The James Webb telescope has broken cosmology. Can it be fixed?

Stephen3141

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2023
477
141
68
Southwest
✟39,905.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
"For decades, measurements of the universe's expansion have suggested a disparity known as the Hubble tension, which threatens to break cosmology as we know it. Now, on the eve of its second anniversary, a new finding by the James Webb Space Telescope has only entrenched the mystery."

After 2 years in space, the James Webb telescope has broken cosmology. Can it be fixed?

I think you mean, that the recent observations with the telescope have demonstrated that the
current MODEL of cosmology, is not correct.

There is no reason to go out and join a doomsday cult, because of this.
 
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
7,034
5,808
✟249,915.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I would like to know if all this other matter or material that is all being gravitationally drawn to or toward one another, is all being gravitationally drawn towards a single centre on those scales or not, etc?

God Bless.
The way I think about it (I could be wrong, I'm no expert) is that the distance between objects in space is both shrinking and expanding at the same time.

So there are two opposite things that are happening at the same time:
Shrinkage
The shrinking is due to gravity and is dependent on how much mass is in that part of space, and how far away the other object is from that mass. That shrinkage of space diminishes the further away you get r^2, so when you are close the shrinkage is really quick. When you are far away the shrinkage is minute.

Expansion
The expansion of the universe is minute but it happens everywhere, irregardless of whether mass is in that part of the universe or not. This expansion is accumulative. So the futher distance two objects are from each other, the higher the rate of expansion.

Both combined
When objects are close to each other the shrinkage due to gravity is quicker than the accumulative expansion over that short distance hence those objects move closer and closer together.
But when objects are really far away from each other then the shrinkage due to gravity is really small and the accumulative expansion over that vast distance is large, so those objects move further and further away.

Does that make sense?
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,291
5,252
45
Oregon
✟961,397.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
The way I think about it (I could be wrong, I'm no expert) is that the distance between objects in space is both shrinking and expanding at the same time.

So there are two opposite things that are happening at the same time:
Shrinkage
The shrinking is due to gravity and is dependent on how much mass is in that part of space, and how far away the other object is from that mass. That shrinkage of space diminishes the further away you get r^2, so when you are close the shrinkage is really quick. When you are far away the shrinkage is minute.

Expansion
The expansion of the universe is minute but it happens everywhere, irregardless of whether mass is in that part of the universe or not. This expansion is accumulative. So the futher distance two objects are from each other, the higher the rate of expansion.

Both combined
When objects are close to each other the shrinkage due to gravity is quicker than the accumulative expansion over that short distance hence those objects move closer and closer together.
But when objects are really far away from each other then the shrinkage due to gravity is really small and the accumulative expansion over that vast distance is large, so those objects move further and further away.

Does that make sense?
It let's me know how you are thinking about it. Thanks.

I saw a picture of the universe where there were several (or many multiple) large empty spots, 100's of millions of light years across, where space is a complete void, totally empty, etc, and where these empty spots would have quote/unquote "walls", was where all the normal matter and material was that we are much more familiar with, etc, and I proposed that these large empty spots are actually responsible for the expansion that is a constant inside each spot, equally everywhere, on the rest of the universe, that never changes, etc. And even if the expansion was occurring at the speed of light, though I suspect it's a bit slower than that, etc, these empty spots are 100's of millions of light years across, in a universe that we can see that is 46.5 billion light years away from us in every direction, or 93 billion light years large, etc, but even if it was happening at 1 times the speed of light, even if it were happening that fast, etc, it's actually very, very, very slow for these empty spots and for the rest of the universe on those scales, etc, like slower than dirt at those scales almost, etc, which could mean that even a very weak gravitational force for "everything else", while at the very same time all being kind of pushed together by these empty spots, etc, anyway, I was wondering if even a very weak gravitational force, could be drawing "everything else" together? And maybe drawing everything else together, probably around these spots, towards a single center maybe, etc?

But thanks for letting me know how you think though. Because I do understand what you are saying, ok. Strong/weak forces, and all of that, etc. I wanted to let you know I do understand that, ok.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
7,034
5,808
✟249,915.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
But thanks for letting me know how you think though. Because I do understand what you are saying, ok. Strong/weak forces, and all of that, etc. I wanted to let you know I do understand that, ok.

God BlBless.
Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I'm no authority on such matters. Strong and weak forces have to do with the atom. Not the universe. Not gravity or the expansion of the universe. I too have a wacky idea about the expansion of the universe and I have wacky ideas about black holes. But not qualified in any way.

I don't know much about vast areas of nothingness but I do understand the universe is clumpy and universe stuff has arranged itself into galaxies, galaxy clusters, and the like and so there are areas with less stuff in them. However, even in empty places there at pervasive gravitational and electro magnetic forces and quantum fluctuations etc
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ophiolite
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,291
5,252
45
Oregon
✟961,397.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I'm no authority on such matters. Strong and weak forces have to do with the atom. Not the universe. Not gravity or the expansion of the universe. I too have a wacky idea about the expansion of the universe and I have wacky ideas about black holes. But not qualified in any way.

I don't know much about vast areas of nothingness but I do understand the universe is clumpy and universe stuff has arranged itself into galaxies, galaxy clusters, and the like and so there are areas with less stuff in them. However, even in empty places there at pervasive gravitational and electro magnetic forces and quantum fluctuations etc
Thank you for your responses, and your time.

God Bless.
 
Upvote 0