most distant galaxy. But, I'm just a layman who enjoys astronomy, so I'd appreciate an explanation on why the disti…
It's linear for small redshifts only. In general it depends on what distance you mean, but it's never linear. This does not change the validity of your argument of course.
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#9It is interesting to think about what could be from a galaxy that was formed ~500 million years before ours.
If life had formed in that galaxy, if somehow it had followed a similar pattern we did (which is doubtful, but just a thought experiment for simplicity). It would be very interesting to see a glimps of where life could be with an "extra" 500 million years. Even just a few million considering homosapiens did not appear until ~300,000 years ago.
It is almost sad in a way that we now know this galaxy exists, but we will always be looking at it 13+ billion years away and will never know what it is now. Can never really compare what that 500 million year head start got it (assuming it still exists).
Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy
#10>The presence of oxygen so early in the life of this galaxy is a surprise and suggests that multiple generations of very massive stars had already lived their lives before we observed the galaxy. For some reason this quote blew me away. It's just so hard to comprehend the timescales and vastness of the universe.
Very large stars live very short lives.
Our star will live 10 billion years, the smallest stars will last trillions of years, the largest stars live less than 10 million years and some very early stars broke the models for how big they were and maybe lived much less long.
What happens is their cores go through stages of fusing an element until they run out, gravity takes over and shrinks the core until the next element ignites, fuses, and runs out, down to iron. At one of those stages the collapse triggers a supernova (or one of the class of ways a star can die) instead.