Stars Fueled by Dark Matter Could Hold Secrets to the Universe
November 3, 2009 By Lisa Zyga
Simulated view of a black hole in front of the Large Magellanic Cloud. Dark stars could grow to become much larger than normal stars, and might collapse to form the giant black holes in the centers of galaxies. Credit: Wikimedia Commons.
(PhysOrg.com) -- The first stars in the universe may have been very different from the stars we see today, yet they may hold clues to understanding some of the mysterious features of the universe. These "dark stars," first theorized in 2007, could grow to be much larger than modern stars, and would be powered by dark matter particles that annihilate inside them, rather than by nuclear fusion. In the early universe, dark stars would have emitted visible light like the Sun, but today their light would be redshifted into the infrared range by the time it reaches us, and so dark stars would be invisible to the naked eye.
Over the past two years, researchers have further investigated the properties of dark stars, as well as how these unusual stars may help scientists better understand dark matter, black holes, and other astronomical features. In a new study, the group of scientists that originally theorized dark stars has presented a review of the research on dark stars and predicted future areas of research. Katherine Freese of the University of Michigan; Paolo Gondolo of the University of Utah; Peter Bodenheimer of the University of California, Santa Cruz; and Douglas Spolyar, currently with Fermilab, have published their results in a recent issue of the New Journal of Physics.
As the scientists explain, dark stars would represent a new phase of stellar evolution - the first phase, occurring just 200 million years after the big bang. At that time, dark matter densities in the early universe were higher than they are today, and the first stars are predicted to have formed in the middle of dark matter haloes (which are precursors to galaxies) as opposed to today’s stars that are scattered about the edges of a galaxy. According to the theory, these early stars grew larger by accreting mass from their surroundings, pulling in dark matter along with the surrounding gas.
Inside these stars, weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs), a candidate for dark matter, could accumulate. Since WIMPs can be their own antiparticles, they could annihilate to produce a heat source. If the dark matter density was high enough, this heating would dominate over other heating (or cooling) mechanisms, such as nuclear fusion. Compared with fusion, WIMP annihilation is a very efficient power source, so that only a small amount of dark matter is required to power the star.
“Dark stars are a natural consequence of WIMPs as dark matter particles ... although it took us a while to put the necessary ingredients together to realize this!” Freese told PhysOrg.com. “At the time we proposed these objects in 2007, we didn't realize that they are really stars in the sense of being hydrostatically stable objects that shine and produce visible light. Now that we have succeeded in finding the stellar structure of these objects, we understand their properties: they are giant puffy objects (like suns that extend out to the radius of the earth) and the light they produce looks a lot like that from the Sun. But they grow to become a thousand or even a million times as massive! These are our new results since we first began our research in this area.”
As the scientists explained, modern stars eventually burn up their hydrogen and transition into other star types on the main sequence diagram. On the other hand, dark stars can keep growing indefinitely, as long as they keep accreting dark matter from their surroundings. If not disturbed, these stars could potentially grow to be tens of thousands of times larger than the Sun. However, most dark stars would probably eventually stray from their locations at the centers of dark matter haloes. Their dark matter fuel would run out, so that the stars would start to collapse and eventually be powered by fusion from the stars’ normal hydrogen atoms, and finally collapse into black holes. The scientists calculated that dark stars have a lifetime of at least one million years, and perhaps billions of years; they might even still be around today.
The scientists predict that it should be possible to detect dark stars, either by detecting their light with upcoming telescopes, or by using neutrino telescopes to measure neutrinos from dark stars. Compared with conventional main sequence stars, dark stars that have run out of dark matter fuel and started using fusion would be much larger, cooler, and “puffier.” And while dark stars ultimately become black holes, the first stars in the traditional view (without dark matter) turn into supernova, giving the researchers a point of comparison.
“These supernova populate the universe with element abundances in very precise ratios (the ratio of even to odd elements is very precise),” Freese explained. “However, we predict that this doesn't happen in dark stars. So this distinction provides a measurable test of the two different scenarios. These element abundances should be measured in the next five years and then we'll know.”
By measuring the properties of dark stars with future instruments, scientists could discover detailed properties of dark matter. Since different dark matter particles produce different annihilation products, measurements could reveal information about the properties of dark matter, such as their mass, their annihilation mechanisms, etc. Freese also plans to investigate whether dark stars could become large enough to produce the giant black holes that are currently unexplainable.
“So far we have built up dark stars to 1,000 times the mass of the Sun,” she said. “But if they keep accumulating dark matter by capturing it from the surroundings, they can end up much larger: possibly even a million times as massive as the Sun. This is my immediate goal as far as research endeavors. Such supermassive objects were first proposed in the ‘60s by Fowler and Hoyle, but nobody knew how to make them. If this is right, it certainly helps explain the enormous black holes seen in the universe that nobody knows how to explain: when the supermassive stars die, they become black holes. There are billion-solar-mass black holes seen at basically the time the first galaxies formed, as well as the ones in centers of galaxies.”
More information: Katherine Freese, Peter Bodenheimer, Paolo Gondolo, and Douglas Spolyar. “Dark stars: a new study of the first stars in the Universe.” New Journal of Physics 11 (2009) 105014.
Copyright 2009 PhysOrg.com.
All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or part without the express written permission of PhysOrg.com.
-
First stars might have been powered by dark matter
Feb 12, 2008 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Hey, WIMPs: Beware of Dwarf
Apr 03, 2007 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Study: Dark matter in newborn universe doused earliest stars
Dec 03, 2007 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Oldest stars may shed light on dark matter
Sep 13, 2007 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Did 'Dark Matter' Create the First Stars?
Mar 15, 2006 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Engineers build first sub-10-nm carbon nanotube transistor
Feb 01, 2012 |
4.9 / 5 (30) |
30
-
Something old, something new: Evolution and the structural divergence of duplicate genes
Jan 31, 2012 |
4.6 / 5 (7) |
1
-
The hidden nanoworld of ice crystals: Revealing the dynamic behavior of quasi-liquid layers
Jan 30, 2012 |
5 / 5 (3) |
1
-
Stock market network reveals investor clustering
Jan 27, 2012 |
3.9 / 5 (23) |
8
-
Of microchemistry and molecules: Electronic microfluidic device synthesizes biocompatible probes
Jan 26, 2012 |
5 / 5 (1) |
0
-
Rubber production is likely to gradually reduce
1 hour ago
-
Help! Physics Momentum/Impulse problem!
2 hours ago
-
Gauss' law cubes, how to prove
3 hours ago
-
A grandfather pulls his granddaughter, whose mass is 20.5 kg
5 hours ago
-
what is significance of torque
5 hours ago
-
Difference between volume displaced fluid and volume of the object
6 hours ago
- More from Physics Forums - General Physics
More news stories
Explained: Sigma
It's a question that arises with virtually every major new finding in science or medicine: What makes a result reliable enough to be taken seriously? The answer has to do with statistical significance -- but ...
19 hours ago |
5 / 5 (11) |
30
Borexino Collaboration succeeds in spotting pep neutrinos emitted from the sun
(PhysOrg.com) -- To learn more about how the sun works, scientists study particles that are emitted from it into space due to thermonuclear reactions that occur inside; by applying known physics principles, ...
Physics research suggests new pathways for cancer progression
Observing that certain cancer cells may exhibit greater flexibility than normal cells, some scientists believe that this capability promotes rapid tumor growth. Now computer simulations developed by Boston University Biomedical ...
17 hours ago |
5 / 5 (1) |
0
Quantum physicist explains $100K offer for proof scaled-up quantum computing is impossible
(PhysOrg.com) -- MIT researcher Scott Aaronson has certainly riled the physics community with his offer this past Friday, of $100,000 to anyone who can prove that scaled-up quantum computing is impossible. ...
Physicists 'record' magnetic breakthrough
An international team of scientists has demonstrated a revolutionary new way of magnetic recording which will allow information to be processed hundreds of times faster than by current hard drive technology.
Feb 07, 2012 |
4.5 / 5 (39) |
14
|
'Dark plasmons' transmit energy
Microscopic channels of gold nanoparticles have the ability to transmit electromagnetic energy that starts as light and propagates via "dark plasmons," according to researchers at Rice University.
FDA-approved drug rapidly clears amyloid from the brain, reverses Alzheimer's symptoms in mice
Neuroscientists at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine have made a dramatic breakthrough in their efforts to find a cure for Alzheimer's disease. The researchers' findings, published in the journal Science, show t ...
Hydrogen from acidic water: Researchers develop potential low cost alternative to platinum for splitting water
A technique for creating a new molecule that structurally and chemically replicates the active part of the widely used industrial catalyst molybdenite has been developed by researchers with the Lawrence Berkeley ...
Ultraviolet protection molecule in plants yields its secrets
Lying around in the sun all day is hazardous not just for humans but also for plants, which have no means of escape. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun can damage proteins and DNA inside cells, leading ...
Soraa LED light may dim 50-watt halogen rivals
(PhysOrg.com) -- Soraa, a Fremont, California company founded in 2008, this week launched its first product, a light that uses LEDS (light emitting diodes). The "Soraa LED MR16 lamp" is the "perfect" replacement ...
Anyone can learn to be more inventive, cognitive researcher says
There will always be a wild and unpredictable quality to creativity and invention, says Anthony McCaffrey, a cognitive psychology researcher at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, because an "Aha moment" is rare and ...
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
Is there any literature available which explores such extreme conditions based on the models we've been able to build with the physics we currently understand?
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (7)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (3)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
It is logically possible, in that we can conceive it. However, we would need evidence in support of such a proposition such that we are more justified in accepting the proposition than its negation.
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 3 / 5 (6)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 4.8 / 5 (5)
The only "problem" is that gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the radius, while the observed radius of a black hole is proportional to the mass. Double the mass, and the radius doubles. In turn, the gravity decreases by the square of the radius (1/4) times the mass (2), so the "surface" gravity is half as strong if the mass doubles! At a significant distance from two black holes, assuming the same distance from the theoretical center for both, the gravity will be proportional to the mass, as with any object.
I have read, but don't know if it's true, that the radius of a black hole with the mass of the observed universe would equal the observed radius of the universe. If so, we live inside a black hole!
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (9)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 2.5 / 5 (2)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
The main problem I see with that idea is that there would have to be an existing universe already which would contain, among other objects, these two stars. It would have to be old enough and populated densely enough for those two stars to have accreted enough matter to become large enough for them to collide with such violence. And then we are back again to the fact that there wouldn't be any need for a Big Bang since all of the above had already happened. But man that would be one massive supernova if or when it happened.
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Lets suppose dark matter was observed through the instruments at LHC, does that make it no longer dark and require a new name. Is realm of dark matter that which is left unknown and undetectable.
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
There will be a day coming soon that says exactly the same thing about dark matter as you just said about all the other stuff.....
Its all very bad speculation. And its all more stuff piled on top of previous theories that cant explain new discoveries. There are many observations that are not explained by dark matter etc.
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Nov 03, 2009
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Light always travels in a straight line. Mass in space bends lights path through space (sigh.. think the classic dimple in a rubber sheet but in 3D), black holes bend it so much that it can't go by, sort of an eternal holding pattern as it spirals into the hole. Lots of particles trying to get into the limited event horizon crashes them into each other giving off lots of nasty energy.
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
http://physicswor...nt/23009
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
What you say is true but is there a limit on how dense a body of mass can be? An increase of mass doesn't necessarily mean an increase of radius, does it?
Which makes me wonder about another question, what is the force which causes a body of mass to compress itself, increasing its density? Is it gravity? If so, would something like the strong nuclear forces fight against gravity inferring on a possible limit in to how dense matter can be?
Lol, I might have to devote myself to studying physics for a hobby, I really want to know some of the answers to the state of nature in the most *extreme situations.
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
It is in essence the phlogiston of space.
Until someone actually can measure dark matter/energy and find a star...your just as good as discussing warp factors from Star Trek...
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
And amcke001, maybe Dark Matter will eventually be proven to exist and we will roll merrily on to with our scientific progress, but in general science doesn't bet on long shots - it measures, hypothesises, proves, repeats. You seem dangerously close to treating it as a belief system rather than in interesting theory.
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
I've always loved thinking about the universe in ways like this. Just a thought though, since we have evidence that our universe is expanding wouldn't it then be fission, not fusion? I prefer M-theory myself which is similar to what you're saying.
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Yes, it's the force of gravity that compresses a star. When you get beyond a certain point, you have a neutron star. What keeps it from contracting further is "degeneracy pressure," which is related to the Pauli Exclusion principle you might have learned about in chemistry. No two particles can occupy exactly the same quantum state.
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
A stellar mass black hole is much smaller, and therefore denser, than even a neutron star. The measured density of a galactic mass black hole (in theory) would be considerably less.
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Unless I misunderstood did you just mean to imply that mass cannot compress in to a denser state than what you find in a neutron star? How would you explain black holes then?
Maybe the Pauli Exclusion principle doesn't apply until much later, I wonder if its affects are even yet the significant factor to explain the state of even the most massive black holes today...
Can a value be calculated to determine at what mass enough gravity can manifest to force a body of mass to compress in to a state so dense that it is in fact the Pauli Exclusion principles at work which finally acts to prevent a body from becoming more dense?
And then can a diameter be determined from such a calculation, to figure out the area of such a mass?
If these two values could be found, it seems to me, we could begin to approximate the size of 'space' before or at the initial moment of the big bang, right? (I'm assuming at that moment all of the matter+energy+spacetime occupied the same area.)
Nov 04, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
As for infinite density, that would be a "singularity", and the laws of physics as we know them won't work there. IN THEORY, a black hole has a singularity at its center, where the density is infinite. Most of what we "see" as a black hole, the volume inside the event horizon, is (theoretically) empty space, with the event horizon being where the escape velocity equals the speed of light.
The neutron star is the densest macroscopic state we can observe. Any denser and the Exclusion Principle fails, basically allowing the mass to fall into a subuniverse of its own. At that point the actual density of the matter is greater than in a neutron star, but all we can see are the gravitational effects at the event horizon.
Nov 05, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (25)
And at that mass (singularity), if light cannot escape, how can gravatational waves escape,...that is, if gravatational waves (or spacetime) can be infinitly curved at the singularity due to mass, would this impose an escape velocity upon it's own effects?
There's no quantum gravity theory yet, but is the graviton to escape, while light cannot?
Nov 05, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
Most theories say gravity waves only occur around moving masses, so having the mass hidden inside an event horizon may not matter. The waves would appear to be generated at the horizon, as it moves, rather than at the singularity.
Since we haven't found gravitons, or reproducible gravity waves, yet, theories abound but facts are few.
Nov 06, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Nov 06, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (25)
Nov 06, 2009
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
IMHO there are no physical singularities (nor infinities). Mathematical singularities/infinities in theories of physics are indicators of incomplete theories.
And that's why we need strings.
Nov 06, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
http://en.wikiped...pressure
A result of continued pressure on a body of mass, fighting against EDP is Degenerate Matter.
http://en.wikiped...e_matter
Where it follows that;
"At densities greater than those supported by any degeneracy, gravity causes the matter to collapse into a point of zero volume. As far as is known today, no degeneracy state can exist within the Schwarzschild radius of a black hole, thus all its energy (mass) will be located in an infinitely dense singularity."
Nov 06, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
I think I'm understanding now why our current understanding of physics melts away in these extreme situations. - It literally melts away, that's amazing... Lol.
Good stuff! That was a lot of cool stuff to read in to. :] And I guess I might have answer my question above, no such diameter can be calculated leading to any idea of what 'size' the universe was at it's birth... it... literally came out of nothing? or it flooded through some kind of 'pinch' or ... something... hrm.... /wanders-off-aimlessly.
Frajo; does string theory off alternatives to what I've posted just now? Just curious...
Nov 06, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Nov 07, 2009
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
String theory offers a lot of alternatives. My pet cosmology, the ekpyrotic/cyclic model is partly based on M-theory and does away with the notion of a BigBang singularity in a very elegant way. Unfortunately string theory is not established yet and has difficulties of its own.
A nice string intro: http://www.sukido...dex.html
Steinhardt's Princeton page: http://wwwphy.pri...~steinh/
Nov 08, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Nov 09, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Nov 09, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Its defintely worth watching. What developments have you observed?
Nov 13, 2009
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
FWIW dark matter and dark energy are entirely different concepts. They just share the "dark" name both being embarrassingly huge unsolved questions.
Dark energy is hubble expansion. Dark matter is stuff that does not appear to emit EM radiation and thus its existance can only be inferred by careful examination of gravitational interaction between things that can be seen.
Nov 13, 2009
Rank: not rated yet
Possibly there's a reason why the dark matter is located where it is, outside the main parts of the galaxies. There ten times as much dark matter as visible matter. Can there be a reason that stars are rare in the outer zones where dark matter seems to be lurking? Electrostatic dispersal of dust particles? Who knows?