Anyone else think this is a huge non-story? Like, of course there's going to be oxygen in distant galaxies. Why wouldn't there be? It would be far more interesting if there wasn't oxygen in distant galaxies.
Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
51–60 of 189 posts
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#52Anyone else think this is a huge non-story? Like, of course there's going to be oxygen in distant galaxies. Why wouldn't there be? It would be far more interesting if there wasn't oxygen in distant galaxies.
The headline is a non-story. Us being wrong about how we thought galaxies form is, in fact, an interesting story. From the article: "The results show the galaxy has formed very rapidly and is also maturing rapidly, adding to a growing body of evidence that the formation of galaxies happens much faster than was expected."
An earlier story posted here, discussed the presence of water around a most distant supernova remnant. The gas surrounding the star had been fused by the shockwave into an expanding sphere of nearly uniform oxygen which then combined with the remaining hydrogen to produce an enormous volume of damp air.
Just a few molecules per cubic meter or less. Estimated at ten trillion times the entire volume of water on earth. Seemed like a lot at the time.
So that was early oxygen. But atypical.
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#53I’m always a bit skeptical about these sorts of things. Perhaps I’m just ignorant about the methods used.. but the amount of data we can get from the most distant known galaxy can’t be very much. How confident can we be that the shift in observed light or whatever is actually from the presence of Oxygen and not one of probably countless other causes, both known and unknown.
Pretty confident. Emission spectra are very specific. The relationship between specific emission lines are invariant to changes in wavelength (redshift/blueshift), and they're complicated enough that it's not too big a deal to weed out false positives.
Here's a textbook example:
https://images.nagwa.com/figures/explainers/469167813067/17....
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article: >Galaxies usually start their lives full of young stars, which are made mostly of light elements like hydrogen and helium. As stars evolve, they create heavier elements like oxygen, which get dispersed through their host galaxy after they die. Researchers had thought that, at 300 million years old, the Universe was still too young to have galaxies ripe with heavy elements. However, the two ALMA stud…
I'm no astronomer but I believe that the first stars tended to be huge and short-lived. Is it surprising that there would have been supernova and heavy elements ejected from them that early?
We expected heavy elements from supernova. It’s surprising that there is 10x more heavy elements than expected. Were there more supernova? Bigger ones? Are we missing other pieces of the picture?
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
How/why does this result increase that specific probability?
If there were intelligent aliens billions of years ago who didn't destroy themselves, they probably build some simulations like we in a way already did with Google Earth, GTA, Minecraft, etc. The most likely is to have more and more simulations, until they'll have all the interesting ones (a simulated multiverse). They can even have a Dyson Sphere or Penrose sphere to capture the energy from a star or black hole
I'm familiar with the theory of simulated universes, though I appreciate the explanation, I am just having trouble connecting why an oxygen discovery in a distant galaxy would increase the probability of the theory.
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm no astronomer but I believe that the first stars tended to be huge and short-lived. Is it surprising that there would have been supernova and heavy elements ejected from them that early?
We expected heavy elements from supernova. It’s surprising that there is 10x more heavy elements than expected. Were there more supernova? Bigger ones? Are we missing other pieces of the picture?
Is a single order of magnitude within a reasonable range of error for the calculation? Some cases that is a massive miss, but other cases that might be within the expected statistical range. In the former cases it implies something entirely missing, while the latter cases are more likely to be known uncertainties which can now be better refined.
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#57Off topic: - Is the big bang theory the scientific consensus on the origin and evolution of the universe ? - What are the alternatives ?
[deleted]
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tech's general atheism has left many tech people with a somewhat compromised ideological immune system: preposterous magical thinking is laundered with sci-fi language and accepted as plausible. (cf. the simulation "hypothesis", Roko's basilisk, paperclip maximizers, etc) Why not stipulate that the Flying Spaghetti Monster oversees the elections like an FEC commissioner? It is equally rational: the only difference is…
> Tech's general atheism has left many tech people with a somewhat compromised ideological immune system It seems wrong to blame atheism for this. Somehow I doubt that devotion to a more traditional "Sky Daddy" would make people any less likely to play around with thought experiments about AI or simulations and the idea that religion has some kind of inoculating effect against magical thinking seems ridiculous. Peopl…
He's implying causality the other way. A desire to not want to die paired with a desire to avoid traditional religion leads people to indulge ideas and concepts they would otherwise dismiss as nonsense - singularity, simulation, medical immortality, and so on.
We want religion, but we don't want it to be called religion. I'm not just mocking others either. I'm quite compelled by the simulation hypothesis, but have the self awareness to realize my personal biases are likely playing a huge role there.
A nice 'scientific hypothesis' that I can comfortably discuss or debate with the benefit that I can convince myself that when I close my eyes for the final time that's not necessarily the end of the journey. Ahhh feels good.
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#59Anyone else think this is a huge non-story? Like, of course there's going to be oxygen in distant galaxies. Why wouldn't there be? It would be far more interesting if there wasn't oxygen in distant galaxies.
From the article: >Galaxies usually start their lives full of young stars, which are made mostly of light elements like hydrogen and helium. As stars evolve, they create heavier elements like oxygen, which get dispersed through their host galaxy after they die. Researchers had thought that, at 300 million years old, the Universe was still too young to have galaxies ripe with heavy elements. However, the two ALMA stud…
* element
Re: Oxygen atoms discovered in most distant known galaxy
#60Off topic: - Is the big bang theory the scientific consensus on the origin and evolution of the universe ? - What are the alternatives ?
Consider the bbt as a collection of observations and models that are independently validated. As each of those components reach increasingly accurate representations of what we observe, the bbt improves.
In this way, there can be no alternative as there is no alternative to music theory. Some people may have a very narrow view of music theory, but it truly encompasses every model we accept about aspects of music.
Tldr- the questions can't be answered because the bbt is a not a theory like "THE theory of relativity". The "theory" is at the end of the term which denotes a collection and not a specific model.