Paper detail

The case for primordial black holes as dark matter

The aim of this paper is to present the case that stellar mass primordial black holes make up the dark matter component of the Universe. A near critical density of compact bodies implies that most lines of sight will be gravitationally microlensed, and the paper focuses on looking for the predicted effects on quasar brightness and spectral variations. These signatures of microlensing include the shape of the Fourier power spectrum of the light curves, near achromatic and statistically symmetric variations, and the absence of time dilation in the timescale of variability. For spectral changes, as the continuum varies there should be little corresponding change in the strength of the broad lines. In all these cases, the observations are found to be consistent with the predictions for microlensing by a population of stellar mass compact bodies. For multiply lensed quasars where the images vary independently it is shown that stellar populations are too small to produce the observed microlensing effects, implying a population of compact dark matter bodies of around a stellar mass along the line of sight. The most serious objection to dark matter in the form of compact bodies has come from observations of microlensing of stars in the Magellanic Clouds. In this paper the expected event rate is re-analysed using more recent values for the structure and dynamics of the Galactic halo, and it is shown that there is then no conflict with the observations. Finally, the possible identity of a near critical density of dark matter in the form of stellar mass compact bodies is reviewed, with the conclusion that by far the most plausible candidates are primordial black holes formed during the QCD epoch. The overall conclusion of the paper is that primordial black holes should be seen alongside elementary particles as viable dark matter candidates.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.