As with so many aspects of life, an explanation or theory of a phenomenon is always a work-in-progress. No such thing as a ‘done deal’ explanation. Classic examples in western history include the ‘done deal’ acceptance of physics explanations by Aristotle, Galileo, Newton and more recently, Einstein vs. proponents of quantum mechanics theory (Bohr et al.). Each of these giants have brought us further toward better understanding. My opinion is that science is a journey, not a final destination however.
Additionally, we tend to strive toward one theory to explain a phenomenon. It’s convenient for us but nature is under no obligation to be convenient for human understanding. It might well be that one explanation of a black hole works and is all that’s needed. This is a typical and widely accepted explanation of what a black hole is:
A black hole is a place in space where gravity pulls so much that even light can not get out. The gravity is so strong because matter has been squeezed into a tiny space.‘ NASA.
But, could black holes be formed in more than one way? Or perhaps, there is a different explanation as to what all black holes really are. So for a moment, let’s consider the possibility of an alternative explanation of what a black hole is.
In this exercise, we will accept the first part of the above quote, as by observation, this effect on light by black holes has been confirmed. Let’s challenge the second part of the statement. Why does it necessarily mean that the strength of gravity has caused matter to be squeezed into a tiny space? After all, there are scientists who believe that gravity acts in all direction in our multidimensional world. What else could possibly be going on?
Orphan Planets
Astronomers generally believe that for every planet that orbits a star, there are thousands that are ‘starless’. In general, planets are dark unless there is a light source to illuminate them, such as the light from the star(s) they orbit. However, these starless planets do not have a star to orbit, so they are dark and are generally not visible to us or our optical instruments. There are a range of explanations suggested as to the cause of their existence – a discussion for another day. These planets are referred to by a variety of names including, ‘rogue planets’, starless planets’, ‘homeless planets’ but let’s go with ‘orphan planets’ in this article.
The Key Question
What if black holes or at least, some black holes are ‘orphan planets’ that have coalesced so much matter they encountered as they wonder and have grown so large and caused so much gravitational effect that even light is unable to escape this gravitational pull? It would explain key definitive observations of the black hole phenomenon such as the ‘gobbling up’ of matter (stars, planets, moon, light etc.) that come within its range of influence. The boundary of this range of influence may also be referred to as the ‘event horizon’, a term currently used in the discussion of black holes. The gravitational effect may also explain why this ‘orphan planetary black hole’ is dark, light cannot escape from it to reflect off it and light up its presence. Normal sized ‘orphan planets’ will no doubt light up when they wonder close enough to a star, lit by the light from that star. An ‘orphan planetary black hole’ will suck up that light, the star as well as its planet(s) and moon(s) that come within its ‘event horizon’. The process of coalescence of matter is the favoured explanation by scientists, of how stars, planets, moons, asteroids etc. formed.
Detecting Orphan Planetary Black Holes
Right, how might we go about detecting this type of black hole? In its infancy, the black hole would be a dark, unsocialised (if there is such a word), planet. As it grows into adulthood it will occasionally become brighter as it draws in and coalesces with massive amounts of light and stars. Then the light will fade into disappearance. This transition of brightness to zero light could be one indicator of the presence of an orphan planetary black hole.
Final thoughts
‘Orphan planets’ are believed to orbit around the centre of the galaxy they are closest to, their ‘home galaxy’ if you like. So why not ‘orphan planetary black holes’? Or perhaps, supermassive ‘orphan planetary black holes’ are at the centre of galaxies?