Haha, not my title, the article’s. I don’t change them too often because it disrupts my flow going through my RSS feeds while I select things I want to get into in depth myself, and I know publishers make these decisions for a reason. The text is pretty ok though. Feel free to downvote them.
The JWST has done it again. The powerful space telescope has already revealed the presence of bright galaxies only several hundred million years after the Big Bang. Now, it’s sensed light from a galaxy only 280 million years after the Big Bang, the most distant galaxy ever detected.
Prior to the JWST, we had no infrared telescopes with large enough mirrors to detect light from the early galaxies. The Hubble can see near-infrared light, but only has a 2.4-meter mirror. It found only one galaxy from the Universe’s 500 million years. The Spitzer Space Telescope was a dedicated infrared telescope, but it only had an 85 cm mirror. Not only does the JWST have a much larger mirror, but detector technology has advanced so much that the veil obscuring the early Universe is being lifted one ancient galaxy at a time.
Those numbers are interesting but what is the result of this? eg. because NASA has approximately 35% women and 30% minorities, it has what level of increased productivity? what has actually come out of this?
Yes, it would just be surprising because, gravity should make them not be evenly distributed.
The whole thing with dark matter is that it’s this magic stuff that causes gravity but isn’t affected by it, which… is not how gravity normally works.
Though there is still room for it, we just need a better framework other than “I added 3 and 5 and got 12, so obviously I must mean to add 3 and 5 and 4 too”.
Then it should also coelescce, particularly since it doesn’t have the em force to keep it repelled, the universe should be dominated by massive dark matter black holes.
Yes, there’s math that explains part of the distribution, but also there is 0 force opposing any collapse we’d have a lot more neutron stars and other degenerate matter catalyzed by dark matter.
We have hypotheses like this when our observations don’t make sense and we need to explain them, it’s definitely a possibility but we still have room to understand the large scale physics at play.
You don’t need a force to prevent collapse if there’s no drag force to slow things down. It would actually be almost impossible for a cloud of dark matter to collapse since any individual particle has momentum and no way to slow down, so they’ll all be in some sort of mutual orbit
I’m guessing you’ve seen as many lorentz attractor simulations as I have, what always happens is something like tidal effects or angular momentum means 90% slow down while a few particles get shot out of hell at ludicrous speed.
The effect is similar to drag, and is basically how we get entropy even without em effects.
It’s not the only problem with them, and potentially not the biggest either - there is no plan to remove or maintain them when they die other than de-orbiting them into the upper atmosphere. A recent study suggests that this will critically harm the ozone layer, and that adding metallic particles in the quantities implied by the number of starlink satellites that Elmo plans to launch could do far more damage to the ozone layer than our previous attempts to screw it up!
astronomy
Ważne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.