Come join the friendliest, most engaging and inclusive astronomy forum geared for beginners and advanced telescope users, astrophotography devotees, plus check out our "Astro" goods vendors.
https://www.theskysearchers.com/
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 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