Smallest Black Hole Ever Found Cannot Be Unexplained and Seems to Be an Anomaly

[@george1la]

I am 77. My father, Charles Buzzetti, was a founding member of Stony Ridge Observatory. I went with him to all the meetings and work parties. George Carroll and the others were prescient genius's. Astronomy has changed so much since then. Even the 200" at Palomar was nothing to the present tools. I also used to live on Mt. Palomar. These new tools are opening up new horizons. You are super good at explaining these complex issues to people like me who do not have your and the others capabilities. Even amateur astronomy is dramatically different and they also have the high tech tools.

[@Thedudeabides803]

I watch this channel after the kids go to bed and I’m cleaning up the kitchen. When my 8 year old hears Anton’s voice he runs downstairs to watch because he loves space and astronomy. His mom is not happy I let him watch but I can’t be happier to keep him up late on a school night if he wants to watch. 😊

[@kempokiin6280]

My experiences relate in many meaningul ways, while simultaneously diverging in others

[@raskov75]

Long standing rule in our house is that bedtimes/curfews can be amended when science content is on the table.

[@aniksamiurrahman6365]

Well, u guys can watch together b4 their bedtime?

[@setitfree78]

What a boring life.

[@RedRocksies]

What a weird thing to be not okay with. Is she religious or something?

[@reddportal]

There is nothing better than Anton telling us about black holes and exotic stars ❤

[@digbysirchickentf2315]

It could be better if he showed any actual data, all we get is pretty cgi.

[@reddportal]

@@digbysirchickentf2315 He links the research papers and all his sources... so... I mean, click the links?

[@digbysirchickentf2315]

@@reddportal I did try a few, and found no data. We all could spend hours looking through it individually or Anton could do a better job. What do you think?

[@reddportal]

​@@digbysirchickentf2315 So two of the links are to the research papers that Anton has based this video on. One is pre-print, one is behind a paywall. The pre-print is 77 pages long with many, many graphs and data sets. I'm unsure what you want Anton to do differently? Unless you want him to literally read the paper to you? It is not unreasonable for Anton to present a discussion around the topic without going into the details of all the data, he isn't writing a research paper, he's creating short form content on KZbin. If people want to learn more they can read the actual research that is linked, like I just did. As someone with a literal career in research, I'm not sure what else you wanted? He's discussing it, linking to sources, is balanced and engaging, and bringing really dense scientific discoveries to a wider audience. It's not his job to detail every single data point, this isn't a presentation at a research conference ffs 😂

[@digbysirchickentf2315]

@@reddportal So did you learn anything?

[@matthewcummings5067]

So if I understand correctly, the proposed sequence of events was something like this: 1. Triple star system, three stars orbiting each other. 2. Each of these stars progress in their life cycle independently (makes sense, they're all different stars). 3. One of the stars turns into a neutron star, the other two are red giants by this point. 4. The neutron star gets absorbed by one of the two red giants, forming a TZO. 5. The TZO eventually collapses into a black hole. 6. The other red giant remained throughout all of this, resulting in the current system of a single red giant in a binary system with a black hole. That's my best understanding of what you're saying here, but I could be wrong. We started talking about TZOs, and I assumed it was to explain the black hole, not the red giant it's orbiting.

[@aralornwolf3140]

Concise synopsis of the video. :)

[@ksongmaker1711]

One of the fallen triple powers.😢

[@patrickgriffiths889]

Yeah. They need a sequence of events that results in a black hole of the right mass without any big booms that would mess up the circular orbit.

[@DarkFox2232]

Welcome to: "Three body problem." And: "Perfectly circular orbit result."

[@Sutairn]

There is way better way to explain this without as many needed steps, step 1: a generation 1 star or population 3 star formed with around 70 to 90 solar masses, step 2: this star collapses straight into a blackhole, step 3: a star is formed around the blackhole due to matter lost during the blackhole collapse, step 4: 16 billion years passes by the star is now a red giant in a circular orbit around the blackhole. This could be our first observation of a generation 1 star which I think all should have become blackhole at this point.

[@arctic_haze]

Interesting. This is a quite amazing proposition and unlike many others, actually one that makes sense without requiring some very weird new physics.

[@pandamonium7996]

We love very weird new physics, and we love things that make sense without requiring it.

[@arctic_haze]

@@pandamonium7996 I love weird new physics when it's real. But I got burned with things like supersymmetry and generally the string "theory". Seeing the title I was afraid that the "anomaly" would be something like that.

[@jimcurtis9052]

Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 🙂

[@charlesjmouse]

When dealing with any discovery that makes no sense: a) You're wrong about the discovery, b) You had a failure of imagination, c) Your assumptions are wrong, d) Your 'understanding' needs rethinking... ...e) And only then do you need a new base theory. Another excellent video, thank you.

[@Strype13]

"We now have data for approximately 1.5 billion different sources, which equates to approximately 1% of the entire Milky Way." That sentence, alone, completely boggles the mind.

[@davidcarlson2152]

I did a double take myself.

[@WaterShowsProd]

The idea of stars becoming internal parasites of other stars is really interesting, I'd not heard of TZO Objects before. I'd imagine the merger would be slow, over a long period of time, during which time the denser star would be feeding off the larger one, slowing down in the process, and moving closer, before finally burrowing its way below the surface, rather than a cataclysmic collision. Quite interesting to think about.

[@illegal_space_alien]

Stars are plasma, so no hard surface. Plus a neutron Star is much denser than anything else in the star. So it would be like dropping a boulder from a plane through a cloudy sky. Although, I wonder if while it was happening, if it would look like a giant sunspot, or a caving in of the site, as the plasma gravitates toward the neutron star?

[@intotron6708]

@@illegal_space_alien I imagine one could see an enormous accretion disc around the Neutron Star, fed by its victim.

[@denysvlasenko1865]

The NS would distort the other star with tidal effects, and if close enough, would start accreting the gas from its outer atmosphere. The accreted gas immediately thermonuclearly "burns" to helium when it impacts the NS surface, and accumulated layer of helium periodically (with periods on the order of one day) explodes, producing a mix of nuclei, starting with carbon and going somewhere into lantanides, IIRC. We already observe many such objects, they are called "X-ray bursters". The explosions are too weak to expel material from the NS, so its mass increases until it collapses into a BH. Then BH would continue siphoning the gas from the other star, not without explosive X-ray bursts, until it "eats" it completely.

[@George-rk7ts]

Another awesome video by a wonderful person. Thanks, Anton.

[@WTH1812]

This is what happens when 2 neutron stars get friendly and "hug". No word on any kids yet.

[@WarkWarbly]

D'AAAAWWEE!!! That's a stellar story! You think there are space storks?

[@WTH1812]

@@WarkWarbly ... Those are the lost UFOs

[@danij5055]

Really it's a story about family 😉

[@yfarrell]

Thanks Anton. You show us all these rare objects I would never have heard of. The potential is incredible.

[@kingnarothept6917]

Thorne-Zytkow Object confirmation?! I never thought I'd see the day!

[@Adoyleonon]

This isn’t confirmation, yet. Rewatch the end.

[@scottdorfler2551]

Thorne-Zytkow Object. Of course 😂 Never heard of it, but I've wondered what a neutron star inside of a star would look like. After all, neutron stars and black holes go where they want and do what they want. Imagine the chaos inside and outside of that star.

[@cloudalien443]

"Cannot be unexplained" 🤔 Thanks for another wonderful video. They've become some of the most peaceful minutes of my day, early in the morning, or late at night.

[@weaponizedemoticon1131]

Oh good. I didn't look far enough before I made my own comment.

[@marfmarfalot5193]

Okay actually detecting a mass gap black hole??? That’d be crazy

[@skoitch]

Ligo filled the gap in 2019, the only gap was in our ability to see them!

[@Masoch1st]

We have detected a few intermediate mass black holes now

[@marfmarfalot5193]

@@skoitch is that true though? Isnt there still the 3-5 solar mass gap?

[@skoitch]

@@marfmarfalot5193 we believe that 3-5 masses would be a neutron star. I don’t think the Universe is old enough for a black hole to have radiated enough mass to become that small.

[@skoitch]

@@marfmarfalot5193 check out PSR J0514-4002E, it’s def close to that grey area!

[@civirebel]

Hello Anton and other wonderful people.. ❤

[@dosesandmimoses]

Thank you Anton! I appreciate your content!

[@aaron_d_henderson1984]

I think Anton accidently stated the solution at 3:51 (the rest of the video never disproved that it wasn't previously a neutron star) granted it would be cool if this was actually a TZO

[@valinorean4816]

the mass doesn't match, you didn't listen carefully

[@systemchris]

​@@valinorean4816could be a neutron star that took on more mass at some point and collapsed more

[@intotron6708]

@@systemchris Thought of that also. Like a White Dwarf becomes a Nova or a Type I Supernova, so the Red Giant made the Neutron Star too fat to hold it. However, then the current Red Giant would still feed the now Black Hole, and it would not be dormant.

[@solanumtinkr8280]

@@valinorean4816 A neutron star is a degeneration mass that has yet to collapse, like a blackhole is a ridiculously slow motion implosion. One question to ask is, what could cause a neutron star to under go a early(as far as we are concerned) implosion...? It's also small enough to be an early universe blackhole... It had rather unique conditions back then... The blackholes we see now are mostly post Ionization(?) era.. Galaxies like we see today formed far far faster than anticipated, so the reason for that could be linked to the other... ?

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

@@solanumtinkr8280 "One question to ask is, what could cause a neutron star to under go a early(as far as we are concerned) implosion...?" It could accrete material from its partner star until it becomes so massive that it implodes. But in this case, apparently the partner is too far away for that.

[@simoncleret]

Clearly we need more layers. Black holes inside of neutron stars inside of red giants!

[@tylerj.6973]

HAHA now I am notified of your uploads IMMEDIATELY

[@andycordy5190]

In the super bewildering variety among the billions of objects we see in just our own galaxy, is it really surprising that we detect some that don't fit our classifications? I have only been following Anton for a few years and in that time the variety of stars we observe and the new vocabulary we need to encapsulate those discoveries has grown hugely. Keep rewriting the dictionary, Anton.

[@stusacks2220]

Very interesting video Anton. Thanks!

[@Deeplycloseted435]

Leg day in an hour. Enjoying a delicious egg sandwich and some strong coffee, while watching Anton. The sun is shining, the birds are singing. Its a beautiful day, for all of us beautiful people. The world is a scary place sometimes, but don’t let it stop you from enjoying our existence.

[@oszb]

This comment + the user name, what a cacophony of a personality going on here, wonderful.

[@jajssblue]

Neat! Maybe primordial BH?

[@BobHenderson-dr2wy]

Finally! I always wanted to know the smallest sized temporal mass hole ever seen, since that might explain how long they stay around and/or if radiant loss is real or not

[@catsdrooltoo]

Thank you Anton! ❤

[@Duane_Day]

Love all of your work Anton and even though I eagerly await your latest videos you should take the weekend off! 😉

[@alberon554]

i have never seen you so excited about a finding ...thrilled!!

[@anthonyalfredyorke1621]

Thanks Anton, great video BLACK HOLE'S are super complicated 😮 , Have a " WONDERFUL" Week and keep WAVING . PEACE AND LOVE TO EVERYONE ❤❤.

[@captain_context9991]

"Captured" orbits are incredibly hard to imagine when looking at the probabilities and circumstances required for it to happen. Almost impossible to ever justify as a probably explanation for anything.

[@cpgphone]

Thank you Wonderful Person for keeping me company during the late painful nights.

[@chad0x]

incredible amount of lensing at 2:28 blows my mind as to whatss going on there

[@stevenkarnisky411]

If the black hole is more distant than we thought, that still does not explain the circular orbit. Thank you, Anton!

[@nilo70]

Hi wonderful Anton !

[@noodles7157]

My heart wants to believe it's a Dyson sphere

[@CelticRover42]

Pretty amazing we just mapped 1% of the Galaxy's mass signatures, the kinda thing you'd need for Hyperspace Maps.

[@JohnKuhles1966]

Almost every video Anton Petrov produced, he says: "A Lôôôôôt of" .... ;) ... How he pronounces "a lot" in such a weird way it is cranking me up every time I hear him say it again ... But I super appreciate his efforts bringing (weird) new interesting stuff every day.

[@Flesh_Wizard]

Black hole sun, won't you come🎵 And wash away the rain🎵

[@JamesQMurphy]

I miss 90’s music

[@wb3904]

@@Flesh_Wizard the text was stupid. The clip even worse... a sun collapses into a black hole so it can't be both 🤪

[@Jagzeplin]

@@wb3904 awesome song tho

[@wb3904]

@@Jagzeplin I hated it but most loved it. Stupid song is in my head now 🥲

[@HolmesHobbies]

​@@wb3904 its about herion addiction. Its not as annoying of a song knowing that.

[@alanhyland5697]

Hello wonderful Anton

[@RaymondSwanson-u9y]

This could be an example of direct collapse. That star may have captured the black hole in its early life.

[@Mellman-g9p]

When something doesn't make sense, it's always black holes.

[@MCsCreations]

Fascinating!

[@alfredmontestruc5466]

My suggestion, the neutron star had a fairly high rotational speed, which was more or less closely aligned with the orbit around the red giant, that was inside the red giant. The neutron star impacted the fluffy portion of the red giant, and was slowed by accumulating mass from the red giant this Slowing continued, but the rotational speed remains high, and it was in such a direction that it created as the moon does on the Earth a tide that tends to cause the neutron star now black hole, To retreat slowly from the red giant. Eventually, it will emerge from the low density portion of the red giant and continue to retreat by tidal interaction.

[@alfredmontestruc5466]

The tidal effects are mainly physically on the red giant’s atmosphere.

[@ilkoderez601]

I don't think you mentioned how massive the red giant was... Would be nice to take into consideration give the circular orbit.

[@Dawid-v2j]

If it is a TZO, 3.1 solar masses seems kind of small for a neutron star + red giant put together. But if this answer from chatgpt is accurate it would be in the normal range. The smallest red giant star observed in terms of solar mass is typically around 0.8 solar masses. Red giants are evolved stars that can range between about 0.8 to 8 solar masses, but the lower limit tends to be around 0.8 solar masses. Stars with masses lower than this will not reach the red giant phase and will remain as white dwarfs after leaving the main sequence. For neutron stars, the smallest observed mass is typically around 1.1 to 1.2 solar masses, though neutron stars theoretically can have masses as low as about 1.0 solar mass. Most observed neutron stars have masses between 1.2 and 2.0 solar masses, with some extreme cases nearing the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit (around 2.16-2.5 solar masses) before collapsing into black holes.

[@denysvlasenko1865]

There is a link to arxiv's page in the video description. The paper says their estimate for the visible star: mass 2.66 (+1.18 −0.68) M⊙, radius = 12.97 (+2.43−1.77) R⊙.

[@dltn42]

Hello handsome Anton 🥰

[@jsEMCsquared]

If stars can travel the galaxy then black holes can too!

[@Duke_Romilar_III]

Stars travel first class. Black holes travel economy, and on standby.

[@mickgibson370]

3.6 solar mass It depended on the spin on the object. High spin, the object turn in a neutron star, low spin it will become a black hole and will spin up as the black hole shrinks!

[@alexandreperron6106]

Anton, you are a national treasure.

[@isleofyew1]

Stop at 10.03 and enjoy his smile. He is "one" with his specialised subject and laughing at the hippies who feel they are one with the whole universe simply after feeling very high!

[@Dankmangolion]

Question, possibly a silly one, how do they know that an elliptical orbit so far away is truly elliptical, and that we are just not seeing it from a slight side angle so it appears elliptical?

[@DC9V]

I just can't wrap my head around orbiting blackholes.

[@yvonnemiezis5199]

Exciting, thanks Anton👍🤔

[@KippinCollars]

It's aliens. It's always aliens.

[@carmenmccauley585]

Fabulous.

[@tiagotiagot]

I dunno how it would work out in the scales involved here, but in many cases circularization is relatively trivial when there's adequate distance -based drag gradients allowing for cumulative aerobraking bringing the apoapsis closer to the same altitude as the periapsis; or alternatively via tidal interactions gradually finding a balance between orbit and rotation speed, bleeding off excess energy via the friction caused by the tidal effects. Perhaps the drag explains why the blackhole is quiet now and possibly even how it formed; as it collided with the wind/atmosphere of the partner star it cleared the orbit while circularizing and grew in mass with the matter it collided with.

[@paulbennett772]

HV 2112 - It's all coming true! Neil would be delighted!

[@RechtmanDon]

Hawking radiation? If a black hole can lose mass, is it not possible that even a large black hole could reduce in size even below that of one solar mass?

[@shawnirwin6633]

That is somewhat along the line I was thinking, but I was thinking that, somehow, it was a star forming from a small black hole leaking Hawking radiation. Pure speculation, of course.

[@burgzaza]

Eventually yeah, but over extremely long periods of time!

[@RechtmanDon]

@@burgzaza If this was a small BH to begin with, and as is suggested it is quite old, then maybe... ?

[@burgzaza]

@@RechtmanDon Possibly, but then again, the process of the radiation is so slow that even if it was super old, it's mass wouldn't have changed that much (I might be wrong on that).

[@RechtmanDon]

@@burgzaza Quite true, but some are apparently revisiting the actual age of the post-bang era.

[@franks4973]

What about a failed binary star? 1 that has enough mass to ignite but not enough to maintain for very long, it then collapses and feeds on the dust/gas cloud in its rings around the main star.

[@GAMakin]

There are MUSSELS. There are CLAMS. And there are OYSTERS. Viewed from the surface, though 5-miles of Ocean water, they might be "perceived" as the same "thing". CUBE the distance (as you drift along) and they might appear to be undifferentiated grains of sand. PROXIMITY AND SCALE.

[@malavoy1]

The circular orbit seems to me to be the one thing that speaks against it being a TZO. If a neutron star merged with another star, probability being what it is, it's far more likely to make the orbit elliptical, as there are many choices of parameter that govern elliptical shapes, whereas only one set of parameters will give you a circular orbit. Then again, what they're calling a perfectly circular orbit may actually be a 'practically' circular i.e. circular in the eyes of the beholder, not the actual measurements.

[@petewright4640]

Anton looks and sounds really tied in this video.

[@SkepTank0404]

ya know, i hear "impossible" too much here, antov. did we forget, theoretically, black holes evaporate? that means they can get smaller....

[@GaussianEntity]

Just do the calculations yourself. Assume you have a small object of arbitrary mass in space and you can throw it as hard as you want. How hard must you throw it so that it gets captured by Earth's gravity in a perfectly circular orbit?

[@unlearningify]

Possibly a silly question, but for the educated here, don't black holes evaporate, and at increasing rates the smaller the black hole? Was this considered, or is it the circular orbit that throws this whole situation into disarray?

[@xM471k]

Continuez votre bon travail.

[@jwarmstrong]

A cool black hole might indicate a very old object which ate all matter billions of years ago and is in the process of cooling down

[@joemcintyre2090]

The distance of the black hole must be correct because it's in a gravity lock with the red giant that possibly has a neutron star inside of it consuming the red giant from the inside like a wasp larvae in a wolf spider.

[@brianwilcox2543]

The Universe is such a beautiful place!

[@alansilverman8500]

You say it's in a circular orbit...do you know it's inclination? If it's not along the line of sight, then that 2.7 solar mass estimate is a MINIMUM value!

[@ultramovier]

Every frigging time the math tells us what is or isn't possible, observation throws us a curve ball.

[@fearthehoneybadger]

Let's just name this one "Tiny."

[@burgzaza]

Or David for the giant star, and Goliath for the small black hole :)

[@hanswitvliet8188]

Nah: “dwarf black holes”, a revenge for the humiliation of Pluto.

[@KaliFissure]

Because of the balance of masses is it possible that there was a smallest physically possible black hole, but there was another star which was in mass so much larger that the star took from the black hole? Instead of the reverse. Yes, BH is higher surface gravity, but the star could have been monstrous

[@Richard_deVries]

Another, less likely but still possible solution to a star or star like object emitting no light whilst not being a black hole. It is covered by a shell of material blocking all light. Natural or not.

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

Such a shell would absorb radiation, increase its temperature and then radiate infrared light. So no, doesn't work.

[@randypowell3180]

It makes more sense to me that it's a black dwarf.

[@bartermens8219]

We might find rare occurances in the universe. It doesn't seem that hard image how this happened. An extra star or more than one extra star seems like the easiest start. Solitions aren't the problem. Proving them is :)

[@immunitycorrupts3641]

I love Science

[@mrexists5400]

Could there be an object that had enough mass to become a star, but failed due to a fast spin?

[@iainclark6210]

Can a black hole radiate enough mass that it becomes a normal star again?

[@tomwojcik9342]

Hawking Radiation! 🙂

[@tillposer]

No. The matter is already in a post-degenerate state, so it would not come near the Event Horizon. A singularity of a million tons already has a lifetime of roughly a 1500 years, one of 10 million tons a lifetime of 1.5 million years. The latter mass has a Schwarzschild-radius 0.0145 fermi or 1.45e-8 nanometers. A singularity with the Mass of the sun would effectively last as long as the universe.

[@Haegemon]

If there is something imposible but exists, then what we think that we know is incorrect.

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

As Anton explained in the video, it actually is not impossible. The title is just clickbait.

[@Haegemon]

@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 Obviously. But as he explains it was considered not possible before. There was some theories but lack of evidence. Still it's not conclusive the explanation for this phenomenon.

[@CoryWipke]

Isn't the core of a start what supports it? I have a hard time believing a neutron star could exist in the center of another star without the star itself collapsing.

[@kristijan8518]

Isn't it possible that a black hole started as 5-6 solar masses and with time it lost some mass due to Hawkin radiation?

[@mickwilson99]

I am skeptical about the notion of a "circular orbit". All orbits in "flat" space are ellipses, with varying degrees of eccentricity. A circular orbit requires eccenctricity to be *precisely* zero - vastly improbable in any physical system. A circular orbit would require that no change in rate of angular velocity over the course of each orbit could be detectable, a very hard task unless the system is conveniently perfectly "flat" or "face on," as viewed from Earth. In fact, I'd expect the researchers to be equally intrigued how any orbit of extremely low eccentricity could occur at all.

[@johnbennett1465]

Obviously they mean circular within the accuracy of measurements.

[@khinmaungthein2624]

Amazing...🤔

[@Dethmeister]

"Smallest Black Hole Ever Found Cannot Be Unexplained"? Once you hear the explanation it can never be unexplained again! Oh wait, did I just get tricked into watching?

[@antimony2986]

Fascinating!

[@eternisedDragon7]

Here's an idea or suggestion for what may explain the low masses of stellar black holes: Since all of both the relativistic as well as the cold dark matter is neutrinos (and not sterile ones either or the glow in the vicinity of our sun and the solar neutrino problem weren't explainable since it then should only increase annihilation chances for other neutrino flavors (unless sterile neutrinos could change their flavors into any of these to allow CDM to be involved in that) or otherwise have the sun's own neutrinos be also able to turn into such 4th flavor, unless the 4th flavor isn't detectable, to the extent to which cold dark matter annihilation contributes to solving either mystery), up to all the (upon slowdown via gravitational pull) cold dark neutrinos produced in or kept around stellar black holes should over the millions and billions of years be annihilated away due to the presence of the galactic CDM to gradually reduce their total mass.

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

No, (most) dark matter is _not_ neutrinos. This possibility was already considered and ruled out _decades_ ago. Neutrinos simply are too "hot", whereas observations show that most dark matter is "cold". "the glow in the vicinity of our sun" What do you mean? "the solar neutrino problem weren't explainable since it then should only increase annihilation chances for other neutrino flavors" ??? The solar neutrino problem _can_ be explained even if sterile neutrinos exist. The math has been done. Look it up!

[@eternisedDragon7]

​@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 It seems like you aren't even aware of 1 of the relevant phenomena I was referring to (which Anton Petrov also covers) and yet you think you can teach me about the nature of dark matter when in fact I'm the world's leading dark matter scientist and I know what I'm talking about. The videos titled "Hubble Uncovers Mystery Glow Inside the Solar System, But What's Causing It?", as well as "Something Is Causing Strange Gamma Ray Signals In The Milky Way Center, Probably Pulsars" cover the kind of phenomenon I'm referring to. And no, I can prove that neutrinos in fact have not been validly, correctly ruled out ever, let alone decades ago. It is even accepted already that neutrinos make up at least 1% of all dark matter that exists out there, and the real only remaining question is what the remaining 99% of it is, mind you. MOND has been ruled out by wide binaries and dwarf galaxies' rotation curves and the fact that it cannot explain galactic or stellar spectrum UV-bumps, among other reasons for why all solely gravity modifying theories actually are conclusively ruled out already. The ALPS-II experiment's detector got an upgrade this year to rule out Axions and similar particles as anyway flawed dark matter particle candidates, and WIMPs cannot make up the cosmic dark matter web and they haven't been found for decades. About the alternative explanation for the solar neutrino problem, it may rely on neutrino oscillations actually existing, which isn't conclusively confirmed so far and there does exist an anti-neutrino experiment that stands in contradiction to neutrino flavor oscillations and isn't so far explainable this way, and I think the explanation, if it is even complete, does assume such oscillations. Actually, if the solar neutrino problem were explained this way, then abundant enough presence of additional (sterile) neutrinos may ruin such explanation by influencing the phenomenon. For you information, even though neutrinos are consistently produced at relativistic speeds, guess what, the hypothesized ancient super-massive population III stars have in fact existed (and there's several remnant evidences pointing at them), and neutrinos produced in fusion processes deep down their gravitational wells were slowed down to CDM's low speeds. This is how at least the vast majority of CDM was created (though stellar black holes might also slightly keep contributing to their abundance).

[@TheGeeMaster1337]

What about those crazy Hawking stars? Could this be the end result of a ~3-solar-mass Hawking star collapsing?

[@collincutler4992]

So if a supernova was extremely weak, wouldnt it just be called...a Nova? 😉

[@Pseudo___]

0:13 pre watch my guess is some white/neutron mergers

[@maxruedy951]

Once again the scientists say that something is impossible and the universe just says "hold my beer".

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

No scientist says that this is impossible! That was just Anton with his video title! Clickbait.

[@daffyduck780]

Something is not impossible just because we dont know of a way it could be made.

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

As Anton explained in the video, it actually is not impossible. The title is just clickbait.

[@randalljsilva]

Couldn’t a neutron star collision with a white or brown dwarf or even with a planet create a small ( < 5 solar mass) black hole?

[@ThecouncilOf8]

It's a ship Bending spacetime like a wave and riding it calling it now

[@jamesnasmith984]

A neutron star might ablate a nearby red giant by accretion but how does it invade and parasitize it from within?

[@stevinharper3551]

Is this one of those sizes that scientists have wanted to find?

[@dogprowilhelm7630]

Anton, I thought blackholes BHs become Quasars when consuming too much mass and there should be jets? How about a Quark Star at the cores and there would be no jets. Would there be higher muon or tauon emissions mass codependency on the quark mass and spin? Great topic❤

[@bjornfeuerbacher5514]

Quasars are only formed by supermassive black holes, not by stellar black holes. And jets only form if the black hole swallows enough material. This black hole is dormant, it swallows (almost) nothing.

[@stargazer5784]

That 5 to 7 solar mass lower limit works on paper, but clearly isn't etched in stone. Mathematical constructs should be looked upon as suggestions. Just sayin.

[@hanswitvliet8188]

How about the black hole in governments finance?😂

[@von_Nett]

Question: Is there an explanation for the huge diffenrence in parallax values for G3425 between Gaia data set 2 and 3? And wouldn´t MCMC always produce something close too idealizied distribution when the used data sets are that far apart?

[@GreenFacePowerRanger]

TZO's !! very interesting !😃😃😃

[@osmosisjones4912]

Why are small things like Electorons and protons and Neutrons depicted as rounde

[@Reiman33]

the simplest object in 3D space is a sphere. When conceptualizing pointlike objects, even though a sphere is literally incorrect, it corresponds to natural conceptualization of what a very tiny "point" object would be. It is a useful abstraction. This idea is where the joke about spherical cows comes from.

[@crispycritter7022]

Is there any black holes the size of a plum?