Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Hubble Reveals 13.2B-Year-Old Picture of the Universe

By - Source: NASA | B 99 comments
Tags :

What if you could travel 13 billion years into the past?

It's a question that some of us may ask when seeing another breathtaking image of space, this time taken by NASA's Hubble telescope. Last week, we learned about images taken Fermilab's DEC reaching about 66 million light years into space. NASA published an eXtreme Deep Field, or XDF, photograph detailing a tiny portion of the sky, showing about 5,500 galaxies that appear via extreme exposure of 2 million seconds and via the combination of 2,000 individual images.

The XDF goes back 13.2 billion years in time, and close to the believed beginning of universe 13.7 billion years ago. The youngest galaxies in the picture are shown as they existed only 450 million years after the big bang. "The early universe was a time of dramatic birth for galaxies containing brilliant blue stars extraordinarily brighter than our sun. The light from those past events is just arriving at Earth now, and so the XDF is a time tunnel into the distant past."

The farthest galaxies shown in the images are 13.2 billion light years away, which translates to about 2.6 septillion miles.


Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 99 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 33 Hide
    Shin-san , September 29, 2012 10:13 PM
    Hm. I wonder far we can zoom in on one of these galaxies. Oh, too bad we don't have the CSI Enhance filter
  • 23 Hide
    A Bad Day , September 29, 2012 10:52 PM
    Light is surprisingly slow if you have enough distance.
  • 12 Hide
    freggo , September 30, 2012 1:57 AM
    JBB-SaDohttp://www.answersingenesis.org/ar [...] ight-proveIf your going to respond please read the article first.I


    Remember lex parsimoniae... That is one long concoction to make the Big Bang fit into the Bible; a book of written prove that we are all the result of massive family incest; or where did Adam's sons find 'brides' ?

    Now back to our regular iPhone bashing :-)

Other Comments
  • 33 Hide
    Shin-san , September 29, 2012 10:13 PM
    Hm. I wonder far we can zoom in on one of these galaxies. Oh, too bad we don't have the CSI Enhance filter
  • 11 Hide
    plznote , September 29, 2012 10:28 PM
    Another blow to the e-peen.
    On a serious note, I think the pictures are nothing short of amazing.
  • 4 Hide
    bison88 , September 29, 2012 10:41 PM
    The Engineers are out there.
  • 23 Hide
    A Bad Day , September 29, 2012 10:52 PM
    Light is surprisingly slow if you have enough distance.
  • 3 Hide
    ctbaars , September 29, 2012 11:29 PM
    My mind is surprisingly slow if you have enough scientists, no, A scientist.
  • 6 Hide
    nforce4max , September 29, 2012 11:42 PM
    ctbaarsMy mind is surprisingly slow if you have enough scientists, no, A scientist.


    You should see the inside of a class room. The very moment the teacher opens his or her mouth to lecture half the class crashes then sleeps till about five minutes before the class is due to end.
  • 1 Hide
    pjmelect , September 29, 2012 11:51 PM
    That's an old photo, it was originally taken by the Hubble by selecting an apparently empty region of space and doing a very long exposure.
  • -6 Hide
    ctbaars , September 29, 2012 11:57 PM
    They stuck the Hubble up the dark region, with exposure, it found gold nuggets at the back end.
  • 0 Hide
    memadmax , September 30, 2012 12:01 AM
    Beautiful.
  • 9 Hide
    Sakkura , September 30, 2012 12:14 AM
    RealbeastInteresting that it is so sharp and clear with all the "dark matter" in the way.

    It's "dark" because it doesn't interact with other stuff (matter, light etc.) except through gravity. So "invisible matter" might have been a more intuitive name.
  • 1 Hide
    beayn , September 30, 2012 12:39 AM
    pjmelectThat's an old photo, it was originally taken by the Hubble by selecting an apparently empty region of space and doing a very long exposure.
    No, this is the new photo of the eXtreme deep field (cropped). Before it there was Deep Field and Ultra Deep Field, and perhaps others. These photos aren't a single shot, they're a combination of thousands of exposures.
  • 8 Hide
    madjimms , September 30, 2012 12:48 AM
    Let me just click the image to see it zoomed in..... Oh wait! that's right I can't.
  • 0 Hide
    Jay-Z , September 30, 2012 12:52 AM
    In the distant future, we will never be able to see these galaxies as space expands. The joys of the Hubble Deep Field
  • 3 Hide
    jupiter optimus maximus , September 30, 2012 1:09 AM
    I am curious as to what the James Webb Telescope will see in this region of the sky once it becomes operational.
  • -6 Hide
    JBB-SaDo , September 30, 2012 1:11 AM
    stingstangAtheists: 5500Theists: 0


    http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove

    If your going to respond please read the article first.


    I
  • -1 Hide
    omnimodis78 , September 30, 2012 1:21 AM
    So what say you Mr. Benedict XVI?
  • 4 Hide
    adgjlsfhk , September 30, 2012 1:44 AM
    A few problems with the arguments in this.
    1: It is based only on general relativity. The inclusion of quantum mechanics solves many of the problems presented.
    2: It uses God's all powerful-ness as an axiom. This can be proved false quite easily by simple logic. Can god make someone more powerful than himself?
    3: the universe must either be infinite or curved back on itself in a hypersphere. Therefore, the earth can not be in the sort of gravity well described.
    4: The third argument is a joke. It is just as meaningful to say that the bible is actually written in a different language that happens to use the same characters, or that the translator of a particular bible mistranslated someones age as it is to say it might use a different standard of time.
    5: In the fourth argument, it is missing the fact that we know from the Doppler effect that the rate of the universes expansion is expanding. Therefore, the rate of expansion in the early universe must be less than it is now.
    6: The biggest problem with the conclusion is that the heat transfer problem would only be a problem if we were looking at the edge of the universe (assuming that exists). These images are only from a point somewhat close to the edge of the observable universe, which fixes the problem.
Display more comments