A recent analysis of stellar velocities and pulsar accelerations in Omega Centauri indicates a cluster of stellar black holes rather than a single medium-sized black hole
Has the decades-old mystery related to the strange movements of the stars in Alpha Centauri finally been solved?
Omega Centauri, a massive star cluster with nearly ten million stars, is in the Centauri group. The unusually high velocities of stars near its center They are an old mystery for astronomers. Two main explanatory theories have been developed: the existence of an intermediate-sized black hole (IMBH), which weighs about 100,000 times the mass of the Sun, or a cluster of smaller interstellar black stars, each weighing a few solar masses.
The evolution of stars indicates that black holes will form naturally in the center of the cluster. But astronomers believed that most of these black holes would be ejected over time due to gravitational plexus interactions with nearby stars. Because of this assumption the existence of a single IMBH seems more likely. The IMBH theory received further support when researchers observed stars moving at even higher speeds near the core of Omega Centauri, and interactions with a massive central black hole are a possible explanation.
Astronomers are excited about intermediate-mass black holes (IMBHs) because they may be the "missing link" between stellar black holes and supermassive black holes. Stellar black holes are formed from the death of massive stars and have been detected using a variety of different techniques. Supermassive black holes are found at the center of large galaxies and can weigh millions to billions of solar masses. We currently do not know how they form or if they begin their lives as stellar black holes. Finding IMBH could solve this cosmic mystery.
In the new study, they looked again at the anomalous velocities of stars in the center of Omega Centauri, but this time using new data. The researchers for the first time combined the anomalous velocity data with new data on the accelerations of pulsars. Pulsars, like black holes, are formed from dead stars. They weigh up to two solar masses, are only about twenty kilometers in diameter and can rotate up to 700 times per minute. When they rotate, they emit radio waves along the axis of rotation, striking like a spinning top. The radio beams pass by the Earth like a beacon, and we can detect them.
Pulsars are highly magnetized rotating neutron stars that emit beams of AM radiation from the poles that create pulses that are picked up in Israel.
Pulsars are natural clocks, as accurate as atomic clocks in Israel. Careful measurement of the change in their rotation rate allows astronomers to calculate how the pulsars accelerate, and directly probe the strength of the gravitational field at the center of Omega Centauri. Combining these new acceleration measurements with the stellar velocities, the researchers were able to differentiate between an IMBH and a cluster of black holes, in favor of the cluster.
Prof. Justin Reid, one of the authors of the paper, said: "The hunt for an IMBH continues, but our research suggests that it must weigh less than about 6,000 solar masses and exist alongside a cluster of stellar black holes. There is, however, a good chance that an IMBH will be found soon."
More of the topic in Hayadan:
One response
I will start with the question I asked the artificial intelligence:
In twin paradox, the traveling twin is younger when they are reunited.
But what's happening if the traveling twin is stationary relative to the cmbr? Let say they both started at a speed of factor gamma equals 10 relative to the cmbr and the traveling twin accelerated until he is stationary relative to the cmbr, travel for one year according to his clock, and then returns to his brother
The answer I received:
Let me think about this interesting variant of the twin paradox step by step.
1) Initial conditions:
– Both twins start moving at γ=10 relative to the CMB rest frame
– The "traveling" twin decelerates to become stationary relative to CMB
- Stays there for 1 proper year
- Then accelerates back to rejoin their twin
2) Key points to consider:
– The "stationary" twin maintains γ=10 relative to CMB throughout
– The "traveling" twin experiences proper time during acceleration phases
- Special relativity tells us that proper time is maximum in the frame where an object is at rest
3) Analysis:
– During the travel period in CMB frame:
* "Stationary" twin's time dilation: Their 1 year dilates by γ=10
* "Traveling" twin experiences:
– Deceleration phase (some proper time)
- 1 year proper time while stationary in CMB frame
– Acceleration phase (some proper time)
4) Crucial insight:
The "stationary" twin is actually the one moving at high speed relative to the CMB frame. They experience more time dilation than their "traveling" sibling who spends most time in the CMB rest frame.
Therefore, in this scenario, the "traveling" twin who becomes stationary relative to the CMB would actually be OLDER when they reunite, not younger. This is because they spend significant time in a frame with less time dilation (the CMB rest frame), while their sibling remains in a highly time-dilated state throughout.
This is a fascinating inversion of the classic twin paradox result, showing how our choice of reference frame can dramatically affect the outcome. The key is that being at rest in the CMB frame minimizes time dilation, while moving at γ=10 relative to it causes significant time dilation.
Would you like me to elaborate on any part of this analysis? For instance, we could calculate the exact age difference if you'd like to specify the acceleration phases in more detail.
According to the answer, the traveling twin will be old and his brother left behind will be younger when they meet after the trip
This is the answer I got from all the AI apps in different detail, but with the same result