James Webb may have Broken the Universe

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
More significantly, there's an assumption used in the analysis that the mass to light ratio we observe locally over 13 billion years after the big bang, will be the same at less than 1 billion years after the big bang, and what if that assumption is incorrect? Well if the mass to light ratio was different back then, it might even be possible to explain the data without much change to our models, we would just need to replace the assumption mass to light ratios are unchanging and frankly that doesn't seem like it was necessarily a good assumption to begin with.

As I said in my previous post, if the assumption in the paper mentioned in the OP that mass to light ratios are the same everywhere was a bad assumption, as I suspected it was, then the "universe isn't broken" after all.

A paper was published almost a year ago essentially saying we shouldn't make assumptions like that. I thought this topic deserves its own thread so I made one:

Did James Webb Space Telescope "Break The Universe"? Apparently not.