Science James Webb telescope confirms there is something seriously wrong with our understanding of the universe - Aether theory boys is this our moment?

Source: https://www.livescience.com/space/c...-wrong-with-our-understanding-of-the-universe
Archive: https://archive.is/363nM

James Webb telescope confirms there is something seriously wrong with our understanding of the universe​


News - By Ben Turner - published March 14, 2024
Depending on where we look, the universe is expanding at different rates. Now, scientists using the James Webb and Hubble space telescopes have confirmed that the observation is not down to a measurement error.

Astronomers have used the James Webb and Hubble space telescopes to confirm one of the most troubling conundrums in all of physics — that the universe appears to be expanding at bafflingly different speeds depending on where we look.

This problem, known as the Hubble Tension, has the potential to alter or even upend cosmology altogether. In 2019, measurements by the Hubble Space Telescope confirmed the puzzle was real; in 2023, even more precise measurements from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) cemented the discrepancy.

Now, a triple-check by both telescopes working together appears to have put the possibility of any measurement error to bed for good. The study, published February 6 in the Astrophysical Journal Letters, suggests that there may be something seriously wrong with our understanding of the universe.

1710874127628.png
"With measurement errors negated, what remains is the real and exciting possibility we have misunderstood the universe," lead study author Adam Riess, professor of physics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University, said in a statement.

Reiss, Saul Perlmutter and Brian P. Schmidt won the 2011 Nobel Prize in physics for their 1998 discovery of dark energy, the mysterious force behind the universe's accelerating expansion.

Currently, there are two "gold-standard" methods for figuring out the Hubble constant, a value that describes the expansion rate of the universe. The first involves poring over tiny fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) — an ancient relic of the universe's first light produced just 380,000 years after the Big Bang.

Between 2009 and 2013, astronomers mapped out this microwave fuzz using the European Space Agency's Planck satellite to infer a Hubble constant of roughly 46,200 mph per million light-years, or roughly 67 kilometers per second per megaparsec (km/s/Mpc).

The second method uses pulsating stars called Cepheid variables. Cepheid stars are dying, and their outer layers of helium gas grow and shrink as they absorb and release the star's radiation, making them periodically flicker like distant signal lamps.

As Cepheids get brighter, they pulsate more slowly, giving astronomers a means to measure their absolute brightness. By comparing this brightness to their observed brightness, astronomers can chain Cepheids into a "cosmic distance ladder" to peer ever deeper into the universe's past. With this ladder in place, astronomers can find a precise number for its expansion from how the Cepheids' light has been stretched out, or red-shifted.

But this is where the mystery begins. According to Cepheid variable measurements taken by Riess and his colleagues, the universe's expansion rate is around 74 km/s/Mpc: an impossibly high value when compared to Planck's measurements. Cosmology had been hurled into uncharted territory.

"We wouldn't call it a tension or problem, but rather a crisis," David Gross, a Nobel Prize-winning astronomer, said at a 2019 conference at the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics (KITP) in California.

Initially, some scientists thought that the disparity could be a result of a measurement error caused by the blending of Cepheids with other stars in Hubble's aperture. But in 2023, the researchers used the more accurate JWST to confirm that, for the first few "rungs" of the cosmic ladder, their Hubble measurements were right. Nevertheless, the possibility of crowding further back in the universe's past remained.

To resolve this issue, Riess and his colleagues built on their previous measurements, observing 1,000 more Cepheid stars in five host galaxies as remote as 130 million light-years from Earth. After comparing their data to Hubble's, the astronomers confirmed their past measurements of the Hubble constant.

"We've now spanned the whole range of what Hubble observed, and we can rule out a measurement error as the cause of the Hubble Tension with very high confidence," Riess said. "Combining Webb and Hubble gives us the best of both worlds. We find that the Hubble measurements remain reliable as we climb farther along the cosmic distance ladder."

In other words: the tension at the heart of cosmology is here to stay.


Ed. Note - The comments section
1710874232710.png
1710874274906.png
1710874351916.png
 
A bigger universe means potentially more retards to laugh at
If that is the case, what if humans are the lolcows? What if the aliens doing crop circles and abductions and so on are just their equivalent of Alogs and the reason they don't respond is because Alien-Null doesn't let them pozzload their neghole?
Imo the answer is the big bang happened everywhere at once from something called vacuum decay.
I thought vacuum decay was supposed to be one of the possible "ends" of the universe because we might be in a false vacuum. Would be cool if it already happened.
 
This reminds me of the holographic universe theory in which all matter (and I think energy too?) is an interaction of two universes for want of a better term overlapping in opposite directions, creating the observable universe like the interference pattern of a hologram. Was a very cool concept.
Sounds like AdS/CFT correspondence. I fell into that rabbit hole a few months ago and am convinced we exist in a simulation of sorts.
 
It’s not completely over. People like him are 1:10,000,000. They’re out there but are probably falling through the cracks today.
By falling through the cracks you mean working in finance. That field sucks up talented mathematicians with tons of money so hedge funds could make 2 percent more a year.
 
ETA I'd like to see Roger Penrose's ideas on this
Penrose champions his own idea of cosmogony called Conformal Cyclic Universe. The details are, as you expect from Penrose, extremely geometrical, but the gist is that the eternal expansion of a previous universe exactly corresponds to what we called Big Bang of our present universe, and that we might even catch a glimpse of the previous Universe if we have the tools to look. By "tools" Penrose meant the observation of gravitational waves, but I won't be surprised that he'd think the unevenness of spacial expansion might be the legacy of a former, dead universe.
 
Penrose champions his own idea of cosmogony called Conformal Cyclic Universe. The details are, as you expect from Penrose, extremely geometrical, but the gist is that the eternal expansion of a previous universe exactly corresponds to what we called Big Bang of our present universe, and that we might even catch a glimpse of the previous Universe if we have the tools to look. By "tools" Penrose meant the observation of gravitational waves, but I won't be surprised that he'd think the unevenness of spacial expansion might be the legacy of a former, dead universe.
This is just my positing, but I don't think it's cyclical in a grow/contract/restart way. I think dark energy pushes things farther apart, but not to a big rip, but more of a vast emptiness of and after many googolplex years a quantum singularity will explode into it's own universe. Or it may be that every black hole in our universe goes into another one. Or, as they might say, it's turtles all the way down.

Back to my earlier point, I'm unsure if this can ever be fully explained unless there's some testable way.
 
I have to ask you if you've ever read Blindsight by Peter Watts. I suspect you have. He's a marine biologist by profession and Blindsight is the only Vampire story I ever actually found scary/unsettling. But on the off-chance you have not, it's only novella length and I suspect you will find it very enjoyable. He has it on his website for free though it is also available on Amazon.

Again, on the off-chance you haven't read it or for anybody who finds your comment above interesting but doesn't know it, it's a strong recommendation from me and avoid reading summaries, comments or anything else about it before you read it. Go in... blind.
Just commenting to confirm that this is a good read. I read it and enjoyed it, and sometimes I think about it whenever there is a new UFO sighting.

I see some people shit on this book and idk why. It's a good short read.
 
Sounds like AdS/CFT correspondence. I fell into that rabbit hole a few months ago and am convinced we exist in a simulation of sorts.
I find the "We live in a simulation created by an outside intelligence that controls everything" theory stuff to be funny because its basically atheist friendly creationism. They're not gods they're just... Identical in all ways to our concept of a god.
I see some people shit on this book and idk why. It's a good short read.
I felt like the addition of vampires to a story about first contact between an alien race that lacks sapience was unnecessary and goofy.
 
Last edited:
I was thinking about this at random, but if you consider that it's spreading unevenly in a three-dimensional way it's not too dissimilar from dropping an egg or other fluid onto a hard surface.

What if the universe itself behaves like a fluid? And the difference in expansion rate has less to do with what's inside it, and more to do with what it's contouring itself around as it expands? The implication that there's differing pressures to the "nothingness" outside of the universe is kind of profound if that's anywhere near accurate.
 
Damn this is some good schizo shit. Not sure how much I believe it but I'm a supporter of Graham Hancock bullshit so more than I probably should.
Haven't some of these guys been proven right on a lot of things by modern scientists entirely by accident? I find it hard to call them crackpots when electromagnetism is an inherent part of subatomic function, and electromagnetism is omnipresent at a macro scale across the universe.
View attachment 5832688
Here's a picture of Jupiter's magnetosphere with Io just to the right of it. You Kiwis can see the visible distortions caused by it even outside its orbit and that green vertical band is the massive magnetic flux tube. According to Wikipedia (and modern science as a result) Io's heating is purely a result of tidal forces (aka gravity) caused by orbital interactions with Jupiter and the Jovian moons with zero mention of the fact its own magnetosphere is purely as a result of electromagnetic induction from Jupiter's far larger and more powerful one. The idea that Io is a giant, natural, electric arc furnace has been completely dismissed.
So if I'm reading this right you're saying the magnetic field between Jupiter and Io are strong enough to heat Io? Why doesn't that apply to it's other moons? And how does magnetism heat?
The issue at stake is Isotropy: the cherished idea that the Earth, our Galaxy, or any thing about us does not occupy a special place in the cosmos. Every sizable volume of the cosmos should look indistinguishable from any other of the same size.

Isotropy is already challenged by the observation of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation. I'm not if cosmology has assimilated the significance of the CMB anisotropy; they seem to chalk it up to quantum fluctuations in the universe being "frozen" during the Inflation phase of the Cosmic history. If the James Webb finding holds, this would be another serious blow to the Isotropy dogma (which is the descendant of the Copernican principle).

The Big Bang Paradigm will hold -- after all, Big Bang merely means time and space have a beginning. What might be at peril is the theory of so-called Cosmic Inflation, first articulated by Alan Guth but then developed into a dozen byzantine versions. Isotropy seems like an expected consequence when space expanded to many, many trillions of its former volume in a fraction of a second. Still, given Inflation is so theoretical, so unconstrainted by observation, there'll be someone who fobs the math enough to accommodate any findings.
I remember when I was in highschool listening to a theoretical physics program that was way above my paygrade. It said that what we observe as reality might just be a bubble in a larger universe where laws we must abide by do not exist. Is that what you're talking about?
 
Last edited:
  • Feels
Reactions: NoReturn
I have to ask you if you've ever read Blindsight by Peter Watts. I suspect you have. He's a marine biologist by profession and Blindsight is the only Vampire story I ever actually found scary/unsettling. But on the off-chance you have not, it's only novella length and I suspect you will find it very enjoyable. He has it on his website for free though it is also available on Amazon.

Again, on the off-chance you haven't read it or for anybody who finds your comment above interesting but doesn't know it, it's a strong recommendation from me and avoid reading summaries, comments or anything else about it before you read it. Go in... blind.
That’s a great read, very enjoyable, thought provoking and very depressing. I am going to read some more of his stuff
 
If that is the case, what if humans are the lolcows? What if the aliens doing crop circles and abductions and so on are just their equivalent of Alogs and the reason they don't respond is because Alien-Null doesn't let them pozzload their neghole?
The way I view things, there are two types of civilized planets in existence when the splitting of the atom's achieved, you got the ones that put power generation on top priority, and you got the ones that put a new era in arms dealing ahead of that. We picked the one that put us on a ton of intergalactic watchlists without even knowing it.
 
I was thinking about this at random, but if you consider that it's spreading unevenly in a three-dimensional way it's not too dissimilar from dropping an egg or other fluid onto a hard surface.

What if the universe itself behaves like a fluid? And the difference in expansion rate has less to do with what's inside it, and more to do with what it's contouring itself around as it expands? The implication that there's differing pressures to the "nothingness" outside of the universe is kind of profound if that's anywhere near accurate.

Isn't that quantum fields theory? That there is a big quantum field and waves in it are matter?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: LurkTrawl
The way I view things, there are two types of civilized planets in existence when the splitting of the atom's achieved, you got the ones that put power generation on top priority, and you got the ones that put a new era in arms dealing ahead of that. We picked the one that put us on a ton of intergalactic watchlists without even knowing it.
It's funny how humanity pretty much lived a farming life for 6 thousand years (hell 2m years really going back to Homo Sapiens origins). Then caved paintings on and off. Nobody really traveled beyond 50 miles of their birth, at most. Then Faraday mastered and understood electricity, then Maxwell, cars replaced horses, then by 1945 there were atomic bombs, by 52 hydrogen bombs, then by the late 70s endless ICBMs with multiple warheads. Between around 1870 and 1970 more happened in 100 years than pretty much everything prior since hand axes and wheels.

There are youtube interviews of people in the 50s that went from agrarian life to being able to summon more power, at the time, than all richest people in history combined before. And now we can put those 50s techs things into a sand grain sized IC.
 
@Mango Cobra Can I ask you a small favour and ask you to Spoiler that bit about what Blindsight is about? It's one of my favourite novellas and I get joy out of sharing it with others who've yet to learn what it's about.

That’s a great read, very enjoyable, thought provoking and very depressing. I am going to read some more of his stuff
I would recommend rather than going onto Echopraxia which is the successor story to Blindsight, going with Starfish. With your scientific background I think you'll get a kick out of it and it is much more interesting in terms of characters as well.

I'm very glad I got to introduce you to this. And yes, weird, depressing and clever. I like it a lot.
 
Back