JWST's surprising galaxies and Big G

[stargene]

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has been revealing
a large number of very high red shift galaxies which are unusually
massive and bright for their age (several hundred million years
after the big bang). This is a contradiction of today=E2=80=99s mainstream
cosmology, which says they can=E2=80=99t have had nearly enough time
and efficiency to grow that many stars so fast. Some possible
explanations have arisen but with no compelling support yet.

A naive suggestion: Would a somewhat larger value in big G
in very early times help explain this unexpected efficiency?

I do know that many if not all searches for cosmic change in the
value of G have turned up essentially null, or at best, mixed
results so far. But could the JWST results be a small hint?

[Richard Livingston]

On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 11:38:42=E2=80=AFPM UTC-5, stargene wrote:
> ...

>
> A naive suggestion: Would a somewhat larger value in big G
> in very early times help explain this unexpected efficiency?
>

> ...

I'm not an astrophysicist, but it seems to me that there are enough
other things having to do with how galaxies and stars form that
are unknown or at least fuzzy that questioning big G should probably
be low on the list. For one thing, there is no known understanding
for where big G comes from, and it certainly appears to be stable
over recent times (a few billion years). There is much unknown
about how early stars (with no "metal") form and radiate,
compared to modern stars with "metal". I also wonder about the
roll of super massive black holes. It is not clearly understood how
they form so early, nor become so massive. There is a lot to
ponder there that involves physics that we might figure out.

Rich L.