Since the latest season hasn’t concluded yet, let’s only look at plot holes from 1990 and before.

    • flying_sheep
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      IIRC, they’re too big to have formed in one of the ways we know and then continuously lost matter at the the rate they should have.

      So one or more of the assumptions about how they could have formed or how they lost matter over time is wrong, right?

        • redballooon@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Can’t watch videos right now, but the wikipedia article says the problem has been solved around y2k by recalculating the age of the universe, and says nothing about JWST making this problem worse.

          • luxyr42@lemmy.dormedas.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Some astronomers are looking at JWST data and claiming they are seeing galaxies with red shifts in the range of 11-20, which if accurate, correspond to ages older than we’d expect to see galaxies of such size formed. Other astronomers disagree, and believe that the results aren’t so clear. This the “hubble tension” or “crisis in cosmology” maybe still live on.

            It is exciting, either we get more data to confirm our current understanding or we need to discover be physics and form new theories that align with the data. Either way is great, imo.

        • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Since around 1997–2003, the problem is believed to have been solved by most cosmologists