Dead Galaxy Mystery! Webb Telescope Unveils a Cosmic Fossil (13.7 Billion Years Old)

The James Webb Telescope has unveiled a groundbreaking discovery: the universe's oldest known "dead galaxy," dating back a staggering 13.7 billion years! This ancient relic offers a unique window into the early universe, raising captivating questions about galaxy formation and the mysteries of the cosmos. Join us as we delve into this fascinating discovery and explore its implications for our understanding of the universe and our place within it.
Chapters:
00:00 Introduction
00:39 The Ancient Relic
02:13 The Mysteries of the Oldest Dead Galaxy
05:16 A Glimpse into the Early Universe and Beyond
07:09 Outro
07:22 Enjoy
Best Telescopes for beginners:
Celestron 70mm Travel Scope
amzn.to/3jBi3yY
Celestron 114LCM Computerized Newtonian Telescope
amzn.to/3VzNUgU
Celestron - StarSense Explorer LT 80AZ
amzn.to/3jBRmds
Visit our website for up-to-the-minute updates:
www.nasaspacenews.com
Follow us
Facebook: / nasaspacenews
Twitter: / spacenewsnasa
Join this channel to get access to these perks:
/ @nasaspacenewsagency
#NSN #NASA #Astronomy#universe, #jameswebbtelescope, #deadgalaxy, #oldestgalaxy, #spaceexploration, #astronomy, #cosmos, #science, #earlyuniverse, #galaxyformation, #starformation, #cosmicmysteries, #secretsoftheuniverse, #ourplaceintheuniverse, #groundbreakingdiscovery, #timecapsule, #cosmicfossil, #ancientrelic, #questions, #mysteries, #exploration, #learning, #knowledge, #journey, #universesbeginning, #webbtelescopediscovery, #deadgalaxymystery, #galaxysecrets

[@jaapongeveer6203]

We'll need an explanation for how this galaxy was able to generate all those dead stars in so short a time after the so-called Big Bang.

[@wernerboehnke5562]

That´s it! Giant Black Hole??? They are telling everywhere...THERE WAS NO BIG BANG!

[@michaelwright1234567]

I'm by no means an expert but from what I understand the early stars were much much much much larger and burned much hotter and far faster. Kind of like the opposite of a red dwarf star. Apparently red dwarf stars are the most common in the universe and no single one has ever burnt out apparently because of their enormous lifespans. Those early Stars would have been the extreme opposite of that I believe.

[@mohammadrashid8919]

very good and importtent information. Best regards from Sweden!

[@brimstonemarcussternklev7407]

Ah nice. Also watching from Sweden👍

[@richardchapman1592]

Perhaps dead galaxies collided with an aggregate of antimatter.

[@user-fc7is6jo2e]

Thank you for this channel's outstanding science news reporting.

[@richardmercer2337]

If it WAS a single event that stopped star formation, I'm glad I missed it!!

[@Realnatur3]

A good data from unsolved one Universe, thank you...🙏

[@parumaksuda5589]

We gained new knowledge about Cosmic Fossils. ❤

[@rezadaneshi]

After a visual gap of 380,000 years, we should be able to see a parent universe where Big Bang itself happened in, the light of which hasn't arrived yet. A universe that recycles matter with black holes born inside galaxies born around super massive black holes, born in the remnants of Big Bang, is infinite in size and age in time.

[@UnexpectedBooks]

Interesting idea. Something to consider: Stephen Hawking said that trying to detect anything before the start of the universe is like looking south of the South Pole.

[@Tomonaroll]

This is cool to think about! I think I’ve heard somewhere that beyond a certain distance/time that light from just after the Big Bang (earlier than CMBR imagery) and anything from before may never reach us due to the rapid expansion, stretching light due to red shift

[@mcbaggins12]

@@UnexpectedBooks problem with that analogy and trying to use intuition is that there IS something "south" of the south pole. It's the atmosphere and then space. We just have to slightly redefine what south means

[@dariusallison5333]

Because of the expansion of the universe, the light would never reach us because at that great distance the universes expansion is impossible for the speed of light to overcome right?

[@vastthinker3427]

Your editing and presentation is terrific. The understanding and the people that you are following for this understanding about the dead Galaxy and the age of the universe and the birth of stars show me one is less than satisfactory. But keep up the good work you're on the right track but not with this dead Galaxy not with the age of the universe and not with the birth of stars you have never seen the birth of a star. Not one show me

[@samyansg]

Comparing the existence of civilisation on earth of 12-20,000 years with 400m years of first galaxies and 13.8 billion years of Big Bang is just unfathomable or like studying something that’s incomprehensible

[@joseph732]

If this galaxy is 13.7 billion years old and obviously contains stars that are billions of years old then te age o the universe needs revision. I'm surprised the video didn't mention that.

[@justaguy4real]

I can't all the bright sporadic images constantly appearing as I'm enjoying a nice dark video and relaxed in bed just for immensely bright lit screens to light up my room and wake me up. Pick a tone and stick to it. Dark or light, but not both. Creators think they need to be all over the place.

[@JungleJargon]

A deeper understanding of gravity gives you a deeper understanding of the universe. The earth is flat locally the same as the speed of light is the same locally but not on a larger scale. The earth is round on larger scales and the speed of light depends on the measures of time and distance which change depending on the amount of gravity in the surrounding area. This means that distant starlight arrives instantaneously from distant galaxies which aren’t as far away as they appear to us to be with our measures of time and distance and the time is also passing by at a much faster rate since there’s no matter between us and distant galaxies to slow down time or shorten distance according to general relativity which is now an observation and not just a theory. …and the converse of things approaching a black hole look stopped to us because of how slow they are moving. The changes in time and distance compound the changes in the speed of light as observed from our frame of reference. Do a thought experiment. Hold your hands a foot apart representing 186,000 miles saying “one thousand and one” representing one second while pretending to see an imaginary photon going from one hand to the other. Now expand the distance saying “one thousand and one” as fast as you can. You should notice that the speed of the imaginary photon increases the more distance expands and the more time speeds up just same as the farther away from the center of the galaxy it is. The opposite is also true. Someone moving in the direction of a black hole will seem to us to be stopped. *If you change the size of a cubit you will change the size of the house that you build with it.* 🏡‼️🏠

[@mcbaggins12]

Incorrect.

[@JungleJargon]

@@mcbaggins12 Prove it.

[@mcbaggins12]

@@JungleJargon the burden of proof is not on me to deny your absurd claims

[@JungleJargon]

@@mcbaggins12 It's an observation. Just try addressing the issues, see if you can. There is no need to modify gravity. Less gravity accelerates time and inflates distance both of which accelerate causation making everything move faster including lightspeed while maintaining the speed of light 186,000 miles per second. The concept is so simple at least for mechanically minded people. If you change the size of a cubit, you will change the size of the house that you build with it. If instead of driving 60 kilometers an hour you drive 60 miles an hour, you will increase your speed because you increased the distance that you traveled in an hour. Then if you change from 60 miles an hour you drove 60 miles in half an hour, you increased your speed again because you traveled 60 miles in a faster time. General relativity is no longer a theory, it is an observation. Distance expands with less gravity and time speeds up with less gravity effectively making everything faster including light without breaking the speed of light.

[@mcbaggins12]

Yes, just an absurd observation with no mathematical evidence behind it. I agree. Your intuition is not fact.

[@SaintFluffySnow]

no such thing as a "dead" galaxy, no more dead than a "live" galaxy all one can say is galaxies are DIFFERENT, but not in age nor "dead-ness/alive-ness"

[@user-McGiver]

but time isn't linear...

[@creeperkinght1144]

exactly. That's how we can understand things like this or the iconic CMBR scans because in a sense we are looking at least indirectly at a point in the past via our perspective.

[@meditationsoundscapes5203]

something else for environmentalists to worry about. is it climate change killing the poor innocent galaxies????

[@tashacherry1480]

😂Good one

[@jhr37623]

Clickbait: fake age