Is dark matter actually tiny black holes?
- AntennaGuy
- Articles: 0
- Posts: 1429
- Joined: Sun May 19, 2019 1:20 am
- 4
- Location: Tyler, TX USA
- Status:
Offline
-
TSS Awards Badges
Is dark matter actually tiny black holes?
https://www.space.com/tiny-black-holes- ... r-suspects
* Celestron C6 SCT on a Twilight 1 Alt-Az mount
Prof. Barnhardt to Klaatu in The Day the Earth Stood Still: "There are several thousand questions I'd like to ask you.”
- Graeme1858 Online
- Co-Administrator
- Articles: 1
- Posts: 7532
- Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:16 pm
- 4
- Location: North Kent, UK
- Status:
Online
-
TSS Awards Badges
TSS Photo of the Day
I Broke The Forum.
Re: Is dark matter actually tiny black holes?
They posit tiny black holes born over 13.8 billion years ago, just after the Big Bang, that are no larger than a proton, could cluster to become suspects for dark matter without the need for new physics.
There would need to be a lot of them!
Graeme
Celestron 9.25 f10 SCT, f6.3FR, CGX mount.
ASI1600MM Pro, ASI294MC Pro, ASI224MC
ZWO EFW, ZWO OAG, ASI220MM Mini.
APM 11x70 ED APO Binoculars.
https://www.averywayobservatory.co.uk/
- helicon
- Co-Administrator
- Articles: 598
- Posts: 12424
- Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 1:35 pm
- 5
- Location: Washington
- Status:
Offline
-
TSS Awards Badges
Re: Is dark matter actually tiny black holes?
Refractors: ES AR152 f/6.5 Achromat on Twilight II, Celestron 102mm XLT f/9.8 on Celestron Heavy Duty Alt Az mount, KOWA 90mm spotting scope
Binoculars: Celestron SkyMaster 15x70, Bushnell 10x50
Eyepieces: Various, GSO Superview, 9mm Plossl, Celestron 25mm Plossl
Camera: ZWO ASI 120
Naked Eye: Two Eyeballs
Latitude: 48.7229° N
- AntennaGuy
- Articles: 0
- Posts: 1429
- Joined: Sun May 19, 2019 1:20 am
- 4
- Location: Tyler, TX USA
- Status:
Offline
-
TSS Awards Badges
Re: Is dark matter actually tiny black holes?
There would seem to be plenty of room for them. Does anyone know of particular measurements or observations (past or future) that could (or already) exclude this possibility? Should we see evidence of their collisions with planets, for example? I suspect it would be dangerous to have a tiny 10-ton black hole pass through your body at high speed, but... perhaps that would depend on collision cross-sections (which would need to be calculated)? Along those lines, if they do exist, should they show up in our particle detectors, along with other "cosmic" rays? Anyway, Is there any fundamental theoretical disconnect with reality here? If not, is it arguably less elegant (or perhaps even more elegant??) than alternative theories of dark matter?Graeme1858 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 16, 2024 5:17 am Interesting.
They posit tiny black holes born over 13.8 billion years ago, just after the Big Bang, that are no larger than a proton, could cluster to become suspects for dark matter without the need for new physics.
There would need to be a lot of them!
Graeme
And there's this amusing story: https://www.universetoday.com/1930/are- ... the-earth/
* Celestron C6 SCT on a Twilight 1 Alt-Az mount
Prof. Barnhardt to Klaatu in The Day the Earth Stood Still: "There are several thousand questions I'd like to ask you.”
Create an account or sign in to join the discussion
You need to be a member in order to post a reply
Create an account
Not a member? register to join our community
Members can start their own topics & subscribe to topics
It’s free and only takes a minute