My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang

by Sea Breeze 36 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    TD,

    You should contact NASA right away and let them know about your theory about how Red Shift will prohibit them from observing galaxies being formed. Because this is exactly why they spent 10 billion dollars. This is what the Big Bang predicts.

    "This means all telescopes view objects not as they are, but as they once were — in some cases millions or even billions of years ago. Because of Webb's sensitivity, it will be able to see all the way back to a time when the first galaxies were forming after the Big Bang, which took place about 13.8 billion years ago." - Article

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    Waton:

    "SB: yeah just thinking, we are catching the balls or photons that were thrown that long ago. "

    Think about this: If light only travelled as photons (particles) then in order for our eye receptors to catch them from billions of light yeas away, we might have to jump around from say Arizona to New York just to catch a couple of them from so far away.

    Think of a shotgun blast where the BBs infinitely travel in a larger and larger pattern, but the BB's (photons) are all getting father and farther away from each other making it harder and harder to catch them on our retina.

    But, that is not how light works. It is far more interesting than that.

    Now think of a circular pond where you chunk a pebble into the middle. The waves generated from the pebble form concentric circles which will eventually reach every point of the shore of the pond..... because it is a wave.

    So what light does is this: it travels as an immaterial probability information wave because it is a far more efficient vehicle. But then, upon observation of the wave, the wave collapses into particles (photons) that can be picked up by the retina of your eye. In other words, you don't have to jump around from Arizona to New York just to catch a photon or two.

    The 100 year old "two slit experiment" proves all this as fact. Google it and watch some amazing videos.

    Pretty cool huh?

    It certainly appears that the universe was meant to be observed.

    The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. - Ps. 19: 1

  • Justaguy
    Justaguy

    What i know, for sure, is that no matter what they “see”, i will have to get up and go to work tomorrow. Lemme know if something changes that from 14 quadrillion photons in a circular flat pond red shifted expanding universes ago….

  • TD
    TD

    You should contact NASA right away and let them know about your theory about how Red Shift will prohibit them from observing galaxies being formed

    Red shift is the mechanism which enables the observation of objects in the very distant past. The JWST is an infrared telescope for exactly that reason.

    Look, I've made an honest effort to explain myself here.

    Perhaps you could reciprocate? Perhaps you could flesh out the OP with a description of what you think the JWST "should" see which would confirm the big bang theory if it were true.

    I don't know what you mean by "big mess."

  • road to nowhere
    road to nowhere

    They usually learn they were wrong.

    If space is curved will you see yourself? I think there are more dimensions, maybe there really are portals. If the bible stories are true the angels must have warp drive. I remember Freddy talking for 2 hours about how angels and prayers travel from realms we cant see way faster than light. Did he eat mushrooms?

  • TD
    TD

    I think Freddy was a closet sci-fi nerd.

    The whole heart and brain / emotion and logic thing they trotted out in the early 70's was eerily similar to the Spock character in the series Star Trek, which had aired just a few years prior.

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    TD,

    With all due respect. You haven't explained anything. Here is a NASA image that explains big bang predictions:

    Notice how the big bang predicts stars and galaxies being formed long after the "big bang". This NASA website says this:

    Webb will be able to see back to about 100 million - 250 million years after the Big Bang. But why do we need to see infrared light to understand the early universe? Because light from these objects is shifted to the red.

    NASA expects to "see" the universe as it was 100 million years ago or so with this new telescope. This is a fact. You cannot change this fact. Your references to red-shift cannot change this fact. I have proved this with numerous references from NASA to show this. But, you are not receiving it.

    If you think what NASA is trying to do is impossible because of red-shift, you should call them right away and explain it to them so they can stop misleading the public about being able to see an early universe.

    Notice this Q & A from NASA Official: Phil Newman

    Question:

    When did the first stars form in the universe?

    Answer:

    "Results from NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) released in February 2003 show that the first stars formed when the universe was only about 200 million years old. Observations by WMAP also revealed that the universe is currently about 13. 7 billion years old. So it was very early in the time after the Big Bang explosion that stars formed....This result surprised many scientists who thought that it would have taken much longer for gravity to pull enough matter together to make a star."


  • waton
    waton
    upon observation of the wave, the wave collapses into particles (photons) that can be picked up by the retina of your eye.

    Sb: wave collapsing! that is what surfers are waiting for, arrives like a wave but becomes like a wall that can hit you at the shore. so, it started as a ball, the pebble, and finished like one in our detectors.

    We already have the "ALMA" array this will give a clearer view.

    When the first images on earlier balloon carried detectors of the MBR were seen somebody said "the hand of god",

    the energy and laws at work should give us a better pictures of the work.


  • TD
    TD

    With all due respect. You haven't explained anything.

    Sure I have

    #1 I've explained the actual mechanism of seeing into the past. --That it is purely a function of speed and distance.

    When we look at our sun, we are looking about 8 minutes into the past. When we look at Proxima Centauri, we're looking about 4.24 years into the past. When we look at Sirius, we're looking about 8.6 years into the past.

    It's about 11.4 years for Procyon A and about 260 years for the Spica binary and about 6197 years for Cygnus X1 and about 775,000 years for ULAS J0744+25.

    When we look at the Andromeda galaxy, we're looking about 2.54 million years into the past. When we look at the Southern Pinwheel, we're looking about 15 million years into the past.

    It's about 23.16 million miles for the Whirlpool galaxy and about 31 million years for the Sombrero Galaxy and about 52 million years for the Eye of Sauron.

    #2 I've explained that this is a limitation inasmuch as it is entirely dependent on how far away any given object is . Non-technical writers are waxing poetic about the JWST being a "time machine" as if it's going to give us a panoramic view of the entire cosmos in its early stages, which is very, very misleading.

    #3 I've explained that if we want to look farther back in time, then we need to look at objects that are farther away from us.

    #4 I've explained the Hubble- Lemaître Law, which is that galaxies are moving away from Earth at speeds proportional to their distance. Or to look at it another way, the galaxies that are farthest away from us are the ones that are moving the fastest.

    #5 I've explained the Doppler effect vis-à-vis the speed and distance of those galaxies. --That the extreme speed coupled with the expansion of the universe has stretched the wavelength of the visible light into lower frequencies. --Hence the need for an infrared telescope.

    #6 I've explained that since light is the medium here, then we are limited to bright objects. (i.e. Stars and galaxies)

    NASA expects to "see" the universe as it was 100 million years ago or so with this new telescope..

    This sounds a lot like the "time machine" notion of what the JWST is capable of. (i.e. --That it's going to give us a panoramic view of the early cosmos, complete with diaphanous hydrogen and planetary nebulae.

    You've linked to a number of NASA articles now and every single one of them has said exactly what I've been saying, which is that the JWST is going to show us the first bright objects in the universe, which are the stars and galaxies farthest away from us.

    Staring with my first post on your thread I've also said very clearly that red shift is the mechanism of observing the earliest objects in the universe which is why (For the second time now) the JWST has been designed from the ground up as an infrared telescope.

    --And these have been your responses:

    "BTW, red-shift won't prevent the "time-machine" from functioning according to NASA."

    "You should contact NASA right away and let them know about your theory about how Red Shift will prohibit them from observing galaxies being formed."

    "Your references to red-shift cannot change this fact."

    "If you think what NASA is trying to do is impossible because of red-shift, you should call them right away and explain it to them so they can stop misleading the public all over the internet right now."

    Either I'm the world's worst communicator or you've got some serious reading comprehension problems. Or maybe astronomy is just not your thing.

    Either way, there is a huge disconnect here.


  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    "Given the fact that the mechanism of "seeing" into the past is via the extreme red shift of the most distant galaxies, I'd say that's [seeing early fully formed stars and spiral galaxies] probably a pretty safe bet."

    What you are calling a "safe bet" is my prediction from a Creation perspective. This is not what the big bang scientists at NASA are expecting.

    That's why they have been "surprised" and will continue to be surprised by early fully formed mature looking galaxies.

    "This means all telescopes view objects not as they are, but as they once were — in some cases millions or even billions of years ago. Because of Webb's sensitivity, it will be able to see all the way back to a time when the first galaxies were forming after the Big Bang, which took place about 13.8 billion years ago." - Article

    This NASA website says this:

    "Webb will be able to see back to about 100 million - 250 million years after the Big Bang. "

    There is nothing poetic about it.
    If you think NASA is wrong, then you should let them know. If these images of the early universe come back with fully formed mature looking galaxies.... and scientists are again 'surprised" at how fast galaxies supposedly formed.... as I predict they will be; then this fits a Creation Model, not a Big Bang Model.

    You are attempting to hijack my prediction, and say that observing fully formed spiral galaxies close to the time of the BB is a safe bet. It is a safe bet only from a literal biblical creation model.

    The BB model presupposes stars slowly getting together over billions of years and assembling themselves into beautiful spiral galaxies.


Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit