PSI Blog
20221010 JWST Photos of 4,265 High Redshift Galaxies Show No
“Younging” of the Universe
These data
support our prediction that the Infinite Universe should look
similar at all distances.
Figure 1.
Evolution of galaxies suggested by Hubble. Credit: NASA & ESA.
According to
Big Bang Theory, the further we look into space cosmological objects should
look increasingly young. However, as I have been pointing out numerous times since 2009, this is
not the case. Cosmogonists assume the 13.8-billion-year age of the universe
is fixed. The
discovery of extremely high redshifts puts the squeeze on the ages, with the
calculated ages of those galaxies being less than our own Sun. As I have said
many times, that is akin to finding a teenager in your bassinet.
All galaxies
consist of stars, with many being similar in age to our Sun (4.6 billion years),
which is an average star in the Milky Way, which has stars as old as 13.6 billion
years. Some cosmogonists no doubt will favor extremely rapid star formation in
their imagined “early universe” as an ad hoc to save the Big Bang Theory.
Unfortunately for Big Bang enthusiasts, a recent survey of the morphology
(shape) of 4,265 galaxies existing at various distances from the James Webb
Space Telescope makes that ad hoc stillborn.[i]
You see, Hubble’s
“tuning fork” classification shows how galaxies evolve, first forming as
spherical conglomerations of stars, then becoming elliptical, and finally
becoming spiral as they begin to rotate (Figure 1).
While this visualization
is highly simplistic due to the
galactic crashes produced in our non-expanding infinite universe, it
nonetheless gives a rough idea of what is happening. According to the Big Bang
Theory, as we look back into space, we should see a “younging” effect. The flat
spirals should drop out, being replaced by perfectly empty space, stars, or, at
most, only spherical galaxies. However, according to Infinite Universe Theory there
should be no “younging” effect. Indeed, that is exactly what Ferreira and
colleagues[ii] just found by observing
the morphologies of those 4,265 galaxies in photos taken by the James Webb
Space Telescope (JWST). For this heads-up I am grateful to Louis Marmet who
brought this to my attention in an email from the “A
Cosmology Group”
website in Quebec, Canada. It seems opposition to the Big Bang Theory has been
in his family for over thirty years![iii] Here is his
contribution, which he allowed me to use. I include it here because it is so
good at explaining the latest challenge to the theory:
By
Louis Marmet
“Just like a cube seen from any distance
looks like a cube, the observed shape of a distant galaxy is not affected by
our cosmological model. Ferreira et al. (authors of the
"Panic! ..." paper) have studied the morphological evolution of a
total of 4265 galaxies observed with JWST:
"The JWST Hubble Sequence: The Rest-Frame Optical Evolution of Galaxy
Structure at 1.5<z<8"
Ferreira et al. https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.01110
As opposed to 'luminosity' and 'angular
size' which are distorted by the assumption of space expansion, the observed
morphology is a reliable property of distant galaxies (when gravitational
lensing and dust absorption are negligible). However, the paper reads
like a struggle to detect evolution when there is not much observed difference
between galaxies at z = 2 and z = 7. The paper claims that galactic
evolution models work 'in principle' [the controversial statement], but the
incompatibilities between JWST observations and models are blamed on the lower
observational power of the HST [the obvious statement - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy].
At least two problems stand out. "Amongst other things, we
confirm that these early galaxies have predominantly disk morphologies, and
that the Hubble sequence appears to be already established as early as z ∼ 8." This claim that the Hubble sequence was
established 650 Myr after the assumed Big Bang is not credible.
There is barely enough time to form a galaxy in 150 Myr, how could the
different types of galaxies already be established 500 Myr later? Every
physical system requires a time that is much longer than the duration of
interactions (galaxy collisions) to reach equilibrium (the Hubble sequence).
The second problem appears on Fig. 8 where the authors hope to show
morphological evolution with redshift while including "other =
unclassifiable sources". I brought this up with Ferreira on Twitter,
explaining that distant galaxies are harder to classify: their Fig. 8 shows our
ignorance increasing with redshift! This adds a bias that is redshift
dependent… So I parsed the info, plotting the data without counting
unclassified sources. The result is on my graphs at the bottom of the
attached image. The relative fraction of three types of galaxies,
"disk", "spheroid", and "peculiar", as a function
of redshift, is compatible with no morphological evolution during
the past 13 billion years.
Without space expansion the transformation to the so-called 'rest-frame'
of the galaxies is quantitatively and qualitatively wrong, and the descriptions
in the rest of that paper have no resemblance to reality.”
Figure 8 of
Ferreira et.al. (2022) modified by Marmet to eliminate unclassifiable sources
as mentioned above. Data for the smaller galaxies are on the left graph and the
data for the larger galaxies are on the right graph.
Thanks once
again to Louis for his kindly contribution to this essay.
To see this
on Medium.com, click here: https://medium.com/@glennborchardt/87323c9323d8?source=friends_link&sk=41dc0258222d05f8375743d8461d0b52
[i]
Ferreira, Leonardo, and others, 2022, The JWST Hubble Sequence: The Rest-Frame
Optical Evolution of Galaxy Structure at $1.5 < z < 8$, p.
arXiv:2210.01110 [https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv221001110F].
[ii]
Ibid.
[iii]
Marmet, Paul, 1990, Big Bang Cosmology Meets an Astronomical Death: 21st
Century, Science and Technology (P.O. Box, 17285, Washington, D.C. 20041), v.
3, no. 2, p. 52-59. [https://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/bigbang/index.html].
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment