I Ancient galaxies: lack of mergers vs. subsequent spatial expansion

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter hkyriazi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Galaxies
AI Thread Summary
Galaxies formed shortly after the Big Bang appear to be closer together than those nearby, which may be attributed to either the merging of nearby galaxies over time or the insufficient time for spatial expansion to separate distant galaxies. Cosmologists are exploring these possibilities, but definitive distinctions have not yet been made. Observations from the James Webb Space Telescope may provide insights, although references to specific studies are necessary for a robust discussion. The concept of "closeness" in an expanding universe raises questions about definitions and scales. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for validating predictions of the Big Bang theory.
hkyriazi
Messages
174
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
Has anyone had success in disentangling the phenomenon of galaxy mergers from that of spatial expansion in explaining the fact that distant galaxies are closer together?
Galaxies far away---that evolved soon after the Big Bang---are reported to be closer together than the galaxies we observe near us. This could be due to two distinct reasons. One is that relatively nearby galaxies, over time, tend to merge, and the ones we see from far away haven't had time to coalesce yet. The other reason is that the assumed spatial expansion of Big Bang Theory hadn't yet had time to separate those galaxies. Have any cosmologists succeeded in distinguishing these two possibilities?
 
Space news on Phys.org
The fact that galaxies in the past were closer together isn't something we would have determined observationally, but something that follows from the expansion of the universe.
 
I think I read a recent (and not definitive) article about observations from the James Webb Space Telescope, dealing somewhat with the issue (maybe in Nature or Nature Astronomy). I'll see if I can track it down.
 
hkyriazi said:
I think I read a recent (and not definitive) article about observations from the James Webb Space Telescope, dealing somewhat with the issue (maybe in Nature or Nature Astronomy). I'll see if I can track it down.
If that is so, in effect, it could be just one more of the millions of fulfilled predictions of the Big Bang theory, as well as any other exotic thing that comes to mind.
 
"I think I read somewhere" is hard to follow up on. I would hope that the article defines what "closer" means in an infinite universe where galaxies clump on multiple scales so we're all talking about the same thing.
 
hkyriazi said:
Galaxies far away---that evolved soon after the Big Bang---are reported to be closer together than the galaxies we observe near us.
Reported where? As has already been commented, you need to give a specific reference. Otherwise we don't have a valid basis for discussion.
 

Thread 'Matter density right after the decoupling'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
View full post »

Thread 'Rutgers finds a transparent Einstein Cross - apparently a dark matter "halo".'

The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
View full post »

Thread 'Big Bang and Infinite Universe'

Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
View full post »

Similar threads

I How do you get to the conclusion that there is accelerating expansion?
Replies
23
Views
2K
I DDO 68: A Young Galaxy Supporting the Steady State Theory
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Imaging galaxies receding at a velocity that exceeds c?
Replies
12
Views
3K
Expansion is a compounded error based on a wrong assumption?
Replies
3
Views
2K
About the size of the Universe and distance between galaxies
Replies
12
Views
3K
I Positions of distant supernova explosions false?
Replies
31
Views
3K
I Is the backward extrapolation of the expansion of the Universe valid?
Replies
49
Views
6K
B Is the Universe infinite or not?
Replies
38
Views
5K
I Are there galaxies with 2 cores?
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Galaxy Merger and Damped Oscillation?
Replies
2
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top