>>14026297As this guy said:
>>14027159, it doesn't have the resolution to go back far enough, even if JWST pointed at a point in the sky for like a month or more. The further back we go, the more congregated the mass of galaxies and stars will be, along with the size of those celestial objects. But if we had a JWST the size of LUIVOR A, and we found nothing, either our understanding of universal mechanics are completely wrong or we'll have potentially hit the observation boundary of the visible universe and that the light has redshifted so much due to the expansion of space time that you're now encountering 1 photon every couple of months, maybe even every few years. Which means that we will have to revisit the mechanics of universal expansion and consider the possibility that closer to the big bang you get (supposedly), the more non-linear that expansion gets relative to our frame of reference. But if that's true, what changed with the laws of physics and where that the expansion is different where we are vs where that is. I'm just making shit up at this point, because finding NOTHING would basically be one of two possibilities:
1. The laws of physics as we know it don't work the way we see them do, which has horrifying implications.
2. We are in some kind of a universal bubble aka we're the thing that's on the OTHER side of a black hole's event horizon and that there's no way out.
