Cosmologists propose new way to form primordial black holes
What is dark matter? How do supermassive black holes form? Primordial black holes might hold the answer to this longstanding question. Leiden and Chinese cosmologists have identified a new way in which these hypothetical objects could be produced immediately after the Big Bang. Their research has been published in Physical Review Letters.
In their quest to understand the universe, scientists are faced with some major unsolved puzzles. For example, stars move around galaxies as if there is five times more mass present than that observed. What makes comprises this dark matter? And another riddle: Galaxies harbor enormous black holes in their cores, weighing millions of solar masses. In young galaxies, collapsed stars did not have enough time to grow that big. How did these so-called supermassive black holes form?
Cosmologists have proposed a hypothetical solution that could solve one of both riddles. Primordial black holes, spawned shortly after the Big Bang, have the ability to either remain tiny or quickly gain mass. In the former case, they are candidates for dark matter. In the latter case, they could serve as seeds for supermassive black holes. Cosmologist Dong-Gang Wang from Leiden University and his Chinese colleagues Yi-Fu Cai, Xi Tong and Sheng-Feng Yan of USTC University have reported a new way in which primordial black holes could have formed around the time of the Big Bang.
After the Big Bang, the universe contained small density perturbations caused by random quantum fluctuations. These are large enough to form stars and galaxies, but too small to grow into primordial black holes on their own. Wang and his collaborators have identified a new resonance effect that makes primordial black holes possible by enhancing certain perturbations selectively. This leads to the prediction that all primordial black holes should have approximately the same mass. The narrow peaks in figure 1 show a range of possible masses as a consequence of the resonance.
Viable model
"Other calculations have different ways to enhance perturbations, but run into problems," says Wang. "We use resonance during inflation, when the universe grew exponentially shortly after the Big Bang. Our calculations are simple enough so that we can work with it. In reality, the mechanism might be more complicated, but this is a start. The narrow peaks that we get are inherent to the mechanism, because it uses resonance."
Explore further
User comments
"Leiden and Chinese cosmologists have identified a new way in which these hypothetical objects could be produced."
..........nothing like being out wandering around in the weeds & being unable to figure out why you're lost.
The supersolid dark matter displaced by a galaxy pushes back, causing the stars in the outer arms of the galaxy to orbit the galactic center at the rate in which they do.
Displaced dark matter is curved spacetime.
At first glance, I wondered WHY they would want to form black holes, presumably in the lab or LHC. Then I looked again and realised they were referring to HOW Primordial black holes COULD HAVE BEEN created in the early Universe. The title is a mite bit misleading, had it not been for the mention of "primordial".
However, there were no black holes in the Universe, before or soon after the mythical Big Bang, simply because even tiny BHs would require Mass/Energy that had been compressed and collapsed, and through other processes become a Star - long before it could collapse and become a Black Hole. They forget that there are very logical steps that are required before a BH can be created out in the Universe - whether Primordial or currently. It would be folly for science to attempt to create a BH in the LHC or anywhere else on Earth, or even in near-Space, as it could prove to be suicidal for the planets and all life
There is Matter/Energy that is (apart from the Matter/Energy that was created already in the known Universe), a Sub-Quantum-scale form of Matter/Energy that emerges or bubbles up out of the Quantum Universe, which then spreads out into our known Universe and interacts slightly with normal Matter/Energy but not too effectively. It is a strangely different kind of Matter/Energy that is slightly reflective so that it can mirror its image(s) onto familiar objects such as Stars, planets, clouds, galaxies.
I am not certain if it has anything to do with Higgs Boson, quarks, gluons, etc. but it could be a SubSet of these particles, and are even smaller and exist in a SubSet Universe. Why it should bubble up out of its origins into the Quantum spaces, and from thence into OUR Universe is an unknown...at least, currently. Perhaps a scientist or two will find out.
End of story.
It's a label for an observed effect. Nothing less, but also nothing more.
Wait a minute, you're one of the ones who has been here expositing the tale that GRAVITY is DENSITY DEPENDENT, not MASS DEPENDENT. What has changed your mind?
.....and the start of your next conundrum.
In fact, given the size of black holes which we think could form since the BB, it would be possible to estimate the age of the black holes which we think are too big to be formed in the last 13.7 billion years.
Making stuff up again?
But I'm sure you can provide a link to where I said something to that effect, no?
Of course gravity is indirectly (quantized) mass dependent because quantized mass decreases the energy density of expanding spacetime. But the dependence on dark matter is direct.
Try Logic! Maybe you should get high! Being normal ain't working! Actually this idea with MJ is over 10000 years old. Why dis' .. I haven't seen any form of Logic for over 4000 years. So thought I'd try it.
This statement... where would one even begin to correct this damage?
Go home Benni: you're drunk; or, if you're a bot: you're broken.
Even Cannabis does damage to brain cells. Other junk like opioids will rot out your brain even faster. If you are still a young person, I would suggest that you cease making a junkie of yourself and come back to Reality, else you WILL pay the price for your stupidity in the coming years as so many others have. At least, the ones who haven't died of overdose.
Your posts are not exhibiting any Logic, but mostly that you are attempting to work out your delusions in the forums by saying things like your paragraph above.
Narf!
Indeed. Benni is a lost cause. Some sort of mental affliction, I'm guessing.
Hey Benni? Still awake? Meds not kicked in yet? What does r-squared mean, Benni? What relation might it have to density? Lol. Bless 'im!
Gravity does NOT depend on the density of Mass. There is a lot of space between atomic particles. If those particles were too close together there could be no movement/motion/momentum of Mass anywhere. What is true of the Quantum Universe is also true of our Universe.
So Gravity is entirely dependent on Mass itself. If you fall off a roof, it isn't the density of the ground that could kill you, but the Mass which is the ground that you are falling onto.
A rocket is in free-fall in outer space with a few bursts of fuel to hold it steady in orbit. But let it get too close to Earth's gravity and it is that gravity that will draw that rocket down to meet the Earth's Mass.
IIRC, Charge has Electrons and Electrons have Mass. Only photons are Massless.
Electrons run through a wire, producing a magnetic field that keeps the electrons in the wire from losing charge.
Narf!
Charge exists; therefore, any other particle or force is derivative.
All that does not compute
If nothing was the beginning; a necessary and sufficient condition is that all charges occupy the same point. Yeah it could be a Black Hole. But show me how God did the assembly! Please mass? Don't make yourself a fool! Logic! Science! Clarity!
Every set contains the NULL set. You so smart!
says our favorite dinoflagellate, FuzzyFuzzball
In the very Beginning, there already was Charge. And the source for that Charge was sub-atomic Particles that existed in the Quantum Universe, the same QU that we are just now getting to know and understand - little by little. There is also a SubSet Universe that is far below the QU that replenishes any Particles that are lost at the Quantum Level. Similar to the chickens producing new eggs.
Which came first?
Leaves you dreaming
that you are Kong!
Realty will be imposing
That you were Wrong!
fuzzy wuzzie was a bear; fuzzy wuzzie lost his hair; then fuzzie wuzzie wasn't fuzzy was he
Yes. Charge being the spin of the bosoms and it is the Bosoms that have mass.
Long live the Bosoms!
;)>
Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more