Another Impossible Galaxy Revealed by JWST, Here's Why It Makes No Sense

Get a Wonderful Person Tee: teespring.com/stores/whatdamath
More cool designs are on Amazon: amzn.to/3QFIrFX
Alternatively, PayPal donations can be sent here: paypal.me/whatdamath
Hello and welcome! My name is Anton and in this video, we will talk about another impossible galaxy
Links:
www.swinburne.edu.au/news/202...
www.nature.com/articles/s4158...
www.nature.com/articles/s4158...
Previous unusual galaxy: • Milky Way Like Galaxy ...
#jwst #jameswebbspacetelescope #galaxy
0:00 Impossible galaxy...again
1:00 Previous discovery of a bar galaxy
2:00 New galaxy and why it makes no sense
4:10 It's also a dead galaxy for some reason
5:20 Incomplete or incorrect models?
6:10 Our simulations may be too simple
7:05 Additional observation show evidence for Milky Way like galaxy
8:05 So not all hope is lost - some things do make sense
9:30 What may happen to all these star clusters
Support this channel on Patreon to help me make this a full time job:
/ whatdamath
Bitcoin/Ethereum to spare? Donate them here to help this channel grow!
bc1qnkl3nk0zt7w0xzrgur9pnkcduj7a3xxllcn7d4
or ETH: 0x60f088B10b03115405d313f964BeA93eF0Bd3DbF
Space Engine is available for free here: spaceengine.org
Enjoy and please subscribe.
Twitter: / whatdamath
Facebook: / whatdamath
Twitch: / whatdamath
The hardware used to record these videos:
New Camera: amzn.to/34DUUlv
CPU: amzn.to/2LZFQCJ
Video Card: amzn.to/2M1W26C
Motherboard: amzn.to/2JYGiQQ
RAM: amzn.to/2Mwy2t4
PSU: amzn.to/2LZcrIH
Case: amzn.to/2MwJZz4
Microphone: amzn.to/2t5jTv0
Mixer: amzn.to/2JOL0oF
Recording and Editing: amzn.to/2LX6uvU
Some of the above are affiliate links, meaning I would get a (very small) percentage of the price paid.
Thank you to all Patreon supporters of this channel
Special thanks also goes to all the wonderful supporters of the channel through KZbin Memberships
Images/Videos:
NASA/Nature
Licenses used:
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...

[@chris_iapetus]

What a fabulous time to be alive! (Watches news.) OHHhh I hate this world. Back to space.

[@alexispaterson814]

@Chris. This World isn't such a bad place to watch from.

[@Steve-si8hx]

Hate the Rich sociopaths only

[@AndyWitmyer]

Imagine letting corporate news / propaganda influence your current emotional states and/or valuation of the world.

[@TRU_Lunchy]

The world is a reflection of humanity. Don't think you're above it all.

[@BORCHLEO]

I think we should be pushing for more science and arts in society, strive for peace and beauty not hate. Politics is disgusting, but necessary, modern society does not share enough common values to get past this.

[@ojoshiro]

The more you can see the more strange things you'll find.

[@sdaniel9129]

Yes, because humans are an idiot species...

[@deadiemeyers1661]

Impossible? "You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."--Inigo Montoya

[@tonyincs]

nice

[@leonmusk1040]

"Inconceivable " did you happen to have six fingers on you're left hand?

[@Ryan-ff2db]

He didn't fall! Inconceivable.

[@Greenmachine305]

Inigo must have dueled with a few flat earthers in his time to be so open-minded. It makes me happy to know that he won every battle.

[@johnathanmandrake7240]

Should be impossible. Breaking how we understand physics.

[@bruced.1472]

I think the operative phrase here is "previous assumptions". Theories based on the bleeding edge observations with at best borderline data always get upset by newer, way better observational data. This isn't "impossible" but "expected". This is a good thing.

[@ShawnHCorey]

Great video. Scientific discoveries are not heralded with, "Eureka!" but with, "That's strange."

[@mattorr2256]

I’d argue they are heralded with a “eureka!” by many people and scientists but with these objects JWST is discovering they are being cautious about overreacting as soon as they are discovered. It is peering so far back in time that what it’s imaging and what we are seeing needs to be dealt with caution, skepticism, extremely detailed analysis, etc. before we all just begin going nuts with these images. It is extremely exciting and almost unbelievable to me but my eyes do not always lie so these far back in time JWST images are boggling my mind to say the least.

[@Xaivius]

"Huh?" and "Did I do something wrong...?" are frequent utterances in such circumstances, as well as progressively more befuddled checking of notes, figures, and lab books. Occaisionally this even leads to multiple repitions of the experiment, frequently unaware that they've stumbled onto something novel. The process is stressful like that when you're 'doing it right', from a decade of observing the fascinating creatures known as scientists in their environ of choice, the lab.

[@Noqtis]

@@Xaivius Sounds like you humans are all noobs. We from the planet Xixapupa just know. You really have to git gud if you wanna survive the dark forest, fools.

[@MaryAnnNytowl]

Yes, and it means new science incoming - which I LOVE! 😊 💙💙 _~happy dance~_ 💙💙

[@larion2336]

It's not strange though. Anyone with a functioning brain knew that the current models were woefully incomplete and slapped together. That's why it's so annoying when you see condescending "science" folk who act as though they have the keys to the universe & can dictate to everyone else what is or isn't plausible, just because they spent a few years huffing their own farts at Uni. There's a common saying among illusionists, which is that the easiest people to fool are scientists and children.

[@circa_76er]

The animations that simulate a journey through what appears to be a star-filled cosmos, but in truth showcases galaxies, ignited a profound sense of awe in me as I grasped the immense scale of the universe. The realization that each point of light represents an entire galaxy was a humbling and almost sacred experience. Furthermore, the depiction of cosmic filaments added an additional layer of astonishment, leaving me utterly amazed by the complexity and vastness of the cosmos. The sheer magnitude of it all is simply mind-boggling. My brain humbly concedes, 'Sorry, my friend, this concept is beyond our grasp...

[@EShirako]

Our brains just cannot really encompass more than a small or MAYBE middling scale of infinity...the wholeness of it, and the amazingness that really REPRESENTS, is just beyond what we can individually envision so far. Maybe future generations will manage it better...we'll see!

[@squanchy666]

Spending the 90s ripped to the tits on LSD greatly enhances my ability to grok that kinda shit

[@Nefville]

If someone tells you they put a cake in the oven 2 minutes ago and you immediately check to see what kind of cake it is only to find it fully cooked and done, maybe they put it in earlier than they thought. 🎂

[@thelazy0ne]

Or it was made using rapid cooking doe. ☝️🤓

[@cht2162]

It was a macrowave oven.

[@SofaKingShit]

Pretty clear to me that the JWST is broken. Really disappointing.

[@jasonmcghee1266]

​@@SofaKingShit explain yourself here. Are you being serious?

[@5ty717]

@@jasonmcghee1266i agree … he is not serious…

[@glorymanheretosleep]

It makes no sense how any galaxy can go without Anton.

[@jeffknott1975]

These discoveries can only help science as its making us rethink and reexamine conventional theories, hopefully, furthering our understanding!

[@LecherousLizard]

The only thing they do about galaxies like that is recalculate their redshift until it's small enough to fit the model. They already did it a bunch of times.

[@Fridaey13txhOktober]

The BBT is false! Clues have been around for a long time but has been ignored, the BBT has been a sacred cow for far too long.

[@Fridaey13txhOktober]

​@@LecherousLizard Big bang theory is a sacred cow, a sacred cow long overdue for a slaughter.

[@johnk-pc2zx]

It's much much more scientific when you headlines say "we don't know," rather than "we've just proved some exotic theory!"

[@Johnny_Dregs]

You're the best, Anton. Thanks for keeping me up to date. I appreciate your videos.

[@mr-x7689]

Nothing is ever truly impossible. It's just our tecnology, understanding and creativity that is lacking. Every time we have said somthing is impossible, we found a way to make it possible. Planes, cars, space rockets, clean water ect. Given enough time, we'll find a awnser to this too.

[@jasonlindsay2082]

Since everything was closer together the farther back in time you go, wouldn't it make sense that you'd have even more galactic mergers and more often?

[@maxhunter3574]

See, there you go using logic again. Don't tell the dark matter folks, lol

[@mattorr2256]

Yes I was pondering that this past weekend. It would make a lot of sense and would help explain many of these objects the JWST is imaging so far back in time

[@verlax8956]

The problem with this idea is that gas is too expensive.

[@petergriffin383]

Well that's kinda like what I keep hearing- "Scientists don't know how super massive black holes at the center of galaxies are formed." ... Really? You can't figure it out?? Just look at a galaxy, think about what black holes are and what they do...then notice the spiral of stars and gas getting tighter and tighter the closer you get to the center...there's your answer. Am I wrong?

[@flambambam3578]

@@petergriffin383 While most of the closer ones could be attributed to black hole merging events, we still don't know why some of the most distant ones (when we look back billions of years) are so massive. Black holes are only as massive as the cores of the stars they originated from (plus a little bit of what orbits them), and some of the black holes we know didn't result from major merging events have masses that far exceed what we know is possible for even an entire star.

[@AdamAnouer]

Science: That’s impossible. James Webb: Challenge Accepted.

[@SanityTV_Last_Sane_Man_Alive]

Thats scientists, not science. The fact you dont know the difference is the real problem.

[@Lund.J]

Scientist: "I am science !" (A. Fauchi)

[@splintmeow4723]

Maybe we are looking into the future of that galaxy and not the past

[@Metal-up-your-azz]

This debunks everything scientists have thought since the 1930s

[@Nat-oj2uc]

No it's necessary

[@cleverhandle420]

Love watching ur views go up as I learn. U deserve ur success, Anton. Best wishes to u and urs.

[@aliceberethart]

I like the idea i heard before that the universe is a "bubble" of many bubbles interacting and crossing into each other, and that new universes are born all the time and sometimes bumps into ours and "trades" matter with our universe, so some galaxies far away are impossible because they're from another universe that is much older. Now whether how plausible that is i don't know, I'm no astronomer or physicist. But it makes for a good sci-fi novel if anything.

[@lorenzo6mm]

That's what I saw and understand. Starting about 20 years ago. The first CBR aka cosmic background radiation pictures showed three faint but distinct rings/ circles inside the oval shape of our universe. If Universe's hive like bubbles ? these older Galaxies out on the edge must be left behind in between our Universe and another Universe. I mean why not? makes perfect sense. Soap bubbles. On an scale of forever. Pye 3.14~ .....space and time Infinitely huge and small ...

[@jenkem4464]

I mean..that structure exists in every other thing we look at so it makes sense. I like the one theory where our observable universe exists as the "skin" of a massive black hole.

[@robdevilee8167]

If you do that, base it not on an exception, but on plentiful evidence. The exception could be a measurement error. Who knows.

[@alfredsutton4412]

Good explanation, again Anton. You do a great job disseminating complex topics at a level I can understand.

[@n-da-bunka2650]

Just because "all we can SEE is 14 billion years" does NOT mean that the Universe itself is only that old.

[@rupeeslang5121]

If that is true then the big bang theory as we know it is done for and everything should be revised.

[@kxjx]

Umm there are other reasons to think that the universe is that old and quite similar everywhere, which are to do with the way physical laws seem to preserve various symmetries. However, as far as I understand it, it does remain possible that the universe is very large and we happen to be in an unsual part of it.

[@user-xt3bi1co3t]

​@@kxjx"very large" could be the greatest understatement ever. An estimate for the size of the total universe is 10^10^122 TIMES larger than the observable universe. A number so ridiculously large that if you turned every particle in the observable universe into a zero, there would not be enough zeroes to write down the number that expresses the number of times larger to entire universe is than the observable universe.

[@hikingwithhollywood]

@@user-xt3bi1co3tthis so wild

[@tingtang9302]

​@@kxjxUmmm really umm like ok then totally

[@RetArm]

Greetings Mr. Petrov. I just wanted to say how much we love watching your videos and appreciate all the research you put into and share with all of us. I also wanted to ask a small favor of you. Is there any way you could share please the outro music with us. Perhaps a link to it or it's name. We find it very relaxing and would like to hear the entire piece. Thank you in advance sir.

[@yomogami4561]

thanks for the information anton looking forward to updates

[@foxling]

Would be great to have a video about age measurements. I kinda understand basic concept of red shift, but at the same time waves get "compressed" or "extended" by relative speed of sender~receiver, also gas can change light color. Why the scientists take red shift as a relatively accurate age indicator?

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

"also gas can change light color" Which has a _totally_ different effect on the spectrum than a redshift. "Why the scientists take red shift as a relatively accurate age indicator?" They don't. There is _lots_ of measurements and reasoning involved in getting age from a redshift measurement.

[@jpslaym0936]

Impossible if one assumes our current understanding of physics is anywhere near complete / accurate / valid

[@exiledintheus7251]

I'm so glad you operate! Great show

[@nebelung1]

I understand why some people were sceptical about the JWST during the much delayed project phase... But I think at this point it has convinced everyone what a masterpiece of engineering it is!

[@parkamark]

Riddle me this. What if the speed of light is not actually constant across the universe? What if it is not actually constant as it travels through "dark matter" or what ever we can't see in the voids of space? Could this then account for why we are observing objects that don't align with our current understanding? If it wasn't actually constant across vast scales, how could we even figure this out? Could we figure this out?

[@user-ft9ul5ul5v]

I think scientists already make corrections on high-mass objects when calculating light speeds and trajectories. And even with those corrections they arrived at such interesting conclusions.

[@KDYinYouTube]

your logic: What if god exist? this type of logic clearly will only blocking our furture.

[@UniDocs_Mahapushpa_Cyavana]

That could explain why those Galaxies form due to different physics, but it would not mean our observations are wrong.

[@robdevilee8167]

From what I know, there's no evidence of the universe being different in any direction. For example, the microwave background is nearly the same in all directions.

[@gandalf8216]

I makes more sense if c is the universal point of stand-still, as in lacking velocity altogether. What propagates the velocities we observe is because of inflation itself, and measuring this virtual velocity we call speed of light gives us a constant because it's the subtracted difference between two constants. We can't accelerate mass past c because mass is subject to the force of inflation, while that without mass is not. It seems only mass interacts with this force of inflation, which transforms into kinetic energy and/or heat. Rather than me butchering the explanation, just do the thought experiment yourself. Assume c is universal stand-still, and remake the Universe from that.

[@mrrob7531]

Here is my theory. The universe was so packed full of matter at the 385,000 year mark that it made massive stars unlike anything we have ever seen which quickly turned into massive black holes. These in turn caused just forming stars to start spinning around the black hole which brought in more matter making more stars. I think it’s completely possible to form a large galaxy in a couple hundred million years.

[@trevinbeattie4888]

I was thinking pretty much the same thing. And I’m rather excited to see studies of additional distant galaxies that can give us more data we can use to improve or rewrite our models of early galaxy formation.

[@empyrean196]

Yeah. It makes sense. A younger universe would have much lower entropy. So maybe processes of formation were accelerated by the greater concentration of energy. These galaxies should have less variability between them too. We should be seeing a predominance. Meaning similar sizes/shapes. With lower entropy comes less divergence. Until higher entropy leads to dispersion; fostering increased complexity.

[@Soupy_loopy]

Hogwash! The evidence will eventually disprove big bang theory and hopefully get rid of Young Sheldon too!

[@crowdpleaser1036]

That is a really sound theory of the kind that respected figures should be postulating instead of keep saying things like 'This doesn't fit the current model.' all the time. Maybe it is time to throw out the current model and JWST proves it.

[@UniDocs_Mahapushpa_Cyavana]

Like... but maths though.

[@bro_dBow]

You have been a solid source for me in space discoveries above all other KZbinrs! Keep doing what you do!

[@jamesgreenler8225]

There's important stuff out there that we don't even know how to see . We would need sensors we haven't created for things that we haven't discovered yet.

[@MysteryClarke]

Imagine if we had antennae. What other information would we receive? We base physical understanding on light, but what if we could detect flugions? No-one looks into them yet because we don't even perceive them. They move way faster than photons and could hold the key to universal transportation.

[@Nehpets1701G]

How embarrassing to be labelled as impossible 😳 Where is the cosmic love?

[@rwfrench66GenX]

lol despite it being impossible they still had the vanity to calculate the temperature. They never thought this could exist, but now they’re providing details!

[@anonymeister123]

I think they’ll find the galaxy is a lot closer than they think. It just appears to be red shifted because all of the stars are having a solid tropical red sunset, like I wish I was having right now. Time for summer 😩🌴🍍

[@blijebij]

Lets rename it then to Chimppossible (unlikely but not impossible).

[@lindaseel9986]

​@@anonymeister123I hear you there.

[@rwfrench66GenX]

@@blijebij I’m old and the word we used was improbable but I’m not opposed to things changing

[@rwfrench66GenX]

My God! It’s full of stars!

[@mattorr2256]

I don’t get it if that’s a joke. Of course galaxies are full of stars. I must be missing something

[@rwfrench66GenX]

@@mattorr2256it’s a reference to the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. The lead character, an astronaut named David Bowman, is flying over a monolith orbiting Jupiter and he takes his ship for a closer look and says that.

[@talkingmudcrab718]

In this case its not... Full of stars that is.

[@rwfrench66GenX]

@@talkingmudcrab718 well, granted, they’re dead stars 😂

[@Noqtis]

'My Gosh! It's full of arse!' - 2069: A Space Orgy

[@rbarrett111]

Great one, Anton! It makes me imagine time going faster earlier in the universe. Like, space is expanding, right? And time and space are sort of the same thing, so . . . when space was smaller was time denser and faster, or something? All way over my head, but still so fascinating. Cheers!

[@pyroyergen5986]

Been an exciting week for astronomy, great work Anton!

[@dm95b]

"Not even surprising anymore" LOL!

[@theGentlemanCaller73]

I've been told time and again that "the science is settled." The hubris of man...

[@OmegaVideoGameGod]

Absolutely amazing how different everything and how much there is.

[@kenlindsey4648]

Really appreciate your explanation of all this discovery.

[@andyburkhart9125]

If it doesn't make sense you should change your presuppositions.

[@mikehannan8206]

Exactly, like maybe re-examing the assumption that red shift equals velocity, especially when there is no direct measurement of velocity to confirm this assumption.

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

@@mikehannan8206 That redshift equals velocity is _not_ an assumption in cosmology.

[@MassDefibrillator]

@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 It sorta is, yes. An assumption being something that you can't directly test. We can't directly measure a velocity: a change in position over time. We don't have enough time, or instruments sensitive enough, to do so. We assume it, and then based on that assumption, interpret what we can measure as being caused by velocity; but this measurements could have a variety of different possible interpretations. There were a lot of good reasons to make this assumption early on, though IMO, those are starting to become questionable. Even at the time, you can read the direct words of Edwin Hubble, and see that he cautioned against assuming that his measurements were caused by a velocity.

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

@@MassDefibrillator "It sorta is, yes" What do you mean by "sorta"? Actually, redshift in cosmology is a measurement for _expansion_, not for velocity. And one _can_ test expansion in other ways which do not directly rely on redshift. "but this measurements could have a variety of different possible interpretations" Feel free to propose a different interpretation which simultaneously also explains all the other pieces of evidence we have for expansion. "though IMO, those are starting to become questionable" Since your opinion is based on the _false_ idea that redshift in cosmology is interpreted as velocity, your opinion isn't worth much. "Even at the time, you can read the direct words of Edwin Hubble, and see that he cautioned against assuming that his measurements were caused by a velocity." We have accumulated mountains of additional evidence since Hubble's time. And reading Hubble, it's quite clear that he got several things wrong back then, which have been cleared up in the meantime.

[@MassDefibrillator]

@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 You are correct that ultimately, expansion is distinct from velocity; but historically, this is not true, redshift was initially assumed to be velocity related, and some redshift is still thought to be velocity related, while cosmological redshift is thought to be expansion related, and the distinction is also not relevant to the level of description we are working at in KZbin comments. We can intermix the terms and not end up in err, as long as we are not deriving any general relativity solutions. Redshift is in fact not a measurement of expansion or velocity, it's a measurement of a change in the position of certain absorption and and emission lines in the electromagnetic spectrum, that line up with certain elements. We assume this measurement is caused by expansion; but this is an interpretation of the measurement, not the measurement itself. When you mistake an interpretation of a measurement, for a measurement, like you are doing, you begin to create dogma.

[@2013Arcturus]

Seems to me we're at the point with cosmology where we need to wipe the slate clean and reimagine fundamental theories. I know MOND has failed again and again, but it seems like our extrapolations about the universe from our current theories just aren't holding up.

[@brucewelty7684]

There is a sub-set of scientists that are trying to present a clean slate. They are persecuted vehemently by Dogmatists like ANton here.

[@jevvf3246]

Not that this is 100%relevant, but we will end up back at religion when this is all said and done. Some things, wont be explained in any models.

[@2013Arcturus]

@@jevvf3246 I'm semi inclined to agree. The scientific method will always be a useful praxis for getting at objective reality, but there are realms of knowledge, philosophically and spiritually, that science is structurally unable to touch.

[@kxjx]

Well science often proceeds like that. We have theories that seem OK, but eventually more and more phenomenon are observed that don't quite fit in - then a new insight is reached and a new better theory emerges. I don't think anyone will be surprised if thst happens, but of course the skillful part is not saying that such a phenomenon has been observed. You can see this from the title of the video. Rather the skill is in finding the new insight and making the breakthrough. The more we find that doesn't fit, the more we have to work with on developing the new models.

[@jimcurtis9052]

Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 👍😁

[@tylerl.gibson268]

those models of the cosmic web behind you are beautiful

[@davroshalfbeard8368]

We might never know how the universe began although we have done alright for a bunch of meat sacks flying through space on a giant rock lol .

[@MysteryClarke]

Yeeee-haaaaah!!! xx

[@TheMarcusrobbins]

The big bang always struck me as rather conveniently aligned with our religious theories of creation.

[@chuckswanson8496]

The big band still happened. There still was a start. What is the problem is it was all created in full and did not evolve into the mature galaxy. This actually lines up more with creation.

[@peterwassmuth4014]

Awesome! Thank you for Sharing! 💯✴

[@hyperyt6730]

Great video, thanks. I think we'll find more and more galaxies like this one, too. And, a simple question : the key explanation for those "anomalous" galaxies couldn't be that we have underevaluate the age of the universe ? A true paradigm change, but it could solve easely this kind of observation. And I expect it'll be a mind-blowing discovery through the comprehension of the evolution of overall structure of the universe over time : our current datation of the age of the universe is false :) or maybe not !

[@DannyJoh]

Maybe specify "impossible according to current models". Your title is a bit too clickbaity and misleading if I may say so. Anyhow, thanks wonderful Anton for another impossibly interesting update :D

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

For $10 billion taxpayer dollars it better be rewriting textbooks!

[@mdw175]

$10 billion over 15 years is nothing. The government handed out $1 trillion to everyone during covid. The deficit this year will be $1.8 Trillion.

[@paulmicks7097]

Great Galactic Geometry , you've done it again Anton !

[@JosephJohn-fb9wx]

I think now we may need to tag astrophysical discoveries as either pre-jwst or post-jwst. Since JWST, everything seems to be undergoing changes in astrophysics, it at least many more questions have arisen, and I love it.

[@Ronaldo-vs3uh]

It just means we understand nothing

[@skyscrapersx5877]

It means we understood what we could see at the time

[@christopherwilson2606]

I understand that I know very little: and that's something.

[@larrybuzbee7344]

We understand enough to design, build, launch and operate a giant telescope several million miles from earth. That ain't nothing.

[@AndyWitmyer]

​​@@larrybuzbee7344 Im an optimist when it comes to humanity and our future, but I'm pretty sure that despite all of our efforts to this point, we still know next to nothing about the true nature of our universe.

[@Ronaldo-vs3uh]

@@larrybuzbee7344 sure we did and thats amazing but this discovery is showing us that our very core understanding of the universe is wrong.

[@psychiatry-is-eugenics]

Not impossible , smart people who want grant money , just lie A Lot

[@johnnydoe3603]

Keep Coping Christian Freak 🤣🤣

[@joshchild]

Correct header “JWST finds old galaxy that we don’t understand”

[@jrr7031]

Привет Антон, thank you for your dedication to your craft, and I am still so sorry for your loss. You are very strong and very smart and very informative.

[@lonewar1]

Hey Anton, your shows are great, I think you should add a short intro at the start of your videos, with a bit of a theme/ music and the subject title, it may aid you getting a bit of funding, and maybe open a webshop with mugs/tee shirts and stuff. You deserve to get something back for your hard work

[@Greenmachine305]

Sabine Hossenfelder just dropped a fantastic video describing why astrophysicists have determined all of these "impossible" cosmological oddities. The short version is that they were never correct in the first place. Could dark matter possibly be a precursor to visible matter? Conversely, could visible matter evolve into dark matter? I don't feel as if my questions are silly given the fact that we don't even know what dark matter or dark energy is. Any insight from the scientific community would be appreciated.

[@chrishartley4553]

I'm not part of the scientific community, but... Science kniows that is understanding of the early universe is incomplete. Its why so much effort has been put into the JWST. The fact this telescope is finding new things we weren't expecting is not unexpected. Nothing found so far disproved the big bang, despite what some clickbait videos claim. Two things will happen eventually. One is that we'll find out why our understanding of early galaxy formation falls short, where our current understanding goes wrong tweak those models and head off with a modified, more accurate understanding of the early universe. This is probably the most likely thing that'll happen. The othere option is that something will be found (Or these galaxies will lead down a rabbithole of incompatable oberservations) that completely unpicks the current models of the unverse and sceince will have to look for a better theory. I like Hosenfelder's vidoes but she isn't saying anything new there. Science works on theories and theories can always be proven wrong.

[@jimfife6255]

Maybe the big bang was more like a big firework, with major ejecta each begetting their own bangs later. You could account for a lot of age and redshift observations by imagining variations on that theme.

[@cydviator6991]

Great talk. Subscribed. Thanks!

[@breadfan_85]

I love your videos, but man! You gotta do something about those sleeves.

[@xavierdemerson1913]

Very very interesting Good job, Anton ! 👏👏

[@linanicolia1363]

Many dimensions.....many possibilities.....so much we do not know. Thank you ! for the information. You are the best ! Nothing like looking into the cosmos to make us feel small.

[@miroslavjuris1426]

Hi Anton, what about the possibility that early on the time dimension expansion was so rapid that the time was faster, or more like the energy expansion and the space properties were so dense and opposite in nature, that space was more fluid that made the expansion more rapid so the development of everything was more rapid, trying to say time has no constant back than, now time seems to be constant, but what about when you super charge the space with so much plasma...

[@michaeldougherty6036]

Spitball: perhaps whatever forces were running around in such early times in the universe made that galaxy rather uniformly diffuse? So it was able to make a ton of stars, but they were all fairly weak (by stellar standards). Wheras our own galaxy has quite a variety of sizes and strengths, but less overall. Silly? Probably. Or...maybe...we might not have enough data to make a really *good* guess as to what's up with that galaxy. After all, we are summarizing something a million-trillion miles wide, and 11 billion light-years away, based on a scant few pixels and graphs of data.

[@benceballo8337]

It's amazing how the ancient civilization was also studying the plants an well understand many things ahead of thier time

[@disruptive_innovator]

too quickly and too big is an interesting theme these discoveries are showing. can't wait for the new theories to come

[@BORCHLEO]

This is amazing, I am so excited that we can basically now think, hmm this galaxy was huge 11.5 billion years ago. What do they look like now?? If they are this big did they have aliens?? Is this a sign of infinite universe? Or is this a sign of time dilation in the earlier universe? Do these galaxies have planets like we do? You gotta think the further we look out in space the further we look back in time and the amount of progress since then must be insane, imagine if we could teleport to that galaxy and see it how it is right now instead of 11.5 billion years ago and this goes for any object, light takes time to travel so relative observers only see light delayed by time and space.

[@williamwillaims]

If it's all true, we certainly wouldn't be the first civilisation, or even the only "current" civilisation. Very exciting!

[@JP-eu2dc]

The universe is older than we think.

[@mattorr2256]

@@williamwillaimsthey’re most likely in my opinion everywhere throughout the cosmos. The distances are simply too vast to know of other intelligent life elsewhere

[@darylbrown8834]

​@@JP-eu2dc It is the same time everywhere.

[@JP-eu2dc]

@@darylbrown8834 except inside of a black hole or anything with high gravity.

[@stevenguajardo6049]

I've been in love with our solar system and our universe since I was a little boy. I have great respect for men of science that help me understand what is going on in our world and our universe. So thanks for your channel. Beautiful pictures.

[@pirobot668beta]

Heavier than air powered flight was 'impossible'... 'Impossible' more often than not is a synonym for "we don't know how"

[@redmanxx73]

Thanks. I think it would be helpful if you gave us the comoving distance or the red shift (z), instead of how long the light took to get here. In other words, how far away is it now?

[@eds1942]

@2:16 the line beneath the image says 2 kpc. Meaning that the line is 2,000 parsecs or 6,520 light years wide. For comparison, our Milkyway galaxy is 30 kpc or 100,000 light years across. So by “massive”, we really mean that it is larger than the mostly excepted model predicts for this early in the universe. Which of course we know would likely be off, since it wasn’t until JWST, we had no way to confirm the assumption (from several counter assumptions) that we liked the best.

[@onemoreguyonline7878]

Hello to you as well, fellow wonderful human 0:45

[@yvonnemiezis5199]

Great video,very interesting, thanks 👍😊

[@danoblue]

We haven't been able to explain either dark matter or dark energy yet, which means our models of galaxy formation might be based on insufficient evidence. Plus, the early universe was much more compact than now, which could mean that interactions at that distant time are no longer possible today, thus leading to misconceptions. Scientists have done pretty well so far with the instruments they had to work with, so it's only logical that new, more powerful instruments reveal phenomena which challenge our previous assumptions. As usual, an excellent topic, Anton.

[@dellseasandoval8187]

With over 1000 comments I don’t think you have time to respond or read all of the comments, especially because you make videos daily but I love your videos & you’re a super cool dude.

[@nicenangry]

Just out of curiosity will you ever be doing more universe sandbox 2 again loved that series miss it alot. 😢

[@pleiotropik]

-Is this dark matter in the room with us right now? -Yes, and he has his friend, dark energy, smiling at you.

[@peggyteague6825]

Thank you so very much for sharing your knowledge with me Anton. I feel more intelligent everytime I watch your videos 🤓

[@coenvanderlinden7375]

a central bar? like a grilled chicken? (lol) good videos! And informative!

[@jimgraham6722]

Thanks Anton. Seems things aren't quite what we thought

[@joeyvelarde5562]

Anton Grascias Chico u all blow me away. I appreciate you much love

[@smallpox6738]

What if the multiverse theory also means there is a reflective membrane between them. These impossible galaxies may be reflections of some that are closer to us and at a different vantage point. The age may be off due to extra space travelled to the membrane. These may even have a slight blue shift instead of a red shift if the galaxy is moving towards the membrane and vice versa if moving towards us too. The reflection would be hard to identify seeing as we are viewing its far side not its near. The reflected full skip path would make the galaxy look older than it is too.

[@marshall9886]

Thanks Anton for being so wonderful.

[@MaryAnnNytowl]

Woo hoo, new science incoming, it seems! _~happy dance~_ I love it! Thank you, Anton, for what you do! 💙💙

[@krumplethemal8831]

It's only "impossible" if we base it on the age of the universe and assume we have been right about that conclusion..

[@Fridaey13txhOktober]

"Impossible..." Wrong! They were wrong all along!

[@zekulir6419]

Water is wet tier comment.

[@Noqtis]

@@zekulir6419 Really? How is that possible?? That's crazy, Bro! You know what's really strange? Bug in the matrix tier strange? You can enter the 'wet' state super fast. Like just jump into a river and you are instantly wet. but the dry state takes much longer to achieve. luckily humans have found a cheat called 'towel' but it's still not as fast as entering the wet state. I think the programmer of the matrix is trying to tell us something with this anomaly. I just don't understand what... :/

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

If we are wrong about the age of the universe, then please explain why we haven't found stars older than about 13.5 billion years anywhere. If the universe is older than 13.8 billion years, such stars should be abundant.

[@mondotv4216]

We think we know the age of the universe because of the age of observable stars and because of the cosmic background radiation which calculates the rate of expansion of the universe and therefore gives us the appox date of the big bang. But JWST is showing us that something is incorrect about our models. It could be the timing, it could be the big bang theory itself. There's at least one paper postulating the universe is twice as old as our calculations. Now that's the great thing about science. It throws up curve balls, and theories may have to be modified to fit the data. Some of those stars that we think are 13.5 billions years old may be much, much older. Or not. Remember, from our observation point we can only assume limited cross section of the universe.

[@yorokobi9530]

The conjecture about bubble universes merging to enlarge exsting uiverses is sounding better all the time.

[@cdgt1]

We have to sit back and relax. All this new information needs to be digested.😊😊😊.

[@xlerb_again_to_music7908]

The model of physics I came up many years ago delivers g and G, an arrow of time and asserts the speed of entropy (aka "time") is not flat. Towards the outer reaches of the universe, the speed of time / entropy runs faster and faster. Expect to see unexpectedly "old" things out there; they have suffered more ticks ie are old vs. "what they should be". Also speed of time and expansion are linked. The entropic response ("ageing") of space is: expansion (why- would take to long to go into here in this marginella). Between galaxies, expansion is "faster" due to suffering more ticks. Expect to see "too fast" things happening in the outer parts of galaxies as the nearly space effects the rotation. Sound familiar?

[@hinesification]

Nothing has ever violated physics, ever! However, lots of thing shave "violated" our contemporary understanding and modeling of physics. This may seem trivial, but it is actually at the very core of physics in particular, and science in general.

[@jige1225]

A sane view, thanks.

[@TheGalacticIndian]

One of the best subscription invitation ever! ps. Imagine what will be discovered with sun gravitational lensing telescope array🤩

[@nerfherder4284]

Still not convinced there's dark matter or energy. It was a placeholder for misunderstanding.

[@Soupy_loopy]

I'm just waiting for these galaxies to get canceled. It's not fair to let them get away with violating our concept of reality

[@Hovercraftltd]

Looks like galaxies are assembled and powered by Birkeland Currents

[@brucewelty7684]

Ahhh a "second" to my suggestion to Ant to expand his knowledge base.

[@LongDefiant]

I mean it's not like ions could ever move in space, it all has to be gravity-driven!

[@leicestersq1]

I wonder why they are so resistant to the idea of an electric universe? What gives?

[@mattterry1255]

Ten four! Ass-trophy-is-sicks, suckses. Dark Matter is mathsturbational nonsense.

[@Lund.J]

It's about pride.

[@gordonwallin2368]

Cheers from the Pacific West Coast of Canada.

[@lajya01]

That's the thing when exploring the Universe. You never discover answers but more questions. The possibility of an eternal/infinite universe must keep many astrophysicist awake at night.

[@daveknight8410]

Always the Best! Thanks 😉

[@ac12484]

I can't believe I wasn't subscribed to you after watching so many videos! Had to click "subscribe" (again?)

[@JAYMOAP]

Keep up the good work

[@manofcultura]

Solid state theory looking pretty good right about now. Fred Hoyle is probably laughing up in heaven.

[@SanityTV_Last_Sane_Man_Alive]

not really... maybe if you want to throw away 99% of evidence and just pay attention to this single thing. But thats dishonest af.

[@tonytor5346]

Just a wild / crazy thought: 1) was left over from the previous universe. 2) Time went “faster” in that area of where this galaxy is. Just out of curiosity, would anyone consider using a Kozyrev mirror in association with a telescope as was briefly shown on the internet and very rapidly removed.?

[@beroecaaaa]

Your video about the Universe bubbles changed everything for me 😅 If this exception is inexplicable, then could it be a remnant of the small established universe bubble (our) that merged into the larger one?

[@bibi_999]

we need to stop with these post-hoc rationalizations positing things that are impossible to verify and find the humility to accept that something is fundamentally wrong with our models (that we take as unassaible truths)

[@LG-km8fw]

​@@bibi_999 yeah they will be moving the goal post very soon. Saying the universe is 26 billion years old. Then the big bang theory makes sense again. I think at the edge of the universe is billions of more galaxys that are observable 13 billion light years away.

[@boonedocksfl2012]

@@bibi_999Stop? Nah, KZbin comments n the cosmos doesn’t have to be all scientist. Sounds like they’re curious, excited and thinking, something should be shunned. What if they were a 14 year old who was passionate about space?

[@Seigensi]

@@bibi_999 then you need to stop reading comment sections on media websites.

[@bibi_999]

@@boonedocksfl2012 I don't care about a 14 year old's sentiments I care about the truth

[@goatrectum]

Awesome!! New mysteries to solve 👍

[@StephenPaulKing]

Do theories of galaxy formation include plasma physics effects?