Magnetospheric eternally collapsing objects

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tovisonnenberg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    black holes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of magnetospheric eternally collapsing objects (MECOs), which are proposed as an alternative to the formation of singularities in collapsing massive stars. Participants explore the stability of MECOs, the implications of radiation pressure, and the conditions under which these objects might exist without forming event horizons.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Debate/contested, Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the theory of MECOs, suggesting that collapsing massive stars do not form singularities but instead enter a state of "eternal collapse" due to radiation pressure reaching the Eddington limit.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the original post's sources, emphasizing the need for credible references to evaluate the claims made about MECOs.
  • A later reply indicates that the Wiki article implies that the mass of a MECO would radiate away, raising questions about the stability of such objects.
  • Concerns are expressed regarding how radiation pressure could prevent the formation of an event horizon, particularly for supermassive black holes, suggesting that significant mass would need to be kept outside the Schwarzschild Radius.
  • One participant notes a lack of examination of the mathematical treatment of the theory, indicating that further understanding may be necessary.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the stability of MECOs and the role of radiation pressure, with no consensus reached on the validity of the theory or its implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for credible sources and mathematical analysis to fully understand the claims made about MECOs and their stability, indicating potential limitations in the current discussion.

tovisonnenberg
Messages
19
Reaction score
1
I read about a theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetospheric_eternally_collapsing_object) (https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0602453.pdf) that proposes that collapsing massive stars never actually form a singularity, and instead they end up as "magnetospheric eternally collapsing objects" (MECOs). The theory states that as the infalling matter from a collapsing massive star grows denser and hotter, there will be enough radiation for the object to approach the Eddington limit and halt the collapse. The object is then said to be in "eternal collapse".
My question is:
How can this object maintain its stability for eternity? Why wouldn't the object eventually radiate itself away? At least some radiation from the object must escape because the theory explicitly states that MECOs do not form event horizons.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
hi there :smile:

tovisonnenberg said:
I read about a theory
where ?
Please don't say something like that without links, quotes etc, so that it can be evaluated by those you would like to read and comment on your post :smile:
We don't know if you were reading a valid scientific paper or some poorly written, for the masses, pop-science article ?regards
Dave
 
I added 2 links in the original post. Thanks for letting me know!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn
The Wiki article seems to claim that the mass would indeed radiate away.

I’m afraid I don’t see how radiation pressure prevents an event horizon from forming, especially in the case of supermassive black holes. The Schwarzschild Radius for these is, in some cases, greater than the diameter of our Solar system. Radiation pressure in this case would have to keep multiple individual stars outside of that radius.

I have not, however, examined the mathematical treatment presented, so maybe I will have a better understanding later.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K