The James Webb Space Telescope's early galaxy images were oddly bright. Now we know why

two clusters of sparkling light radiate purple streaks across a black canvas
An artist’s impression of star-bursting galaxies in the early universe, being fed the raw material for star formation through filaments in the cosmic web. (Image credit: Aaron M. Geller, Northwestern, CIERA + IT-RCDS)

The bright galaxies found by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) in the very early universe could be the product of bursts of massive star formation — and it's likely that this fact renders the galaxies more luminous than expected for the era in which they exist. This is the conclusion drawn by researchers who used computer simulations to model how these galaxies formed and began producing stars.

When the JWST began science operations in the summer of 2022, its deep observations of the universe quickly began turning up high-redshift galaxies. These are galaxies that seemed to have existed earlier in the universe than astronomers had ever seen before. In fact, the galaxies, which were seen as they were when the universe was less than 400 million years old,  appeared more luminous than what the standard model of cosmology predicts for the era. This led to claims that the standard model —which depicts galaxies starting off small and then growing hierarchically through mergers driven by filaments and haloes of dark matter in the cosmic web — must be wrong.

"The discovery of these galaxies was a big surprise because they were substantially brighter than anticipated," Claude-André Faucher-Giguère of Northwestern University said in a statement. "Typically, a galaxy is bright because it's big, but since these galaxies formed at cosmic dawn, not enough time has passed since the Big Bang. How could these massive galaxies assemble so quickly?"

Related: James Webb Space Telescope reveals ancient galaxies were more structured than scientists thought

Faucher-Giguère is a member of a team led by Guochao Sun of Caltech, who together are performing simulations of how the first galaxies formed. They found that rather than being big, the galaxies observed by the JWST are luminous because they are seen during a time when they underwent a frenzy of star formation. The simulations succeed in not only modeling the luminosity of the galaxies, but also their abundance, both of which exactly match what the JWST observes.

"A system doesn’t need to be that massive," said Sun. "If star formation happens in bursts, it will emit flashes of light. That is why we see several very bright galaxies."

Starbursts like these are not unusual. Astronomers even witness them happening in galaxies today, sometimes when there has been a collision with another galaxy. This sort of merger can result in molecular gas being stirred up to the point that gravity takes hold and forces the gas to fragment and collapse, forming a bunch of stars all at once. In the early universe, where the environment was still pretty tumultuous, the first galaxies may not have accreted all their star-forming material at an even rate.

Some examples of the distant, yet luminous for their era, galaxies found by the JWST. The ‘z’ number refers to their redshift – the higher the redshift, the farther back in time we see them, in this case 13.4 and 13.5 billion years ago, respectively.   (Image credit: NASA/ESA/CSA/T. Treu (UCLA))

"Bursty star formation is especially common in low-mass galaxies," said Faucher-Giguère. "What we think happens is that a burst of stars form, then a few million years later those stars explode as supernovae. The gas gets kicked out [of the galaxy] and then falls back in to form new stars, driving the cycle of star formation."

In the early universe, galaxies were much smaller than they are today, and grew partly by accreting intergalactic clouds of gas, but also by merging with other galaxies. The larger they became, the more gravity they had, reaching a point where they could hang on to more of their star-forming material. This steadied the rate of star formation, and today galaxies such as our Milky Way form stars at a more sedate pace.

Most importantly, the results from the new simulations fit with the hierarchical growth model of galaxies as depicted in the standard model of cosmology.

"Our simulations show that galaxies have no problem forming this brightness by cosmic dawn,"said Faucher-Giguère.

The findings were published on Oct. 3 in The Astrophysical Journal Letters.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Keith Cooper
Contributing writer

Keith Cooper is a freelance science journalist and editor in the United Kingdom, and has a degree in physics and astrophysics from the University of Manchester. He's the author of "The Contact Paradox: Challenging Our Assumptions in the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence" (Bloomsbury Sigma, 2020) and has written articles on astronomy, space, physics and astrobiology for a multitude of magazines and websites.

  • Helio
    I could be wrong, but this might be a ‘I told you so.”

    The earliest stars were Texas stars — big and bright.
    Reply
  • rod
    Very interesting, everything okay now in the BB model for high redshift galaxies seen by JWST, it seems :)

    https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.15305 and the 13-page report on the simulations makes for good reading.

    "...Using approximately 25,000 galaxy snapshots at 8≤z≤12 in a suite of FIRE-2 cosmological "zoom-in'' simulations from the Feedback in Realistic Environments (FIRE) project, we show that the observed abundance of UV-bright galaxies at cosmic dawn is reproduced in these simulations with a multi-channel implementation of standard stellar feedback processes, without any fine-tuning."

    Okay, the paper states this situation about Population III stars.

    "4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS We have demonstrated that the FIRE-2 simulations
    with a multi-channel implementation of standard stellar feedback processes can reproduce well the observed
    abundance of UV-bright galaxies at z ≳ 10, including both the photometrically selected candidates and the
    spectroscopically confirmed sources recently discovered by JWST. We further showed that the bursty SFH predicted to be common in galaxies at cosmic dawn is important for explaining the bright-end of the UVLF. With
    burstiness included, the simulations demonstrate that a boosted UV emissivity due to, e.g., an enhanced SFE,
    a top-heavy IMF, AGN contributions, or Population III stars (see e.g., Harikane et al. 2023b,c), is not necessary
    to explain the bright-end UVLF at z ≳ 10."

    The new simulation does not confirm Population III stars in the universe or use them.
    Reply
  • Helio
    It also helps to recall that with hotter stars comes not only greater UV but greater luminosity. I once assumed the peak wavelength made a key difference, but as the peak moves so to does the total luminosity, just as a growing tide lifts all.... waves.
    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    We're going to need a bigger telescope!

    It is no surprise to me that the model of star and galaxy formation can be tweeked to fit whatever the new observations are. There are so many unconstrained variables that it would be very hard to find something that could not be fit with a simulation.

    It would be a lot more convincing if they predicted what they found, instead of being surprised and then finding an explanation.

    It would be a lot more convincing if they could show that, before some point in time, there were no stars or galaxies.

    But, to do that, to see all the way back to before cosmic dawn, they are going to need a bigger telescope!
    Reply
  • Helio
    Unclear Engineer said:
    We're going to need a bigger telescope!
    Always! The Magellan and other monsters are coming.
    Unclear Engineer said:
    It is no surprise to me that the model of star and galaxy formation can be tweeked to fit whatever the new observations are. There are so many unconstrained variables that it would be very hard to find something that could not be fit with a simulation.
    Though I had guessed this would happen, notice that astronomers waited until they had the data to support their position. Perhaps more data will reveal something new. Given the technology and data quality, if there is something new lurking, you can bet they will be happy to find it. But, till then, BBT is looking ok, IMO.

    Unclear Engineer said:


    It would be a lot more convincing if they predicted what they found, instead of being surprised and then finding an explanation.
    I suspect the excitement of something new made the headlines. It's a safe bet that they most knew the Pop III stars are brighter, so galaxies would naturally be brighter. I do think that they are still a little surprised to see more galactic structure for their early age, but the range of age I've read in the past suggests that this is well within their full range of possible formation.
    Unclear Engineer said:

    It would be a lot more convincing if they could show that, before some point in time, there were no stars or galaxies.
    That's a tall order given that astronomers like to have at least a few photons to work with. :)
    Reply
  • billslugg
    If galaxies had existed at 380,000 years after BB, when CMBR originated, we would probably be able to see them in the CMBR anisotropy. After all, Andromeda spans six full Moons. WMAP resolution 13 arc-minutes.
    Reply
  • Helio
    billslugg said:
    If galaxies had existed at 380,000 years after BB, when CMBR originated, we would probably be able to see them in the CMBR anisotropy. After all, Andromeda spans six full Moons. WMAP resolution 13 arc-minutes.
    Yes. I haven't been that interested in keeping track on the earliest times some think the data is suggesting for galaxy formation, but I would expect them to be 200 Myrs or more. 200 Myrs would indeed be on the very early edge of estimates that I think I've stumbled across over the last few years, making it a "surprise", but hardly shocking.

    But even 200 Myrs is over 500x longer than it took for atoms to first combine (Recombination) to form the CMBR.

    DM likely is playing an even bigger role in assisting galaxy formation, which again, shouldn't be shocking since we know so little about it. Perhaps quantum behavior has a slightly greater effect on DM "particles" to enhance the anisotropy necessary to see the universe with enough density for galaxy formations, and perhaps stars as well.
    Reply