Saturn's Naturally Occurring Radio Signal --New Insights
"Voice of the Big Bang" --Sounds of the Universe 760,000 Years After (AUDIO)

Cosmic Flashes May Signal Birth of Black Holes




When a massive star exhausts its fuel, it collapses under its own gravity and produces a black hole, an object so dense that not even light can escape its gravitational grip. According to a new analysis by an astrophysicist at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), just before the black hole forms, the dying star may generate a distinct burst of light that will allow astronomers to witness the birth of a new black hole for the first time.

Tony Piro, a postdoctoral scholar at Caltech, describes this signature light burst in a paper published in the May 1 issue of the Astrophysical Journal Letters. While some dying stars that result in black holes explode as gamma-ray bursts, which are among the most energetic phenomena in the universe, those cases are rare, requiring exotic circumstances, Piro explains. "We don't think most run-of-the-mill black holes are created that way." In most cases, according to one hypothesis, a dying star produces a black hole without a bang or a flash: the star would seemingly vanish from the sky -- an event dubbed an unnova. "You don't see a burst," he says. "You see a disappearance."

But, Piro hypothesizes, that may not be the case. "Maybe they're not as boring as we thought," he says.

According to well-established theory, when a massive star dies, its core collapses under its own weight. As it collapses, the protons and electrons that make up the core merge and produce neutrons. For a few seconds -- before it ultimately collapses into a black hole -- the core becomes an extremely dense object called a neutron star, which is as dense as the sun would be if squeezed into a sphere with a radius of about 10 kilometers (roughly 6 miles). This collapsing process also creates neutrinos, which are particles that zip through almost all matter at nearly the speed of light. As the neutrinos stream out from the core, they carry away a lot of energy -- representing about a tenth of the sun's mass (since energy and mass are equivalent, per E = mc2).

According to a little-known paper written in 1980 by Dmitry Nadezhin of the Alikhanov Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics in Russia, this rapid loss of mass means that the gravitational strength of the dying star's core would abruptly drop. When that happens, the outer gaseous layers -- mainly hydrogen -- still surrounding the core would rush outward, generating a shock wave that would hurtle through the outer layers at about 1,000 kilometers per second (more than 2 million miles per hour).

Using computer simulations, two astronomers at UC Santa Cruz, Elizabeth Lovegrove and Stan Woosley, recently found that when the shock wave strikes the outer surface of the gaseous layers, it would heat the gas at the surface, producing a glow that would shine for about a year -- a potentially promising signal of a black-hole birth. Although about a million times brighter than the sun, this glow would be relatively dim compared to other stars. "It would be hard to see, even in galaxies that are relatively close to us," says Piro.

But now Piro says he has found a more promising signal. In his new study, he examines in more detail what might happen at the moment when the shock wave hits the star's surface, and he calculates that the impact itself would make a flash 10 to 100 times brighter than the glow predicted by Lovegrove and Woosley. "That flash is going to be very bright, and it gives us the best chance for actually observing that this event occurred," Piro explains. "This is what you really want to look for."

Such a flash would be dim compared to exploding stars called supernovae, for example, but it would be luminous enough to be detectable in nearby galaxies, he says. The flash, which would shine for 3 to 10 days before fading, would be very bright in optical wavelengths -- and at its very brightest in ultraviolet wavelengths.

Piro estimates that astronomers should be able to see one of these events per year on average. Surveys that watch the skies for flashes of light like supernovae -- surveys such as the Palomar Transient Factory (PTF), led by Caltech -- are well suited to discover these unique events, he says. The intermediate Palomar Transient Factory (iPTF), which improves on the PTF and just began surveying in February, may be able to find a couple of these events per year.

Neither survey has observed any black-hole flashes as of yet, says Piro, but that does not rule out their existence. "Eventually we're going to start getting worried if we don't find these things." But for now, he says, his expectations are perfectly sound.

With Piro's analysis in hand, astronomers should be able to design and fine-tune additional surveys to maximize their chances of witnessing a black-hole birth in the near future. In 2015, the next generation of PTF, called the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF), is slated to begin; it will be even more sensitive, improving by several times the chances of finding those flashes. "Caltech is therefore really well-positioned to look for transient events like this," Piro says.

Within the next decade, the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) will begin a massive survey of the entire night sky. "If LSST isn't regularly seeing these kinds of events, then that's going to tell us that maybe there's something wrong with this picture, or that black-hole formation is much rarer than we thought," he says.

In 2006, astronomers, using ESO's Very Large Telescope, for the first time made the link between an X-ray flash and a supernova. Such flashes are the little siblings of gamma-ray bursts (GRB) and this discovery suggests the existence of a population of events less luminous than 'classical' GRBs, but possibly much more numerous.

"This extends the GRB-supernova connection to X-ray flashes and fainter supernovae, implying a common origin," said Elena Pian, (INAF, Italy), lead-author of one of the four papers related to this event. 

The event began on 18 February 2006: the NASA/PPARC/ASI Swift satellite detected an unusual gamma-ray burst, about 25 times closer and 100 times longer than the typical gamma-ray burst. GRBs release in a few seconds more energy than that of the Sun during its entire lifetime of more than 10,000 million years. The GRBs are thus the most powerful events since the Big Bang known in the Universe.




The explosion, called GRB 060218 after the date it was discovered, originated in a star-forming galaxy about 440 million light-years away toward the constellation Aries. This is the second-closest gamma-ray burst ever detected. Moreover, the burst of gamma rays lasted for nearly 2,000 seconds; most bursts last a few milliseconds to tens of seconds. The explosion was surprisingly dim, however.

A team of astronomers has found hints of a budding supernova. Using, among others, ESO's Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile, the scientists have watched the afterglow of this burst grow brighter in optical light. This brightening, along with other telltale spectral characteristics in the light, strongly suggests that a supernova was unfolding. Within days, the supernova became apparent.

The observations with the VLT started on 21 February 2006, just three days after the discovery. Spectroscopy was then performed nearly daily for seventeen days, providing the astronomers with a large data set to document this new class of events.

The group led by Elena Pian indeed confirmed that the event was tied to a supernova called SN 2006aj a few days later. Remarkable details about the chemical composition of the star debris continue to be analysed.

The newly discovered supernova is dimmer than hypernovae associated with normal long gamma-ray bursts by about a factor of two, but it is still a factor of 2-3 more luminous than regular core-collapse supernovae.

All together, these facts point to a substantial diversity between supernovae associated with GRBs and supernovae associated with X-ray flashes. This diversity may be related to the masses of the exploding stars.

Whereas gamma-ray bursts probably mark the birth of a black hole, X-ray flashes appear to signal the type of star explosion that leaves behind a neutron star. Based on the VLT data, a team led by Paolo Mazzali of the Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics in Garching, Germany, postulate that the 18 February event might have led to a highly magnetic type of neutron star called a magnetar.

Mazzali and his team find indeed that the star that exploded had an initial mass of 'only' 20 times the mass of the Sun. This is smaller, by about a factor two at least, than those estimated for the typical GRB-supernovae.

"The properties of GRB 060218 suggest the existence of a population of events less luminous than 'classical' GRBs, but possibly much more numerous", said Mazzali. "Indeed, these events may be the most abundant form of X- or gamma-ray bursts in the Universe, but instrumental limits allow us to detect them only locally."

The astronomers find that the number of such events could be about 100 times more numerous than typical gamma-ray bursts.


The Daily Galaxy via California Institute of Technology and ESO


Great article. I just released the 3rd Edition of my book: The Elegance of Reason, ISBN 9780977229239. The URL above will take you to it on in North America.

My book is important to you for an array of reasons, the least of which is Equation 94: Entanglement Density per Unit Area. This function, fundamentally, is what is responsible for nucleosynthesis. The layers within a star as you know undergo stratification and nuclear burning occurs at these layer boundaries. I would expect different configurations of stars to exceed their EDUA as a function of that internal configuration. Each configuration may have a different trigger initiating the event you describe.

Also, know that we have a blog up augmenting the book at its ISBN dot blogspot dot com.

Just a thought.


Charles McGowen

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)