Scientists keep debunking 'monster black hole' discovery. So, what's the deal with binary system LB1?

[Admin]

As scientists continue to weigh in, one thing is clear: the "monster black hole" discovered in 2019 doesn't exist.

Scientists keep debunking 'monster black hole' discovery. So, what's the deal with binary system LB1? : Read more

 

[geoffrey.landis]

Could you please correct this statement: "This would have been the most massive black hole ever discovered (by far)".
Not true, not even close to true. The M87 black hole imaged by the Event Horizon Telescope last year, for example, is 6.5 billion times the mass of the sun.
You mean, "more massive than other stellar-mass black holes, but not as massive as the supermassive black holes found at the center of galaxies."

 

[rod]

This new study is a good example of how follow up observations in astronomy should work, testing and verifying reports. Here are some other report links, https://phys.org/news/2020-04-supermassive-black-hole.html, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2216-x, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200412882S/abstract

The phys.org report stated "Using higher-resolution data from the Flemish-funded Mercator Telescope on the island of La Palma (Spain), the KU Leuven team ran several simulations and concluded that the original interpretation of the system was in fact incorrect...", https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200412882S/abstract, "...Hence, LB-1 does not contain a compact object. Instead, it is a rare Be binary system consisting of a stripped donor star and a Be mass accretor rotating at near its critical velocity. This system is a clear example that binary interactions play a decisive role in the production of rapid stellar rotators and Be stars." The B3 Ve star spins at 300 km/s according to the report and abstract.

A B3Ve star spinning at 300 km/s is not a 68 to 70 solar mass black hole. The distance changed too, close to 6500 light-years for the new observations vs. previous of 13800 light-years or so.

 

[dfjchem721]

Clearly not the biggest.

There appears to be a number of black holes that are larger than 10E10 solar masses. Many occur in galaxy clusters and quasars. Of course these are estimates, as is M87's BH. But all are certainly much larger than the one of the article posted.

Here is an example. It is believed to be the largest "confirmed" black hole so far at 4 x 10E10:

This huge galaxy has the biggest black hole ever measured | Astronomy.com

The monster black hole in galaxy cluster Abell 85 is roughly the size of our solar system, but packs the mass of 40 billion suns.

astronomy.com

On most anybody's BH size scale, "a black hole 70 times as massive as our sun" is a wimpy little thing!

 

[Sarath]

Clearly not the biggest.

There appears to be a number of black holes that are larger than 10E10 solar masses. Many occur in galaxy clusters and quasars. Of course these are estimates, as is M87's BH. But all are certainly much larger than the one of the article posted.

Here is an example. It is believed to be the largest "confirmed" black hole so far at 4 x 10E10:

This huge galaxy has the biggest black hole ever measured | Astronomy.com

The monster black hole in galaxy cluster Abell 85 is roughly the size of our solar system, but packs the mass of 40 billion suns.

astronomy.com

On most anybody's BH size scale, "a black hole 70 times as massive as our sun" is a wimpy little thing!

I was surprised to read that too. I think they have meant the biggest "solar mass blackhole".

 

[Lovethrust]

Sloppy language in Space.com articles is unfortunately a tradition.