JWST evidence: Big Bang never happened? (as classically told)

[BobRyan]

https://www.realclearscience.com/2022/08/12/james_webb_data_contradicts_the_big_bang_847610.html

Too many distinct unique Galaxies that are too far away for BB theory?

The August 19,2022 update
Do James Webb Telescope Images Disprove The Big Bang Theory? | Principia Scientific Intl.

"the new James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) images of the cosmos are beautifully awe-inspiring.

"But to most professional astronomers and cosmologists, they are also extremely surprising—not at all what was predicted by theory.

"In the flood of technical astronomical papers published online since July 12, the authors report again and again that the images show surprisingly many galaxies, galaxies that are surprisingly smooth, surprisingly small and surprisingly old. Lots of surprises, and not necessarily pleasant ones. One paper’s title begins with the candid exclamation: “Panic!”

"Why do the JWST’s images inspire panic among cosmologists? And what theory’s predictions are they contradicting? The papers don’t actually say.

"The truth that these papers don’t report is that the hypothesis that the JWST’s images are blatantly and repeatedly contradicting is the Big Bang Hypothesis that the universe began 14 billion years ago in an incredibly hot, dense state and has been expanding ever since.​

The paper mentioned above as starting off with "Panic!" is this one that finds 10x more than Hubble at that distance.

"Panic! At the Disks: First Rest-frame Optical Observations of Galaxy Structure at z>3 with JWST in the SMACS 0723 Field" July 19,2022

"We discover the surprising result that at z>1.5 disk galaxies dominate the overall fraction of morphologies, with a factor of ∼10 relative higher number of disk galaxies than seen by the Hubble Space Telescope at these redshifts"​

============= the old 1991 "news"
The Big Bang Never Happened - SAND

What is happening to the Big Bang theory these days?

 

[lsume]

I then wonder where the echo comes from if not creation?

 

[BobRyan]

I then wonder where the echo comes from if not creation?

I suspect the real issue is that the moment of creation was not as random and chaotic as they would have "needed it to be" in their assumption that "stuff just blew up and then after being a homogeneous mess for a few 100 million years started to fall into place to create a 747 given enough time and chance"

At 6:15 in the video above ...

"As JWST gazed farther and farther back in time there should be fewer and fewer galaxies, and eventually none. A cosmic dark age. However a report to be published in "Nature" states that galaxies as huge as the Milky Way are common even a few hundred Million years after the proposed Big Bang... there are at least 100,000 times as many galaxies at red shifts greater than 10, than theorists predicted. There is no possibility that many huge galaxies could have been created in such a short period of time"​

 

[lsume]

I suspect the real issue is that the moment of creation was not as random and chaotic as they would have "needed it to be" in their assumption that "stuff just blew up and then after being a homogeneous mess for a few 100 million years started to fall into place to create a 747 given enough time and chance"

Or they could be wrong about a great many things.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Or they could be wrong about a great many things.

Like creation vs evolution

 

[BobRyan]

Another example of how JWST is debunking some key Big Bang assumptions vs God simply "saying it" and "it was so"

 

[Mark Quayle]

Part of that I didn't follow. Like how does/should a galaxy farther away appear larger, just because its light left it earlier than galaxies not so far away? It's not just counter-intuitive; it simply doesn't add up to me. That's like saying that if you put a bowl of warm water in the freezer that it will freeze faster than a bowl of cool water, all other things being equal.

 

[hedrick]

No, the data doesn’t deny the big bang. The James Webb Space Telescope never disproved the Big Bang. Here's how that falsehood spread.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

No, the data doesn’t deny the big bang. The James Webb Space Telescope never disproved the Big Bang. Here's how that falsehood spread.

are you an evolutionist?

 

[The Barbarian]

No, the data doesn’t deny the big bang. The James Webb Space Telescope never disproved the Big Bang. Here's how that falsehood spread.

are you an evolutionist?

Evolutionary theory has exactly nothing to do with the Big Bang. You might as well have asked him if he has blue eyes.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Evolutionary theory has exactly nothing to do with the Big Bang. You might as well have asked him if he has blue eyes.

please explain the differences

 

[The Barbarian]

please explain the differences

Hmm...
Evolutionary theory is about how living populations change over time, and the Big Bang theory is about how the present observable universe formed.

Evolutionary theory is biology. Big Bang theory is cosmology.

Evolutionary theory is supported by observable cases of evolution, a very large number of transitional series in the fossil record, genetics, embryology, and other biological sciences. The Big Bang theory is supported by observable expansion, the Red Shift, the cosmic microwave background and particle physics.

Evolutionary theory applies to this particular planet. The Big Bang Theory applies to the observable universe.

All creationists are scared of evolution. Only some creationists are scared of the Big Bang.

How many differences would you like? Here's one way they are similar:

Evolutionary theory has nothing to do with the Big Bang. Big Bang theory has nothing to do with biological evolution.

 

[Mark Quayle]

All creationists are scared of evolution.

You were doing really well, right up to here: "All creationists are scared of evolution."

To be fair, yes, you have a bit of a snarky point, but I'm not scared of evolution, and I'm a long way from the only creationist who is not. God can do anything he wants. He can even do both!

Here's one way they are similar:

Evolutionary theory has nothing to do with the Big Bang. Big Bang theory has nothing to do with biological evolution.

Speaking of snarky! !)

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Hmm...
Evolutionary theory is about how living populations change over time, and the Big Bang theory is about how the present observable universe formed.

Evolutionary theory is biology. Big Bang theory is cosmology.

Evolutionary theory is supported by observable cases of evolution, a very large number of transitional series in the fossil record, genetics, embryology, and other biological sciences. The Big Bang theory is supported by observable expansion, the Red Shift, the cosmic microwave background and particle physics.

Evolutionary theory applies to this particular planet. The Big Bang Theory applies to the observable universe.

All creationists are scared of evolution. Only some creationists are scared of the Big Bang.

How many differences would you like? Here's one way they are similar:

Evolutionary theory has nothing to do with the Big Bang. Big Bang theory has nothing to do with biological evolution.

you are well versed thanks for the reply

 

[The Barbarian]

Here's one way they are similar:

Evolutionary theory has nothing to do with the Big Bang. Big Bang theory has nothing to do with biological evolution.

Speaking of snarky! !)

I never thought of basic science as snarky.

 

[The Barbarian]

To be fair, yes, you have a bit of a snarky point, but I'm not scared of evolution, and I'm a long way from the only creationist who is not. God can do anything he wants. He can even do both!

OK... "most creationists are scared of evolution."

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I recall when Carl Sagan had the courage to speak in a fundamentalists church about the "Big Bang Theory.

After his talk, he took questions which got a little heated.

His final words stuck with me, he said to the effect of; "to me, a God who took billions of years
to create the universe, is more powerful than one who would've made it in just six days."

 

[The Barbarian]

His final words stuck with me, he said to the effect of; "to me, a God who took billions of years
to create the universe, is more powerful than one who would've made it in just six days."

I tend to agree. And I lean toward the ideas of St. Augustine of Hippo, who saw the "days" as different aspects of creation, not periods of time.

 

[mindlight]

https://www.realclearscience.com/2022/08/12/james_webb_data_contradicts_the_big_bang_847610.html

Too many distinct unique Galaxies that are too far away for BB theory?

The August 19,2022 update
Do James Webb Telescope Images Disprove The Big Bang Theory? | Principia Scientific Intl.

"the new James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) images of the cosmos are beautifully awe-inspiring.

"But to most professional astronomers and cosmologists, they are also extremely surprising—not at all what was predicted by theory.

"In the flood of technical astronomical papers published online since July 12, the authors report again and again that the images show surprisingly many galaxies, galaxies that are surprisingly smooth, surprisingly small and surprisingly old. Lots of surprises, and not necessarily pleasant ones. One paper’s title begins with the candid exclamation: “Panic!”

"Why do the JWST’s images inspire panic among cosmologists? And what theory’s predictions are they contradicting? The papers don’t actually say.

"The truth that these papers don’t report is that the hypothesis that the JWST’s images are blatantly and repeatedly contradicting is the Big Bang Hypothesis that the universe began 14 billion years ago in an incredibly hot, dense state and has been expanding ever since.​

The paper mentioned above as starting off with "Panic!" is this one that finds 10x more than Hubble at that distance.

"Panic! At the Disks: First Rest-frame Optical Observations of Galaxy Structure at z>3 with JWST in the SMACS 0723 Field" July 19,2022

"We discover the surprising result that at z>1.5 disk galaxies dominate the overall fraction of morphologies, with a factor of ∼10 relative higher number of disk galaxies than seen by the Hubble Space Telescope at these redshifts"​

============= the old 1991 "news"
The Big Bang Never Happened - SAND

What is happening to the Big Bang theory these days?

The boundaries of the fully formed universe do seem to have been pushed back by James Webb. Atheists may well be tempted to return to the steady state infinite universe they spoke of before Big Bang theory prevailed although the background echo of some significant cosmic event remains to be explained.

It was always an assumption that we would see partially formed galaxies from moments after the big bang in cosmological time

 

[hedrick]

The boundaries of the fully formed universe do seem to have been pushed back by James Webb. Atheists may well be tempted to return to the steady state infinite universe they spoke of before Big Bang theory prevailed although the background echo of some significant cosmic event remains to be explained.

It was always an assumption that we would see partially formed galaxies from moments after the big bang in cosmological time

Maybe not moments after, but much closer than before. James Webb Space Telescope reveals some of the oldest stars in our universe