Can primoridal black holes completely explain dark matter

In summary, it has been widely reported in the news that there has been a second observation of two black holes' gravitational waves. It has also been reported that this observation has implications for the understanding of dark matter, with some scientists proposing that dark matter could be made up of primordial black holes. This would mean that dark matter is not a particle physics issue, but rather a gravitational one. However, there are strong constraints from various observations that limit the amount of dark matter that could potentially be in black holes to be under 0.1 to 1%. Additionally, the idea of low mass black holes, such as asteroid mass black holes, as a solution for dark matter has been ruled out based on measurements of the gamma ray background flux
  • #1
kodama
978
132
widely reported in the news is a second observation of 2 black holes gravitational waves. also reported are its implications


Science World Report-Jun 15, 2016
Astronomers have reportedly started to think that dark matter could be made up of primordial black holes. According to Alexander Kashlinsky,

according to this, dark matter is real, but it is not a WIMP, Axion, or any SUSY-extension of the SM. Dark matter can be wholly explained by primordial black holes.

what are the ramifications to string theory, susy, BSM and other heP if there are no particles that make up dark matter, instead dark matter is 100% explained by primordial black holes

dark matt
er is not a particle physics issue but a black hole explanation, it is gravitational in origin. how would it effect the scientific credibility of SUSY and strings if there are no neutralinos or any SUSY dark matter candidate in this scenario?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Despite the hoopla in the popular press, the idea doesn't work - there are strong constraints from non-observation of hawking radiation, femtolensing, microlensing, the CMB, and so forth limits the amount of dark matter in black holes to be under about 0.1 to 1%.
 
  • Like
Likes QuantumQuest
  • #3
Vanadium 50 said:
Despite the hoopla in the popular press, the idea doesn't work - there are strong constraints from non-observation of hawking radiation, femtolensing, microlensing, the CMB, and so forth limits the amount of dark matter in black holes to be under about 0.1 to 1%.

what about low mass bh like asteroid mass
 
  • #4
kodama said:
what about low mass bh like asteroid mass

Despite the hoopla in the popular press, the idea doesn't work - there are strong constraints from non-observation of hawking radiation, femtolensing, microlensing, the CMB, and so forth limits the amount of dark matter in black holes to be under about 0.1 to 1%.
 
  • #5
Vanadium 50 said:
Despite the hoopla in the popular press, the idea doesn't work - there are strong constraints from non-observation of hawking radiation, femtolensing, microlensing, the CMB, and so forth limits the amount of dark matter in black holes to be under about 0.1 to 1%.

stable quantum mechanical Planckian mass bh are still possible
 
  • #6
But tiny black holes quickly evaporate.
 
  • #7
kodama said:
stable quantum mechanical Planckian mass bh are still possible
As Khashishi just pointed out, that is not true. Did you read it somewhere?
 
  • #8
Perhaps he was referring to this idea?

From what I read, asteroid mass black holes should not exist. There has been enough time in the universe for any black holes smaller than the moon to have evaporated.
 
  • #9
@kodama how about you TELL us what you are talking about instead of our having to guess. Personally, I'm assuming that since what you said was "primordial black holes" that what you actually MEANT was "primordial black holes".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Fervent Freyja
  • #10
Low mass PBH have been repeatedly ruled out as DM candidates based on the measured gamma ray background flux as discussed, for example, in this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.05349, Constraints on primordial black holes from Galactic gamma-ray background.
 
  • #11
phinds said:
@kodama how about you TELL us what you are talking about instead of our having to guess. Personally, I'm assuming that since what you said was "primordial black holes" that what you actually MEANT was "primordial black holes".
Planckian interacting dark matter
 
  • #12
kodama said:
Planckian interacting dark matter
I have no idea what that means. Also, you have not responded to post #7 where I asked you a specific question.
 

1. Can primordial black holes account for all of the observed dark matter in the universe?

No, while primordial black holes may contribute to a small fraction of the total dark matter in the universe, they cannot account for all of it. Observations of the cosmic microwave background and gravitational lensing suggest that the majority of dark matter is in the form of non-baryonic particles.

2. How do primordial black holes form?

Primordial black holes are thought to have formed in the early universe, shortly after the Big Bang. They are created when density fluctuations in the initial stages of the universe's expansion collapse under their own gravity.

3. Can primordial black holes be detected?

Yes, primordial black holes can be detected through their effects on other objects, such as gravitational lensing or accretion of matter. However, the detection of primordial black holes is still a subject of ongoing research and has not been definitively confirmed.

4. How do primordial black holes differ from other black holes?

Primordial black holes are distinct from other black holes in that they are thought to have formed in the early universe, while other black holes are created through the collapse of massive stars. They also differ in size, with primordial black holes being much smaller than stellar black holes.

5. What implications would the existence of primordial black holes as dark matter have on our understanding of the universe?

If primordial black holes were found to make up a significant portion of dark matter, it would challenge our current understanding of the universe's formation and evolution. It would also have implications for theories of gravity and the nature of dark matter itself.

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
198
Replies
4
Views
44
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
7
Views
4K
Back
Top