Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wisp
Is it not more likely that the supermassive black hole was a fragment blasted out from something bigger – an ultra-suppermassive black hole or MABLE,
|
No, it simply doesn't work that way.
To form any black hole there needs to be a gravitational collapse. The first hypothesized black holes were stars and it was pretty well established that it took a star somewhere between 3 and 8 times larger than our sun for the degenerative matter process below the Neutron stage to occur, for the mass to be large enough for a black hole to form.
Now they believe they have found a Netron star that may have been 40 times the size of our sun originally (can't remember where I saw that), so that 3 to 8 may be wrong, OR their could be some variables about star sizes and processes that have not been well constrained yet.
BUT, the 2 real problems come into play when it comes to HyperNova and the progenitors of SMBH's.
The Nuker Team have determined that the star speeds in the outer edges of the discs of spiral galaxies, has a direct proportionality to the Mass of the SMBH's in each of their repective galaxies, and this could only be true if the Birth of the MBH was intimately tied to the 'materials' in the outer disc at Birth.
BUT OF Course, they are adhering to (better known as Job Security) the highly speculative concept that the entire universe was 'full' of Hydogen/Helium, from the promordial Gamma Radiation (and because NO ONE can figure out what 'could' have graviationally collapsed!), so they are trying to show how a 'large cloud of hydrogen' could have collapsed to create a SMBH.
However,
"IF"the highly speculative concept that the universe started off as High Energy Gamma Radiation is
not right, then the creation of the SMBH is what causes the High Energy Gamma Radiation that makes the electrons/protons and the Hydrogen/Helium to make the baryonic matter for each galaxy.
And, this can also show how the statement that SR forbids Black Holes and GR demands them, can be remedied!