| > 300M years is very short period of time, unless everything cooled very very uniformly, which is not the case ~300M years is the time between the Big Bang singularity and the CMB, but not really relevant. The entire universe was everywhere as hot as the surface of a star at the time of the CMB, so any evidence of galaxies forming before that is surprising. The surprisingly high uniformity of the temperature of the CMB — isotropic to roughly one part in 100,000 — is one of the reasons the Big Bang model replaced one of the older competing hypotheses (continuous creation IIRC). So it is in fact the case that everything cooled very very uniformly and I'm not sure why you think otherwise? I'm also not clear what you're saying with > so we should see a transition somewhere Given the CMB is itself the transition that we see. > Sometimes, somewhere there must be a galaxy past CMB. I think here you're mixing up space and time. It's reasonable (please permit my use of conventional language rather than 4-vectors) to assume that a galaxy exists on the other side in space of the CMB as we see it now, but that happens at a point in time after the recombination epoch began and space became transparent, and light from that event hasn't reached us yet; when it does, the apparent distance of the CMB will be large enough for the galaxy to appear on this side. Are you familiar with light cones and the convention of one space axis and one time axis? It might help you visualise it if you draw what's going on. |
GLASS-z12 is 33.2Bly away from us. It should be behind some of the CMB produced by BB, isn't?
> Given the CMB is itself the transition that we see.
In BB model, CMB emitted by hot plasma. Where it is, that plasma?
In steady universe model, CMB is light with z=1000, emitted by distant galaxies, in range of 4Tly. It explains high uniformity of temperature. It's like the temperature of a water stream from underground: it's uniform across a climate area because underground temperature averages seasonal temperature shifting.