GRBs from collapse of NSCs --> SMBHs ??

[Widdekind]

Nuclear Star Clusters resemble massive Globular Clusters, residing in the cores of small galaxies (Ho. Galaxy Formation & Evolution). NSCs, in low-mass galaxies, are associated with surface-brightness 'cusps', having 'disky' isophotes, and evidencing weak rotation. High-mass galaxies tend to host SMBHs, instead of NSCs (Mason. Astrophysics Update 2, p.180). According to 'Hierarchical Structure Formation', small proto-galaxies merge, to make larger galaxies. And, in 'wet' gas-rich galaxy mergers, gas gets 'funneled' to the center of the system, whereat NSCs would reside. Perhaps, then, when small, gas-rich proto-galaxies merge, gas gets funneled to the center, enveloping all the stars in a 'common envelope', which absorbs stellar energies & angular momenta, leading to a 'collapse' of the NSCs into SMBHs ?? If so, could the catastrophic collapses, of millions of stars, into SMBH, generate GRBs ??

 

'wet',

i.e.

gas-rich, proto-galaxy core

 

GRB in core of galaxy

[Widdekind]

Observation, of a 2 billion solar-mass SMBH, when our universe was <1 Gyr old, apparently precludes the possibility, that this SMBH formed from the merger of star-mass BHs. Instead, a large-scale "direct collapse" appears more plausible (Science News 2011).

[Airbrush]

Interesting observation. I had always believed SMBH formed long before any stars or galaxies. The only way that much matter can be close enough together is soon after the moment of the Big Bang.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Airbrush

[Widdekind]

Interesting observation. I had always believed SMBH formed long before any stars or galaxies. The only way that much matter can be close enough together is soon after the moment of the Big Bang.

 

I'm arguing for a sudden-and-catastrophic "implosion", of an entire cluster, of millions of stars, "mired" amidst a "common envelope" of gas & dust that "saps" their orbital energies, until they all "sink" towards their system center, "past the point where the space-time fabric can support their mutual mass", so that "the rubber trampoline mat sags & rips", suddenly forming an entire SMBH, in situ, all at once.

[Arch2008]

Maybe not...

 

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/12/time-machine-shows-how-black-holes-became-supermassive-after-big-bang.html

 

http://www.astronomy.com/en/News-Observing/News/2011/12/Early%20black%20holes%20grew%20big%20by%20eating%20cold%20fast%20food.aspx?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ASY_Sub_news_111216_final&utm_content=

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111212124557.htm

 

I haven't found the paper in Arxiv...yet.

 

Here you go:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1107.1253

Edited December 16, 2011 by Arch2008

[Widdekind]

Thanks for the links... they discuss how the first SMBH grew (and, grew quickly); yet, I was asking, about how they formed (collapse of large star clusters??):

 

the very first black holes, those that started the entire growth process when the universe was only several hundred million years old, had masses of only 100-1000 times the mass of the sun. Such black holes may be related to the very first stars in the universe [i.e. (cores of dense) star clusters]. They also found that the subsequent growth period of the observed sources...lasted only 100-200 million years [cp. characteristic life-time of quasars is 100-200 Myr] (science daily 2010).

More than half of detected SMBH are heavily obscured, in enshrouding dust & debris, "black holes must be hidden behind large quantities of dust and gas from their host galaxies" (science daily 2011, science daily 2011). That is what a "wet collapse" scenario would resemble.

Edited December 24, 2011 by Widdekind