News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by permo-w on Monday March 31, 2025 @08:07AM (#43534001)
maybe this is a stupid question, but is it possible that the big bang simply had some kind of clockwise angular momentum to it? how different is that idea from the black hole cosmology concept? I don't really understand how the two fit together
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by Reubachi on Monday March 31, 2025 @08:29AM (#43534201)
I don't believe the current consensus is that motion from big bang imparted a spin on objects. Rather, that dark matter (mass) was "dropped" all over as a result of the bang, making gravitational hot spots. Millions of years of dark energy progression affects those hotspots, making a sort of ever expanding (yet perceptively slowing down) sink drain with water pouring into it.
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by ziofill on Monday March 31, 2025 @09:47AM (#43535018)
It’s different because it’s simpler to assume that the total angular momentum of the universe is zero. If one black hole is rotating one way there must be other stuff rotating the other way to counterbalance. If you assume instead that the whole universe has angular momentum, well, where did that come from?
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by rdtsc on Monday March 31, 2025 @10:04AM (#43535206)
> If you assume instead that the whole universe has angular momentum, well, where did that come from

Would that be same kind of question as “where did the Big Bang come from?”. That’s a lot of energy that came from somewhere as well seemingly for no good reason.

I also wondered immediately about dark matter; could it be that’s where the counter-balance of momentum went? Like most galaxies spin one way and most dark matter would then have to spin the opposite way.

I am not a physicist so this is all random guessing of course.

Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by RandomBacon on Monday March 31, 2025 @02:30PM (#43538145)
> That’s a lot of energy that came from somewhere as well seemingly for no good reason.

I never finished the book, but this reminds me of God's Debris by Scott Adams which explores a philosophy of pandeism (where God annihilated itself and became the universe).

Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by exe34 on Monday March 31, 2025 @04:16PM (#43539409)
Some say god is light. maybe it was a high energy photon that met its antiphoton.
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by permo-w on Monday March 31, 2025 @06:47PM (#43540800)
I say that god is just the universe
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by exe34 on Tuesday April 01, 2025 @04:08AM (#43544068)
Why not just say the universe?
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by permo-w on Tuesday April 01, 2025 @07:37AM (#43545547)
why not just say say?
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by rdtsc on Tuesday April 01, 2025 @10:33AM (#43547261)
> why not just say say?

that’s exactly how it all started, at least according to john 1:1

Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by exe34 on Tuesday April 01, 2025 @11:22AM (#43547886)
was the word kaboom?
Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by weberer on Monday March 31, 2025 @11:23AM (#43536094)
>If you assume instead that the whole universe has angular momentum, well, where did that come from?

You can say the exact same thing about mass. Obviously it came from somewhere. And it could have taken angular momentum with it.

Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by paulrouget on Monday March 31, 2025 @10:13PM (#43542123)
It split. The counter part is antimatter. And there’s more matter than antimatter.

So it’s a similar question. Where does this asymmetry come from.

Re:James Webb Space Telescope Reveals That Most Galaxies Rot... by platz on Monday March 31, 2025 @10:55AM (#43535754)
Where did the the values of the coupling constants between the various fields come from?

There are many parameters that do not have a reason for their value.