On Dec 2, 5:31*am, bert wrote:
Well Ladies and germs TV astronomy news fits well with my conservative
estamate that the universe is 22 billion years young. In the far
future astronomers reading my posts in Google history will know I was
a good thinker. *My far out thinking of today is the reality of the
future. *I know how long it took to create the 90% of the universe of
now. *The other 10%(heavier elements than hydrogen took much longer.)
I am working on how galaxies are created,and why so many?? *I am
taking myself back in spacetime when the first origenal universe was
created. Out of that first #1 universe the cosmos has more universes
than flakes of snow in an endless storm.They are all exactly the same
right down to their number of electrons. *They are created in
pairs,because nature can't create any other way. This all comes out of
my "Critical mass density theory" *which I am in the process of
immerging with my "Spin is in theory" *My convex curve of space
theory *"Spin is in theory" fit so well together its scary * Go
figure *TreBert

It's hard to say how much volume larger than previously thought our
universe is, but at least it seems there's no shortage of regular
mass, as well as no limits as to the number of rogue items the size of
Ceres or larger (could easily be 2.56e11 per galaxy, plus whatever
else is between galaxies can't be insignificant).

Extending the radii of each galaxy by 10r (makes our Milky Way worth
500e3 ly) might put that accounting of cool rogue other stuff up to
1e12 items per average galaxy. With our spendy JWST, that new and
improved accounting of red dwarfs, brown dwarfs and loads of other
cool/cold nebula/molecular stuff could should easily push that extra
mass over the required threshold of the universe being capable of
fully collapsing upon itself.

~ BG