Do Black Holes create dark matter?

No external text link... Random thought..
Sorry if this has been asked before..
I just thought that we don't know squat about either one, maybe there's a correlation..
you know..so much energy and such..weird things start happenin..

this video use to be on google video before it was melded with youtube, and it was over an hour long. since it was put on youtube, it's been cut down to 3 minutes. doh. anyway, in it, they show how they discovered the universe was created by super massive black holes that created the galaxies around them. so it's possible, yeah.

reply to post by canucks555


Since nothing can escape a black hole...not even light, the idea that they might create anything in our universe is unlikely. However, it is possible that black holes create matter in other universes or at least that the matter and energy they consume reappears somewhere.

My theory is that dark matter is simply matter that vibrates at a rate that us undetectable to use at this time. Much like light and sound that is outside of the range of our human senses.

Originally posted by Metallicus
reply to post by canucks555

 

Since nothing can escape a black hole...not even light.

The idea that they create anything in our universe is unlikely.

My theory is that dark matter is simply matter that vibrates at a rate that us undetectable to use at this time. Much like light and sound that is outside of the range of our human senses.

incorrect. they have 2 states. active and inactive. when they are active, they look like this

reply to post by Metallicus


They do create within our Universe. It is shown that black holes emit matter. This takes place prior to the 'point of no return'. Hawking Radiation or whathaveyou.

I've been doing some looking into both black holes and dark matter/energy lately, and I was actually surprised to discover just how little anyone knows about either. What I really found to be astounding is that no one (according to every legitimate scientific source that exists) has ever seen a black hole, or even the lack of photons in the center of a galaxy that would indicate the presence of a black hole. The inability for photons to escape the gravity field of a black hole is not a net ramification that has ever been observed. It's a net ramification that has only ever existed on a physics blackboard.

Spacetime - the concept - may or may not exist as real, since it's solely based on the theoretical notion that the spatial trajectory creates the event trajectory - i.e. movement causes time to emerge. This concept is beginning to reveal itself as seriously flawed, and possibly fatally so. If this ends up being the case, then the entire paradigm that bases the concept of black holes, dark matter, dark energy and the Big Bang in general, will have to be scrapped.

Oh, and dark matter is another math blackboard supposition. Cosmologists have noticed the presence of what Einstein labeled the Cosmological Constant (without ever suggesting what it is or what it could be other than to insist that "something" is preventing gravity from collapsing the Big Bang universe model, so this matter "constant" must exist) and it has since evolved as a concept to become dark matter. Dark energy is the effect that dark matter has (as is the case with normal matter and energy and how that relationship works) so it's pretty unlikely that black holes - if they actually exist as more than the "required" mass density to explain why a galaxy center has such a powerful gravitational field - have anything at all to do with dark matter, other than the fact that they could color coordinate with each other without a phone call before showing up at a party. Black being the new (and old) black, and all.

Originally posted by NorEaster
I've been doing some looking into both black holes and dark matter/energy lately, and I was actually surprised to discover just how little anyone knows about either. What I really found to be astounding is that no one (according to every legitimate scientific source that exists) has ever seen a black hole, or even the lack of photons in the center of a galaxy that would indicate the presence of a black hole. The inability for photons to escape the gravity field of a black hole is not a net ramification that has ever been observed. It's a net ramification that has only ever existed on a physics blackboard.

Spacetime - the concept - may or may not exist as real, since it's solely based on the theoretical notion that the spatial trajectory creates the event trajectory - i.e. movement causes time to emerge. This concept is beginning to reveal itself as seriously flawed, and possibly fatally so. If this ends up being the case, then the entire paradigm that bases the concept of black holes, dark matter, dark energy and the Big Bang in general, will have to be scrapped.

Oh, and dark matter is another math blackboard supposition. Cosmologists have noticed the presence of what Einstein labeled the Cosmological Constant (without ever suggesting what it is or what it could be other than to insist that "something" is preventing gravity from collapsing the Big Bang universe model, so this matter "constant" must exist) and it has since evolved as a concept to become dark matter. Dark energy is the effect that dark matter has (as is the case with normal matter and energy and how that relationship works) so it's pretty unlikely that black holes - if they actually exist as more than the "required" mass density to explain why a galaxy center has such a powerful gravitational field - have anything at all to do with dark matter, other than the fact that they could color coordinate with each other without a phone call before showing up at a party. Black being the new (and old) black, and all.

edit on 7/8/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)

thankyou for that thorough explanation, i really mean it.
so its safe to say that black holes would not be the origin of dark matter.
black holes, dark matter, big bang, are all juvenile hypothesis. in years o come they will be laughed about like a flat earth.
i've also got my doubts about the suns hydrogen and helium trip.

Whilst I shall keep in mind the theoretical possibilities (valid) of NorEaster, especially when one considers that we are mere infants when it comes to understanding WTF happens with 'black holes', I do suggest that Hawking Radiation defines the fact that yes, black holes can and do, indirectly, emit 'things'.

However... the suggestion that black holes themselves, actually emit things is highly questionable.

Once we understand what is a black hole and what its structure appears to be (and the space/time around it) then we begin to see that whilst radiation (i.e. potential information in another form) is a by-product of active black holes, they are not a necessary condition of them. And thus we start to see black holes as existing a-priori to space-time. I.e. black holes seem to exist before, after, and during interaction with space time from our perspective.

The emission of radiation indicates that they cause the emission of massive amounts of energy, that if with 100 light years of Earth would be potentially hazardous.

With so little actually known about them, I would hesitate to say that Black holes do not produce 'dark matter'. In fact, it is an interesting concept that - when one considers quantum theory - may well be squarely on the button.

Somehow though, I don't think I will be awake when TPTB finally admit to having the tech to prove it.

reply to post by NorEaster

This concept is beginning to reveal itself as seriously flawed, and possibly fatally so. If this ends up being the case, then the entire paradigm that bases the concept of black holes, dark matter, dark energy and the Big Bang in general, will have to be scrapped.

Oh, and dark matter is another math blackboard supposition. Cosmologists have noticed the presence of what Einstein labeled the Cosmological Constant (without ever suggesting what it is or what it could be other than to insist that "something" is preventing gravity from collapsing the Big Bang universe model, so this matter "constant" must exist)

Well said. Much of what we "think" we understand about advanced physics, is really based on "blackboard suppositions"... Things that are "required" to make the math work. Doesn't mean they are absolutely correct. They could be barking up the wrong tree, or even be in the wrong forest.

good answers from Noreaster and that is pretty much the bottom line- no one knows for sure.

Part of my grim dedication to quantum space theory (the observable universe is a super-fluid vacuum exhibiting bose einstein condensate properties) is because it describes a black hole as basically a dense collection of "quanta" or bits of space and doesn't require any imaginary dark matter or dark energy to exist.

Once these bits of space become tightly packed (due to a supposed Astrophysical influence exerting the required energy) space assumes a super symmetric geometry that gives space more curvature due to its higher spatial density.

Any particle traveling within this relative region of space travels straight into the center of the black hole (conserving angular momentum as it travels in straight line through space) where it is packed against other timeless, none resonating quantas.


Intuition of the large physical interactions gives us a glimpse into the small (which is where the rules are apparently made) so I reckon in this case; if we are mathematically missing a large amount of matter or energy in the Universe; it is probably contained within space itself.... but is just very well spread out in the quantum interactions of the superfluid vacuum

Originally posted by NorEaster
Oh, and dark matter is another math blackboard supposition. Cosmologists have noticed the presence of what Einstein labeled the Cosmological Constant (without ever suggesting what it is or what it could be other than to insist that "something" is preventing gravity from collapsing the Big Bang universe model, so this matter "constant" must exist) and it has since evolved as a concept to become dark matter. Dark energy is the effect that dark matter has (as is the case with normal matter and energy and how that relationship works)

I don't know where you're getting your information from, but this isn't right. I think you're getting confused between dark matter and dark energy.

The cosmological constant is thought to be possibly related to dark energy, not dark matter, so "so this matter "constant" must exist) and it has since evolved as a concept to become dark matter." isn't correct from several perspectives. It's dark energy not dark matter and I haven't heard it said it "must" be Einstein's cosmological constant, only that it "may" be the cosmological constant.

Regarding the OP question, since we don't know what dark matter is, or what causes the observations we attribute to dark matter if you prefer, it's not possible to answer your question.

About nobody seeing a black hole, that's true but nobody has seen an electron either, yet we have evidence for both black holes and for electrons even though nobody has seen either one directly.

I have sometimes wondered about 'dark space' where dark matter and dark energy live, (?) perhaps that's why the other two 'darks' cannot be seen?

Originally posted by canucks555
No external text link... Random thought..
Sorry if this has been asked before..
I just thought that we don't know squat about either one, maybe there's a correlation..
you know..so much energy and such..weird things start happenin..

Both of them are pretty well understood. Particularly black holes. They do not have anything to do with dark matter.

Originally posted by NorEaster
I've been doing some looking into both black holes and dark matter/energy lately, and I was actually surprised to discover just how little anyone knows about either.

I'm also surprised at how little anyone seems to know about it. Especially given that these things are very well understood by physics.

What I really found to be astounding is that no one (according to every legitimate scientific source that exists) has ever seen a black hole

This sentence doesn't mean anything. Have you "seen" another planet? An atom? DNA? Have you seen China? I haven't seen any of these things, but I have very good reason to believe they all exist!

or even the lack of photons in the center of a galaxy that would indicate the presence of a black hole.

This is not what would indicate the presence of a black hole! Having enough mass below the Schwarzschild radius is, synchronotron radiation is, orbits of gas and stars is, etc, and these things have all been observed.

Spacetime - the concept - may or may not exist as real, since it's solely based on the theoretical notion that the spatial trajectory creates the event trajectory - i.e. movement causes time to emerge.

This sentence is technobabble and doesn't mean anything at all. Like much of the rest of your post. Attacking things based on not understanding them plus technobabble is not a legitimate method of discussion.

Cosmologists have noticed the presence of what Einstein labeled the Cosmological Constant (without ever suggesting what it is or what it could be other than to insist that "something" is preventing gravity from collapsing the Big Bang universe model, so this matter "constant" must exist) and it has since evolved as a concept to become dark matter.

You're conflating two entirely different things, misunderstanding them both, and then accusing scientists of not understanding it. Bravo!

Not to sound obtuse.... but isn't the inability to see a black hole kinda the point? No light escapes and all that jazz.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
Not to sound obtuse.... but isn't the inability to see a black hole kinda the point? No light escapes and all that jazz.

It depends if they are "feeding" or not. If they aren't "feeding" the only sign we might have of their existence could be stars revolving around them.

But if they are "feeding" we can see the results of that even if we can't see the black hole itself. Our own Milky Way's supermassive black hole is getting ready to start feeding on a little snack about three times the mass of the Earth and we will be watching that over the next year or so.

A chance to watch Milky Way's black hole gobble up 'snack'

"This is the first chance we've had to witness such an event in nearly 40 years of monitoring the galactic center, so this is a rare privilege," said P. Chris Fragile, an astrophysicist at the College of Charleston who works on computer simulations of the cloud's fall. The phenomenon, he said, "will be one of the most carefully observed astronomical events ever."

reply to post by Moduli


This is exactly the kind of finalised science answer that doesnt make any sense to those interested in exotic energy interactions.



There is no generally agreed scientific answer as to what the main observable facet of a black hole; Gravity, actually is...we know what it does but no one can completely define the mechanism of action observed.

Looking at a region in space where no information leaves the locality and extrapolating that because we can calculate how heavy a golf ball is on Mars, we understand it, is a monumental slap in the face to critical thinking.

hey op.
dark matter is very poorly understood by mainstream science.
but it is dark matter that makes a particle feel its mass even tho the dark matter permeates the particle itself

Some black holes are cannibalistic. Take our sister galaxy Andromeda...at one time in history, it's massive black hole --- in the center of the galaxy --- had swallowed up it's rather large sibling black hole. When Andromeda collides with our Milky Way --- billions of years from now --- ours, or Andromeda's center black hole --- will absorb one or the other. I fathom that...after such a feast ---the victorious BH --- will tend to grow bigger, after such an absorbing digestion.

Will this process make the BH bigger in relation to dark matter? I tend to speculate that it does.

I also speculate...that before the Big Bang, the entire matter of the universe --- was concentrated into one super-massive BH --- with the resulting Big Bang, along with the help of antimatter, brought about the physical nature of our universe; including dark matter.

Originally posted by Erno86


I also speculate...that before the Big Bang, the entire matter of the universe --- was concentrated into one super-massive BH --- with the resulting Big Bang, along with the help of antimatter, brought about the physical nature of our universe; including dark matter.

But BBB this ultra massive black hole unlike the black holes of today was superhot