The discussion centers on the theoretical existence of antimatter black holes and their properties compared to regular black holes. Participants agree that an antimatter black hole would not differ from a matter black hole if they share the same mass, charge, and angular momentum. The conversation also touches on the implications of dark matter's interaction with black holes, emphasizing that dark matter is less likely to be captured due to its collisionless nature. Key references include discussions on Hawking Radiation and the potential for quantum black holes to contribute to dark matter.
PREREQUISITESAstronomers, physicists, and students interested in theoretical astrophysics, particularly those exploring the nature of black holes and dark matter interactions.
2milehi said:It has yet to be proven that matter and anti-matter are gravitational attracted to each other.
Seems to me that if a an electron and a positron annihilate outside the event horizon, a resulting photon might be pointed away from the black hole in which case the resulting addition to the mass of the black hole would be less by the mass equivalent of the energy of the escaping photon than if the two particles had just fallen in.ViperSRT3g said:This makes me wonder if the two types of matter have any effect on each other upon falling into a black hole. But a black hole will still pull in the things around it as it is a gravitational phenomenon.
There is no such thing as a "dark matter black hole". If dark matter goes into a black hole, it's still just a black hole.Andrekosmos said:Yes it is probable and Dark Matter Black Holes too.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-matter-black-holes-destroying-pulsars/
The problem w/ tiny black holes is that if Hawking Radiation does exist, then tiny black holes last for less time than my last slice of pizza and there would not be any around even if they HAD formed in the early universe.Andrekosmos said:I forgot to mention these are just claims made by theorists, also quantum black holes could be the constitutes of dark matter and is being considered a candidate.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-substance-lurking-universes-mass-hiding.html
That's not a problem with tiny black holes themselves, but a problem with their observation!phinds said:The problem w/ tiny black holes is that if Hawking Radiation does exist, then tiny black holes last for less time than my last slice of pizza and there would not be any around even if they HAD formed in the early universe.
I'm not following you. It seems to me the issue is whether they exist for any amount of time even if they come into existence. Hawking Radiation says no they don't. How do you observe something that doesn't exist? Yeah, I guess that would be a problem.Shyan said:That's not a problem with tiny black holes themselves, but a problem with their observation!
The point I'm trying to make, is that this argument is different from the argument against e.g. the existence of white holes corresponding to collapsing stars. Because of the latter, we don't search for white holes. But about the former, we should note that there are(theoretically) processes that result in the creation of microblackholes within our reach. We may actually be able to observe such black holes in LHC.phinds said:I'm not following you. It seems to me the issue is whether they exist for any amount of time even if they come into existence. Hawking Radiation says no they don't. How do you observe something that doesn't exist? Yeah, I guess that would be a problem.
Since dark matter is gravitationally attractive wouldn't it feel the pull of a black hole? And if it crossed the event horizon wouldn't it be unable to escape and considered as captured?Chronos said:If Dark matter is truly collisionless, as is believed, it has no way to shed kinetic energy - meaning little, if any of it can be captured by black holes
Yes and yes, but the point being made is that dark matter is much less likely to be captured in an accretion disk because it doesn't bump into anything so if it is not captured by a black hole as it passes by, it's going to just keep on going, whereas normal matter would interact with any accretion disk and thus slow down and later be captured.websterling said:Since dark matter is gravitationally attractive wouldn't it feel the pull of a black hole? And if it crossed the event horizon wouldn't it be unable to escape and considered as captured?