Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A Can primoridal black holes completely explain dark matter

  1. Jun 17, 2016 #1
    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?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 17, 2016 #2

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    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%.
     
  4. Jun 17, 2016 #3
    what about low mass bh like asteroid mass
     
  5. Jun 18, 2016 #4

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    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%.
     
  6. Jun 21, 2016 #5
    stable quantum mechanical planckian mass bh are still possible
     
  7. Jun 21, 2016 #6
    But tiny black holes quickly evaporate.
     
  8. Jun 21, 2016 #7

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    As Khashishi just pointed out, that is not true. Did you read it somewhere?
     
  9. Jun 23, 2016 #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.
     
  10. Jun 23, 2016 #9

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    @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: Jun 23, 2016
  11. Jul 1, 2016 #10

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    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.
     
  12. Jul 1, 2016 #11
    Planckian interacting dark matter
     
  13. Jul 2, 2016 #12

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    I have no idea what that means. Also, you have not responded to post #7 where I asked you a specific question.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Can primoridal black holes completely explain dark matter
Loading...