James Webb Space Telescope sees early galaxies defying 'cosmic rulebook' of star formation

If it isn't observed, it doesn't exist. If it isn't observed to have existed 14-billion or so years ago, it simply did not exist 14-billion years ago or so ago. You of course see that "observation" is absolute and infallible and all the problems exist with the universe and none with "observation." There is no "maybe we just aren't observing the reality at the distance but a difference in dimensional facets, sides, of the universe because of distance; because of the element of 'nonlocality' (thus complexity / chaos) itself." Because "Relativity" is subject to break down . . . breaks down / collapses.
 
Sep 26, 2023
2
1
15
If it isn't observed, it doesn't exist. If it isn't observed to have existed 14-billion or so years ago, it simply did not exist 14-billion years ago or so ago. You of course see that "observation" is absolute and infallible and all the problems exist with the universe and none with "observation." There is no "maybe we just aren't observing the reality at the distance but a difference in dimensional facets, sides, of the universe because of distance; because of the element of 'nonlocality' (thus complexity / chaos) itself." Because "Relativity" is subject to break down . . . breaks down / collapses.
Add this to your model if you want. Space-time is negatively curved (Einstein). All negative curves must mathematically intersect themselves. What if ours already did? What if the universe is cyclic? What if the intersection is the mother of all black holes (a real one with no escape of any EMR)? Our observation point would lead us to believe that the universe is expanding when when instead its contents are accelerating piecemeal toward an infinitely massive gravity well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Atlan0001
Add this to your model if you want. Space-time is negatively curved (Einstein). All negative curves must mathematically intersect themselves. What if ours already did? What if the universe is cyclic? What if the intersection is the mother of all black holes (a real one with no escape of any EMR)? Our observation point would lead us to believe that the universe is expanding when when instead its contents are accelerating piecemeal toward an infinitely massive gravity well.
Good thoughts but do not skip over the projection of at least eleven dimensions to gravity, more than a few of which tie to the antigravity half portion of gravity. Which then negates, cancels out to '0' and '1' ('G'), the infinity of gravity anywhere, everywhere, locally relative (though it does not cease to exist overall). I tie it also to the strong binding (strong nuclear) force as transforming coalescence, and further portion of eleven or more dimensions of sixth fundamental force gravitational (antigravitational) strong binding force (G(A)SBF) (fifth being electro-weak force (EWF) and seventh, the 'fundamental base' apex of the inverse fundamental force pyramid building, being the 'Life Force').

Thus, I put the infinity (overall) and finite (set and reset) of the "fractal zoom universe" SPACE structure, morphing to and from the "fine structure constant" in the G(A)SBF court . . . and black hole singularity (and singularities (magnetic monopole (dipole moment) point portal singularity)) in the EWF court . . . [locally relative] powerful enough to curve local portions (finite discrete quanta (universes, galactic clusters, galaxies, stars, worlds, molecules, atoms, and so on....)) of a cosmic total mass matter and energy to closed systemic vortex and vortices but no more (leaving the "fractal zoom universe" SPACE structure (including its built-in "fine structure constant" framework)).
 
Last edited: