Year of the Comet
Comet C/2011 L4 (PANSTARRS)

PANSTARRS information

Comet C/2012 S1 (ISON)

ISON information

Astronomy News
E-mail Article to a FriendPrint ArticleBookmark and Share

From super to ultra: Just how big can black holes get?

A new analysis suggests that at least 10 black holes in a sample of 18 galaxy clusters weigh between 10 and 40 billion times the mass of the Sun.
By Chandra X-ray Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama Published: December 19, 2012
Supermassive-black-hole
The black hole at the center of this galaxy is part of a survey of 18 of the biggest black holes in the universe. This large elliptical galaxy is in the center of the galaxy cluster PKS 0745-19, which is located about 1.3 billion light-years from Earth. X-ray data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory are shown in purple and optical data from the Hubble Space Telescope are in yellow. // Credit: X-ray: NASA/CXC/Stanford/Hlavacek-Larrondo, J. et al; Optical: NASA/STScI; Radio: NSF/NRAO/VLA
Some of the biggest black holes in the universe may actually be even bigger than previously thought, according to a study using data from NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory.

Astronomers have long known about the class of the largest black holes, which they call “supermassive” black holes. Typically, these black holes have masses ranging between a few million and a few billion times that of our Sun.

This new analysis of the brightest galaxies in a sample of 18 galaxy clusters suggests that at least 10 of the black holes in these galaxies weigh between 10 and 40 billion times the mass of the Sun. Astronomers refer to black holes of this size as “ultramassive” and only know of a few confirmed examples.

“Our results show that there may be many more ultramassive black holes in the universe than previously thought,” said Julie Hlavacek-Larrondo of Stanford University in California.

The researchers estimated the masses of the black holes in the sample by using an established relationship between masses of black holes and the amount of X-rays and radio waves they generate. This relationship, called the fundamental plane of black hole activity, fits the data on black holes with masses ranging from 10 solar masses to a billion solar masses.

The black hole masses derived by Hlavacek-Larrondo and her colleagues were about 10 times larger than those derived from standard relationships between black hole mass and the properties of their host galaxy. One of these relationships involves a correlation between the black hole mass and the infrared luminosity of the central region, or bulge, of the galaxy.

“These results may mean we don’t really understand how the very biggest black holes coexist with their host galaxies,” said Andrew Fabian of Cambridge University in the United Kingdom. “It looks like the behavior of these huge black holes has to differ from that of their less massive cousins in an important way.”

All of the potential ultramassive black holes found in this study lie in galaxies at the centers of massive galaxy clusters containing huge amounts of hot gas. Outbursts powered by the central black holes are needed to prevent this hot gas from cooling and forming enormous numbers of stars. To power the outbursts, the black holes must swallow large amounts of mass in the form of hot gas. Because the largest black holes can swallow the most mass and power the biggest outbursts, ultramassive black holes had already been predicted to exist to explain some of the most powerful outbursts seen. The extreme environment experienced by these galaxies may explain why the standard relations for estimating black hole masses do not apply.

These results can only be confirmed by making detailed mass estimates of the black holes in this sample, which is by modeling the motion of stars or gas in the vicinity of the black holes. Such a study has been carried out for the black hole in the center of M87, the central galaxy in the Virgo cluster, the nearest galaxy cluster to Earth. The mass of M87’s black hole, as estimated from the motion of the stars, is significantly higher than the estimate using infrared data, approximately matching the correction in black hole mass estimated by the authors of the Chandra study.

“Our next step is to measure the mass of these monster black holes in a similar way to M87, and confirm their existence. I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up finding the biggest black holes in the universe,” said Hlavacek-Larrondo. “If our results are confirmed, they will have important ramifications for understanding the formation and evolution of black holes across cosmic time.”

In addition to the X-rays from Chandra, the new study also uses radio data from the NSF’s Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array and the Australia Telescope Compact Array and infrared data from the 2 Micron All-Sky Survey.

Find us on FacebookFind us on Twitter
User Comments
Be the first to leave your comment below!

Only registered members of Astronomy.com are allowed to comment on this article. Registration is FREE and only takes a couple minutes.

Register Today!
 
5 stars
WAYNE LUKEY from AUSTRALIA (QLD) said:
Is it just possible that the size of these "Supermassive" and "UntraMassive" Black Holes may actually put a dint in the theory of the Big Bang, and the thought that it was smaller than an Atom.

If these BH's are so big in size as well as in mass does that not show that there is a limit to how small mass can be be clumped? And therefore how big the BB was in size to start with.

Just throwing an idea out there....

5 stars
PETER COHEN from NEW JERSEY said:
To continue on the comments of other readers there are indeed two questions that come to my mind:
Is there - can there be - a state where a black hole passes some treshold where it can no longer stay together and consequently explodes?
Could a black hole like this have caused the Big Bang as is theorized?
5 stars
JOHN GOETHE from SOUTH CAROLINA said:
the big bang needed energy to cause the universe to expand . then came dark matter .why cant scientists see this?
4 stars
RICHARD MCCONNELL from UNITED KINGDOM said:
This goes to show that a good theory relating the size of black holes to that of their host galaxies is urgently needed.
Do small irregular galaxies like the Magellanic Clouds also have black holes at their centres, as it is not obvious that they have a centre?
4 stars
ROBERT A MORSTADT from UTAH said:
I am wondering if some black holes (primordial black holes) could have been thrown out by the big bang. I've never seen an answer anywhere
5 stars
DAVID DELARIA from MARYLAND said:
Black holes to me look like Bernoulli tubes, where the flow at one end develops as rotational and speeds up as it sucks into its very narrow throat, matter, gas, light, and then most likely spews it all out in another explosion or star nova unviewed on this side of this Bernoulli tube except as black and invisible, that is, the back of the new explosion into most probably a parallel universe. Somebody show me the math or physics for it if possible.
5 stars
BILL SIMPSON from LOUISIANA said:
@James
I don't think the holes will absorb each other because of the increasing rate of the expansion of the universe recently confirmed by 2 different methods. I have never heard of a limit to the size of a black hole. What will be their fate in the eventual big rip would be interesting to know. Can they be torn apart by the runaway expansion of the universe caused by dark energy? Maybe when we perfect artificial intelligence the machines can find out the answer, unless they decide to do away with us before telling us their answer.
4 stars
RANDOLPH JONES from COLORADO said:
Was our Big Bang beginning the end of a previous universe where all the mass in it coalesced into a single black hole a micron in diameter? What would a dark matter black hole "look" like?
4 stars
JAMES FRANKLIN from UNITED KINGDOM said:
Uncomfortable with this, I am not sure if it is an unwillingness to accept black holes as the explanation for the weirdness we see in the Universe or something deeper, but I am not convinced by their existence and more that we seem to use them as a handy excuse for everything we cannot explain makes me feel even more uncomfortable.

I suppose the problem is that the idea of locking mass away in such a manner seems an anathema and not something nature normally does, everything can be recycled in time, but black holes really do appear to be the end of matter as we know it...

Perhaps the research is correct and all the black holes will eventually all absorb each other, or enough large ones will and the resultant explosion will be a new Universe...do black holes have a mass limit, if they reach a certain mass do they also implode and return the matter to our Universe or perhaps another??

Oh blimey, rambling at 04:40hrs is not good, sorry people.
DENNIS BLANCHARD from CALIFORNIA said:
Before reading I would ask if there is a theoretical limit, or some mass constraints? Can't be infinite. Is there ever enough observations to know one way or the other?
SEARCH SITE
Subscriber Only Access
Subscriber Only Content
Look for this icon. This denotes premium subscriber content. Learn more »
Become a Member of Astronomy.com
Register today for access to more valuable resource information.
Interact in our forums, comment on articles, receive our newsletter and much more!
Not a member?
Subscriber and Member Login
Password
Remember me