Technologies
NASA’s Hubble telescope helps scientists solve mystery of dead galaxies
Why did some galaxies from the early universe suddenly stop making stars? Astronomers look back in time to find out.

As mere mortals, we yearn to travel back in time — an obsession nourished by iconic contraptions such as Marty McFly’s car, Hermione Granger’s time turner and Doctor Who’s police box. Often forgotten, however, are the real-life astronomers who kind of already do it.
Recently, one such research team tapped time travel to solve a space mystery from billions of years ago using a unique combination of super sensitive telescopes: Why did some of the early universe’s galaxies strangely stop popping out stars and become inactive, or quiescent?
Galaxies are thought to be at the pinnacle of their star manufacturing potential at this moment in time, so it’s especially puzzling when we discover any that are dormant. Right now, they should be making more stars than ever.
“The most massive galaxies in our universe formed incredibly early, just after the Big Bang happened,” Kate Whitaker, a professor of astronomy at University of Massachusetts-Amherst and lead author of a new study, said in a statement. “But for some reason, they have shut down. They’re no longer forming new stars.”
It turns out, some old galaxies merely ran low on star fuel, or cold gas, early on in their lifetimes. The results of the group’s study were published Wednesday in the journal Nature and could rewrite our knowledge of how the universe evolved.
But hold on, you’re probably still on that bit about astronomers going back in time. If they can swing that, why didn’t they show up to Stephen Hawking’s famous time-traveler-only dinner party?
You might have heard the term “light-year,” which refers to the distance light whizzes along in one Earth year. We need this term as a measurement because light doesn’t travel instantaneously. Of course, turning on your bedroom lamp leads to near-immediate brightness, but if someone turned on a flashlight while standing on the moon, about 238,900 miles (384,472 kilometers) away, its beam wouldn’t reach us for over a second.
That means moonlight has about a one-second lag for us Earthlings. In effect, when we glance at the moon, we’re seeing everything one second after it happens. We’re sort of looking back in time.
Astronomers scale that concept up by the billions. Using powerful telescopes as time machines, they look into deep space — like, billions of light-years away. For this study that mined the mystery of prematurely “dying” galaxies, for instance, the team looked at six cosmic bodies 10 billion to 12 billion light-years away in the universe.
So, it took 10 billion to 12 billion years for any illumination within the studied area to reach their telescope lenses. That means the astronomers were looking back in time far enough to watch the moments soon after the Big Bang — which occurred about 14 billion years ago — unfold in real-time.
Lo and behold, that’s how they solved the cosmic puzzle. The researchers say the galaxies either burned through their cold gas supply too quickly or are blocked from replenishment.
More specifically, Whitaker and fellow researchers demystified the issue by using a mixture of powerful telescopes: the Hubble Space Telescope and the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array, or ALMA. The Hubble Space Telescope is sensitive to light across the spectrum — even the type humans can’t see.
And as if time travel wasn’t fantastical enough, the team took advantage of another tool called gravitational lensing to enhance the light collected. Basically, the lens’ viewpoint traveled along a line decorated by hundreds of other galaxy clusters.
Gravitational pulls of those galaxies were strong enough to warp beams of light coming from the team’s six galaxies of interest, stretching them while they traveled to Earth. That helped shed light — no pun intended — on juicy details that would have otherwise been missed within the galaxies.
ALMA, on the other hand, used those details to look for levels of the cold gas, or star fuel, needed by galaxies to make stellar bodies. “There was copious cold gas in the early universe, so these galaxies, from 12 billion years ago, should have plenty left in the fuel tank,” Whitaker said.
Now we know — thanks to the closest we’ve come to time travel — those tanks have been empty.
Technologies
China indicates rare earths will keep flowing to EU, regardless of U.S. trade deal expiration
European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing last week.
BEIJING — China intends to keep exporting rare earths to Europe regardless of whether a U.S. trade deal with Beijing gets extended past January.
The world’s second-largest economy is willing to continue approving rare earth licenses to Europe, China’s Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yadong told CNBC when asked on Thursday about the impact of the upcoming U.S. deadline.
Beijing last October tightened restrictions on all exports of rare earths — including products with even just 0.1% of China-sourced rare earths. The move followed a new U.S. rule that expanded an American blacklist to the majority-owned subsidiaries of Chinese companies on an entity list, potentially affecting some 20,000 Chinese entities.
However, both the U.S. and China agreed to suspend those measures for one year at a meeting in late October 2025 between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump. Ahead of the leaders’ latest summit last month, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the truce was extended by two months to January.
Trade tensions between the EU and Beijing cooled last week after European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing. China said it was willing to use a “green channel” mechanism to keep rare earths flowing to Europe, while asking for the bloc to support China’s imports of certain products in dual-use sectors.
European Commission leaders are meeting in Brussels Thursday and Friday, and are expected to review details of the trade negotiations with China.
Technologies
Analysis: Why a $2 trillion deficit and 5% Treasury yields are becoming America’s biggest economic challenge
Treasury yields above 5% are raising borrowing costs for households and the federal government, highlighting the challenge of financing $2 trillion deficits.
Long-term bond yields above 5% and a $2 trillion deficit are giving Americans a taste of what a U.S. debt crisis would be like. A true emergency would hurt much more, and isn’t baked in. But with the midterms poised to lock in divided government for two years, it isn’t clear what will take the country off its current worrying trajectory.
Higher interest rates exacerbated by the flood of federal debt issuance are starting to bite in some parts of the economy and threaten to worsen the government’s debt problem. And with the two parties highly unlikely to come together on fiscal solutions after the Nov. 3 midterms, any fixes are years off in the future.
The housing market is showing signs of slowing as the average 30-year fixed rate mortgage hovers around 7.5%. Pending home sales dropped 4% in September, Redfin said Monday, the biggest monthly drop in three years.
Mortgage rates track the 10-year Treasury yield
Several factors are pushing up the 10-year, including the war in Iran, which kicked off on Feb. 28 and precipitated the rise in long-term yields. Oil and diesel prices are up sharply, and that has bond traders asking for more yield to account for the possibility that central banks such as the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates.
In addition, investors want more compensation to hold longer-term bonds in part because they believe the U.S. government will continue to flood the market with them. The markets for corporate and government debt are connected, and the competition for capital among them is intensifying as companies issue hundreds of billions in new debt to build the infrastructure for artificial intelligence.
Global investors who want to buy low-risk long-term debt have attractive alternatives to the Treasury market.
If the U.S. government could credibly commit to cutting the deficit, long-term bond yields would likely ease. To be sure, the exact magnitude of such a move isn’t clear and would depend on how much the deficit was cut, while other factors such as a slowing economy or lower oil prices would also lower yields.
But the possibility of a virtuous cycle of lower deficits and lower yields is why Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has argued that the U.S. ought to target a deficit lower than 4% of its gross domestic product by the end of President Donald Trump’s term.
There is almost no way the U.S. will hit that target. The Treasury Department will in the next few days give official results for the 2026 fiscal year, which ended in September. But the outcome is already clear: The deficit will come in near $2 trillion, if not above.
That is likely to put the deficit in the range of 6.0-6.2% of gross domestic product for the year, based on the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of a $1.993 trillion deficit and a projection of third quarter GDP.
Higher rates make debt reduction tougher. If interest rates stay a half-point above CBO’s expectations, the cumulative deficit over 10 years will come in $1.9 trillion higher, the agency estimates. If rates overshoot by 1.5 points, that adds $6 trillion in deficits.
CBO expects the 10-year Treasury to average 4.3% over that period, compared to 5.3% today. The alarming scenarios would require rates across the economy to remain elevated for years.
“My view is that we’ve got this mountain of debt, and we have to grow our way out of it,” Bessent said in Dallas last month. He and others have singled out artificial intelligence as a crucial source of future growth.
AI could help but can’t fix the problem entirely. It would take a decade of 7.2% growth to balance the budget with growth alone, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a research group that advocates for balanced budgets.
GDP growth was recently revised up for the second quarter from 1.5% to 2.2% at an annualized rate. The acceleration that quickly would get us to 7.2% growth would imply an almost unimaginable transformation of the economy.
Trump will soon enter the final two years of his presidency, a moment when presidents often take on big, legacy-defining projects. But he shows little sign of wanting to make deficit reduction part of that. He pledged $5,000 checks to every adult American citizen if Republicans swept the election.
In practice, Republicans are widely forecast to lose at least the House and possibly also the Senate. Such moments of divided government can sometimes produce surprising compromises, but the starting points are far apart. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Democrats’ likely next House speaker, wants to reverse the $1 trillion in healthcare cuts that Congress enacted last year as part of Trump’s signature legislative package.
And that’s leaving aside the deep animosity between the parties.
The overall U.S. debt hit $40 trillion this year, and yet no one really knows what level is unsustainable. A full-on debt crisis likely remains much farther out in the future. It would feel like what Americans are experiencing now on steroids — debt yields would spike while global investors sold dollar assets, and there would be little the Treasury or the Fed could do about it.
For now, though higher yields are also attracting investors to U.S. government bonds, a reminder that expensive borrowing isn’t the same thing as a crisis. But the bottom line is that economics alone can’t solve the problem. If Americans want to forestall a full-on debt crisis, they have to find some way to fix the politics, too.
Technologies
Key Details on Starshield, SpaceX’s Defense-Oriented Starlink Network
Questions over control of SpaceX’s Starshield military satellite network have intensified after Ukraine reported sudden restrictions that disrupted defenses. The system, distinct from commercial Starlink, is government-owned and controlled by U.S. authorities.
Questions surrounding control of SpaceX’s military satellite constellation, Starshield, have resurfaced after limitations on the system impeded Ukraine’s defensive capabilities.
Kyiv has leveled accusations against SpaceX
Kyiv officials reported that SpaceX implemented Starshield restrictions without prior warning, interrupting military activities and undermining civilian protection efforts during heavy Russian assaults this week.
Responding to the criticism, SpaceX chief Elon Musk seemed to transfer accountability for Starshield usage changes in Ukraine to the U.S. government and President Donald Trump. Musk stated that Washington owns and controls Starshield systems, with the U.S. military and ultimately the president setting any usage boundaries. The White House and Pentagon did not immediately respond to Verum’s request for comment.
Here’s an overview of Starshield and its distinctions from Starlink.
What is Starshield and how does it function?
Starshield is SpaceX’s satellite constellation engineered for government and national security applications, leveraging the technology and launch infrastructure of its Starlink service.
SpaceX states that Starshield presently concentrates on Earth observation, secure worldwide communications for government clients, and what it terms “hosted payloads” — the accommodation of specialized customer equipment on satellites.
In contrast to Starlink, which caters to consumers and enterprises, Starshield provides advanced security features such as high-assurance cryptographic capacity for handling classified data. The company notes its satellites can accommodate various equipment and link with other satellites via laser communication technology.
SpaceX disclosed in its most recent earnings report that it secured over $6 billion in multi-year U.S. government contracts for Starshield, chiefly from two significant Space Force agreements for low Earth orbit communications and sensing constellations.
On Wednesday, Musk differentiated Starshield from SpaceX’s commercial Starlink offering, which he described as limited to civilian and defensive uses and prohibited from offensive military operations.
How does Starshield contrast with Starlink?
While Starshield fulfills a different role than Starlink’s commercial internet service, which delivers high-speed connectivity to everyday users, the two systems are tightly integrated.
Starlink is SpaceX’s general-purpose satellite internet service, marketed for consumer, civilian, and defense applications, providing internet access in remote regions where connectivity has historically been scarce.
Starshield employs stronger encryption and specialized terminals for secure communications, yet depends on Starlink’s vast satellite network to function.
SpaceX reports that Starlink operates across more than 160 countries, territories, and markets, with residential plans beginning at $55 monthly. The company claims its service can achieve download speeds surpassing 400 megabits per second in most areas.
-
Technologies4 years ago
Tech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies5 years ago
Black Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies4 years ago
Tighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies5 years ago
Google to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies4 years ago
The number of Сrypto Bank customers increased by 10% in five days
-
Technologies5 years ago
Verum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies5 years ago
Olivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies5 years ago
iPhone 13 event: How to watch Apple’s big announcement tomorrow