←back to thread

James Webb Space Telescope reveals that most galaxies rotate clockwise

(www.smithsonianmag.com)
352 points instagraham | 8 comments | 31 Mar 25 10:31 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
misja111 ◴[31 Mar 25 11:01 UTC] No.43533514[source]▶
Everybody here is talking about the black hole hypothesis, but to me it seems that the other explanation, a wrong assumption about the rotation of our own galaxy, is more likely: because it could explain 2 other problems as well.

> "The re-calibration of distance measurements can also explain several other unsolved questions in cosmology such as the differences in the expansion rates of the universe and the large galaxies that according to the existing distance measurements are expected to be older than the universe itself.”

replies(2): >>43533557 #>>43533621 #
perihelions ◴[31 Mar 25 11:05 UTC] No.43533557[source]▶
I don't understand how the 1e-16 Hz rotation of the Milky Way affects how we perceive other spiral galaxies' orientations.
replies(2): >>43533648 #>>43534809 #
1. scythe ◴[31 Mar 25 11:19 UTC] No.43533648[source]▶
>Due to an effect called the Doppler shift, astronomers expect galaxies rotating opposite to the Milky Way’s motion to appear brighter, which could explain their overrepresentation in telescopic surveys.

I found this a little surprising as well

replies(1): >>43533667 #
2. perihelions ◴[31 Mar 25 11:22 UTC] No.43533667[source]▶
- "Doppler shift, astronomers expect galaxies rotating opposite to the Milky Way’s motion to appear brighter"

But how does that work?

replies(2): >>43533746 #>>43534086 #
3. z33k ◴[31 Mar 25 11:33 UTC] No.43533746[source]▶
I'm not an astronomer, but my intuition is this: When the source of the light is moving towards the observer, each successive photon emission happens from a position closer to the observer than the previous photon. Hence, from the observer's perspective, the time between photons is reduced, meaning more photons are observed in a given time, and the brightness is increased. When we observe a galaxy that is rotating opposite to us, not only is the source of the light moving closer to us, but we are also moving closer to it.
replies(1): >>43535519 #
4. IsTom ◴[31 Mar 25 12:15 UTC] No.43534086[source]▶
I would assume that they're talking about redshift.
replies(1): >>43534148 #
5. like_any_other ◴[31 Mar 25 12:23 UTC] No.43534148{3}[source]▶
Yes, but one half of a galaxy would get redshifted, and the other blueshifted, no matter which direction it spins in. So why would that change its overall brightness?

(Though one of the papers notes that the tiny change in brightness this causes isn't enough to explain the large difference in spin directions)

replies(1): >>43535212 #
6. marcosdumay ◴[31 Mar 25 14:04 UTC] No.43535212{4}[source]▶
The close and far sides get shifted too, and those have different brightness.
replies(1): >>43535285 #
7. perihelions ◴[31 Mar 25 14:12 UTC] No.43535285{5}[source]▶
No, 'like_any_other has it right: any physical system is 1-to-1 isomorphic with its mirror image, which is spinning the opposite direction.

Whatever asymmetry you're visualizing for one galaxy, its mirror-image galaxy is equally physical, and possesses the same asymmetry.

8. Nevermark ◴[31 Mar 25 14:33 UTC] No.43535519{3}[source]▶
From the perspective of us looking directly down on a parallel “plate” of a galaxy (with the other galaxy viewing us in the same way), relative differences in speed for the situation of same direction of rotation will be much smaller than for opposite directions.

But between any point in one galaxy to another, just as much matter will be moving closer as moving away. Regardless of same or opposite rotations.

But perhaps greater red shift and greater blue shift (as apposed to lesser of both) as a practical matter of telescopes vs. their cross spectrum sensitivities, means more light detected.