Our Sun, like all stars, is made mostly of hydrogen and helium. They are by far the most abundant elements, formed in the early moments of the Universe. But our star is also rich in other elements astronomers call "metals." Carbon, nitrogen, iron, gold, and more. These elements were created through astrophysical processes, such as supernovae and neutron star collisions. The dust of long-dead stars that gathered together into molecular clouds and formed new, younger stars such as the Sun. Stars rich in metals. But there are still stars out there that are not metal rich. These extremely metal-poor stars, or EMPs, hold clues to the origin of stars in the cosmos.
When JWST launched, it found the most distant known galaxy: JADES-GS-z14-0, with a redshift of 14.32, and seen about 290 million years after the Big Bang. Now, a team of astronomers has gone even deeper, searching for galaxies in the redshift 15-30 range, which would be galaxies from 270 to 100 million years after the beginning of the Universe. They've found a few candidates in the 15-20 range, but these could be closer, low-mass dusty galaxies.
This Washington Post article (click headline to read, or find it archived here), shows how chilled the research climate in America has become because of the Administration’s threats. And the Admin hasn’t even =said anything about evolution yet. (Has anybody ever asked Trump or RFK Jr. whether they accept evolution?)
The threats involve not just the potential of being demonized for publishing on a subject that the administration might denigrate, but also the possibility of researchers in that area being punished because they’re foreigners.
A few quotes:
A few days before they were to submit a scientific paper together, an evolutionary biologist in Europe received an unexpected request from two co-authors in the United States.
After much thought, the co-authors said they preferred not to risk publishing at this time. One had just lost a job because of a canceled government grant; the other feared a similar fate if they went ahead with the paper. Although both were legally in the U.S., they worried they might lose their residency if their names appeared on a potentially controversial article.
The subject: evolution.
. . . .Although President Donald Trump’s executive orders have not targeted research involving evolution, the authors’ unease about publishing on the subject reflects the fear and uncertainty now rippling through the science world.
The paper “was months of work, but at the same time I know the current situation, and I’m scared for my friends in the U.S.,” said the European evolutionary biologist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation. “I told them, ‘If you think it is too dangerous, don’t do it.’ ”
Now granted, this is for a symposium volume (something that Steve Gould called the least-read form of scientific literature), with the paper and volume described in this way:
The withheld paper described ways in which evolution unfolds in both living and nonliving systems, a subject relevant to the search for life elsewhere in the universe. The authors included measurements and genomic data on different species. An example of evolution in the nonliving world would be the growth of the universe after the Big Bang, as new minerals and elements came into being, the European scientists said.
. . .The special edition of the Royal Society journal that was to have included the withdrawn paper, emerged from the Workshop on Information Selection and Evolution last October in Washington, which drew a multidisciplinary collection of 100 researchers from as far away as Japan to discuss the latest thinking on evolution.
“People were talking about the evolution of languages, the evolution of technology, the evolution of species, the evolution of minerals and atoms and planets and things like this,” Wong said. “It was just so scintillating.”
Of course there’s a big difference between biological evolution and the idea of “change”, even though people have tried to analogize them by confecting the idea of “memes” (which can’t explain the evolution of minerals, atoms, or planets), so this heterogeneity is why the volume doesn’t get my juices flowing.
But that is not the point. NO scientific paper should be withheld, or the authors forced to hide their real names, because they work and publish in a well-accepted field or are living under a government that is bludgeoning people left and right. Every day it gets crazier, and every day science becomes subject to more censorship.