A new survey looks at galaxies to see whether they are actively forming stars (awake) or not forming stars (asleep). Under commonly accepted cosmology, the galaxies at 12 billion light years distance are seen quite shortly after the big bang 13.7 billion years ago. If galaxies evolve then we expect them to produce stars early on and not so much later.
This is reported in Science Daily.
But what is found is that some galaxies are turned on and some off at all distances. So it seems that galaxies are turning on and off repeatedly. Such a possible cycle would be interesting to cycles researchers.
My personal expectation is that if there is a cycle it is quite likely to fit one of the geological cycles periods such as 586, 293, 146 or 73 million years. Regular walls of galaxies are found in space at close to 586 million light years apart. That combined with the geological cycles fits with the existence of light speed standing waves filling the Universe.
It should be possible to establish for nearby galaxies whether the pattern of asleep and awake galaxies fits with such standing waves.
Cycles Research Institute
Ray Tomes
acepsut
Leslie Carol Botha
tallbloke
K. David Katzmire
The cycles are more likely derived from the need star formation has for mass. Until enough material has blown off supernovas and such, stars cannot form. So, a wave of star formation sucks up a lot of the interstellar matter and suppresses future star formation until it is replenished This sort of cycle would be started by the first wave of short-lived massive stars going supernova and then tend to reinforce itself over time.
Charles, I think that a second and possibly third wave of stars could be set off by such an explanation. But supernovas have quite short lives and this sort of thing would not be kept up for over 10 billion years because each cycle of gas expelled is much smaller than the last.
I chanced on your Blog from ICECAP. Very glad to find it, but need to do more reading.
One thing has always puzzled me: Why do cosmologists speak of the age of the universe? Isn’t the current “age” just a distance that we’ve been able to see? God knows what’s after that, no?
In the big bang theory, the age and the maximum distance that we can see are closely related, though we must allow for acceleration also. Even in big bang theory, the Universe may be much bigger than the distance that we can see.