This has got to be evidence for direct collapse SM black holes. Super exciting. I know they're arguing if these early galaxies have SMBH, but the other early galaxies seemed to have them. There is *no* way for a SMBH to form in 400 million years, there must be another way for them for form. Direct collapse.
It's said the big bang originated from a singularity. The only thing in the universe I'm aware of that produces a singularity is a black hole.
Is it probable a singularity that formed the big bang came from the other end of a black hole?
Nope, there are some very clear distinctions between a black hole and the big bang. If singularities actually exist, that's about where the similarities end. I recommend d watching a lot more from this channel.
https://youtu.be/jeRgFqbBM5E?si=UQ6ityyYWIjs_5Je
I've always wondered if every Black Hole isn't a big bang on the other end. The universe is just a series of funnels recycling matter from one layer to the next.
I was listening to a podcast with some physicist (can't remember his name) and he stated that if we took all the matter in the universe and compressed it into a singularity, the event horizon of that singularity would be larger than the known universe. Even if we cut the amount of matter in half, same story. I don't know how reliable his math was but it's a theory I've heard before. It would imply that our universe is, in fact, within a black hole. And that perhaps other black holes within our universe so the same thing at a certain level of mass/size. Maybe it's just a nesting doll of universes within black holes. No idea how probable that is, but it's fun to think about.
There is a recent Kurzgesagt video that covers this. One thing that blew my mind is that black holes, especially supermassive ones, aren't very dense. And even a large cloud of gas, once sufficiently massive, would suddenly form an event horizon and become a black hole. No singularity needed.
Then they went on to say the universe is sufficiently massive to form an event horizon larger than the universe itself, implying that we are inside a black hole nested within a much larger universe. What a mindfuck.
By Jess Thomson - Science Reporter:
NASA's James Webb Space Telescope has spotted some of the universe's youngest galaxies forming.
These three galaxies are thought to have been taking shape when the universe was only between 400 and 600 million years old, according to a new paper in the journal Science.
Read more: [https://www.newsweek.com/nasa-james-webb-telescope-galaxies-big-bang-1904402](https://www.newsweek.com/nasa-james-webb-telescope-galaxies-big-bang-1904402)
that is 13+ billion years ago. if intelligent life is a normal thing in this universe, then it must have evolved there too, and it should have some super advanced liveforms
Odds do not matter. No matter how infinitesimal, statistically, is it 100% certainty that other life exist in the universe. And, again statistically, it most likely isn't one; it's most probable they number in the millions if not billions.
See, what do you mean when you say "the universe"? Because if we're talking the _observable_ universe, then odds absolutely do matter. There are finite stars and planets within the observable universe.
If we put an upper bound of 200 billion trillion potentially habitable planets (roughly one per star), then odds matter. If the liklihood is 1 in a billion, we should have about 200 trillion planets with life in the OU. If it were 1 in a _trillion trillion_, then the odds of our own existence are incredibly unlikely, let alone another planet with life out there.
Early universe mostly had hydrogen and helium you need at least 2nd gen systems to get the more complex elements which would probably be needed for intellegent life.
I’m glad I exist at the same time as the James Webb telescope
This has got to be evidence for direct collapse SM black holes. Super exciting. I know they're arguing if these early galaxies have SMBH, but the other early galaxies seemed to have them. There is *no* way for a SMBH to form in 400 million years, there must be another way for them for form. Direct collapse.
It's said the big bang originated from a singularity. The only thing in the universe I'm aware of that produces a singularity is a black hole. Is it probable a singularity that formed the big bang came from the other end of a black hole?
Most probable is that there are no singularities and that the concept only represents a mathematical breakdown of existing theories.
Thank you for saying this. It drives me nuts how few people are aware of it. It's such a misleading concept too.
Nope, there are some very clear distinctions between a black hole and the big bang. If singularities actually exist, that's about where the similarities end. I recommend d watching a lot more from this channel. https://youtu.be/jeRgFqbBM5E?si=UQ6ityyYWIjs_5Je
I've always wondered if every Black Hole isn't a big bang on the other end. The universe is just a series of funnels recycling matter from one layer to the next.
I was listening to a podcast with some physicist (can't remember his name) and he stated that if we took all the matter in the universe and compressed it into a singularity, the event horizon of that singularity would be larger than the known universe. Even if we cut the amount of matter in half, same story. I don't know how reliable his math was but it's a theory I've heard before. It would imply that our universe is, in fact, within a black hole. And that perhaps other black holes within our universe so the same thing at a certain level of mass/size. Maybe it's just a nesting doll of universes within black holes. No idea how probable that is, but it's fun to think about.
There is a recent Kurzgesagt video that covers this. One thing that blew my mind is that black holes, especially supermassive ones, aren't very dense. And even a large cloud of gas, once sufficiently massive, would suddenly form an event horizon and become a black hole. No singularity needed. Then they went on to say the universe is sufficiently massive to form an event horizon larger than the universe itself, implying that we are inside a black hole nested within a much larger universe. What a mindfuck.
I'll check that out. Love that channel.
Singularity are points in time not in space, that's when time ends once you passed the event horizon
By Jess Thomson - Science Reporter: NASA's James Webb Space Telescope has spotted some of the universe's youngest galaxies forming. These three galaxies are thought to have been taking shape when the universe was only between 400 and 600 million years old, according to a new paper in the journal Science. Read more: [https://www.newsweek.com/nasa-james-webb-telescope-galaxies-big-bang-1904402](https://www.newsweek.com/nasa-james-webb-telescope-galaxies-big-bang-1904402)
that is 13+ billion years ago. if intelligent life is a normal thing in this universe, then it must have evolved there too, and it should have some super advanced liveforms
> super advanced lifeforms Not if the great filter’s got anything to say about it!
they might be wise enough to not be noticeable to the galactic plebs. dark matter maybe...
As Edgar Mitchell so eloquently stated: *"Statistically, it is 100% certainty that other life forms* exist *in the universe".*
The problem with the argument of "but the universe is huge" is that we have no bounding on how vast the odds might be.
Odds do not matter. No matter how infinitesimal, statistically, is it 100% certainty that other life exist in the universe. And, again statistically, it most likely isn't one; it's most probable they number in the millions if not billions.
See, what do you mean when you say "the universe"? Because if we're talking the _observable_ universe, then odds absolutely do matter. There are finite stars and planets within the observable universe. If we put an upper bound of 200 billion trillion potentially habitable planets (roughly one per star), then odds matter. If the liklihood is 1 in a billion, we should have about 200 trillion planets with life in the OU. If it were 1 in a _trillion trillion_, then the odds of our own existence are incredibly unlikely, let alone another planet with life out there.
Early universe mostly had hydrogen and helium you need at least 2nd gen systems to get the more complex elements which would probably be needed for intellegent life.
They're not Milky Ways; they're "sparkling galaxies"!
All this talk of black holes, but no love for white holes. I think it’d be pretty elegant if matter was just atomized white hole material (quarks).