Our Milky Way galaxy may not have a supermassive black hole at its centre but rather an enormous clump of dark matter exerting the same gravitational influence
https://www.ras.ac.uk/news-and-press/research-highlights/dark-matter-not-black-hole-could-power-milky-ways-heart
37 Comments
Isn’t that… the same thing?
I think I’m going to need an astronomer to explain how that makes it not a black hole. Interesting nonetheless, science is meant to be challenged.
Does a dark matter well have a name?
I thought we measured the size of the supermassive black hole directly (or at least placed an upper limit) as well as the mass, and confirmed it can’t be anything other than a black hole?
Dark matter does not exist.
Great, so we have a *budget* galaxy..
Astronomer here: this paper postulates one particular type of dark matter (purely theoretical) and shows that if it exists, and if it has some particular mass distribution near the center of our galaxy, it could explain the motions of stars in the central region roughly as well as a black hole could.
Not very interesting to me, but perhaps fans of fermionic dark matter will enjoy it.
Wasn’t the first ever photo of a black hole from a few years ago the photo of one in our galaxy?
I thought dark matter does not interact with gravity? Or was it dark energy that doesn’t?
I could’ve swore I’d read recently that dark matter is pretty much out of fashion and baloney?
The [actual paper](https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/staf1854) is, as usual, a lot less misleading (but also quite a bit denser) than the press release.
It’s a black hole. We took a picture of it.
Dark Matter: It’s anything you need it to be.
– Astrophysicists probably
>For the G-objects, no conclusive preference emerges between models. For all stellar objects tested, the BH and fermionic models predict orbital parameters that differ by less than 1 per cent. More accurate data, particularly from stars closer to Sgr A*, is necessary to statistically distinguish between the models considered.
If I’m reading this right, it says that a specific type of fermionic dark matter (which is entirely theoretical and has never been shown to exist) would also explain the movement of stars in the galactic core, but not any better than the black hole model, which *does* have evidence behind it.
So what’s the point? I could also say that it’s not a black hole at the center, it’s a purple hole. A purple hole is a thing I just made up that perfectly matches the observed orbits of stars near the galactic core. You’re welcome, science.
Isn’t “Dark Matter” just a catch all term for whatever is causing the inconsistencies we observe in the current universe that could really be ANYTHING?
Is this postulation then just saying “If this unknown thing happened to have characteristics and distribution that would make it act like a black hole at the center of our galaxy, then it would seem like there was indeed a black hole at the center of our galaxy even though there isn’t. All that is there is just this “not black hole” we are proposing (please ignore that for all intents and purposes this “not black hole” acts exactly like a black hole at the center of our galaxy would)”?
Like, you mean Rosie O’Donnell?
Same but different, if it holds no difference for us, is it relevant?
Nope, nonsense. Go back to start.
So if its a sonic black hole, that’s actually significantly different from a stellar black hole. One is a trash compactor, one is a gateway. Dark matter is clearly phonons, the universe is a light and sound laser disco.
Don’t take Sagittarius A* from me. I can’t take it anymore.
A clump of matter with the same gravity would by definition still be a black hole
AI picture used as “artistic representation” from the Royal Astronomical Society, how the mighty have fallen
This would actually explain why we keep taking blurry pictures of it. “Sorry folks, turns out we’ve been photographing absolutely nothing this whole time.”
I drop enormous clumps of dark matter into the toilet everyday
So difference between dark matter and black holes is that dark matter doesnt attract itself and clump? It is just fixed in space or floating or some hidden infrastructure of space? Dark matter is just twisted space time?
It could also be a giant marshmallow that’s been smushed
My question is: What about the recent ‘picture or image’ from the black hole at the center of our galaxy? Would a clump of dark matter still look like that image?
In other words: we know nothing …
Dark matter enthusiasts are going full clown makeup now huh? Their made up concepts with zero evidence or proof now overide observable evidence.
Trying to insert dark matter over something we have images of and say the images are fake.
Dark Energy is in the same clown car.
Hmm, perhaps the galactic *core* is made of cheese.
And if my grandma had wheels she could be a bicycle.
It’s also possible that dark matter doesn’t experience the electromagnetic force the same as “ordinary” matter allowing dark matter to turn into a singularity much easier so that all super massive black holes are created from dark matter initially.
I do appreciate the science being done, the headline, no so much so
If dark matter formed a blob as dense as what we observe in the center of the milky way, then it would form a black hole. Curving space time to beyond the escape velocity of light can be done with any kind of matter.
Ok, but haven’t we actually *imaged* the SMBH at the center of our galaxy?
It could also be collapsed boson masses.
Corporate identifies it as the same
“I’m not black I’m dark matter.”
u/Andromeda321
Can you please remind me again why we’re certain that the Triangulum Galaxy doesn’t have a Supermassive black hole in its center region?