On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 2:36:09 AM UTC-5, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
In article , "Robert L.
Oldershaw" writes:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.00464

Title: Did LIGO detect dark matter?

Almost by definition, black-hole physics is the same no matter what the
black holes are "made of". So, of course, they could be made of dark
matter, or back issues of the ApJ, or whatever.

But presumably you are well enough informed to know that the dark
matter is non-baryonic and why that means SN-generated BHs and PBHs
must be distinguished in conventional astrophysics when it comes to
dark matter research

for primordial black holes as dark matter. It's saying they could be
dark matter, and that black holes in this mass range are not ruled out
(though I think the Lacy & Ostriker argument rules out them being a
substantial fraction of cosmological dark matter).

Perhaps you should review that paper, and post a LINK to that paper
(if it is from the arxiv era), and make sure more recent research has
not invalidated their conclusions.


It seems to me that the paper is jumping on the bandwagon and trying to
get "LIGO" and "dark matter" into one paper. Not wrong, but not really
relevant.

Weren't you the one accusing me of making disparaging comments about
the motives of authors. Does Dr. Phil speak with forked tongue?

RLO http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw