'Ordinary' black hole discovered 12 million light years away

'Ordinary' black hole discovered 12 million light years away
The yellow arrow in the picture identifies the position of the black hole transient inside Centaurus A. The location of the object is coincident with gigantic dust lanes that obscure visible and X-ray light from large regions of Centaurus A. Other interesting X-ray features include the central active nucleus, a powerful jet and a large lobe that covers most of the lower-right of the image. There is also a lot of hot gas. In the image, red indicates low energy, green represents medium energy, and blue represents high energy light. Credit: NASA / Chandra

(PhysOrg.com) -- An international team of scientists have discovered an ‘ordinary’ black hole in the 12 million light year-distant galaxy Centaurus A. This is the first time that a normal-size black hole has been detected away from the immediate vicinity of our own Galaxy. PhD student Mark Burke will present the discovery at the National Astronomy Meeting in Manchester.

Although exotic by everyday standards, are everywhere. The lowest-mass black holes are formed when very massive stars reach the end of their lives, ejecting most of their material into space in a supernova explosion and leaving behind a compact core that collapses into a black hole. There are thought to be millions of these low-mass black holes distributed throughout every galaxy. Despite their ubiquity, they can be hard to detect as they do not emit light so are normally seen through their action on the objects around them, for example by dragging in material that then heats up in the process and emits X-rays. But despite this, the overwhelming majority of black holes have remained undetected.

In recent years, researchers have made some progress in finding ordinary black holes in binary systems, by looking for the X-ray emission produced when they suck in material from their companion stars. So far these objects have been relatively close by, either in our own Milky Way Galaxy or in nearby galaxies in the so-called Local Group (a cluster of galaxies relatively near the Milky Way that includes Andromeda).

Mr Burke works under the supervision of Birmingham University astronomer Dr Somak Raychaudhury and is part of an international team led by Ralph Kraft of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. The team used the orbiting Chandra X-ray observatory to make six 100,000-second long exposures of Centaurus A, detecting an object with 50,000 times the X-ray brightness of our Sun. A month later, it had dimmed by more than a factor of 10 and then later by a factor of more than 100, so became undetectable.

'Ordinary' black hole discovered 12 million light years away
X-ray image on left and the optical DSS image on right shows the position of the black hole inside Centaurus A.  Credit: NASA / Chandra

This behaviour is characteristic of a low mass black hole in a binary system during the final stages of an outburst and is typical of similar black holes in the Milky Way. It implies that the team made the first detection of a normal black hole so far away, for the first time opening up the opportunity to characterise the black hole population of other galaxies.

Mr Burke comments: “So far we’ve struggled to find many ordinary black holes in other galaxies, even though we know they are there. To confirm (or refute) our understanding of the evolution of stars we need to search for these objects, despite the difficulty of detecting them at large distances. If it turns out that black holes are either much rarer or much more common in other galaxies than in our own it would be a big challenge to some of the basic ideas that underpin astronomy.”

The group now plan to look at the more than 50 other bright X-ray sources that reside within Centaurus A, identifying them as black holes or other exotic objects, and gain at least an inkling of the nature of a further 50 less luminous sources.


Explore further

Spectacularly bright object in Andromeda caused by 'normal' black hole

More information: The new work will appear in, “A Transient Sub-Eddington Black Hole X-ray Binary Candidate in the Dust Lanes of Centaurus A”, M. Burke et al, Astrophysical Journal. A preprint of the paper can be downloaded from arxiv.org/abs/1202.3149
Citation: 'Ordinary' black hole discovered 12 million light years away (2012, March 27) retrieved 16 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2012-03-ordinary-black-hole-million-years.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
0 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

210
Mar 27, 2012
What a beautiful thing...yes, the photo could have been larger, but, the majesty of nature, the scope of naturallly occuring phenomenon in space and time...the physics, the math, the chemistry...we will need a few more Einsteins, Curies, Steinmetz, Paulings, to ever use or understand it all, but...there IT IS, beckoning to us...WE have unlimited Vistas. We do not have 2 fear running out of things that beckon & embrace us unto greatness...the vastness of the unknown, is our playground.This playground even extends into our most basic elements of life's biology: we still do not know what life is, but, in that mystery is the marvel: It really is the Undiscovered Country where we find the compeltion and fulfillment that speaks to the marvel of thought! What are we, to the Universe that ina twinkling of Geological time we know so much and yet are not full? We beg to know more and Nature can't wait for us to grow up and learn it all. We bit that fruit a moment ago...eat more, faster...
word-

Mar 27, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Mar 27, 2012
In the illustration, the yellow arrow points squarely at a most trivial star. Some distance below that star, is the obvious black hole. There's even a radio jet emanating to the upper left from it. It is reasonable to assume that this jet is pointed somewhat towards our direction, and the opposite jet somewhat away from us, thus appearing considerably fainter in the picture.

At the very lowest right, there is a shock front, which may very well be related to the latter jet.

But to return to the subject at hand: I find it deplorable that PhysOrg shows illustrations that downright distract the reader. -- Many of us are not here merely for the Science Entertainment, but to learn about science and the Real World out there. Such sloppiness only serves to counter our cause.

Mar 27, 2012
In the illustration, the yellow arrow points squarely at a most trivial star. Some distance below that star, is the obvious black hole...But to return to the subject at hand: I find it deplorable that PhysOrg shows illustrations that downright distract the reader. -- Many of us are not here merely for the Science Entertainment, but to learn about science and the Real World out there. Such sloppiness only serves to counter our cause.

@gwrede - That is a picture of the entire galaxy. The radioemitting gas jets are coming from centaurus a's AGN/Supermassive black hole.

Presumably the dot that the arrow points at IS the black hole.

The photo by itself does not have enough data for us to distinguish the black hole, other than by the arrow.

I agree with you that adding the picture made the article more confusing, rather than help. Usually it's the other way around, and I wish they added a pic.

Mar 27, 2012
" We beg to know more and Nature can't wait for us to grow up and learn it all."- 210

That's how it's s'posed to be- Livin' young and wild and free!

yyz
Mar 28, 2012
"the yellow arrow points squarely at a most trivial star"

As that_guy correctly points out, that IS the stellar-mass black hole described in the article, as it appears in an x-ray image of Cen A. Check out Fig 1 of the paper linked at the end of the story for a positive ID.

The bipolar jet in the image is from the supermassive black hole located at the center of the galaxy. Here's a link to an optical-submillimeter-xray composite image showing the galaxy in its entirety: http://upload.wik...BOCA.jpg

Mar 28, 2012
The farther, the worse for Big Bang model...
Downovoted with Parsec, GDM, barakn, El_Nexus, thermodynamics, that_guy, bewertow, Tseihta, Shinichi D_ and another six people not interested about falsification of theories. What's wrong with religious people, who do believe, theories are here for ever?

Mar 28, 2012
No, it's because we know your "science" and how you are just trying to bait someone into responding so you can go on one of your long rants about aether theory. I'll ask though How in the world could stellar mass black holes being found further out possibley hurt the big bang theory? that is one of the dumbest things ive ever seen you post.

Mar 28, 2012
Thanks, that_guy and yyz for clarification!

(I made an obvious error, hopefully only because it was late night here.)

Mar 28, 2012
Sub:Psychology of mind to Advancement of Science
Everywhere same terminology- Black-hole and Big-Bang !!. If the conclusion is preset psychology- why do you search ?black holes are everywhere
At least, you must permit future generations to digest and question the process or phenomena - Cosmos Quest
http://upload.wik...BOCA.jpg- is a beutiful float image- need to search Energy functional index.Universe has a specific function- milkyway galaxy is the base. Where does Space-astronomy stand-up in Indexing -I search for Cosmological Index- Space Cosmology Vedas look for Dimensional frame-set
http://archive.or...-96228-0

Mar 28, 2012
Thanks, that_guy and yyz for clarification!

(I made an obvious error, hopefully only because it was late night here.)


I initially assumed that the jets were from an AGN and bypassed the issue without thinking about it.

However, once you pointed out that there is obviously a black hole a little ways from the arrow, I had to google image search it to clarify the issue myself. The picture and caption are just not well clarified for the article.

And what I -assume- is the image of the black hole looks just like any other ordinary foreground star or background galaxy in this pic, so obviously, very confusing set up they gave us.

Mar 28, 2012
The farther, the worse for Big Bang model...
Downovoted with Parsec, GDM, barakn, El_Nexus, thermodynamics, that_guy, bewertow, Tseihta, Shinichi D_ and another six people not interested about falsification of theories. What's wrong with religious people, who do believe, theories are here for ever?


Awww, poor baby!

Do you think that instead of downvoting you because of close mindedness, we might have just downvoted you because you made an unsubstantiated idiotic remark?

I don't recall you actually putting forth any actual logic or evidence as to why this hurts the big bang model, or comprehension of the fact that 12 million light years is basically the same neighborhood (About 5 times farther than andromeda)

Mar 28, 2012
Gor a larger picture see:

http://www.sr.bha...URKE.jpg
-.

Mar 28, 2012
I am not into aether whatever model. But people talk about the big Bang as if it is a proven hypothesis, which it is not. Sounds religious to me. The problem is, just like other religious people they can't see the fallacies they make with their ideas, they try to shove fallacies up peoples mouth who don't agree with them.
that_guy proves that by making strawman attacks towards Callippo even though he didn't mention aether hypothesis yet.

Mar 28, 2012
people talk about the big Bang as if it is a proven hypothesis, which it is not. Sounds religious to me. The problem is, just like other religious people they can't see the fallacies they make with their ideas, they try to shove fallacies up peoples mouth who don't agree with them.

No. The problem is that two or three people (or are they ...a singularity?!!) have a theory, and they bring it up ALL THE TIME. And they are always bringing the same argument: other people have
a) a closed mind
b) problems with their path of thinking.
Whatever is happening, it is not acceptable to return again and again on the same subject, presenting the same claims (hint: untill you convince others, your theory is called a claim).
The proper path is this: write a paper and submit it for publication. Create a webpage with same content. Invite people to read it. Review their criticism. Revise accordingly.
-.

Mar 28, 2012
I am not into aether whatever model. But people talk about the big Bang as if it is a proven hypothesis, which it is not. Sounds religious to me. The problem is, just like other religious people they can't see the fallacies they make with their ideas, they try to shove fallacies up peoples mouth who don't agree with them.
that_guy proves that by making strawman attacks towards Callippo even though he didn't mention aether hypothesis yet.

No, I downrated his comment because he complained without giving any reason for his complaint, on an article that has specifically nothing to do with what he's complaining about. All this article shows is that there is a problem with planetary formation theory. Period. It does not have any pro or con for the BB model.

In my opinion, there are no theories yet that I believe sufficiently explain the origin of the universe or DM/DE for that matter.

Im not using calippo as a straw man for shit. I'm downrating him for a pointless comment.

Mar 28, 2012
LMAO, strike the planetary formation part. I was reading a different article.

Point is, this isn't a BB related article, it is just about an effing black hole.

Mar 28, 2012
I am not into aether whatever model. But people talk about the big Bang as if it is a proven hypothesis, which it is not. Sounds religious to me. The problem is, just like other religious people they can't see the fallacies they make with their ideas, they try to shove fallacies up peoples mouth who don't agree with them.
that_guy proves that by making strawman attacks towards Callippo even though he didn't mention aether hypothesis yet.

No, its the most proven hypothesis however. no one thinks we've got it all down. thats why we are continuing to learn. until you can come up with a better theory that has science behind it that explains things more completely the big bang is the "hypothesis" to beat.

Mar 28, 2012
I downrated his comment because he complained without giving any reason for his complaint, on an article that has specifically nothing to do with what he's complaining about. .. I'm downrating him for a pointless comment
What I wrote was a single sentence "The farther, the worse for Big Bang model...", but it says it all. The formation of black holes in contemporary theories needs some time, when the observable matter in Universe condensed from very diluted state after inflation. So, the younger black hole we will observe, the more stress such observation poses for Big Bang cosmology.

After all, this is exactly why the recent PO article introduces a theory of accelerated accretion of black holes. These theories are developed just because the astronomers are finding older and older black holes, which are difficult to explain with standard models of accretion.

Mar 28, 2012
This article linked says:
"This may explain how these black holes got so big so fast. "We don't know exactly how gas flows inside galaxies in the early universe," said King, "but I think it is very promising that if the flows are chaotic it is very easy for the black hole to feed."

For the people, who don't know about these connections my post may appear like being out of context. But the experts who know, how slowly black hole can actually condense the finding of mature black hole in the early Universe really makes a problem for existing cosmology. In dense aether model the Universe is essentially steady state: we cannot see the distant black holes behind its event horizon because of dispersion of light with vacuum fluctuations like during observation of landscape under the haze - i.e. not because the black holes weren't formed yet. Every observation of developed black hole in early Universe therefore supports this model.

yyz
Mar 28, 2012
While the illustration for the article appears to have caused some confusion, it should be noted this is the *only* image of this stellar-mass BH we have. Subsequent searches at optical and radio wavelengths failed to turn up any counterparts and this is thought to be due in part to the objects' proximity to a major dust lane crossing the face of the galaxy. And according to the paper, the source is now undetectable in x-rays as well.

"The formation of black holes in contemporary theories needs some time, when the observable matter in Universe condensed from very diluted state after inflation. So, the younger black hole we will observe, the more stress such observation poses for Big Bang cosmology."

Stellar-mass BHs can form in the present day universe from the collapse of massive stars. The link you gave concerns supermassive BHs, a totally different beast. Newly-minted stellar-mass BHs pose no problems for BB cosmologies.

Btw, this was not a BH 'birth' event, just an outburst.

Mar 28, 2012
What yyz said. Also, supermassive black holes forming early on has multiple credible hypothesis. it doesnt hurt the big bang either.

Mar 28, 2012
supermassive black holes forming early on has multiple credible hypothesis. it doesnt hurt the big bang either
In Czech we have a proverb "A hundred times nothing killed the donkey" which roughly means "Many small burdens add up to a big crushing burden." The problem of schematically thinking physicists is, they're waiting for evidence, which is disproving/confirming the phenomena from 90 or more percent. The ten evidences, which are disproving/confirming it to 60% means nothing for their deterministic spirit. This approach plays well with conservative attitude of mainstream physicists, who actually don't hurry anywhere, until their money are going - but it gradually introduces a cognitive bias into intersubjective acceptation of otherwise quite apparent facts. It lead into false refusal of cold fusion before twenty years, for example - and we are losing huge money because of this ignorance.

Mar 28, 2012
The dense aether model is based on the duality of longitudinal and transverse wave spreading, which essentially means, the ten two-sigma evidences play same role, like one three-sigma evidence. Technically speaking, the multiple paths integral plays the same role in Lagrangian of evidence, like the Hamiltonian matrix by principle of least action. In fuzzy fractal landscape the strictly deterministic choice may not lead into most effective approach for finding of shortest paths. The waiting for robust evidence may become misleading, when we're ignoring a huge amount of less pronounced indicia during it. The AWT therefore enforces the holistic, pluralistic approach for judging of facts.

Mar 28, 2012
sigh...I can't continue this conversation. It's like a chess game where Callippo has successfully troll-mated me. I realize that callippo has me at a point where I want to point out flaws with the things he's saying currently, pulling me away from the point that he's obnoxiously off point and unsubstantiated.

Alternately, if I tried to follow the crumb trail to finally reach a conversation about his aether theory, I would be so annoyed by his retarded train of thought, that I would never be able to take anything seriously that ever came from him, and poisoning any open minded thought I might to that theory.

Well played Trollippo. Well played.

yyz
Mar 28, 2012
"...astronomers are finding older and older black holes, which are difficult to explain with standard models of accretion."

By chance an overview paper discussing various scenarios for the formation of SMBHs in the early universe was posted on arXiv tonight; you may find it informative Callipo: http://arxiv.org/...6075.pdf

Note that several formation models are reviewed and future observations by telescopes like the JWST are discussed as a means to discriminate between models. Why not wait for further observations to be conducted before choosing between formation scenarios (or an altogether different method)?

Mar 29, 2012
sigh...I can't continue this conversation. It's like a chess game where Callippo has successfully troll-mated me. I realize that callippo has me at a point where I want to point out flaws with the things he's saying currently, pulling me away from the point that he's obnoxiously off point and unsubstantiated.

Alternately, if I tried to follow the crumb trail to finally reach a conversation about his aether theory, I would be so annoyed by his retarded train of thought, that I would never be able to take anything seriously that ever came from him, and poisoning any open minded thought I might to that theory.

Well played Trollippo. Well played.

Just downote him automaticall then comment on the article. On-Topic i have to say that photo.......?

Mar 29, 2012
.. Why not wait for further observations to be conducted before choosing between formation scenarios (or an altogether different method)?
Why not, but the purpose of theories is to make the predictions and streamline the research effort for the sake of cost of research. Only people payed from taxes may want to observe the sky randomly.
you may find it informative Callipo: http://arxiv.org/...6075.pdf
In dense aether model there are no "first black holes". These black holes are condensing and evaporating at all places of Universe around us like giant fluctuations of gas. Such a black holes aren't formed with accretion only, rather with condensation of dark matter clouds in similar way, like the planets in the inner region of protoplanetary disks by Condensation theory.

Mar 29, 2012
BTW The similar paradigm shift emerged in evolutionary theory, where more advanced genomes weren't only formed with "accretion of mutations" from bottom up, but with "condensation of genes" employing the horizontal gene transfer too (a top to bottom approach). In dense aether model it's related with atemporal character of Universe at the distant scales, where the events appear reversible from our local perspective.

Mar 29, 2012
BTW The similar paradigm shift emerged in evolutionary theory, where more advanced genomes weren't only formed with "accretion of mutations" from bottom up, but with "condensation of genes" employing the horizontal gene transfer too (a top to bottom approach). In dense aether model it's related with atemporal character of Universe at the distant scales, where the events appear reversible from our local perspective.


This is the fantasyland of Trekkies where super-luminol speeds are called "warpdrive" thus rendering the human mind incapable of functioning because the electrons that makes the human nervous system function cannot keep up the pace because they move along the neurons at sub-luminol speeds.

Mar 31, 2012
The farther, the worse for Big Bang model...
Downovoted with Parsec, GDM, barakn, El_Nexus, thermodynamics, that_guy, bewertow, Tseihta, Shinichi D_ and another six people not interested about falsification of theories. What's wrong with religious people, who do believe, theories are here for ever?


@Callippo I signed up to Physorg just to say that your science is bad and you should feel bad... also your English is horrendous. From now on, I pledge to help downvote you into oblivion ESPECIALLY when you are talking out of your ass about something you know NOTHING about (which is always)

Mar 31, 2012
@Callippo I signed up to Physorg just to say that your science is bad ..
Why not, the bad people are doing bad things. But is it wrong?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more