Can primoridal black holes completely explain dark matter

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
11 replies · 2K views
kodama
Messages
1,092
Reaction score
145
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
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   Reactions: QuantumQuest
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
 
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%.
 
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
 
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?
 
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.
 
@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   Reactions: Fervent Freyja
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
 
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.