James Webb He never stops showing us pictures and new data about some of the most distant objects in the universe. However, like all scientific achievements, it was also accompanied by some hoaxes. One of them guarantees that this space telescope will show that everything we thought about big Bang is a lie. It was the blog article that set off the alarm that quickly spread through the networks. However, his arguments have neither a head nor a tail.
In fact, his only argument delusion of authority rather idiosyncratic, mainly because the authority in question does not agree with what is said. We are talking about an astronomer who distorted some of the statements she made about the discoveries of James Webb.
So no, the big bang theory cannot be refuted by the results of James Webb’s study.. For now, this is still the most accepted explanation for the origin of the universe, and articles like this bring nothing but misinformation to those who read them.
Distorted claims about James Webb
The article that triggered the prank was published by a science writer and independent researcher. Eric Lerner, on his own blog. However, to make such bold claims, he relies on the supposed theory of an astronomer Allison Kirkpatrickbelonging University of Kansas.
As explained in IFLScience, she took it with humor and even added the phrase “The Big Bang Happened” to her Twitter nickname. He even jokingly explained on his social media that since the blog entry was published, many people have written to him to congratulate him on his courage in deniability of the Big Bang. But there was no refusal. She just said it after seeing some data from James Webb:
“Right now I’m waking up at 3am wondering if everything I did was wrong.”
Allison Kirkpatrick, astronomer
By this, he had to explain later, he meant that the images and data extracted by James Webb show that the disks of galaxies arose much earlier than thought. Eric Lerner interpreted this in his own way and suggested that galaxies appeared before the date of the Big Bang and therefore there could not be a Big Bang, because there would be nothing before it. But it’s not.
Reality of the Big Bang
As Kirkpatrick herself explained in CNETJames Webb not only does not refute the Big Bang, but also He supports. Essentially, this shows that the earliest galaxies were much smaller and therefore began to appear after the Big Bang.
But Lerner went even further and also assured that some of the stars studied by James Webb are older than the Big Bang itself. This, in fact, must be read with the correct scientific interpretation, taking into account expansion of the universe.
If we talk about small distances, then these can be compared with antiquity, taking into account light years. However, when we talk about the limits of the universe, we must make a reservation, taking into account that the universe is expanding. This is what he recently explained hypertext astronomer David Galadi on a simple example:
“The moon is 1.3 light-seconds away, and besides, the light that reaches us from it left 1.3 seconds ago. But for more distant objects, it begins to count the expansion of the universe. Imagine a distant object from which we now receive the light that it emitted 2 billion years ago. This is his retrospective time, we see it as it was 2 billion years ago. However, in the 2,000 million years that light has traveled, the space between this object and our galaxy has increased due to the expansion of the universe. Therefore, the distance to this object today is more than 2 billion light years.
David Galadi, astronomer
Thus, we can conclude that Lerner drew wrong conclusions without drawing good conclusions. scientific interpretations. And the best part is that your article is being circulated a lot on the net, spreading erroneous information and discrediting the work of a scientist who, without eating or drinking, was doing business. Fortunately, she took it with humor. It only remains that the articles aimed at rebutting Lerner’s blog entry are more ardent than his own article.
Source: Hiper Textual
