Can you have an antimatter black hole?

In summary: According to the website I added the link to on the bottom there is no difference:"...there is no way to distinguish an antimatter black hole from a regular-matter black hole. In fact, there is no difference between an antimatter black hole and a regular-matter black hole if they have the same mass, charge, and angular-momentum.
  • #1
Philjhinson
5
0
Sorry for a bit of a sci fi question but are anti matter black holes likely, presumably they would need to come from whole antimatter stars in antimatter galaxies? otherwise they would already have destroyed themselves?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
A black hole is a black hole is a black hole. An anti matter black hole would be no different than a black hole formed from stars, hydrogen clouds or abandoned ET spaceship engines. See here for discussion https://sciencequestionswithchris.wordpress.com/2014/05/16/how-can-you-tell-a-black-hole-made-out-of-antimatter-from-a-black-hole-made-out-of-matter/ [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
It has yet to be proven that matter and anti-matter are gravitational attracted to each other.
 
  • #4
2milehi said:
It has yet to be proven that matter and anti-matter are gravitational attracted to each other.

If energy is conserved, Pound-Rebka proves that. Even if energy is not conserved, this would show up in Eotvos-type experiments. Furthermore, the same theory that gives you black holes predicts that matter and antimatter fall at the same rate.
 
  • #5
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.
 
  • #6
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.
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.
 
  • #8
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
 
  • #11
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
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.
 
  • #12
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.
That's not a problem with tiny black holes themselves, but a problem with their observation!
 
  • #13
Shyan said:
That's not a problem with tiny black holes themselves, but a problem with their observation!
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.
 
  • #14
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.
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.
 
  • #15
OK, now I see what you are saying. This sort of sidetracked the discussion about whether or not quantum black holes could be all or part of dark matter. That is, your statement really had nothing to do with that topic, which is why it confused me.
 
  • #16
According to the website I added the link to on the bottom there is no difference:
"...there is no way to distinguish an antimatter black hole from a regular-matter black hole. In fact, there is no difference between an antimatter black hole and a regular-matter black hole if they have the same mass, charge, and angular-momentum.:
https://sciencequestionswithchris.wordpress.com/2014/05/16/how-can-you-tell-a-black-hole-made-out-of-antimatter-from-a-black-hole-made-out-of-matter/ [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes ViperSRT3g
  • #17
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
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?
 
  • #18
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?
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.
 
  • Like
Likes ViperSRT3g

1. Can antimatter form a black hole?

Yes, it is theoretically possible for antimatter to form a black hole. According to the theory of general relativity, any form of matter can collapse under the force of gravity to form a black hole, including antimatter.

2. How would an antimatter black hole differ from a regular black hole?

An antimatter black hole would have the same properties as a regular black hole, such as a singularity and an event horizon. However, it would have opposite charge and spin compared to a regular black hole. This means that it would repel matter instead of attracting it.

3. How would we detect an antimatter black hole?

Currently, there is no way to directly detect an antimatter black hole. However, scientists are able to indirectly detect the presence of black holes through their effects on nearby matter, such as the emission of high-energy radiation. If an antimatter black hole were to interact with matter in our universe, it would produce a unique signature that could potentially be detected.

4. Could an antimatter black hole be a source of energy?

It is possible that an antimatter black hole could be a source of energy, just like a regular black hole. As matter and antimatter annihilate each other, they release a tremendous amount of energy. However, harnessing this energy would be extremely difficult and not currently feasible with our current technology.

5. Are there any known examples of antimatter black holes?

No, there are currently no known examples of antimatter black holes. However, scientists continue to search for evidence of their existence, both through theoretical studies and observational data. The existence of antimatter black holes could have important implications for our understanding of the universe and the laws of physics.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
972
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
965
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
841
Back
Top