Monster Black Hole Busts Theory

[GordonCopestake]

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/071017-monster-bhole.html

[lunator]

Interesting read. Cheers Gordon

It shows just how little we really know about black holes.

[supernova]

WOW thanks Gordon. :shock: worth a look.

[GazOC]

Good read. Cheers Gordon.

[gort]

This is a very interesting article - thanks for bringing it up, Gordon.

I think it proves two things - current models of supernova remnants (to black holes) are evolving, and take whatever you read with a grain of salt and a dose of scepticism!

Unless I am missing something, the surprise at finding a BH with 16 solar masses is puzzling. Older theories (maybe 5 years old) seem to place an upper limit of stellar BHs (collapse of single star - no accretion afterwards) at about 14 solar masses. Not far from 16. But a recent Astrophysical Journal article (Jan 2007) entitled "Fallback and Black Hole Production in Massive Stars" by Zhang et al says, in part:

"For Population III stars above about 25 M? and explosion energies less than 1.5 × 1051 erg, black holes are a common outcome, with masses that increase monotonically with increasing main sequence mass up to a maximum hole mass of about 35 M?".

It seems that current models can accommodate larger stellar BHs.

The main problem is modelling what happens during and shortly after a supernova. Especially when the core collapse requires everything to be treated relativistically. No doubt the models will continue to evolve.

Anyway, interesting subject!

Cheers,

James