Thanks for the pings.
· List topics · post a topic · subscribe · Google ·
Posted on 12/12/2024 3:43:39 AM PST by Red Badger
Astronomers using the James Webb Space Telescope to peer back in time into the farthest reaches of the universe have found stunning evidence for an alternate theory of gravity.
Current models of galaxy formation in the early cosmos predict the presence of excess gravity caused by dark matter to pull material into slowly forming galaxies. However, an alternate theory of gravity first proposed in 1998 called Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) suggests that structures in the early universe formed very quickly without the need for theoretical dark matter.
Now, researchers from Case Western Reserve University say that scans of ancient galaxies gathered by the JWST seem to contradict the commonly accepted predictions of the most widely accepted Cold Dark Matter theory, Lambda-CDM. Instead, the readings seem to support a basis for MOND, which would force astronomers and cosmologists to reconsider this alternative and long-controversial theory of gravity.
The Dark Matter Debate
The Lambda-CDM model has long posited that dark matter, an elusive and invisible form of matter, is essential for explaining the structure of the universe. According to this model, dark matter’s gravitational influence shaped galaxies and caused the formation of large-scale structures. It predicts that ancient galaxies in the early universe should appear small and dim, as they were gradually pulled together by dark matter over cosmic time.
However, McGaugh and his colleagues argue that these predictions do not match JWST observations. Instead, the newly observed galaxies appear bright, large, and fully formed, even as scientists peer deeper into the universe’s past. This unexpected brightness directly challenges the conventional understanding of galaxy formation driven by dark matter.
“Astronomers invented dark matter to explain how you get from a very smooth early universe to big galaxies with lots of empty space between them that we see today,” said Stacy McGaugh, professor and director of astronomy at Case Western Reserve, in a press release announcing the study.
“(But) what the theory of dark matter predicted is not what we see.”
Specifically, McGaugh said that if the lambda-CDM model were accurate, the extra gravitational pull from dark matter, which only interacts with other matter through gravity, would cause small pieces of matter surrounding nascent galaxies to accrete to the center slowly.
MOND: A Radical Alternative Theory of Gravity
The MOND theory, first proposed in 1983 by Israeli physicist Mordehai Milgrom, offers a different explanation. MOND suggests modifying Newton’s second law to account for discrepancies observed in galaxy rotation curves without invoking dark matter. These modifications are relevant in regions of tiny accelerations, such as those experienced at the universe’s periphery, where JWST is now observing.
In 1998, McGaugh co-authored a seminal paper proposing that galaxy formation happened more rapidly and did not rely on dark matter. Instead, he and his co-authors, including Federico Lelli, Jay Franck, and James Schombert, theorized that galactic material was quickly collected, expanded with the universe, and then collapsed under gravity. This theory contends that galaxies came together early, forming large, luminous structures without the need for dark matter.
Evidence and Challenges
According to McGaugh and colleagues, JWST’s data aligns more closely with predictions made by MOND proponents than with Lambda-CDM models. As an example, McGaugh highlights that the MOND-based predictions of R H Sanders matched observations more accurately than those made by Lambda-CDM advocates Mo, Mao, and White. Yet, despite the recent success, MOND remains a contentious theory, as reconciling it with Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity—a foundation of modern physics—has proven elusive.
“We can always attempt to modify a theory to accommodate new facts,” McGaugh concedes, acknowledging that while facts inconsistent with one model do not necessitate abandoning it entirely, the inability to fully explain observational data might indicate a weaker theoretical framework. Even so, some modern astronomical measurements does still favor the dark matter hypothesis.
The Ongoing Case for Lambda-CDM
Despite MOND’s apparent success in explaining some JWST observations, Lambda-CDM continues to enjoy broad support. The model has accurately predicted the universe’s expansion rate since the 1920s, with evidence of a cosmological constant pushing the universe to perpetually expand. Additionally, while the universe is nearly flat, a requirement for Lambda-CDM, slight deviations remain a grey area for further exploration.
The broader astrophysical community remains cautious, and many researchers point out that Lambda-CDM has withstood numerous tests and provides a cohesive framework for understanding the universe. Even so, McGaugh is excited about the ongoing debate.
“The expectation was that every big galaxy we see in the nearby universe would have started from these itty-bitty pieces,” McGaugh said. “That’s not what JWST is showing us.”
McGaugh concedes that finding a theory compatible with both General Relativity and MOND remains an unrealized challenge. However, following the discoveries by the JWST that seem to support their MOND concept and its alternate theory of gravity, McGaugh says he and his colleagues are feeling somewhat vindicated.
“The bottom line is, ‘I told you so,’” McGaugh said. “I was raised to think that saying that was rude, but that’s the whole point of the scientific method: Make predictions and then check which come true.”
The paper “Accelerated Structure Formation: The Early Emergence of Massive Galaxies and Clusters of Galaxies” appeared on November 12, 2024 in the The Astrophysical Journal.
And, I have always thought (imagined) that a “black hole” is where an object departed our time frame, faster than the speed of light.
I suspect, that you could follow that path. But trying to get back?
Yet, someday, some “AI” thing might map the “black holes” of the universe. So, some places beyond the beyond, you might travel to and return from . . .
But I am thankful for the blessings of Jesus, and with God, ‘the end of time’ actually means, what we think of time, is entirely his creation: ‘The end of time’ is non-existence of time.
The first time I heard the term “dark matter,” I figured we could replace the term with “God” or “magic” interchangeably. People are way to quick to accept dodgy explanations for what they don’t understand.
Most excellent
‘Dark Matter’ is just a placeholder in an equation that stands for an unknown variable, it might as well be X∞.................
An “unknown variable” is a great way to explain things we don’t know but want credit for knowing. (Note: I’m embarrassed for using “to” instead of “too” in my previous post.)
I find that, with those of Faith, science supports the Bible. God's wonders are manifest and
display His supernatural genius.
There are Flat-Earthers everywhere...
Here is how I look at it. Imagine a 2 dimensional creature, that only has length and width, but no height. Like a small square of paper (obviously paper has height, albeit very small, but pretend it is like that). A creature from the 3rd dimension, (us!) comes and lifts up that 2 dimensional creature and holds it in the 3rd dimension, hovering over all its friends. He thinks it is awesome!
Then it gets set back down. It tries to tell its friends about this 3rd dimension, but there is no point of reference to try to explain it to someone who hasn't been in the 3rd dimension.
So back to us, is there a 4th dimension, but we cannot grasp it, because there is no such frame of reference. Maybe that is what the whole space/time and/or dark matter thing is.
These theories are worthless.
It’s simple. There is no such thing as gravity.
The Earth SUCKS.
But, what made it suck? Sin.
And, whodunnit? Adam and Eve, when they went Woke.
Bad move. Ruined the climate too!
:-)
Where did the matter come from that produced the “infinitely” dense speck that “expanded” into the universe? Where did the energy come from that made the “infinitely” dense baby universe expand as it’s now doing?
Good start on getting rid of that “dark-”whatever nonsense. If your theories math requires unicorn farts to exist... it’s probably wrong.
Now if they can just couple in the rate of particle creation from quantum perturbation of space/time... maybe they can adjust the Universal “expansion” that they are seeing that should just rightly be quantified as “movement”.
‘Dark Matter’ is what you see when your head is up your ass...............
This is a very poorly-written article.
Dark matter is the hypothetical gravitationally interacting mass that permits galaxies to spin much faster than their baryonic (non-dark) mass would seem to permit. JWST seeing brighter and more complex galaxies in the early eons of the observable universe doesn’t refute the hypothesis.
Dark matter is not the hypothetical explanation for the observed expansion of the universe - that’s dark energy.
Possible maybe.
Time for a nap.
The Bible teaches that space was stretched out like a tent, one dimension after the other, not an explosion- a great expansion not a big bang, but, at the end of time, Jesus is said to release His grip on the elements and they will fly apart with a great noise. Space will then collapse, forming “hell” Hell is simply the old universe at the time of its death. This is why Satan u.s. always said to be crushed at his judgement. Hell in the Bible is a place of intense heat but also darkness. There is a valley between hell and the new universe which “no one may cross.”. That would be the event horizon. Hawking said time runs like normal in the center of a black hole so for the spirits trapped within, time would continue forever fueled by a universal-mass hole.
“Gravity possesses concentrated time.”
It depends on how being “concentrated” (as a concept) affects the experience of time.
There is measurable evidence that the greater the gravitational pull (or linear acceleration) within a frame of reference, the slower time moves. It’s called “gravitational time dilation”.
Considering how many of these scientists have tenure riding on their theories continuing to bring in funding?
You are most likely correct.
“dark matter”
or Goat Entrails.
Lol.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.