Tbh i view it a bit different . It seems to me they already know the answer to all these questions beforehand . Even the early galaxies , that was suppose to be something really abnormal and strange ( according to science-media) was explained in two seconds by stating that galaxies formed quicker than we thought , not that the universe was way older or that the big bang theory was false
Of course we can look into it, study it and perhaps eventually figure it out. Or we can stick with "God did it" which fails to explain why he put these things so far away in the first place......
@@TopTop000 You want to read Thomas Kuhn on scientific paradigm shifts. Instead of "knowing the answer," you are seeing many scientists saying, "we can't have been that wrong!" But, considering the history of science, of course the can. Many are defending the investment they have put into learning the model and their work forcing it to accept difficult observations. They make up stories that they hope will prove to be useful, stories like dark matter and energy, which were introduced to account for observations that did not fit theory. The "galaxies just formed sooner" is a dreadful explanation because it literally asserts the Standard Model theory up to now is largely false. The periods of reionization, the "dark ages" are all critical products of the Standard Model, and the highly developed galaxies observed by JWST forbid this. Some of the most remote galaxies possess spectral characteristics of Population 1 and 2 stars, and no version of current theory permits that under any circumstance. You don't simply have a galaxy right near the BB, you have a galaxy with stellar characteristics that indicate the galaxy pre-dates the BB. That is a problem. There are several elements of theory here that are in direct conflict due to JWST observations: star formation, chemical element production, BBT, inflation, re-ionization, the estimated age of the universe, and several have to be wrong, or we would not be seeing what JWST is showing us.
brother, you give precise details, at an understandable level, keeping it interesting, AND have none of the garbage associated with a lot of other channels!!! new sub here you are the man
@@joel198d The video may be well produced but its point is to associate AI into it for click as its such a popular term. Many times in the video people being interviewed say nothing about AI and just talk about drone software and the presenter continually states 'AI' to the dismay of the interviewed person. Its GARBAGE! But it does amuse and trick small minded people into a wanderlust of agreement to the most ridiculous things. Only a s child would think that they were not scammed in this video. DRONES are just remote control planes they have NO intelligence any more so than your electric rice cooker. But you being so low in IQ probably can not see that. Tell me why is it NOT garbage?
That's how science works. We accept that we do not know and that it's an opportunity to learn something new later. Pretty sure we're gonna get some neat hypotheses in the coming months. My money is on accretion disks of primordial direct-collapse black holes that seeded the supermassive ones at the center of the galaxies, BEFORE they assembled their galaxies around themselves? Galactic embryos so to speak? It feels like we already need a bigger scope out there lol. If one wants hard certainty and dogma - that's what religion is for.
Almost no scientists ever try to say they know the answer to something they don't actually know the answer to. Pop science authors are the ones who claim to know
That is not how science works, but how we would like to think it is. First it is the hypothesis, then perhaps the funding. My physics professor taught us once that and I rejected, but after 30 years in the field I understand him.
@@MicroClases_CienciaUnnecessarily contrary, cynical, dash of bitter, yeah academia has its drawbacks, but... Holy flaming hot red dots, sadman! No response to the ideas in the post? Mystery no longer a draw?
13k likes Anton 🔥👍 I remember the time when was less than 500 likes. Couldn't have happened to a better well deserved person!! Much love buddy and thank you!!! Love your content 🔥👍
anton you truly restore my faith in our species with your curious mind and passion for learning. in that way i try to be more like you and you help keep my mind together and on track because you upload so consistently. i wish i had more money to spare for you but i swear as long as you keep making these videos i will always be here to watch and eventually i will be able to support you more. thank you anton
Im not sure if you do this for your living, probably more than just this though, but I really do hope you are doing very well Anton. Your way of explaining the seemingly unexplained to a layman is like no other. You make me feel as if im understanding these topics even though i really dont. The effort you put into these everyday goes far too unnoticed. Probably my favorite most consistent youtuber. KEEP BEING AWESOME!
I am 50. I was just thinking, wonder what my grandchildren will see in their lifetime? Their children? It gets mind boggling…. I thought Skylab was just amazing!
@@Sick_Boy_Rick74 youre both wonderful fellows I am only nearly 20 and I too think of this often. I cannot imagine what i will get to see with even the insane advances weve made since i was a child
@@Sick_Boy_Rick74 They won't see anything at all if you don't vote for progressive, intellectually supportive representatives in your government. Tell your friends this is what you want.
I'm trying so hard to rack my brain for a black holes/sex joke that isn't totally banal, but it's eluding me... Garbage diet & too much coffee: 1 Wittiness: 0
'Why is there such a noticeable void around our celestial neighborhood & why do so many celestial objects appear redshifted?' "Think of that, as 'tail-lights'."
@@TheSkyGuy77 Yes, but much moreso in our case, than most! There's a whole halo of starstuff moving away from our _particular_ location; most stars don't sit near the middle of a huge cavity blown out of the surrounding area. Ours does.
I love that we are looking at the edges of the cosmologic horizon. My gut says these objects are somehow related to the transition from the matter-dominated epoch to the dark-energy-dominated epoch.
In a similar vein, we discovered infrared light because Herschel was trying to figure out which spectra of light contained the most energy through a prism. However, the control thermometer showed the most heat, because it was past the red part of the spectrum.
Radioactivity was discovered when photographic plates were exposed to uranium salts in the sun, as Becquerel thought they were invisibly phosphorescent. However a control plate and uranium (simplified description), not exposed to the sun, showed the same thing when developed. It must be coming off the uranium all on it's own.
I love how you break down such a complex topic into understandable segments. The discovery of these strange red dots by JWST is mind-blowing, and your explanation of potential theories behind them is very clear. It's exciting to think about what these discoveries could mean for our understanding of the universe. Your enthusiasm for space exploration is infectious!🥰
A lot of what we are seeing from our vantage point could be a distortion. We could be seeing the same objects in multiple places due to time or space delusion. This could also apply to stars and galaxies. Like watching separate frames in a movie of a flower swaying in the wind, and thinking each frame is a picture of a different flower.
OMG. As the son of scientists I got to learn the contractor scam of N.A.S.A. A Hughes friend showed me something you will never see that I believe you have a right to see. It's absolutely disgusting that this crap is still going on while ignorant of fact men like this perpetuate it. Kinda creepy but if not in the know I get the shiny to most.
@@jasonrobinson401 It's like trying to understand the configuration of the millions of dominoes around you that are falling, standing, and laying on the ground, meanwhile you are yourself a domino and must perform science with those limitations in mind, lmao.
It's getting clearer that we likely: - can't estimate star age by spectroscopy (as in stars likely form different atoms according to different criteria) - can't estimate distance by redshift alone - have no idea what the early Universe actually looks like
@@Juliexits "My god, it's full of stars!" is a line from the Arthur C. Clarke novel 2001: A Space Odyssey. The line was never spoken in the film though.
YET ANOTHER reason why I HOPE the 15 Metre Luvoir space telescope is built and 'Shipped' up there. JWST - 6.5 Metre, Luvoir - over twice the mirror size. So, allowing us to see clearer, more detailed and further back in time. After all, it being same design as JWST, we've proved the 'Foldy Tech' works! 😏 😎🇬🇧
@@grantandrew619 Really? how do you figure that one genius? Hubble took us so far. JWST helped us see further back. Luvoir would help us see deeper into the outer most reaches of the universe... So, THAT MEANS seeing a little FURTHER BACK in time to an earlier point in the Universes history... Especially with the advancements in modern sensors, CCD, computing and other tech compared to when JWST was made...
@@grantandrew619 That's literally what being able to detect light originating from further away means. It is a look back in time, equal in years to the distance to the source of said light in lightyears. What did you think was happening when Hubble or JWST was photographing objects in the sky? None of it should be considered real-time, it's all relative.
So these red dots are everywhere at the end of the observable universe, but we dont find any such objects (maybe less red, but as bright) in the closer volume of the observable universe? Im Excited ;)
Last summer through to winter, in Kentucky, me and my cousin have always been sky watching fanatics. We started seeing red colored stars, like 1 or 2 in the sky at any given time, sometimes just 1. We would watch them thinking off of how red they were, and they would slowly in just a few seconds get slightly brighter, and instantly disappear completely. Every time I saw any they never came back into view. I also talked to my brother months later, and he said him and a few more people were fishing at the river about 10 minutes away, and saw the same thing a few times and they all noticed it.
I saw them, too, everywhere in the JWST Images. I think they are indeed primordial black holes which formed early in the "dark ages". And Dark Matter may have played the critical role in their formation. Super fascinating!
Anton, thanks for your videos, I find all of them interesting. Maybe you can address a question or postulate: why don't we consider the CMB as potentially the black body radiation of the event horizon of the expanding universe, that sphere around us where the universe expansion rate reaches the point where any objects at the horizon (stars, dust, etc) appear to be (relatively) moving away from us at the speed of light? And that the temperature variation in the CMB is simply the points at which objects cross the event horizon? If that's the case, then that might explain why JWST is seeing "old" galaxies early in the universe's theorized formation. And "dead" black holes that are much older than we think that the universe is.
Again we see the Doppler interpretation of line spreading as rotational velocity. And net redshift as distance. Also, remember what we learned from “Buried in the Coronal Graveyard”, of how X-ray emmision might be absorbed, and therefore not a reflection of what we expect to see. Simply, don’t assume that a lack of X-rays detected here means that no X-rays were emitted at the source, and especially in the case of the old red stars seen here.
I have to admit, you do some good talks. Question however, where you get those nice backgrounds you use in your videos? Would ve nice to use some as pc backgrounds
I see Galaxy Seeds: Quasar jets involve super-accellerated material, but some chunks will statistically far closer in relative velocity than others. Leads to a sort of "direct collapse" SMBH and a gravitational clumping effect which we as a "string of pearls" in the jet. The reason this central BH is feeding "too fast" is because we have for some reason underestimated how big it can be. Either because the BH really is collapsing directly as the jet leaves it's "mother" quasar, or because the jet actually emits some portion of the "hidden" spacetime within the event horizon of the mother. Kind of like pinching off a bubble, without necessarily actually "opening" it. In any case: the red dots are almost certainly Galaxy Seeds, formed from the jet of an ancient (much larger) quasar.
I was thinking something along these lines. It makes sense to me that we could be seeing a direct collapse scenario that formed these super massive black holes so early
I love it time and time and time again when scientists in an intelligent civilization that's only about 6,000 years old, telling the universe, the things they see should and shouldn't exist.
Just a wild guess... A significant number of those dots are red/brown dwarfs, right here in our own galaxy. They have long been hypothesized as being the most numerous of all stars, but the problem was seeing them because of their low brightness, that was until JWST got up in space, and seeing in infrared with the resolution and light collecting capabilities it has is currently the best tool to spot them.
From my understanding they aren't in our galaxy but billions of light years away. Even the JWST has no chance of spotting a brown dwarf at that distance.
I’m a halfway intelligent, educated person but the people that figure this stuff out are incredibly smart. It seems so frustrating the years of observation and computer simulations to figure stuff out millions if light years away
It might have been already said below but these might be the earliest outer galaxies created moving away and red shifting into whatever is beyond. That would be consistent with the frequency of the red dots which are a "constant". They are galaxies now hidden in plain sight for all to view thanks to JWST. BTW. Might be some lensing going on adding to the numbers, but the spacing is still consistent.
He understands the subject matter so well that he probably doesn’t need to spend as much time researching and worrying about scripts as someone less versed in the field. Also he’s a professional teacher, so he has lots of experience explaining things and probably with creating lessons. Anton is a smart guy.
Literally every video he does is exactly the same format. Even the same footage is often reused. Doesn't take much effort or time to produce this when he has years of practice.
Measles !! I guess the MMR (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella) vaccine was not available to the universe back then !! There I am dating myself. I have a little blue booklet with my kiddy vaccinations in it.
Lmao... I went thru the exact same contortions. Was gearing up for "maybe the universe should try a facial cleanser..." then stopped, anf assumed 50 other people had already done it. Space herpes was already taken, so... chicken pox it was. We really are herd animals sometimes. 😂@@Alondro77
You beat my explanation by five hours, Jeremy, but I suggested chicken pox. They were much dottier than measles, which are rashier and less well defined. I had them. So did my older children.
There is no big bang, just rips in space time that regurgitate matter from another dimension that collects matter through our black holes. It's an infinite loop that restores higher entropy in both dimensions. Or it's like what Anton said.
Obscured in dust maybe? Given the variables presented in the study, here are the most likely scenarios: 1. **Low-luminosity AGN**: These BL Hα emitters are most likely a population of low-luminosity AGN. The identification of broad Hα lines strongly suggests the presence of active supermassive black holes (SMBHs), even though they are faint in the UV and X-ray spectra. These AGN might be less luminous and therefore harder to detect with traditional methods, which often focus on more luminous quasars. 2. **Dust-obscured AGN**: The red continuum observed in the 2-4 μm range indicates significant dust obscuration around these AGN. This obscuration could be why these AGN have evaded detection in previous surveys, especially those relying on UV and X-ray emissions. The dust is likely absorbing and re-emitting energy at longer wavelengths, making these AGN appear faint in the UV but detectable in the infrared. 3. **Intermediate-stage SMBH growth**: The diversity in UV slopes and Hα profiles among the BL Hα emitters suggests they are at different stages of SMBH growth and host galaxy evolution. Lower-mass SMBHs associated with significant star formation may represent an earlier evolutionary stage, while higher-mass, dust-obscured AGN likely represent a later stage where the AGN activity begins to dominate. 4. **Star Formation and AGN Activity**: The presence of both narrow and broad Hα components indicates a combination of star formation in the host galaxies and AGN activity. This dual presence suggests an evolutionary sequence where star formation initially plays a significant role, with AGN activity becoming more prominent as the SMBH grows. 5. **Gas Inflows and Outflows**: The detection of complex Hα profiles, including redshifted and blueshifted absorption features, points to dynamic processes such as gas inflows feeding the SMBH and outflows driven by AGN feedback. These processes are crucial for understanding the fueling mechanisms and feedback in early AGN. 6. **Contribution to Cosmic Reionization**: Although these AGN likely contribute less than 1% to the total UV emission, they still provide valuable insights into the population of faint AGN during the reionization era. Their role in cosmic reionization is likely minor due to dust reddening and low escape fractions of ionizing photons. 7. **Higher-than-expected Number Density**: The higher number density of these faint AGN compared to previous models suggests that faint AGN might be more common in the early Universe than previously thought. This finding has implications for our understanding of SMBH seeding and growth during the early stages of galaxy formation. 8. **Future Observations**: The study highlights the need for further observations with JWST and other instruments to confirm these findings and refine models of AGN evolution. Detailed observations targeting the gap between faint AGN identified by JWST and brighter quasars found in ground-based surveys will be essential for a comprehensive understanding. Overall, the most likely scenario is that these BL Hα emitters represent a population of low-luminosity, dust-obscured AGN at different stages of SMBH growth and host galaxy evolution, contributing valuable information to our understanding of early Universe AGN and their role in cosmic reionization.
@@runed0s86 While the idea that the BL Hα emitters are white holes is intriguing, it's highly speculative and less likely given our current understanding of white holes and the evidence presented in the study. Here are a few points to consider: 1. **Nature of White Holes**: White holes are theoretical opposites of black holes, where nothing can enter and everything inside is ejected. They are solutions to the equations of general relativity but have not been observed in nature. Theoretical models suggest white holes would be extremely short-lived and unlikely to produce the steady emissions observed in AGN. 2. **Observed Properties**: The properties of the BL Hα emitters, such as their broad Hα lines, dust obscuration, and UV-optical colors, align more closely with known characteristics of AGN rather than theoretical predictions for white holes. AGN are known to emit across a broad spectrum, including Hα emission, due to accretion processes around SMBHs. 3. **Spectral Characteristics**: The broad Hα components with FWHM ≈ 2000 km s−1 are consistent with the velocities expected in the broad-line regions of AGN, where gas orbits close to the SMBH. White holes, if they exist, would likely produce very different spectral signatures due to their distinct physical processes. 4. **Galactic Context**: The study also observes star formation in the host galaxies of these emitters. This combination of AGN activity and star formation is well-documented in the context of SMBHs and their host galaxies, but there's no theoretical basis for white holes being embedded in star-forming galaxies. 5. **Evolutionary Sequences**: The evolutionary sequences suggested by the study, where AGN activity grows over time and eventually dominates over star formation, fit well within the framework of SMBH growth models. White holes do not fit into this framework, as they are not associated with accretion and gradual growth. 6. **Evidence and Theory**: Current astrophysical models and evidence do not support the existence of long-lived white holes. The phenomena described in the study-such as gas inflows and outflows, broad emission lines, and dust obscuration-are well-explained by AGN physics. Given these points, while the white hole hypothesis is a fascinating theoretical consideration, the evidence strongly supports the interpretation that these BL Hα emitters are a population of faint AGN with low-luminosity SMBHs, rather than white holes. **References:** - “White Holes and the Separation of the Universe into Two Different Parts.” *European Physical Journal C*, 2018. - Peterson, B. M. *An Introduction to Active Galactic Nuclei*. Cambridge University Press, 1997. - NIRCam and JWST observational studies referenced in the initial study summary.
@@runed0s86 While the idea that the BL Hα emitters are white holes is intriguing, it's highly speculative and less likely given our current understanding of white holes and the evidence presented in the study. Here are a few points to consider: 1. **Nature of White Holes**: White holes are theoretical opposites of black holes, where nothing can enter and everything inside is ejected. They are solutions to the equations of general relativity but have not been observed in nature. Theoretical models suggest white holes would be extremely short-lived and unlikely to produce the steady emissions observed in AGN. 2. **Observed Properties**: The properties of the BL Hα emitters, such as their broad Hα lines, dust obscuration, and UV-optical colors, align more closely with known characteristics of AGN rather than theoretical predictions for white holes. AGN are known to emit across a broad spectrum, including Hα emission, due to accretion processes around SMBHs. 3. **Spectral Characteristics**: The broad Hα components with FWHM ≈ 2000 km s−1 are consistent with the velocities expected in the broad-line regions of AGN, where gas orbits close to the SMBH. White holes, if they exist, would likely produce very different spectral signatures due to their distinct physical processes. 4. **Galactic Context**: The study also observes star formation in the host galaxies of these emitters. This combination of AGN activity and star formation is well-documented in the context of SMBHs and their host galaxies, but there's no theoretical basis for white holes being embedded in star-forming galaxies. 5. **Evolutionary Sequences**: The evolutionary sequences suggested by the study, where AGN activity grows over time and eventually dominates over star formation, fit well within the framework of SMBH growth models. White holes do not fit into this framework, as they are not associated with accretion and gradual growth. 6. **Evidence and Theory**: Current astrophysical models and evidence do not support the existence of long-lived white holes. The phenomena described in the study-such as gas inflows and outflows, broad emission lines, and dust obscuration-are well-explained by AGN physics. Given these points, while the white hole hypothesis is a fascinating theoretical consideration, the evidence strongly supports the interpretation that these BL Hα emitters are a population of faint AGN with low-luminosity SMBHs, rather than white holes. **References:** - “White Holes and the Separation of the Universe into Two Different Parts.” *European Physical Journal C*, 2018. - Peterson, B. M. *An Introduction to Active Galactic Nuclei*. Cambridge University Press, 1997. - NIRCam and JWST observational studies referenced in the initial study summary.
Fascinating information! It is indeed interesting how so many of these mysterious dots are visible in many random directions. I do have questions that may provoke new thoughts.......... Is it possible that these red dots we see are not in fact complete in their presentation? Is it possible that there are different types of photons that do not travel across the universe as quickly? creating an incomplete visual? Or, is it possible some other type of element or light is an important part of these objects, but is being redirected/absorbed/slowed down/destroyed/converted? Your thoughts will be welcomed! Please reply.
@@Nonsense913that’s most likely impossible seeing as how those items may be billions of years old. 😞 What you are looking at is all in the past. Also, a better technology may be developed so wouldn’t actually have to go and check 😊
6:25 What if we look so deep back in time that we can see the big bang? Those gases are not Spinning. They are traveling toward us in verry high speed.
We can't see the Big Bang because we are 'inside' of it. If we were outside of the Big Bang, waiting for it to arrive, then when and how were we created?
Well the dots are red, beacuse they are redshifted, so they actually "travel/escape" from us very fast. But I put travel in commas, beacuse it's spacetime expansion actually push them further. About seeing big bang... Well we see background radiation as a remnant of it. And it's most likely that the spacetime actually expands faster than light from our point of observation. So we cannot see it.
Things like this suggest to me that astrophysics is still a young discipline and that there's still room for several scientific revolutions within it. I've been in academia long enough to notice that some areas of research are far more lively than others.
What if super massive black holes are the result of some odd property of anti matter, causing it to collapse into SMBH right after the big bang? Would explain where the missing anti matter went
Anton, How long have the little red dots been noticed? Do they appear to be more concentrated (or less concentrated} in certain large areas of the sky?
@@thehellyousay As the star collapses into a back hole, the event horizon forms from the center of mass outward and the light can no longer escape. Any light just outside of the horizon leaves a redshifted image of the infalling light as a 2D hologram on the surface of the event horizon. We never truly see anything fall into a black hole and vanish, a redshifted image of the infalling object imprints on the event horizon as per the black hole information paradox solution. The little red objects were stars before they collapsed and the outgoing light from the star pulled back down under the event horizon.
Due to massive red-shift as our universe expands, all the star-clusters near the edge of our observable universe should indeed show up as red dots (tiny red splatters, then tiny splatters in the infrared and radio spectrum) before they go dark as they exit our observable universe (the distance to us increasing faster than the speed of light, so subsequent light from them could no longer reach us)
@@freebozkurt9277 I'm not assuming anything in the abstract "universal" sense, but only assuming expansion taking place in our "observable universe" pocket. Isn't that the whole idea behind "cosmic background radiation"? The red tiny splatters are objects slightly closer to us than the radio frequency "background" that are on the verge of falling out of our observable universe bubble.
I think a fundamental property of entangled particles is that they can hide the space between them in extra spatial dimensions. They're effectively the same particle that has been chopped into halves. If by entangling particles allows them to manipulate extra spatial dimensions, like a warp bubble, then it's possible that the dark matter around galaxies is just normal matter and space that is hidden in extra spatial dimensions. Whether or not this is a natural phenomenon or the effect of alien technology, is anyone's guess.
I love E.O. Wilson's ideas of how we would be approached by alien life. Not for our intelligence or our technologies, but for our creativeness and individuality. They would LOVE you Anton! You would be the poster child of what is the most wonderful thing about being human.
The assumption that aliens won't be as creative as humans is a stupid fallacy born from a stupid stance: "Humans are just so fucking amazing, right? We're the center of the universe!" We really aren't though, we're not even dust. If our planet exploded, literally no-one would care (because we'd all be dead). Aliens that have the tech level to visit us would be just as creative, if not more so, than us humans. Did their technology just fall from the sky? Of course not, they used creativity and logical reasoning to build it just like us humans. There's literally no reason to assume that we're special and it's safer to assume that we're roughly ant-tier in the list of sentient creatures. Any advanced aliens will probably disdain our music as childish, simple and repetitive. They'd describe our celebrity culture as trite and then diss our AI as a shit-tier non-starter. They might not even bother to take another look at us because we're arrogant and believe that we're unique snowflakes and better than everyone else in the universe. In reality, creativity is a bare-minimum standard required for sentient creatures to build up such a level of technology.
Antimatter - matter explosions in the early universe. Would explain the lack of anti matter left and would have provided the turbulence needed to create large galaxies and black holes so early.
It doesnt explain the lack of antimatter. The problem isnt that there isnt antimatter. The problem is that there is matter _but not_ antimatter. The asymmetry is the issue.
@@dumbbuckets2668 we know that there is an asymmetry in the amount which is why there is little to none remaining (that we know of) as the particles wiped each other out in the very early universe, leaving only a relatively small amount of matter. But in every large random distribution you will get areas that contain far higher or lower percentages than the average. If some areas had far higher percentages on antimatter (for whatever reason) then those areas could explain the effect when they came in contact with areas that had a higher percentage of matter. I'm not saying this is right, lm just throwing out an idea. When none of the rational options works, start trying the irrational ones.
Thanks for making this! I hadn’t heard about these before and love hearing about mysteries of the cosmos :-). Also, I was hearing some odd modulation of your words, like a high-low-high tone coming through in some words which was slightly distracting. English tends to use tones more at the sentence level to emphasize parts of interest and help make out phrase boundaries, not the syllable level to help make out words, as in Italian. Overall your English is great though, but this is an unusual characteristic that I don’t recognize as a European accent, unless you’re a mix like Dutch & Italian or something. Anyway, good stuff, keep going :)
It's super obvious supermassive blackholes came out of the big bang pretty quickly, this would explain their origin, quick galaxy formation and so many other things.
These little red dots are all images of the same thing: The universe moments after the 'big bang'. All light cones return to this point. I've got some good weed in my bowl...
The 5th fundamental force is, obviously, the power of Rock & Roll, baked into the fabric of the universe from day 1. Those little red dots are primordial gongs being banged, launching great waves of the Rock n Roll boson, the Getiton. Duh.
@@MadBiker-vj5qj it's the only music in human history that wasn't pre-ordered to conform. the corporate pap of today is a return to "the music is what we command it to be" paradigm that has rued human civilisation for thousands of years. face it, the mid 60s to the early 80s was the only time any of the music we heard was what the musicians wanted it to be as opposed to what those running the gong show wanted it to be. cry hard. you have no clue what might have been because you were robbed of it before you were even born, let alone old enough to appreciate it.
@@thehellyousay You seem to misunderstand. My reference was to a Marc Bolan/ T Rex Song, "20th Century Boy", continuing on from the references in the OP. ... . And yes, I'm old enough to remember it from the first time around.
Since the idea of dark energy and dark matter were mainly a way of describing 'something is there that we can't see or detect', I'm wondering if this is some of that missing matter and energy. Fascinating stuff!
Sorry for being so dumb, but what else did "we" expect to see at the very edge of anything available to be seen other than something A: Extremely bright, B: Extremely red ?
Apparently the universe has a shelf life that’s not evolving but collapsing. Space is a vacuum under compression that causes a separation of matter. It’s a decrease in compression. This was first observed when the universe was expanding, “reduced compression.” As it continues to expand and compression is reduced black holes will quite possibly reverse and release matter into space.
There's a really bright one in the "Interacting Galaxies ARP 142" image. It's on the left side a bit below where the galaxy is, about 3/4 of the way down the picture
my theory: The universe was there before the big bang. Some massive galaxy cores survived the phase of instability and can be seen since the moment that the universe became transparent again.
