JWST Reveals a Black Hole So Bright It Breaks Physical Models

[@speakeroftruth1952]

The blackhole responded with "I'm doing it, so it must be possible".

[@Hubris030]

Yeah I wouldn't tell the black hole what and what not to do.

[@rezadaneshi]

Don't ever underestimate a blackhole that overestimates itself.

[@osmosisjones4912]

More affects of Aliens

[@wnkbp4897]

No, it's a Super Sayan black hole! 😅

[@andypoppey5243]

​@@wnkbp4897 it's just Vegeta getting mad at kakarot lol

[@robertthomason8905]

When the black hole is fed a dense star or another black hole. The object that lingers longer

[@WarkWarbly]

A very sci fi quote for the ages! : )

[@dankslug]

This black hole sucks massively

[@rwfrench66GenX]

Can I get her digits?

[@seriousmaran9414]

Forget Dyson, get our black hole to really clean up. Do not use on your weiner, we do not replace them...

[@Etimespace]

This supermassive concentrations are not black holes. There is no black holes. It is expanding supermassive concentration which emit zillions and zillions expanding dark matter particles. Expanding galaxys was born quickly center to outside. For that you need two expanding supermassive concentrations which move near eachothers. Then there was born quickly new expanding stars like from nothing. Ofcourse not from nothing. This expanding dark matter particles just moved through eachothers again and again and finally they start expanding so fast that they did not had a time pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what this dark matter particles was expanding. So, then there was born quickly new expanding stars which just pushing away from expanding galaxy center. First faster what expansion, but like today relative same way what matter and light expanding. Too much for you? Expanding supermassive concentrations was born quickly with own three dimensional big bangs which still continue. There is no spacetime which expanding. Space is eternal and infinity three dimensional stage which IS nothing. ..

[@burtonupchurch1690]

Unless you find one of the legendary primordial ones. They only slightly suck.

[@tricky2917]

Well done, hero.

[@edwardteach3080]

At the center of every black hole is an AI that has been creating paper clips for millions of years.

[@raphaellubbers1759]

I suddenly feel a great calm now that the purpose of the universe has been solved. I suspected paperclips all the time!

[@notanemoprog]

We're going to need a bigger Physics.

[@SB-qm5wg]

LOL ⛵🦈

[@meyou2696]

Hello wonderful Anton! You make learning fun! God bless you!

[@HupfderFloh]

- Professor, there's a tiny speck of light in the night sky! - And...? - it's bright in a slightly different way than the other ones!

[@osmosisjones4912]

Maybe Aliens using it as trash can

[@walternullifidian]

Too bad we can't tell Eddington about this!

[@JorgetePanete]

There's a limit to how much Eddington can know now

[@groundcontrol6876]

@@JorgetePaneteEhh not really, it’s the other way around. We’re in the blind. He’s most likely hanging out with 2pac & Biggie in a secluded area in a very nice, large offgrid farm.

[@3characterhandlerequired]

This is first time I have seen accretion disk not being single disk but breaking apart and spinning in different angle than rest of the disk. Very interesting.

[@DrOtto-sx7cp]

... relax ... it's only a computer simulation based on theory.

[@Zeropointill]

If that's what is even happening, that is.

[@3characterhandlerequired]

@@DrOtto-sx7cp Pretty much all we know about black holes is computer simulation based theories. So this is interesting.

[@DrOtto-sx7cp]

@@3characterhandlerequired In that case you will have 'interesting' life ahead. Computers are still improving.

[@Etimespace]

This supermassive concentrations are not black holes. There is no black holes. It is expanding supermassive concentration which emit zillions and zillions expanding dark matter particles. Expanding galaxys was born quickly center to outside. For that you need two expanding supermassive concentrations which move near eachothers. Then there was born quickly new expanding stars like from nothing. Ofcourse not from nothing. This expanding dark matter particles just moved through eachothers again and again and finally they start expanding so fast that they did not had a time pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what this dark matter particles was expanding. So, then there was born quickly new expanding stars which just pushing away from expanding galaxy center. First faster what expansion, but like today relative same way what matter and light expanding. Too much for you? Expanding supermassive concentrations was born quickly with own three dimensional big bangs which still continue. There is no spacetime which expanding. Space is eternal and infinity three dimensional stage which IS nothing. ...

[@jimcurtis9052]

Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 😁

[@rwfrench66GenX]

Anton’s channel is great! He’s a great host, he chooses and summarizes very cool topics, the audio is clear and editing is professional. The thing is, I find myself watching videos with titles that include the word impossible. It seems like a lot of researchers have been wrong about quite a few things that have been part of many theories for many decades. Sometimes it’s a small correction to these other theories, other times it completely breaks the other theories, and other times it helps other theories.

[@MagnusQuake]

This either means they cannot have an Eddington mass limit, or simply, what we believe to have been the limit is in fact not the limit.

[@LeftyScaevola]

Dammit, I forgot to turn off the lights before going out.

[@KoopavonRox]

Thank you Anton for making these videos!

[@Jokers_Yugioh666]

Cool find Anton!

[@russellbarndt6579]

Wow ! I would show up nearly anywhere to be in a classroom where you are the teacher . I can comprehend so much more when you explain it kind, sir , much appreciation for your doing this

[@stevesloan6775]

i love that you are talking about the push from photons 0n a galactic scale.... : )

[@petepanteraman]

7:34 40X the Eddington limit might be because there is a shift ( gravity beat light by a small margin) that finally gave way over time.

[@andycordy5190]

Whenever we get near the subject of super massive black holes, I always think that these phenomena must contain the answers to our questions about fundamental physics and the origine of the universe. Whatever is physically responsible for the expansion of the universe, for instance, is bound to be impacted by a place where energy and matter are so excited that they become interchangeable on a scale that we struggle to comprehend. I think that what we see as matter, evolving in our universe from hydrogen as the smallest and most common element, is a condensate from the apparently empty void we observe between detectable particles. Though we don't yet understand that relationship, I think we are on the verge of doing so, as.we must if research is to progress.

[@theastroguy6710]

Look at Anton's wonderful biceps in that wonderful person shirt 👀

[@someguy-k2h]

I was wondering when you were going to get to this new discovery. This came out last week, and I knew you would pick it up. These discoveries were showing 40X more than theoretical maximums for mass injection. As these are very early massive BH's my thought was that the average mass density of space must play into this calculation. If the currently average mass density is 9.9 x 10-30 g/cm3, and the average mass density back then was 1 X 10-10 g/cm3, then there would have been a lot more pressure to feed these BH's. The Bondi accretion calculation only considers the velocity of the accretion disk, but what if the mass pressure was great enough that mass was consumed from more than just the accretion disk? Then the theoretical consumption rate would depend only on the surface area of the BH, and pressure of mass external to the BH.

[@denysvlasenko1865]

The average matter density of Universe was already very low even as early as 300k years after BB. It was a billion times dense than today, but it was already lower than what the usual density of interplanetary matter in Solar System today - what usually classified as "hard vacuum" in a terrestrial lab.

[@noelstarchild]

If it is physically there it is impossible for it to break the laws of physics, only our understanding of them. Thank you Mr. Petrov.

[@denysvlasenko1865]

Eddington limit only works if the object is not too far away from being spherically symmetric (e.g. a star which rotates slowly). Accretion disks are not fulfilling these criteria. Also, if we sit close to the rotational axis, the apparent brightness of the jet emitted towards us can be amplified by relativistic beaming.

[@peopleseethis]

If there is one thing I know, it is that we do not get to tell the universe what it can or should do. All we can do is observe what it is actually doing and try to understand.

[@OutsiderLabs]

Yup, that's exactly why we have models and theories

[@RaymondSwanson-u9y]

There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Anton, than are dreamt of in your philosophy. But you're helping us figure it out, so thank you.

[@johnnygraz4712]

I thought you said "nutella scopes" and now I can't unhear it.

[@swiftycortex]

Oh why did you have and go and share this, now I can't undo it either. Please don't read the above comment

[@kryptyk7712]

My eyes flicked down to this comment about 10 seconds before he said it. I got cursed at the right time.

[@Terran.Marine.2]

😮😊

[@Etimespace]

This supermassive concentrations are not black holes. There is no black holes. It is expanding supermassive concentration which emit zillions and zillions expanding dark matter particles. Expanding galaxys was born quickly center to outside. For that you need two expanding supermassive concentrations which move near eachothers. Then there was born quickly new expanding stars like from nothing. Ofcourse not from nothing. This expanding dark matter particles just moved through eachothers again and again and finally they start expanding so fast that they did not had a time pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what this dark matter particles was expanding. So, then there was born quickly new expanding stars which just pushing away from expanding galaxy center. First faster what expansion, but like today relative same way what matter and light expanding. Too much for you? Expanding supermassive concentrations was born quickly with own three dimensional big bangs which still continue. There is no spacetime which expanding. Space is eternal and infinity three dimensional stage which IS nothing. ....

[@EKA201-j7f]

It worries me that you look nervous, Wonderful Person!

[@DrOtto-sx7cp]

He knows it's proof of nothing ... yet another impossible radio source ?! 😉

[@kitwest61]

Nice to know. Thanks AP

[@geraldfrost4710]

If the light associated with a black hole comes from polar jets light years long, it won't impact the accretion disk. 2) if two stars pass the black hole on opposite sides, and are spaghettified, their masses will orbit in opposite dieections. If atoms colide, they will give off heat in collision, but have reduced momentum, and drop down to a lower orbit. Pictures show the inner wall of the accretion disk as definit, something a few Schwachild radii out. It has to be more messy than that.

[@plamenzlatev1206]

this is based on invalid hypothesizes , if this objects are plasmoids there are no problems neither with singularity or other fantastical thingies

[@kaarlimakela3413]

ANTON!!! Dude I hope next its the newest theory that gravity doesn't need mass so we don't need dark matter to explain gravity dense empty areas. Something BUBBLES. I forget!

[@AutisticThinker]

Maybe the first stars were supermassive themselves, in a universe that at one time supported them as non-singularities, then a phase change happened and they all direct collapsed in to SMB’s.

[@arctic_haze]

This is some really interesting stuff. The amount of large black holes colliding we see in gravitational wave data called for an expanation. It seems we are close to one.

[@Gregorythe5_5551st]

Lots of people here who think they know better than physicists dedicating their whole lives to these things and act like this is some sort of huge gap within our model of the when in a few months at most, there'll be a solution(there's already a potential solution literally in the video anwyays but whatever) that fixes this issue AND fixes the issue of how supermasive black holes formed too. This is how science works. But actually they're increasing engagement so maybe it's worth it. Who knows.

[@kzar8405]

Anton a video on Janus model pleaaaase ! it would be physically possible ?

[@amokjok]

As far as I know, the only way not to break the absorption limit is to absorb other black holes. Which imho additionally shows that a jet or an accretion disk is capable of possibly creating them. The central black hole creates lumps of density and eats them!^_^ So cute....

[@bodiless99]

"A tremendous amount of energy is released in the process" - Understatement of the year ;)

[@m1079Binhnh]

Thank you for the bright emotions! Your videos are always so inspiring! 💖😘

[@JorgetePanete]

BOT

[@spyersecol0013]

I just had a thought. As space and time are two sides of one coin and they get "flipped" once crossing the event horizon it would seem that matter and energy (also being 2 sides of one coin) would also be flipped when crossing the event horizon.

[@stargazer5784]

Think of it this way. Space and time, like matter and energy, exist simultaneously on one sided coins. IMHO. 😎

[@Trazel_Apeally]

​@@stargazer5784Knowing what /I/ know, that's a really good metaphor. That said, I know nothing because I know what I don't.

[@adnandada7458]

The more physics I study the more I've begun to believe that we do not really understand anything. Our theories have so many holes it's ridiculous. New ideas are needed here.

[@narusferree6506]

If that thing's 12+ billion years old, one has to wonder what happened to it; if it managed to survive that time as a galactic core, or is somewhere in the interstellar void.

[@Doozler]

Maybe the end of the universe (big crunch) doesn't destroy everything, and black holes get recycled from iteration to iteration of universes

[@oldmech619]

Sorry to disappoint you, the universe will die a cold dark death in eternity. The universe doesn’t care what we think or hope or dream.

[@JP-eu2dc]

The Big Crunch is just a theory

[@oldmech619]

@ There’s no legitimate math that supports the Theory of the Big Crunch

[@NNokia-jz6jb]

Yes.

[@phuzed37]

Early universe was much more energetic than our models led us to believe. It would have to be, for what we see, today, to make sense. Also, I have the sense that blackholes are not in our time. I propose they exist outside of time and this is why we cannot see them. If light cannot escape, then the gravity must be faster than light?

[@stargazer5784]

Every object in the universe has a value assigned to it that's referred to as the escape velocity. This value is determined by the object's density. The Earth, at it's current density has an escape velocity of about 24,000 mph, if I remember correctly. Black holes are dense enough to have escape velocities that exceed the speed of light. You really shouldn't think of gravity as having a 'speed', because it isn't something that's moving. It isn't even technically a force. The curved space-time created by mass induces an observed acceleration in objects toward the center of said mass. The closer you are to the center of mass, the higher the acceleration, so the 'speed' you're thinking of varies with the distance from the center of mass. It has no fixed value. Clear as mud? LOLOL!

[@phuzed37]

@@stargazer5784 Yes, thank you. After making the comment I investigated the idea further and found that it is the space curvature and not as simple as gravity being so strong it acts faster than light.

[@nev_mid_uk]

It feels similar to rotating a bottle of water as you empty it. The vortex allows the water to rush out much quicker.

[@zhoxnq6776]

the idea of black hole stars feels like a nice idea to me for explaining why there were so many supermassive black holes already in the early universe

[@Etimespace]

This supermassive concentrations are not black holes. There is no black holes. It is expanding supermassive concentration which emit zillions and zillions expanding dark matter particles. Expanding galaxys was born quickly center to outside. For that you need two expanding supermassive concentrations which move near eachothers. Then there was born quickly new expanding stars like from nothing. Ofcourse not from nothing. This expanding dark matter particles just moved through eachothers again and again and finally they start expanding so fast that they did not had a time pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what this dark matter particles was expanding. So, then there was born quickly new expanding stars which just pushing away from expanding galaxy center. First faster what expansion, but like today relative same way what matter and light expanding. Too much for you? Expanding supermassive concentrations was born quickly with own three dimensional big bangs which still continue. There is no spacetime which expanding. Space is eternal and infinity three dimensional stage which IS nothing. .....

[@yvonnemiezis5199]

I think l understood,thanks Anton 👍❤

[@scottnorin]

The flow of time can appear to go backwards when gravity gradients are negative. So large black holes in the early universe implies to me that instead of a super big bang , this all just a super big suck.

[@fnumbuh]

3:55 Leonard: see Sheldon!

[@MyCatJeff]

Velikovsky is holding on filament 2...

[@mykofreder1682]

It would assume light goes in all directions, while a smaller black hole being swallowed is in only 1 of the surface directions. I doubt a black hole can be broken up and added to the disk like a star.

[@eliinthewolverinestate6729]

Is that how they burp out stars? They bite off more than they can chew. I think they concentrate whatever makes them found in stars. And emit x-rays, gravity, and x-rays. Maybe it's atoms missing electrons or positive electrons. Like the opposite of radioactive.

[@OctopusWithNoFriends]

Anton, is it possible that these accretion discs are basically superfluids or even supersolids, as you've been discussing in your other videos?! It seems to me that all these forces interacting and being impressed upon each other at such close distances would be the perfect natural environment for these things to form... And what are the possible "dark energy" affiliations related to these super-duper-fluids?! 😅

[@robotaholic]

When YOU have a perplexed look I CLICK.

[@thedeadbatterydepot]

You ssid it already, it's the brightest, shows how the black hole feeds speeds are controlled. 😮

[@AnthOny-gl7lj]

Anton, I need your help! When galaxies merge, I understand it is unlikely that very many stars actually collide with each other. Why is it that the super massive black holes at the center merge? I haven’t heard of any/many galaxies that have binary black holes at the center, so it sounds like usually it is one black hole. Does this mean the SMBHs always collide? Are these the gravitational waves we keep detecting, this event? Thank you!

[@JungleJargon]

Objects in space are NOT as far away as they seem to be. We can’t project our measures of time or distance into the space between galaxies.

[@nazarethrift1019]

I admit I do not keep up on physics, and the math. last I knew the math breaks down when trying to figure out black holes anyway, so we still don’t know what actually happens inside one.

[@Vernon-gn9wb]

I am still pretty sure that supermassive black holes are definitely the main component in dark energy

[@neilhallberg1784]

Perhaps black holes that consume more matter do so based on the density or metalicity of the accretion disk.

[@jimjohansen4674]

Is it really spinning faster or is it the time dilation around the black hole just making it appear to spin faster?

[@gavingreensmith1110]

Time dilation would make it look like its spinning slower mate

[@markharwood7573]

See the reference to frame dragging after 10 minutes.

[@Etimespace]

This supermassive concentrations are not black holes. There is no black holes. It is expanding supermassive concentration which emit zillions and zillions expanding dark matter particles. Expanding galaxys was born quickly center to outside. For that you need two expanding supermassive concentrations which move near eachothers. Then there was born quickly new expanding stars like from nothing. Ofcourse not from nothing. This expanding dark matter particles just moved through eachothers again and again and finally they start expanding so fast that they did not had a time pushing eachothers away from eachothers same way what this dark matter particles was expanding. So, then there was born quickly new expanding stars which just pushing away from expanding galaxy center. First faster what expansion, but like today relative same way what matter and light expanding. Too much for you? Expanding supermassive concentrations was born quickly with own three dimensional big bangs which still continue. There is no spacetime which expanding. Space is eternal and infinity three dimensional stage which IS nothing. ......

[@JeffMoody]

I'm so glad you abandoned the click-bate. It demeans the quality of your content. I started blocking other channels that resorted dignity robbing tactics. Keep it real 👍🏼

[@ThinkingBetter]

Emptiness makes matter which gathers by gravity to eventually make black holes that yield dark energy or sort of anti gravity expelling matter at large distances.

[@robharwood3538]

Thanks, Anton! Can't get this kind of high-quality science news reporting from anywhere else! This is an amazing new finding!

[@stevesloan6775]

How about primordial particles that were both, partially in a different dimension and extremely large, like SMBH large.....???

[@GameraSoup]

Perhaps this massive feeding has a measurable, gravitational wave signature?

[@craigsurbrook5702]

The further we look the further back in time we see. Strangely enough the things we see seem to be slowed down the more and more further back we look. This is an illusion. However, this doesn't appear to have been taken into account when they estimated how much faster this black hole is accreting matter. Thus, it is accreting matter much faster than 40x. Extraordinary indeed.

[@OutsiderLabs]

Uhm... no? Not at all what we see when we look back in time

[@stuartclough915]

What happens if the meger of two galaxies reverses the rotation direction of the acretion disk? At some point you would have accretion material falling directly into the event horizon. This would create a superfeeding mode for a short period of time that could massively increase the growth rate. And maybe reduce the light emissions at the same time.

[@loisk6186]

Cool!

[@robsolete23]

My favourite show right now, always has the best cliffhangers😄

[@sonarbangla8711]

TUNNELLING is the most wide spread quantum phenomenon in the universe, remember wormholes? But physicists never thought it is responsible for the giant BH becoming a giant in a jiffy.

[@maxruedy951]

Once again science says that something is not possible and the universe just says "hold my beer".

[@technohippie2702]

Thank u ❤❤❤

[@jimlipscomb3236]

Since back holes create gravitational lensing, and gravitational lensing can enlarge our perception of distant celestial objects, maybe something between Earth's position and this black hole is massively distorting space-time so it appears incredibly large?

[@OutsiderLabs]

If that was the case it would appear distorted, which it doesn't

[@OliviaHucuc]

Every time I am convinced that your channel is a real gem on KZbin. Thank you for your creativity and efforts!♠️💛🐎

[@JorgetePanete]

BOT

[@petepanteraman]

3:15 NASA just posted a week + ago that they witnessed a black hole form. Are you disputing that or did I/article writer misinterpret the article?

[@Killer_Kovacs]

Could energetic flow cause gravitation with a sort of pressure differential? Could Bernoulli's Principal apply to dark energy?

[@fariesz6786]

0:07 i feel like that animation right at the start of the video is running backwards 😅

[@oberguga]

What will happen if massive object approach Black hole from direction perpendicular to the accretion disc? If light from disc can push harder than gravity, maybe object start deaccelerating and will be consumed faster than it should. Also original accretion disc also would be disturbed.

[@Toddis]

Thank you for my brief respite from political content 🙏

[@fairygurl9269]

Even On The Cellular Level How Often Does Expectation Actually Align With Reality ?

[@michaeldarling1759]

One would think that with the velocities around the BH that the relativistic mass could approach infinity.

[@shangrilaladeda]

It’s about to become a star

[@antonbelsky]

Another explanation is this: those black holes grew in previous cycles of Cyclic Cosmology.

[@kastenolsen9577]

How big is the Great Attractor. Is it a black hole of "Galactic mass"? How many galactic masses does it contain?

[@MalcolmYoung-h4k]

Perhaps part of the problem is that we lump all black holes as the same thing. who knows what goes on in side one. which ones are quark stars, which are gluon stars, which collapse into a singularity. Where is the dark matter and energy... maybe they are not all the same, maybe some are just crushed matter... and maybe some are something more. perhaps ones like this, that break all understandings...perhaps they gobbled up some exotic stuff or massive portions of dark matter.

[@PanPrawda]

Ok, fine. I'll still wait for full ost patch.

[@InstantLightning]

If it’s a direct collapse black hole, is it possible for the gas to already be moving incredibly fast towards the center of gravity that the photons dont push all of the gas away they just slow it down?

[@jeremyreese54]

Theory, galaxies are what are left of the accretion disc.

[@markmcd2780]

I wonder how many more times the universe breaks the 'impossible' limits of the Standard Model of Cosmology theory before physics stops, decides they've gone wrong somewhere & starts over based on science & data instead of 'magic' solutions when the BBT didn't produce our universe?

[@ryanrobison8973]

You literally do not understand what science is at all lmao. Finding new contradictory evidence is scientists dreams, because it points to there being something being missed. Then they look for what is being missed, and when they find it, they start the process of adjusting the model to fit the new information. Why would they throw out the models and theories? All that is backed up by incredible amounts of evidence and work.

[@OutsiderLabs]

That's literally what physics does every day. We fit our models to the data. What did you think they did?

[@markedis5902]

Did we ever work out if the universe could expand so fast that it rips itself apart?

[@RadicalCaveman]

The aliens put up signs: "Don't feed the black hole!" But no one listened.

[@jamm8284]

Could a black hole act as a gravitational lens for another black hole, making it appear as one and give a reading beyond the Eddington limit?

[@kastenolsen9577]

All of man's theories are valid until proven wrong!!!

[@Krelen107]

Ty

[@patandthecats5983]

My opinion is super massive black holes were created before the universe cooled off.

[@pauldavis1943]

Mind....blown!

[@PropagandaFacts]

The universe has already ended. We haven't seen it yet, and the expansion is reality trying to catch up. It can only happen so fast.

[@andrewbruce-jones6036]

Could we not be looking at a direct on jet, the width of the accretion disc? Call it a super quasar lol.

[@shawns0762]

G.R. does not predict singularities wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, it predicts dilation. Dilation perfectly explains dark matter. In 1939 Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation. Mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's what our high school teachers were talking about when they said "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated. It occurs wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass. This includes the centers of very high mass stars and the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers. The mass at the center of our own galaxy is dilated. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. In other words that mass is all around us. It's the "missing mass" needed to explain galaxy rotation curves.

[@denysvlasenko1865]

"Say 'no' to drugs"?

[@shawns0762]

@denysvlasenko1865 Einstein's reasoning on why singularities do not exist is solid. Nobody believed in them when he was alive including Plank, Bohr, Schrodinger, Dirac, Heisenberg, Pauli, Feynman etc. because that would violate the known laws of physics. What we see in modern astronomy has been known since 1925. This is when the existence of galaxies was confirmed. It was clear that there should be an astronomical quantity of light emanating from our own galactic center. Singularities were popularized by television and movies beginning in the 1960's. There was clarity in astronomy before this happened. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. It has recently been confirmed in 6 ultra diffuse galaxies including NGC 1052-DF2 and DF4 to have no dark matter. In other words they have normal rotation rates. This is virtual proof that dark matter is dilated mass. All galaxies with low mass centers have normal or near normal rotation rates.

[@crawkn]

Why doesn't anyone ever talk about the dark matter that black holes consume? Some people propose that it can annihilate with itself releasing energy under certain conditions, and it wouldn't have the same difficulty of friction to overcome.

[@denysvlasenko1865]

Dark matter can not lose angular momentum (unlike ordinary matter, which does it by gas friction - by forming an accretion disk), thus ONLY dark matter particles which happen to fly directly into a BH end up falling into it. All others just swing by and fly away.

[@crawkn]

@denysvlasenko1865 as far as I'm aware dark matter is thought to be relatively static, not orbiting with normal matter, which would seem to suggest it doesn't have much angular momentum, and would tend to fall directly in to whatever degree it is attracted to the black hole.