Re:Physicists Solve a Muon Mystery. Now, Old Results Don't A...
by CuriouslyC on Thursday July 30, 2026 @11:28PM
(#49118668)
The Higgs and black holes are quite different. We've basically observed Higgs according to how we've defined them, while we've only observed phenomena consistent with black holes as we hypothesize them. Singularities are the result of theories based on (ironically named) real numbers, it's entirely possible that what we call black holes are really dark stars formed from exotic matter that can only exist in hyper-extreme conditions, like a leveled up neutron star.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Physicists Solve a Muon Mystery. Now, Old Results Don't A...
by i_no_can_eat on Friday July 31, 2026 @05:29AM
(#49120898)
The difference is that we have theorerically sound formation scenarious for black holes under very broad conditions, and we have absolutely no model for a formation scenario of such an exotic dark star.
Re:Physicists Solve a Muon Mystery. Now, Old Results Don't A...
by mr_toad on Friday July 31, 2026 @08:29AM
(#49122252)
Observations keep poking holes in those hypotheses (Iām not sure they even count as theories). We keep finding black holes with anomalous masses, or black holes that formed too early.
Part of the problem is that we have very little observational data. But another big problem is that our best ideas, based on general relativity are known to be incompatible with quantum mechanics.
Re:Physicists Solve a Muon Mystery. Now, Old Results Don't A...
by i_no_can_eat on Friday July 31, 2026 @02:14PM
(#49126708)
My comment was specifically about those alternative "dark stars" hypothesis. Is there one with a formation scenario?
Re:Physicists Solve a Muon Mystery. Now, Old Results Don't A...
by CuriouslyC on Saturday August 01, 2026 @12:44AM
(#49131118)
That's gated by a constructivist replacement for general relativity and a deeper understanding of heavy quarks. Science marches on.