
Scientists found AMORE6, a galaxy almost free of heavy elements. Its existence strongly supports key predictions of the Big Bang model.
Our knowledge of the Universe begins with the Big Bang, the moment when cosmic expansion first began. During this event, a process called Big Bang nucleosynthesis produced only the lightest elements: hydrogen, helium, and trace amounts of lithium. Heavier elements, which astrophysicists refer to as metals, were created later in the hearts of stars that lived and died after this first epoch.
The earliest generation of stars, known as Population III stars, were the first to forge these heavier elements through stellar nucleosynthesis. These stars themselves contained no metals, or at most extremely small amounts, and their life cycles enriched the Universe with its first metals. Because stars are born in galaxies rather than in isolation, there must also have been Population III galaxies whose stellar populations contained no metals at all.

Despite progress in understanding cosmic history, significant gaps remain. One of the most important missing pieces is evidence for these Population III galaxies. Theory predicts that some early galaxies, observed at high redshifts, should display zero metallicity. Confirming their existence would provide crucial support for our current cosmological framework.
Surprising results from JWST
The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has already reshaped expectations by revealing massive, well-developed galaxies far earlier in cosmic history than models had predicted. According to previous understanding, galaxies of that size and maturity should not have appeared so soon after the Big Bang. These discoveries have forced astronomers to reconsider how quickly galaxies formed and evolved.

Yet, even with its remarkable capabilities, JWST has not definitively identified a zero-metallicity galaxy. While it has observed galaxies that emerged only a few hundred million years after the Big Bang, none of them have yet shown the complete absence of metals predicted for true Population III systems.
The role of OIII emissions
Oxygen plays an essential role in this search. According to cosmological models, the earliest galaxies should contain only hydrogen and helium, with no oxygen or other heavier elements. Astronomers use the OIII emission line in spectroscopy to study galaxies: it reveals ongoing star formation and is especially effective at probing very distant, high-redshift systems. JWST, with its sensitivity, has made these measurements even more powerful.
In primitive galaxies, strong OIII emissions can indicate very low metallicity. Conversely, weak OIII signals suggest galaxies formed under conditions unlike those seen today. Until recently, no convincing example had been found.
That may now be changing. New research submitted to Nature reports the possible discovery of a galaxy that fits the criteria for being pristine. The study is led by Takahiro Morishita, a staff scientist at the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center (IPAC) at the California Institute of Technology.

“The existence of galaxies with no elements such as Oxygen – formed by stars after Big Bang nucleosynthesis – is a key prediction of the cosmological model,” the researchers write. “However, no pristine “zero-metallicity” Population III galaxies have been identified so far.”
Confirming the Big Bang model
Until now. Morishita and his co-authors have found a galaxy that fits the description. They detected it at redshift z = 5.725, meaning its light was emitted when the Universe was only about 900 million to 1 billion years old. It’s named AMORE6 and was detected through gravitational lensing. This magnified and duplicated the images of the galaxy, making it easier to observe. The JWST found Hβ emissions, an important line in astronomy used to measure galaxies in different ways, but it didn’t detect any oxygen. That means its metallicity is very low. “The absence of [O iii] immediately indicates that AMORE6 harbors a very low-metallicity, near pristine, interstellar medium,” the authors explain.
The galaxy also shows low stellar-mass and an extremely compact morphology. “These properties are consistent with massive star formation in a pristine or near-pristine environment,” the authors write. The thing is, this galaxy isn’t as old as some earlier, fully-formed galaxies the JWST found. It’s somewhat puzzling that this strong example of a pristine and low-metallicity star-forming environment was found almost one billion years after the Big Bang.
More studies will be needed to confirm these findings and understand them in greater detail. But the detection suggests that we are on the right track in understanding Nature.
“The finding of such an example at a relatively late time in cosmic history is surprising,” the researchers write. “However, regardless of cosmic epoch, the identification of a potentially pristine object is a key validation of the Big Bang model.”
Reference: “Pristine Massive Star Formation Caught at the Break of Cosmic Dawn” by Takahiro Morishita, Zhaoran Liu, Massimo Stiavelli, Tommaso Treu, Pietro Bergamini and Yechi Zhang, 31 July 2025, arXiv.
DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.10521
Adapted from an article originally published on Universe Today.
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
10 Comments
The discovery of a galaxy with a low metallicty at such an early epoch does not in itself “validate” curent cosmological models. As noted in the article, galaxies have been found at even higher redshift that are more evolved than AMORE6.
https://scitechdaily.com/when-the-universe-broke-the-rules-webb-spots-impossible-galaxies-at-cosmic-dawn/
Galaxies that are extremely metal-poor are actually quite rare in the universe, regardless of the epoch, and most of them are dwarfs. AMORE6 may simply have been a “late bloomer”. The starburst galaxy IZwicky18 has a very low metallicity, and yet its redshift is only 0.00258, estimated to be 60 million light years distant, hardly an early epoch.
This is not a low-metallicity, or ultra-low metallicity, galaxy.
It is a z e r o (so far as they have studied it) -metallicity galaxy. And this is one of those occasional semantic differences that do make a difference. It’s like a crime scene where only a picogram of DNA is needed to bring an accused to a conviction. If there is zero DNA, that really matters.
And this is one of those articles for which skimming will not do. It must be read.
There was no “skimming” here. Throughout the article terms like “pristine”, “near pristine”, “very low metallicity”, and ” zero metallicty” are used at various times when AMORE6 is mentioned. Even in the original paper submitted by the researchers the term ‘extremely metal-poor” was used to describe AMORE6 in the very first paragraph. If the interchangeable use of these descriptive terms was good enough for them, it’s good enough for me.
Even LLMs have a problem with this: “Population III galaxies are considered to be zero-metallicity, meaning they are almost devoid of heavy elements. This characteristic distinguishes them from later generations of galaxies that contain higher levels of metals produced by previous stars.”
On Astronomy Stack Exchange, someone posted a good question: Are any Population III stars red dwarfs?
Answer: Yes, in principle, but while we have indeed found some extremely low-metallicity stars, we have yet to discover zero-metallicity stars. Moreover, accretion of metal-rich gas over billions of years may actually increase a star’s metallicity significantly.
You seem to contradict yourself.
“In primitive galaxies, strong OIII emissions can indicate very low metallicity. Conversely, weak OIII signals suggest galaxies formed under conditions unlike those seen today.”
Doesn’t this say strong & weak OIII signals BOTH indicate low metals?
BTW, elsewhere you call oxygen a metal. It’s not.
In astrophysics, any elements with more protons than H and He are counted as ‘metals’. This has nothing to do with their heat or electrical conductivity or anything else.
This is one of those astronomy facts that has to be repeated monotonously in articles, because people are always learning it for the first time, for some reason. And the article does in fact allude to it:
“Heavier elements, which astrophysicists refer to as metals…”
A strong OIII signal just indicates active star formation, whereas the “absence of [O iii] immediately indicates that AMORE6 harbors a very low-metallicity, near pristine interstellar medium.”
B note 2509041234_Source 1.Reinterpreting
Source 1.
https://scitechdaily.com/jwst-may-have-found-the-universes-first-pristine-galaxy/
JWST discovers the first primordial galaxy in the universe
Evan Gough wrote: Universe Today, September 3, 2025
1.
_It is possible that the James Webb Space Telescope has discovered AMORE6, one of the first galaxies in the universe. There are very few heavy elements in this galaxy.
_If confirmed, this would be the long-awaited evidence for primordial galaxy population III that formed shortly after the Big Bang. (Writer Concept). Photo courtesy of SciTechDaily.com
_Scientists have discovered AMORE6, a galaxy with few heavy elements. The existence of this galaxy strongly supports key predictions of the Big Bang model.
【>>>>>
> The early galaxy is probably sample1.qpeoms.galaxy because it is filled with light elements.
sample1.
msbase12.qpeoms.2square.vector
oms.vix.a’6,vixx.a(b1,g3,k3,o5,n6)
b0acfd|0000e0
000ac0|f00bde
0c0fab|000e0d
e00d0c|0b0fa0
f000e0|b0dac0
d0f000|cae0b0
0b000f|0ead0c
0deb00|ac000f
ced0ba|00f000
a0b00e|0dc0f0
0ace00|df000b
0f00d0|e0bc0a
>> Then, a black hole vixer in a flat galaxy may also have been created by the inflow of hydrogen or subatoms.
>> Of course, vixer is a transformant of vixx.neutron_stars.
>> However, it was recently estimated that it may arise from the path of tsp.nqcell.nqvix.nqms.dark_energy.
<<<>>
> In Big Bang cosmology, a large explosion has a one-second banc decay scenario of heavy-mass nk2.msbase.
>> In the same vein, if there is now a light instantaneous velocity of subatomic (one Googol) superecession, it is almost comparable to the nk2 Big Bang.
>>Then you’ll be curious about the energy of light tsp particles that speed up like this. That’s nqms.dark_energy. Haha.
<<<>>>>
>>A somewhat metallic group Δ A galaxy was born with a small size as shown in Figure 1.msbase4. The type was confirmed by constant analysis to be 672 types.
View 1.
04110613
14051203
15080902
01100716
<<<>>
> The redshift is in the hot os.vix.ain.main. The main is a small galaxy, like bogey 1.msbase4, away from the observer’s Earth. Hmm.
> Rather, the cryogenic blue shift of the side approaches the observer. Uh-huh.
<<>>>
>> The reason is that the pre-Big Bang universe qpeoms.galaxy.nqms.dark_energy is too huge. Uh-huh.
> James Webb may not know what the quantum galaxy qpeoms is, even if he sees it. That reveals a problem with the existing Big Bang hypothesis.
>Because you can’t see nqcell.qms.dark_energy in the pre-Big Bang, Planck universe era, multiverse. Huh.
<<<】
3. Check the Big Bang model
_The galaxy was named AMORE6 and was detected through a gravitational lens. This technique has made observations easier by magnifying and replicating images of galaxies.
_The JWST discovered the Hβ emission, an important line used in astronomical measurements of galaxies in a variety of ways, but not oxygen. This indicates that the galaxy has a very low metal content
The Big problem is that it’s 900 million years after the Big Bang where earlier galaxies don’t exhibit 0 oxygen and o mettalicity and these galaxies were already fully formed around 200 million years after the a big bang
So… what are we gonna do with that galaxy now?