Live data from Hacker News

James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

blogs.nasa.gov

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#11

>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.

It's interesting that [1] has a diagram showing that in 2022 the NASA diagram claimed that stars & galaxies formed 400M years ago so this feels like a big shift to having a massive galaxy already at 300M with data suggesting it's formed after several generations of stars.

> All of these observations, together, tell us that JADES-GS-z14-0 is not like the types of galaxies that have been predicted by theoretical models and computer simulations to exist in the very early universe

This is exciting. Maybe our understanding of the Big Bang is extremely flawed & this data is just the first inklings that we have to reimagine what we know about it?

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#13
For any astronomers here, or others with the relevant knowledge of astrophysics, a question: this discovery would suggest the existence of a fully-formed galaxy at ~290 gigayears (Gyr), when the first stars are presumed to have emerged between 200 and 300 Gyr. How badly does this damage current models of early galaxy formation, and what new physics might it suggest?

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#14
post #12

Anyone know the algorithmic approach to finding this? I assume they ran an ML over the dataset with a search function to figure it out.

It's a lot less sophisticated than that. They take images in multiple filters. In the context of JWST of order 10 filters (sometimes more sometimes less). Source extraction is then performed on the images by essentially identifying bright spots and dropping an aperture (separating ones that are nearby and blended if possible). The standard tool for this is called source extractor. They then have catalogs of tens of thousands of sources per image and the next step is to figure out redshift. There is a lot of code to do this but the simplest methods require fitting templates of what we think galaxies look like to these catalogs. High redshift sources tend to "drop" out of filters at shorter wavelengths. This is because neutral hydrogen in the early universe essentially absorbs almost all of the light at shorter wavelengths than 1216 angstroms. So if a galaxy is at redshift 10, the flux should essentially be zero at all filters that cover wavelengths shorter than 1.33 microns. JWST has filters both bluer and redder than this wavelength so we see the source appear in the redder filters and not the bluer ones. This technique was pioneered in the mid 1990s. This gives an approximate redshift called a "photometric redshift". There are other features in a galaxy spectrum that can mimic this "dropout" so not all photometric redshifts are robust. Therefore one has to take a spectrum of the galaxy which was what was done in this paper to confirm that the dropout is in fact the absorption feature we think it is. In this particular case, the authors were skeptical early on because there is a source right next to the object that is at a redshift where one of these other spectral features can mimic absorption by neutral hydrogen (this feature is the Balmer break). In any case, it's really an impressive demonstration of the power of JWST.

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#15

For any astronomers here, or others with the relevant knowledge of astrophysics, a question: this discovery would suggest the existence of a fully-formed galaxy at ~290 gigayears (Gyr), when the first stars are presumed to have emerged between 200 and 300 Gyr. How badly does this damage current models of early galaxy formation, and what new physics might it suggest?

I wouldn't say it's too damaging yet. There is a general trend where these early galaxies are brighter than we had thought by simply extrapolating models that were built prior to JWST, but these make numerous assumptions on how efficiently stars can form and the properties of these stars. Mildly relaxing any of these assumptions can easily solve the problem within our current framework and not significantly change what happens later in the evolution of the Universe.

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#16
post #5

I 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.)

Only maybe in the dense core of a galaxy because incident radiation falls off with the square of distance.

The nearest star to us after the Sun is ~4ly away, or ~250k AU. The Sun would have to be ~63 billion times brighter to give the same incident radiation at 250k AU, and that is just a typical distance between stars in our neighborhood . The Sun is also brighter than the average star, especially the older stars that congregate near the galactic center.

Galaxies can easily have 1 trillion stars but they are usually so spread out as to make this impractical. This is also why the Milky Way, Triangulum, LMC, SMC, and Andromeda (nearest galaxies) are so faint to the naked eye.

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#17

>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.

Multiple generations is perhaps an overstatement. The first oxygen in the Universe came from what we call Population III stars which is the first generation of stars to form after the Big Bang and what separates these from other stellar populations is that they do not have elements heavier than hydrogen or helium (except for minuscule traces left over from the Big Bang but these are insignificant). Now we don't know much about Population III stars but many models predict they are massive and when they die, can release 60 times the mass of our sun in the form of oxygen. That's really a lot of oxygen so you don't need too many of these to go off to pollute the early Universe and probably one of the reasons why we haven't yet found Population III stars.

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#18
"The data reveal other important aspects of this astonishing galaxy. We see that the color of the galaxy is not as blue as it could be, indicating that some of the light is reddened by dust, even at these very early times."

We continue to see evidence that the universe is older than first believed.

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#19

For any astronomers here, or others with the relevant knowledge of astrophysics, a question: this discovery would suggest the existence of a fully-formed galaxy at ~290 gigayears (Gyr), when the first stars are presumed to have emerged between 200 and 300 Gyr. How badly does this damage current models of early galaxy formation, and what new physics might it suggest?

Your unit is wrong. Giga means billion. The universe is ~14 Gyr old.

Re: James Webb Space Telescope Finds Most Distant Known Galaxy

#20

>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.

The scale of both time and space are the least confusing things in our universe, to me at least.
Post reply on HN