The discussion revolves around the concept of antimatter black holes, exploring their existence, formation, and interaction with matter and dark matter. Participants examine theoretical implications, gravitational interactions, and the nature of black holes in the context of antimatter and dark matter.
Participants express multiple competing views regarding the existence and nature of antimatter black holes, the gravitational interactions between matter and antimatter, and the role of dark matter in black hole formation. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.
Limitations include the lack of empirical evidence for the gravitational attraction between matter and antimatter, the speculative nature of dark matter interactions, and the unresolved status of tiny black holes in the context of Hawking Radiation.
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?