Oldest galaxies found

[Jacques]

They found very evolved galaxies cluster 9 billion light year ago!

Does it chalenge the BB model ?

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7087

 

Choice quotes:

 

"We would have thought characters [from so early in the Universe] would have been a bit more youthful," Mullis told New Scientist. "But this guy looks quite old."

 

Richard Mushotzky, a galaxy cluster expert at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, agrees. "Finding such massive, evolved systems at such a great distance is somewhat unexpected," he says.

 

 

 

Also see:

 

http://www.physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/3/2/1

[whap2005]

I believe it does but I would say its a theory shatering find. We don't know exactly when the universe began or can even proove it has a begining.

[us.2u]

I thiught everrything we knew had a date stamped 4.5 billion years or younger guess I was wrong! so maybe existence is older than any cares to imagine that's great...

coz forever looks like now that maybe possible...us.2u

[Jacques]

a date stamped 4.5 billion years or younger guess

That the age estimated for the solar system. The estimated age of the universe is something like 14 billion years. But for structure that big (the galaxies cluster) to have time to form 9 billions years ago is hard to explain with the bigbang model.

[Martin]

here is a technical article by Chris Mullis (mentioned in your news article)

that talks about their find

you might like to check it out and compare with the journalists account, for details

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0503004

 

Here is a webpage with some pictures and more info

 

http://www.astro.lsa.umich.edu/~cmullis/research/xmmuj2235/

[Martin]

Here is another technical journal article related to this news item

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0502216

 

Spectroscopic Redshifts to z > 2 for Optically Obscured Sources Discovered with the Spitzer Space Telescope

J. R. Houck, B. T. Soifer, ...

Accepted for publication on 7 Feb 2005 in ApJL. 7 pages 2 figures

 

".... Redshifts derived primarily from strong silicate absorption features are reported here for 17 of these sources; 10 of these are optically invisible (R > 26 mag), with no counterpart in B_W, R, or I. The observed redshifts for 16 sources are 1.7 < z < 2.8. ..."

 

Houck and Soifer were mentioned in the news item.

Where the article says 11 billion LY, that seems to refer to their z>2 observation.

[Martin]

Does it chalenge the BB model ?

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7087

 

 

http://www.physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/3/2/1

 

I dont think it challenges the BB model.

 

the researchers themselves, in the journal articles, do not suggest that it challenges the basic cosmology model

 

and I dont see why it would

 

what it does affect is whatever model they use to estimate how soon spherical clusters of galaxies are likely to form

that is a part of the model, which they can tinker with and modify to fit observation

[J.C.MacSwell]

Another victory for the Steady State Theory!

[us.2u]

Doe's anyone know if there is a limit to how far we can view anything in the cosmos aided with techonology? Is there a limit...or limitless? how far can we go?...us.2u

[Cadmus]

Doe's anyone know if there is a limit to how far we can view anything in the cosmos aided with techonology? Is there a limit...or limitless? how far can we go?...us.2u

Yes. Cosmologists consider the age of the universe to be some 14 billion years. The fact that the speed of light is finite means the light from anywhere further than that will not have reached us yet and so cannot be viewed.

[us.2u]

So basically then anything we look at... is history in the making? Is that correct? e.g. even viewing our own sun is something like 8 or 9 miutes ago..if my theory is correct how far back can we see; can we see as far back as billions of years? or are we limited; If so doe's any one know our limits in simple clarification? e.g. can we see as far back as a billion years or further or what?....us.2u

[MrAsylum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by us.2u

Doe's anyone know if there is a limit to how far we can view anything in the cosmos aided with techonology? Is there a limit...or limitless? how far can we go?...us.2u

 

 

Yes. Cosmologists consider the age of the universe to be some 14 billion years. The fact that the speed of light is finite means the light from anywhere further than that will not have reached us yet and so cannot be viewed

 

 

There are certain mediums modify the speed of light. How do we know what type of interstellar (and intergalactic)! gasses, and sorts of matter are between we and the stars to the oldest galaxies? This doesn't even take into account of things like the manifestations of gravity exotic matter etc. I happen to think (with the new telescopes coming on line, as well as advances in particle physics), that the age of the universe as well as some dearly held cosmologic models will be completely revised.

 

However with that in mind lets assume that the speed of light is 186,000mps (in an interstellar space as well as a vacuum), that is no guarantee that there is nothing beyond our "light horizon."'

 

MrA

[insane_alien]

we know about interstellar and intergalactic plasmas. heck we even have a good idea about their densities so we can factor them out quite well.

 

us.2u - it ain't your theory, its been around since hubble thatswhy we have the 'hubble' limit which is the farthest distance we can see with a telescope of any kind be it optical, radio or gamma