A team of researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used various computer models to examine 69 confirmed black holes and found their data results changed based on the model's configurations.
The researchers want to better understand how and why this happens and what steps can be taken to have more consistent results.
"If you change the model and make different assumptions, you get a different answer about how black holes formed in the universe," said Sylvia Biscoveanu, an MIT graduate student and co-author of the study.
People need to be careful because we are not yet at the stage with our data where we can trust the model.
Black holes are similar to the stars in that they both have the ability to collide, as well as being born from the collapse of giant stars.
There are two theories regarding the formation of the black holes.
When a pair of stars explode, there are two black holes in their place, which remain the same as before.
It is thought that their spins and tilts should be aligned.
The scientists theorize that their aligned spins are from a disk in the universe.
When two black holes are brought together by extreme astrophysical processes, they will form their own black hole system.
In a dense environment such as a globular cluster, thousands of stars in close proximity could cause two black holes to collide.
What fraction of black holes come from each method? Black hole spin measurement data is believed to be the answer.
Astronomers used the 69 confirmed black holes to determine that these massive objects could have come from either a cluster or a disk.
The rotational periods of the 69 confirmed black holes have been determined by the LIGO laboratory in the United States and the Italian one.
We wanted to know if we had enough data to make this distinction. It turns out that things are messy and uncertain.
The researchers constantly tinkered with a number of computer models to make sure their results were in line with predictions.
A model that assumed only a fraction of black holes were produced with aligned spins was used. A slightly contrasting spin orientation was predicted by another model.
The results consistently changed according to the models they used.
More data than the 69 confirmed black holes is required to have more consistent results.
The paper shows that the result is dependent on how you model your astrophysics.
"If we want to make a claim that is independent of the astrophysical assumptions we make, we need more data," said Vitale, who is an associate professor of physics.
The astronomer will need more data. The LIGO network will be able to detect a new black hole every few days once it returns to service.
Vitale said that the measurements of the spins were not certain.
We can get better information as we build them up. The data always tells me the same story regardless of the model I use.
This article was published in the past. The original article is worth a read.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
