3 ms·

So, as you touch upon, I think mergers are the most likely reason as to the formation of this hole so early. It didn't start as a single singularity - it start

So, as you touch upon, I think mergers are the most likely reason as to the formation of this hole so early. It didn't start as a single singularity - it started as many, in a matter-dense region of space in the early universe - possibly primordial singularities, or first generation super-massive stellar formed singularities, in a cluster. If these each then accrete matter from the space surrounding them, they do so independently and each can accrue mass faster than a single singularity of equivalent total mass could while adhering to the Eddington limit. Once the space surrounding them ends up mostly devoid of other matter, the only remaining gravitational influence on them is each other, and thus they start to fall together, coalescing and increasing in mass, changing spin and vector, and potentially causing further coalescence and the availability of fresh matter to consume. Ultimately, this process would result in a single supermassive singularity which would be exceedingly hot, as it would be massive enough to take in matter from a much larger area than its ancestors, and would do so at a vast rate due to the matter previously being relatively untouched. Anyway, that's my armchair physicist hypothesis.

privong 12y ago
> If these each then accrete matter from the space surrounding them, they do so independently and each can accrue mass faster than a single singularity of equivalent total mass could while adhering to the Eddington limit. The Eddington limit is a linear function of mass, so the accretion onto a collection of objects would not differ from the accretion onto a single object. At least, not because of the Eddington limit – (hydro)dynamics would play a role. > Ultimately, this process would result in a single supermassive singularity which would be exceedingly hot, as it would be massive enough to take in matter from a much larger area than its ancestors, and would do so at a vast rate due to the matter previously being relatively untouched. I'm not sure what object you are referring to as "hot". The accretion disks around black holes typically become _cooler_, as the black hole mass increases. And, black holes themselves are aqutally quite cold, as they do not emit significant amounts of radiation.

privong 12y ago

> If these each then accrete matter from the space surrounding them, they do so independently and each can accrue mass faster than a single singularity of equivalent total mass could while adhering to the Eddington limit. The Eddington limit is a linear function of mass, so the accretion onto a collection of objects would not differ from the accretion onto a single object. At least, not because of the Eddington limit – (hydro)dynamics would play a role. > Ultimately, this process would result in a single supermassive singularity which would be exceedingly hot, as it would be massive enough to take in matter from a much larger area than its ancestors, and would do so at a vast rate due to the matter previously being relatively untouched. I'm not sure what object you are referring to as "hot". The accretion disks around black holes typically become _cooler_, as the black hole mass increases. And, black holes themselves are aqutally quite cold, as they do not emit significant amounts of radiation.