Recent observations, including those from the Hubble Space Telescope, suggest that early galaxies harbored significantly more black holes than previously thought, challenging our understanding of their rapid growth given the limited time after the Big Bang.
The study explores various formation theories including direct collapses influenced by dark matter and exotic processes involving dark stars, setting the stage for future explorations by next-generation space observatories like the James Webb Space Telescope, which aim to uncover faint quasars and potentially witness the birth of black holes.
Supermassive Black Holes
Supermassive black holes are among the most astonishing objects in the universe, boasting masses that can exceed one billion times that of the Sun. And we know these massive entities have been around for a long time.
Indeed, astronomers have identified the extremely luminous compact sources that are located at the centers of galaxies, known as quasars (rapidly growing supermassive black holes), when the universe was less than 1 billion years old.
Early Universe Black Hole Abundance
Now our new study, published in Astrophysical Journal Letters, has used observations from the Hubble Space Telescope to show that there were many more (much less luminous) black holes in the early universe than previous estimates had suggested. Excitingly, this can help us understand how they formed – and why many of them appear to be more massive than expected.
Black holes grow by swallowing up material that surrounds them, in a process known as accretion. This produces tremendous amounts of radiation. The pressure from this radiation places a fundamental limit on how quickly black holes can grow.
Scientists were therefore faced with a challenge in explaining these early, massive quasars: without much cosmic time in which to feed, they must have either grown quicker than physically possible, or been born surprisingly massive.
Credit: NASA, ESA, Matthew Hayes (Stockholm University), Steven V.W. Beckwith (UC Berkeley), Garth Illingworth (UC Santa Cruz), Richard Ellis (UCL), Joseph DePasquale (STScI)
Formation Theories of Black Holes
But how do black holes form at all? Several possibilities exist. The first is that so-called primordial black holes have been in existence since shortly after the Big Bang. While plausible for black holes with low masses, massive black holes cannot have formed in significant numbers according to the standard model of cosmology.
Black holes definitely can form (now verified by gravitational wave astronomy) in the final stages of the short lives of some normal massive stars. Such black holes could in principle grow quickly if formed in extremely dense star clusters where stars and black holes may merge. It is these “stellar mass seeds” of black holes that would need to grow up too fast.
The alternative is that they could form from “heavy seeds,” with masses around 1,000 times greater than known massive stars. One such mechanism is a “direct collapse,” in which early structures of the unknown, invisible substance known as dark matter confined gas clouds, while background radiation prevented them from forming stars. Instead, they collapsed into black holes.
The trouble is that only a minority of dark matter halos grow large enough to form such seeds. So this only works as an explanation if the early black holes are rare enough.
Recent Discoveries and the Role of Observations
For years, we have had a good picture of how many galaxies existed in the first billion years of cosmic time. But finding black holes in these environments was extremely challenging (only luminous quasars could be proven).
Although black holes grow by swallowing surrounding material, this does not happen at a constant rate – they break their feeding into “meals,” which makes their brightness vary over time. We monitored some of the earliest galaxies for changes in brightness over a 15-year period, and used this to make a new census of how many black holes are out there.
It turns out that there are several times as many black holes residing in ordinary early galaxies as we originally thought.
Other recent, pioneering work with the James Webb Space Telescope (JSTW) has begun to reach similar conclusions. In total, we have more black holes than can form by direct collapse.
Advanced Theories and Exotic Formations
There is another, more exotic, way of forming black holes that could produce seeds that are both massive and abundant. Stars form by gravitational contraction of gas clouds: if significant numbers of dark matter particles can be captured during the contraction phase, then the internal structure could be entirely modified – and nuclear ignition prevented.
Growth could therefore continue for many times longer than the typical lifetime of an ordinary star, allowing them to become much more massive. However, like the ordinary stars and direct collapse objects, nothing is ultimately able to withstand the overpowering force of gravity. This means these “dark stars” should also eventually collapse to form massive black holes.
We now believe that processes similar to this should have taken place to form the large numbers of black holes we observe in the infant universe.
Future Directions in Black Hole Research
Studies of early black hole formation have undergone a transformation in the last two years, but in a sense this field is only just beginning.
New observatories in space, such as the Euclid mission or the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, will fill in our census of fainter quasars at early times. The NewAthena mission and the Square Kilometer Array, in Australia and South Africa, will unlock our understanding of many of the processes surrounding black holes at early times.
But it is really the JWST that we must watch in the immediate term. With its sensitivity for imaging and monitoring and spectroscopic capabilities to see very faint black hole activity, we expect the next five years to really nail down black hole numbers as the first galaxies were forming.
We may even catch black hole formation in the act, by witnessing the explosions associated with the collapse of the first pristine stars. Models say this is possible, but it will demand a coordinated and dedicated effort by astronomers.
Written by Matthew J. Hayes, Associate Professor of Astrophysics, Stockholm University.
Adapted from an article originally published in The Conversation.
Reference: “Glimmers in the Cosmic Dawn: A Census of the Youngest Supermassive Black Holes by Photometric Variability*” by Matthew J. Hayes, Jonathan C. Tan, Richard S. Ellis, Alice R. Young, Vieri Cammelli, Jasbir Singh, Axel Runnholm, Aayush Saxena, Ragnhild Lunnan, Benjamin W. Keller, Pierluigi Monaco, Nicolas Laporte and Jens Melinder, 6 August 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters.
DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad63a7
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
Follow us on Google and Google News.
7 Comments
Equally critical (in writing to some staff) of so-called “expert” and “evidence-based” articles on cosmology on “The Conversation,” it is more likely the age and size of the universe have been and are being misinterpreted due to a fundamental misinterpretation of gravity. As I continue to demonstrate with aging low budget videos (e.g., “1Gravity:” https://odysee.com/@charlesgshaver:d/1Gravity:8) first three years after my personal discovery of how gravity actually works in 2009 (interesting time frame?), it appears a tiny ‘glitch’ in the program keeps replicating itself everywhere I look.
Again, for some, gravity is an attractive force which is induced by some higher force (reverberations of the Big Bang?) to radiate across the universe from all objects in generally spherical fields of pulsing angular lines which increase in intensity and strength with rotation of an object and diminish in intensity and strength in accordance with the inverse square law of attraction.
Consequently, with gravity known to affect even photons (e.g., gravitational lensing), I postulate that photons emitted by distant objects accelerate (blue shift) on expanding lines of gravity force upon departure from their sources and decelerate (red shift) on contracting lines of gravity force upon their arrival to earth. The original error was misinterpreting the scattered dot patterns of double-slit experiments as a duality of particles and waves; not; pulsing lines of gravity force redirecting particles. For me, ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’ remain in the realm of science fiction.
“generally spherical fields of pulsing angular lines which increase in intensity and strength with rotation of an object and diminish in intensity and strength in accordance with the inverse square law of attraction”
Maybe you should make a video of two bowling balls circling on a trampoline painted like a giant target.
I believe my rotating wheel videos are proof enough for anyone scientifically objective enough to allow Einstein to make one serious mistake, based on other’s earlier mistakes, which he questioned of himself before settling on the wrong answer; “space-time.” “E equals M C squared” still makes him a genius, to my way of thinking. As to your imagery, gravity is three dimensional, not two. Thanks for a stimulating reply.
Hayes is an expert, as his first authorship on the peer reviewed paper show.
No, the age of the universe is not in question, and your personal opinion videos do not demonstrate anything that is quantifiable and published in peer review.
To also respond to your last comment, those videos are not “proof enough” since that is not how science is done. There is no reason for experts or others interested in the field to view them.
If you are interested in science, apply to an appropriate university course where they will make you connect with what science is. And perhaps start a science career, who knows?
Thank you, Professor Larsson, for a thought provoking reply. Wikipedia: “There are seven steps to the scientific method: Question, Research, Hypothesis, Experiment, Data Analysis, Conclusion, and Communication.” I’ve been in the communication stage for about twelve years now, first making certain my experiments were “reproducible.”
Notyably the Hayes et al paper only discuss how the observations are a problem for direct collapse scenarios, his Conversation article is the one that proposes dark matter models. There are conventional models that are more likely:
“Other heavy seed formation channels include collisions of stars in young star clusters and hierarchical BH mergers within a star cluster. Such dynamical pathways to heavy seeds can generate a spectrum of seed masses. In the second halo model considered in this paper, the authors find seed BHs up to 10,000 solar masses, generated through such dynamical channels. The formation of these seeds is 100,000 times more likely than heavy seeds produced via direct collapse and are therefore more likely to explain the overall MBH population.” [“The seeds that formed the garden of massive black holes”,
Pranav Satheesh, Astrobites, Jun 14, 2024.]