Huge black holes are found in the cores of almost all galaxies, a new study contradicts the hypothesis that these black holes were the remnants of stars that exploded and several million of them gradually merged and even swallowed stars that stood in their way. Is it possible that they formed together with the galaxy itself?
Since the discovery of supermassive black holes, astronomers still do not know how they formed. What is certain is that they are there, inside most galaxies. In fact, observations of quasars reveal supermassive black holes existed in the young universe. Quasars are among the brightest objects in the universe, because of the radiation emitted from them by supermassive black holes that swallow matter around them.
One possibility is that these monsters had a humble beginning as a massive star that exploded and went supernova, then became a black hole. This is a process that astronomers understand quite well. The problem with this theory is that these early supermassive black holes had to grow from the start, at a constant, maximum rate dictated by physics. And as we see today, galaxies oscillate between active states when their black hole swallows matter, and quiescent states.
Another possibility is that these black holes were created directly, by collecting so much material that they skipped beyond the star phase.
Doctor Mitchell S. Begelman, a professor in the Department of Astrophysics and Stellar Sciences at the University of Colorado, recently published a paper titled 'Are supermassive black holes formed by direct collapse?' The article describes an alternative theory of the creation of black holes in the young universe.
After the Big Bang, the universe cooled enough to allow the first stars to form from the primordial hydrogen and helium atoms. It was pure matter, not yet contaminated by previous generations of stars. Astronomers calculated that these first stars, called 'Population III', had a maximum rate at which they could collect material to become a star.
But what if there was a lot more gas around? Much more than the limitations necessary to create a star?
In a normal star, the material collects relatively slowly, forming a mass in the center. When there is enough mass, the center of the star ignites, resulting in an outward pressure that stops the material from collapsing into the center of the star.
But Doctor Begelman calculated that a situation is possible in which the rate of collapse towards the center will be more than a few tenths of a solar mass every year. In this case, the core of the star will be so compressed that the energy released in the process of nuclear fusion will not be sufficient to prevent the star from further compacting. In this case, we will not have a star at all - we will simply pass from the accumulation state of a hydrogen cloud to the state of a very compressed central mass. And from there we will move to a black hole.
The obvious question is - can matter converge at the required speed? And the answer is that he can, if something pushes him... like dark matter [2]. According to Dr. Bagelman, there can be several situations in which an external force - such as the gravitation from a large halo of dark matter - can force gas to move to a central region. In fact, this velocity of matter falling into a central mass has been shown to hold for matter falling into black holes. This is the collapse rate required to 'fuel' quasars. But is it possible to reach such a collapse speed without a black hole, or if the black hole is very small?
Once only a few solar masses of gas have accumulated, the core begins to contract under its own increasing mass. There is a brief period of nuclear fusion, when the object reaches a mass of 100 solar masses, but it passes this stage so quickly that it does not get a chance to spread outwards.
Eventually the object reaches a mass of several thousand solar masses, and its temperature climbs to hundreds of millions of degrees. At this point, gravity takes over and causes the core to collapse in on itself. In this way, a black hole with 10-20 solar masses is obtained, which begins to consume all the mass around it.
From this point on, the black hole is able to efficiently pump additional matter into it, while growing at the maximum rate predicted by physics. In this way it will eventually reach a mass of millions of solar masses. If too much material falls in, then the supermassive black hole, still being ejected, may behave as a 'mini-quasar' (Dr Begelman calls it a 'quasister'). This quasar will glow with radiation as matter collapses into it from around the black hole.
And the good news: it will be possible to locate these quizzers using powerful telescopes. However, their lifespan will be very short - no more than 100,000 years. There is a chance that we will be able to glimpse the Questars with the help of the future 'James Webb Space Telescope' [3]
For the news in Universe Today
[1] It is now commonly thought that black holes are formed from stars like our sun (but much larger and more massive), which go through several stages of internal combustion (the stage our sun is currently in) and then a 'lights out' stage, collapsing into themselves and turning into a black hole . for further reading
[2] Dark matter - a hypothetical substance whose components are unknown, and does not reflect or emit enough electromagnetic radiation to be seen directly. It can be concluded that it exists as a result of the gravitational effects it exerts on visible matter. It is currently suspected that most of the mass in the visible universe consists of dark matter. for further reading
[3] The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is a large space telescope, specially adapted for observing in the infrared range. Its launch is planned for 2013. It will orbit 1.5 million kilometers around the Earth. It is named after a former NASA administrator. The James Webb Space Telescope website within the overall NASA website
More on the subject on the science website
The sky is full of black holes
Astronomers have discovered the black hole nuclei of galaxies undergoing merger processes
17 תגובות
Beautiful. Thanks.
In my humble opinion, these black holes could have been created without the engine of gas absorption, but directly from the initial dense state of the universe, quantum fluctuations created rapidly growing black holes (there was a lot of dense matter around them).
To burst, it is true that the black holes at the center are the engines of the galaxy, or at least that's how the galaxy was designed. But this has nothing to do with "desire" which is a mental process and has no effect on biology (the main biological phenomena are explained using the known chemical substances).
For Sabdarmish.. it has already been said that a stranger and not your mouth will be praised and it always sounds better!
I want to touch on a point that is self-evident, and that is the centrifugal force with which they explain the star remaining at a distance from the sun and not being attracted to it all the way!
Maybe the centrifugal force doesn't work in space!? Because if you think about it without total gravity, the centrifugal force has no effect!
The well-known example of the ball moving away from the center when you rotate the surface on which it is located is based on the resistance of the surface with the help of gravity! Then I remembered the motorcycle from the circus that travels on the walls and I thought here is a bad example for me where the centrifugal force works without an opposing surface! But when I imagined the motorcycle a little more, I saw in front of my eyes the surface on which it rides...this surface is only horizontal, so there is something that will oppose it!!
But in space it is about two bodies with a self-gravitational force without any resistance surface on which the centrifugal force can be "created".. then these two bodies were supposed to be attracted to each other with all their strength until they merge and.. it doesn't happen!
It is clear from my words here that I examine with a critical eye (my strong eye) the accepted and probably the unproven (of course if we built an experiment that tests the presence of the centrifugal force as affecting the distance of the star from the sun and the experiment gives a positive result that justifies this explanation then what I have written here is meaningless) .. and if there is not A possibility to prove.. another explanation is needed and it is provided by the dark matter as it keeps the distances between all the planets and between them and the sun by its very essence and presence while it also keeps the star in one piece! Of course up to a certain limit that if the same star passes the collision is inevitable!
But surely the scholars here will now bring decisive proofs of the presence and activity of the centrifugal force that creates a force of repulsion between bodies in space... okay! whip !
To Ami Bachar
About this it is said:- Righteous, their work is done by others.
Have a happy new year to you, to Czesna, to new singer and in general, to all the science commenters!
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Dear Mr. Cezana and Mr. Hadad,
Allow me to direct you to a link on the scientist's website created by Mr. Sabdarmish, which explains well the problems of dark matter and even gives a certain alternative. I found this pair of essays very interesting and the questions and answers of the talkbackists and the writer very mind-blowing. If so:
On spiral galaxies, gravitation and dark mass
Chapter B, continued - about spiral galaxies, gravitation and dark mass
Greetings friends,
Ami
Here are my responses to the commenters:
Mr. What's new?
My objection includes eight possible explanations and not only by dark mass. And the other explanations in my opinion are no less good than those of the dark mass and at least one surpasses it.
And regarding my knowledge on the subject, here I analyzed the entire system from all sides as I know how to analyze industrial systems as well, mainly from being an engineer in industrial management.. There will be those who will see this as a disadvantage, but in my humble opinion there is an advantage here that I am not tied to any existing paradigm.
In addition, there really is no problem for an academic person to grasp a certain limited topic and to write down everything known about it, everything known (almost). If they let me analyze and optimize the activities of a construction company, I'm sure I can do it well even without being a construction engineer.
Another thing, I would appreciate it if you introduced yourself by the name of the type of settlement and not something new or old.
To Roy Cezana
Even if we think our solution is the right one, we must not sanctify it, and as a result belittle, or even prevent other solutions.
And regarding your following claim:
"Gravity is the strongest force in the macro dimensions, so it is reasonable to assume that if dark matter exists, it affects mainly through gravity." End quote.
Well you and 99.9999% of scientists believe and are sure that gravity is the strongest force in the universe, only that this statement has no scientific proof beyond the distances of a thousand light years. In other words, gravitation that works according to Newton's formula is proven only in the solar system and perhaps also in double star systems where the distance between the couple is at most a few hundreds of astronomical units. It's very strange, people tend to dismiss it outright but... it's true!, there is no proof.
To remind you, there are 63400 astronomical units in one light year.
A force that can replace gravitation at the enormous distances in question - up to billions of light years - is a force that results from the very existence of particles in huge quantities in all parts of the universe, starting with cosmological radiation, neutrinos and many other particles that will surely be discovered, that by virtue of their movement in space, must cause pressure on the body that resides within them - The galaxies and clusters of galaxies.
To Yossi Andor
The MOND theory is one of eight possible explanations, and it is quite good, but in my humble opinion is incorrect because it is too bold even for my opinion in its demand to change Newton's second law F=M*A.
Led. breach
I agree with you that one should not hurry and write:- "never", science really changes at a pace and it would be problematic to claim that way.
Happy holiday to all commenters!
Sabdarmish Yehuda
I'm not an astrophysicist either, and nothing less than that! All my reference to dark matter stems from personal thinking and a fairly light reading of the developments in this matter.. What I am writing are personal insights as I understand them according to the article and the new facts arising from it!!
I would like to draw the attention of the commenters and readers to Enbada because in a TV program (Wednesday I think) in which first class scientists (space exploration) appeared one of them (unfortunately I do not remember his name) built computer models of the universe and when he did not include the dark matter all the stars disintegrated To the dust because gravity was not enough to hold together all the components of the star! And when dark matter was included in the calculation in the correct dose (we must emphasize this) the galaxies as we know them were created..therefore the conclusion from the computerized experiment is that stars cannot exist without dark matter..without it everything is just dust in space and only when it enters the picture does the birth of stars begin!!
That's why I see him as the will of the universe or if you will the one who executes the will or other desires!!
Regarding the black holes as motors of the galaxies, I may have exaggerated something...but something has to move the galaxy!? So for me, as long as there are no other candidates, they are on par with the big engine that drives and navigates the galaxy in space!
And regarding the effect of dark matter on biology..in the same program it is said that at any given moment billions of dark matter particles pass through our bodies!! What I was referring to is that the way in which the dark matter affects the stars is not yet known, but the effect exists, so maybe just maybe the dark matter also affects biology in an unknown way! After all, if you had told someone a hundred years ago that invisible radio waves affect him, he would not have believed you, and it is known that many people looked behind the radio for the talking man!!
Besides, I wouldn't rush to write, never.. it's always problematic, especially in the field of science!
And thanks to all the respondents and happy holidays (for yesterday)
As I think recently they disproved the relativistic version of MOND (called TeVeS if I'm not mistaken).
Mr. Sabdarmish –
The reason I preemptively 'sanctify' the role of dark matter as a gravitational effect is that it is the force that seems most likely. As far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong), gravity is the strongest force in the macro dimensions, so it is reasonable to assume that if dark matter exists, then it affects mainly through gravity.
I would love to hear from you about other theories that exist on the subject.
Lesbadramish Yehuda
I was impressed by your strong opposition to the "dark matter, dark energy" theory.
Is this determination backed up from a mathematical and physical point of view and includes all the possibilities (I don't know how much your knowledge of physical mathematics is).
If your knowledge on the subject is professional and deep, then please submit an article on this subject to the Academy of Sciences or another academic body, and who knows, you might win a Nobel Prize.
I'm not saying this to tease, I really mean it.
A common mistake in the words ofRoey Tsezana. He says:-
"Dark matter is a theory associated with astronomy only, and is intended to explain unexplained gravitational effects that operate between objects in space.
End of quote.
It must be intended to explain unexplained movement of objects in space.
As soon as you write:- "unexplained gravitational effects"
You decide in advance that the problem is a problem whose solution is gravitational, and thus prepare in advance (from the word:-kosher) the gravitational explanation of the dark mass.
By seeing the problem as: "unexplained movement of cosmological bodies", we give a possibility in advance to all other possible explanations for the problem.
You can also look at the problem the way commenter Binyamin May looks at it: "The "dark matter" and "dark energy" are meant to explain gaps between observations and formulas." End quote. Here the commenter Binyamin Mai raises where the problem of the inequality is located that requires an explanation (in formulas), and in advance does not dedicate one of the possibilities to an explanation.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Mr May –
The site was not a mistake by the scientists. He was a theory that was put forward, which was supported by certain evidence... but in the end was refuted by other evidence (even before Einstein, if my memory serves me correctly).
This is the way of science - to come up with theories and disprove their existence by finding theories that better describe reality.
It may be a cumbersome way to get to the truth, but the simple fact is that there is no other way. See for example religion, where there is a very specific axiom "everything is in the hands of God", which limited the ability to come up with new theories and reject them. As a result, religion has not advanced humanity at all over a period of more than three thousand years.
Now see the science. From the moment that the idea of 'critical thinking' was raised and perfected by Francis Bacon in the 16th century, humanity has moved within 400 years to an era where the average Western person lives in conditions that even kings in the Middle Ages did not have.
So the scientists are constantly learning from the mistakes of their predecessors (and even Einstein made a mistake here and there) - and this is exactly the way of science.
I think science is waiting for a "new Einstein",
or for calibration..
"Dark matter" and "dark energy" are intended
explain discrepancies between observations and formulas,
Just as the non-existent substance, "ether",
Designed to explain the passage of electro waves
Magnetic in a vacuum. eventually came
Einstein and explained that there is no need for an "ether"
To transmit waves in the void - and today
Everything is clear about this.
The question is, when will the scientists learn
from the mistakes of their predecessors.
Mr Peretz,
I do not intend to address the existence or non-existence of dark matter. At this point in science, dark matter is a theory whose existence is being tried to disprove or confirm. If, one day, enough evidence for the existence of dark matter and dark energy accumulates, then the theory will become one of the cornerstones of the science of astronomy. If not, then… no.
What bothers me is that you wrote that:
"According to the observations of the astronomers and their conclusions, the black matter can be regarded as the "will of the universe" it is the one that drives processes in the universe at the level of the stars and who knows, maybe it will turn out even at the biological level!"
Dark matter is a theory associated with astronomy only, and is intended to explain unexplained gravitational effects that operate between objects in space. It has nothing to do (and never will, in its current form) with the science of biology. Biology deals with living things, while dark matter explains gravitational phenomena that have no other explanation yet. Since in our infant solar system all the movements of the planets and stars can be explained even without the presence of dark matter, it is unlikely that it has any contact with life on Earth - or at all.
The date of the lecture is 21.10.2007.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
How far can you go with dark matter and black holes?
You can't see them, so can you give them any feature you want?
And then the dark matter, like the Almighty God, he even, (according to the commenter D. Peretz) also gives us life?
So after everyone is already singing the praises of dark matter, I'm sorry to be the category for dark matter and omnipotent black holes.
What bothers me is the fact that someone decides that there is dark matter in the vastness of the universe whose strange properties were all invented to "sewn" solutions to unsolved cosmological problems, first of all the too fast rotation of the spiral galaxies.
The dark matter solution is just one of many other options, some of which are more successful, such as the MOND theory.
We should not forget that dark matter cannot stand as a solution in its own right and using such a solution would also require the existence of dark energy, a kind of repulsive force of the void, which would explain the accelerated expansion of the universe.
This is another solution invented to explain unexplained physical phenomena, and it was done not very successfully.
And now in the article we are talking about a massive black hole that even swallows dark matter.
I am opposed to the explanation of dark matter and in addition to a massive or supermassive black hole or even a "yanko", whose properties are strange.
I understand from the words of the commenter Ami Bachar that his opinion is also not comfortable with the solutions we tend to attribute to the dark black hole whose size is tiny relative to the size of ordinary galaxies.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
For anyone who is interested, I am going to give a lecture on this topic at Technode, the observatory in Givat Olga on Sunday, April 21.4.2007, XNUMX at eight o'clock in the evening.
d. dear burst,
First I must say that I do not understand a thing and a half about astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology or anything else that differs from my field of specialization (microbiology). Having said that, my friends will correct me, but as far as I understand, a supermassive black hole in the center of the galaxy, which can contain millions of solar masses (let's say even a few tens or hundreds) is, apparently, a small body compared to a galaxy that consists of hundreds of billions of stars. To say that something super massive is driving the galaxy would, if I'm not mistaken, contain the concept of "super massive" on the order of galactic magnitude and there is an injustice here. Galaxies are orders of magnitude larger than black holes, even the supermassive ones at the center.
As for dark matter… again, I have no idea. But maybe (when there is no idea it is permissible to say everything) the affinity of dark matter for black holes is different from the affinity of "normal" matter? Maybe a black hole doesn't attract dark matter at all? Maybe it attracts him much more than ordinary material? If so, if supermassive black holes attract dark matter to them in a special way and with a very high affinity (much more than "normal" matter), then it could be that the mass of the black hole or alternatively the pressure around the black hole, is a computational artifact.
And for the thousandth time (forgive me, I feel like I have to say it again and again and again) I don't understand anything in the field, I'm just a little interested and know a little basic concepts. I would be happy if those in the know could reply and refer to D's words. breach
Happy New Year to the readers of Science
Ami
Don't the astronomers and physicists define the huge black holes at the center of every galaxy as the engine of the galaxy? Because that's how I see them since I read here about the fact that there are black holes over 2 3 million solar masses and even 10 and 15 million solar masses and now we're talking about hundreds of solar masses!
Obviously, they are not there by chance, so it is most natural to think of them as the engines of the galaxy...which means that there should be a correlation between the size of the black hole in the center of the galaxy and the size of the galaxy!
At least here they already mention the possible activity of the black matter (I became a publicist for the black matter!!) .. a completely reasonable thing!
According to the observations of the astronomers and their conclusions, the black matter can be regarded as the "will of the universe" it is the one that drives processes in the universe at the level of the stars and who knows maybe it will turn out even at the biological level!
It sounds logical to me that these are black holes that are created in this way in the first place with a huge size and even more logical to me, these black holes start the "birth" of the galaxy and only then do the stars begin to form...very logical!
In any case, everything is overseen by dark matter, and if we want to know what the future holds, we will have to learn the language of dark matter (I went one step further) (allowed at this time!). In other words, it would be worthwhile to develop an instrument that would decode the activity of dark matter, so that we can know in advance what will happen in the future For the visible material!!