Thus spake jacob navia
Oh No a écrit :
Thus spake Oh No
Can anyone reference the paper or even just a report stating the
redshifts of these galaxies


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091209...aceastronomyhu
bble_20091209083101

I did find this

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap091209.html

There is already a problem in standard cosmology explaining how galaxies
can form at red shift 6. Naturally I take this as further evidence of
the squared redshift law found in relational quantum gravity. According
to this the universe would have been about 1/3 current size, instead of
1/9th, at the time light left these galaxies


Anyway, how can a GALAXY form in a mere 500 million years?
The milky way doesn't have the time to make 2 revolutions in
that time.

And the authors of the paper say they will see galaxies at redshift
10, even much farther away.

Given the importance of this, I am inclined to wait until they are seen.
But I am expecting redshifts up to ~20-30.

Now is evident that the 13.7 Giga years is a ridiculous low number,
similar to what our ancestors thought: 4500 years for the Universe
counting generations since Adam in the Bible...

In fact there are a number of very good reasons for thinking that
~14Gyrs is about right (most particularly the mix of light elements
predicted by big bang nucleosynthesis). But I think this is powerful
evidence that the age of galaxies at given redshift is incorrect.
According to rqg, galaxies at z=8 are ~2.3 Gyrs old.

Regards

--
Charles Francis
moderator sci.physics.foundations.
charles (dot) e (dot) h (dot) francis (at) googlemail.com (remove spaces and
braces)

http://www.rqgravity.net