Did monster black holes or galaxies come first? The James Webb Space Telescope may have a surprise answer

Joseph Silk has found yet a new vehicle to decry the standard cosmological model successes, which ironically he was an early instigator of. The proposal paper is not surprisingly ending in various hypotheticals about the early universe which are clashing against observations (such as primordial black holes).
So where did these massive black holes come from? And, why do we not see their signatures in the CMBR?

There is also a stunning robustness that every early black hole survey finds that a conventional black hole formed by Pop III stars lies on the Eddington limit growth to hit the observations. As an outsider it is easy to think that this is caused by this limit being an attractor for early growth in a dense universe – super-Eddington growth not being sustainable for long – and that is why it is a persistent find.

But I guess it is too conventional a prediction to be an attractor for astronomer modeling. They may be loathe to go as far as Silk in suggesting standard cosmology has its issues, but currently an exotic alternative of á hypothetical massive "direct collapse" of primordial gas clouds is popular. Then again, science needs its criticism and that will apply to the exotic suggestions as well.

Latest posts