• queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    4 days ago

    Very cool paper and I don’t want to be the Internet Armchair Astrophysicist, but doesn’t the fact that we’ve already observed a merger show that second-generation black holes are a thing? Or is this evidence that BH mergers (and therefore second-gen BHs) might be more common than we previously thought?

    • teft@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      We had seen merges of two first generation black holes but never of this type which would have had at least one other merger prior to this merger detected (either four merged into two merged into one or some other configuration like that). That’s what they mean by hierarchical mergers.

      • queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Ah, so the differing spin (and mass) of the merging black holes they just detected indicate that at least one of them was already a second generation black hole, and is evidence for multi-generation hierarchical mergers. That makes sense.

    • oracle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      “Second-generation” isnt referring to whether it merged before, it’s referring to (and this might be a not fully correct analysis either) whether conservation of angular momentum got fucked up, like when you’re playing Mario Kart and you get smacked so many times that you get confused and start driving in the wrong direction.