Science cannot explain how galaxies could have formed, to the degree they have, within the lifetime of the universe as science understands and believes it to be.

(Refer to the Galaxy pictures in the link and picture below from the Hubble telescope. They show fully formed galaxies billions of years ago, essentially at the supposed beginning of the universe.)  (Remember that science tries to explain the big bang as just a simple explosion of a ball of matter.)

Also refer to the article "An Expanded View of the Universe" in the May 1, 2002 issue of the Seattle Times.  This article talks about Hubble seeing galaxies already formed 13 billion years ago when the universe was supposedly first forming itself.   This does not fit science models of the formation of the universe and galaxies.

Matter in the early universe is attracted together by gravity.  Computer modeling shows that with the laws of physics as they are now understood, there would not have been enough time in the history of the universe for particles of matter to have come together and formed such organized structures as seen in galaxies formed near the supposed beginning of the universe.   There is a Galaxy Formation Problem (middle of that web page) for science.

Science calculates the apparent age of the universe (the time for galaxies to form) based on certain experiments but also must make certain simplifying assumptions in the calculations.  As with most of science, the calculations are based on some hard facts, but also on some model which is almost always only valid within a certain range of reality.

In the July 2004 "Scientific American" magazine there is an article on page 32 titled; "Growing Pains, Old, Massive Galaxies When None Should Be."  The word "When" is correctly used to indicate that astronomers have found old galaxies looking far back in time (measured by the red shift of light) to near the supposed beginning of the universe.  (Note, although the big bang theory seem to fit the Bible, not all scientists accept the theory completely in term of dating the origin of the universe.)  There are anamolies in the redshift which raise serious questions.  Start reading this link about the fifth paragraph which starts with "The first challenge to the conventional theory----".  Here is another site which discusses problems with dating the big band from the redshift.

In a May 2002 "Scientific American" an article about Galaxies scientists admit puzzlement and speculate about the laws of physics as now understood.

In the May 1997 issue of Scientific American there are a number of interesting admissions of failures of galaxy formation theories.  On page 95 referring to the Hubble telescope images which show the universe in the past; "Even at relatively early times, these normal-looking galaxies seem to have existed in numbers comparable to the total found in the universe today."  According to theory, more galaxies are supposed to be formed as the universe gets older.  Hubble images apparently show this not to be the case.  "At the limits of today's observations, there are at least 10 times as many galaxies as there are in the local universe." "Cosmologists do not yet understand what physical mechanisms drive this evolution or where these galaxies have gone."

Clearly, science does not have models of the universe which are consistent with the observed reality of galaxies as that actually are nor where the laws of physics came from which determine the structure and nature of galaxies.  Essentially when the Hubble telescope is used to look back in time, there are also far too few Primal Galaxies (PG's) seen in the process of formation to fit the science models and observations of galaxies close to our galaxy.

The pictures below were taken by the Hubble telescope and show that as far back as you look in time in the universe, there are still fully formed galaxies.  This fact contradicts the basic theories of the formation and development of the universe.  Science is not always absolute truth but rather is just a model of reality with certain limits to its validity.

Even the big bang theory has serious problems.  (That is when modeled by physics as now understood (or possibly misunderstood.)  The big bang theory assumes that the creation of the universe can be understood as just an explosion of some sort.  That may not be how it was created.)

With all science theories, future facts discovered when the theory is tested to a new limit/level, can prove a theory to be incorrect.

 Hubble's deepest shot is a puzzle.

Distant Galaxies Break Record.

Hubble's Deepest View Ever of the Universe Unveils Earliest Galaxies  (The NASA statements do not fit the picture which shows a number of well formed spiral galaxies.  Left and bottom in particular.  A simple time concept of the universe with the red-shift correlated to distance and age does not fit this picture.)