Scientists think they've spotted the farthest galaxy in the universe

[Admin]

Astronomers have peered out into the vast expanse and spotted what they think is the farthest (and oldest) galaxy ever observed.

Scientists think they've spotted the farthest galaxy in the universe : Read more

 

[rod]

The article said "The galaxy GN-z11 might not have a flashy name, but it appears to be the most distant and oldest galaxy ever detected, scientists have found. Astronomers led by Nobunari Kashikawa, a professor in the department of astronomy at the University of Tokyo, embarked on a mission to find the universe's most distant observable galaxy, to learn more about how it formed and when. "

Here are some other links on this interesting galaxy too, distance measured by light-time or look back time in the BB cosmology (redshift distance). 'The farthest galaxy in the universe', https://phys.org/news/2020-12-farthest-galaxy-universe.html, not the comoving radial distance where the galaxy could be.

The NASA ADS Abstract, Evidence for GN-z11 as a luminous galaxy at redshift 10.957, December 2020, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv201206936J/abstract

The 21 page arXiv paper is attached. On page 10, the metallicity of this galaxy, "The vermillion circle is GN-z11, whose metallicity is assumed to be 0.2 Z⨀ (Z⨀ is the solar metallicity). The error bars indicate 1σ uncertainties." Also,
Evidence for GN-z11 as a luminous galaxy at redshift 10.957, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-020-01275-y, "Abstract GN-z11 was photometrically selected as a luminous star-forming galaxy candidate at redshift z > 10 on the basis of Hubble Space Telescope imaging data1."

My observation. The report suggest a rapid formation process too, note "yet moderately massive, implying a rapid build-up of stellar mass in the past." Early star formation rates in the BB cosmology and chemical content of gas clouds is very different than what is observed in objects like M42 in Orion today. Uniformitarian rates and process are not supported in the universe over billions of years. The Hubble time for the universe age when GN-z11 first formed is said to be about 420 million years old.

 

[Helio]

It looks like they have up to a 5 sigma value for at least one of the spectral lines, which is excellent if true.

The formation rate seems consistent with BBT.

 

[rod]

FYI, new report on star formation here, https://phys.org/news/2020-12-nearby-galaxies-stars.html, and https://www.nature.com/articles/s42005-020-00493-0

The paradigm of star formation is not as well defined as some think or perhaps as predictable as events in the heliocentric solar system paradigm.

"Stars are born in dense clouds of molecular hydrogen gas that permeates interstellar space of most galaxies. While the physics of star formation is complex, recent years have seen substantial progress towards understanding how stars form in a galactic environment. What ultimately determines the level of star formation in galaxies, however, remains an open question. In principle, two main factors influence the star formation activity: The amount of molecular gas that is present in galaxies and the timescale over which the gas reservoir is depleted by converting it into stars. While the gas mass of galaxies is regulated by a competition between gas inflows, outflows and consumption, the physics of the gas-to-star conversion is currently not well understood. Given its potentially critical role, many efforts have been undertaken to determine the gas depletion timescale observationally. However, these efforts resulted in conflicting findings partly because of the challenge in measuring gas masses reliably given current detection limits."

Apparently, there is much work to be done like Cosmic high noon redshift observations from Spitzer and different star formation rate in the early universe compared to present era.

 

[Mickey lane]

Farthest galaxy in the universe?

Let us, just for the sake of discussion, assume that there is a people just like us somewhere in that galaxy and that they point a telescope at us and make the same discovery we have.

Now let us assume that they flip said telescope around 180 degrees and make the same observation in the opposite direction. What does that do for our farthest galaxy?

 

[Helio]

Yes. Our own Milky Way is losing much in gas flows outward but we are taking in much, especially with dwarf galaxies being gobbled by us. But so much of this work is tough to get strong evidence, so I doubt there is great clarity on this issue.

The OP claim of distance and time uses reliable spectrospic evidence, however, so it’s place is reasonably certain, but all are unsure of just how it formed in any clear-cut way.

 

[rod]

Interesting post #5 by Mickey lane. The GNz-11 galaxy distance is based upon the redshift obtained ~ 11.0 and applying the cosmology calculators, https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/help/cosmology_calc.html

You will get different look back time distances to earth using different rates of expansion for H0, I have a collection of reports now showing H0 from 66.2 to 82 km/s/Mpc, example, https://phys.org/news/2020-12-multi-messenger-astronomy-neutron-star-size.html

This is a frame of reference view, based upon Earth.

 

[Atlan0001]

Spatial distance: "134 nonillion kilometers (134 followed by 30 zeroes)."

Impossible!

 

[rod]

Okay, not sure where post #8 got the big number from Using BB model, an object at 4.3 x 10^9 parsec is 1.4025 x 10^10 LY distance. In km, 1.3268 x 10^23 km. A distance beyond what telescopes on Earth cannot see because of Special Relativity although an object's comoving radial distance can be immensely farther, just not visible.

 

[Helio]

Surprisingly, if I did this right, the IR window on Earth might allow the high z galaxies to shine through because their high z values allow their higher emission bands to skip over the dark IR regions.

In this case, GN-z11 should emit fairly strongly in the 450nm to 625nm range (quite true for the SUN, btw) which means with the ~ z=11 redshift would put the receiving wavelength range to 5400nm to 7500 nm, so within that window.

I'm not sure, however, if its apparent magnitude is bright enough, but maybe it is.

 

[Atlan0001]

Okay, not sure where post #8 got the big number from Using BB model, an object at 4.3 x 10^9 parsec is 1.4025 x 10^10 LY distance. In km, 1.3268 x 10^23 km. A distance beyond what telescopes on Earth cannot see because of Special Relativity although an object's comoving radial distance can be immensely farther, just not visible.

"Not sure where post #8 got the big number from"? Right from the article itself. To be exact N. K., astronomer from the University of Tokyo.

The impossibility...that distance can't be our [spatial] universe. We can't even see to our moon [spatially], though time and space are so close at that distance as to almost merge. There is about an eight minute difference between time and space concerning the Sun and Earth (space) and the Sun from Earth (time). That galaxy isn't even in our real time spatial universe....nor are/were we in its. Though, projecting Stephen Hawking, it may be in a "baby universe" under a most powerful microscope. It's not in our [spatial] universe. It is not 134 nonillion kilometers, or any spatial distance short of infinity, out from here.

 

[rod]

Atlan0101, I see where the big number came from, found it too in a Scientific American web report. However, using the cosmology calculators, https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/help/cosmology_calc.html, a redshift of 11 or z = 11.0 does not convert to such large exponents, even comoving radial distance in BB cosmology, distances are still in the 1E+28 cm range. In 1672, Cassini and Richer measured the Mars parallax for the first time using telescopes showing the distance to Mars, later came lunar parallax showing the distance to the Moon using telescopes, and Venus and Mercury transits in the 1700s and 1800s allowed the solar parallax to be measured defining the astronomical unit. Stellar distances were not known until the 1830s when stellar parallax reported for 61 Cygni star in 1838, see Resolving long-standing mysteries about the first parallaxes in astronomy, https://phys.org/news/2020-11-long-standing-mysteries-parallaxes-astronomy.html

Stellar parallax is not much useful beyond about 8,000 to 10,000 light-years if even that far away as a reliable, positive stellar parallax. Any distance measurements beyond that range from Earth are indirect, thus can contain errors.