These 2 monster black holes may be the closest pair ever discovered in visible and X-ray light (video)

News
By
published

"We were not expecting to see something like this."

It's the ultimate telescope vs. supermassive black hole tag-team match as the NASA team of Chandra and Hubble pin down a supermassive black hole pairing! Not only was this black hole tag team surprisingly close to Earth, but they were also in tight proximity to each other!

The supermassive black holes are located in the merging galaxies MCG-03-34-64, around 800 million light-years away, and are separated from each other by just 300 light-years.

That's not all. These two black holes actively gobble gas and dust falling to them from their surroundings, powering bright light emissions and powerful outflows or jets. Such regions are referred to as "active galactic nuclei" or "AGNs," and they can often be so bright that they outshine the combined light of every star in the galaxies that surround them. 

A Hubble image of the galaxy MCG-03-34-064 reveals three bright dots at the galaxy's center two of which are X-ray blasting black holes. (Image credit: NASA, ESA, Anna Trindade Falcão (CfA); Image Processing: Joseph DePasquale (STScI))

Despite being an almost incomprehensibly vast distance from Earth, this pairing is still the closest AGN pairing seen in multiple wavelengths of light. Hubble observed it in visible light, and Chandra saw it in X-rays. A pair of supermassive holes closer together than this one has been discovered, but it was detected only in radio waves and has not been confirmed in other wavelengths, according to NASA.

The supermassive black holes at the heart of MCG-03-34-64 are also closer to each other than the occupants of previously discovered binaries of this type. They would have both been at the centers of their own respective galaxies at one time, with a collision and merger between those galaxies bringing them close together.

The two supermassive black holes won't stay as widely separated as this, either. As they swirl around each other, the binary will emit ripples in spacetime called "gravitational waves." As these gravitational waves ring through space, they carry angular momentum away from the black holes, causing them to draw together and emit gravitational waves faster and faster.

This will continue for around 100 million years until the supermassive black holes are so close together that their immense gravity takes hold, and they are forced to collide and merge like their parent galaxies once did.

Related: Small black holes could play 'hide-and-seek' with elusive supermassive black hole pairs

A diagram shows the three main stages of black hole mergers with stage 2 being the theorhetical phase that explains the final parsec problem. (Image credit: Robert Lea (created with Canva))

AGN binaries similar to this one are thought to have been common in the early universe billions of years ago when mergers between galaxies were more common. This pairing provides a unique opportunity to observe such a binary that is much closer to home than those that existed billions of years ago and are thus billions of light-years away.

Hubble gets lucky

This discovery is an example of how serendipity can play a role in astronomy. Hubble spotted the AGN in data that indicated a dense concentration of oxygen within a very small region of MCG-03-34-64.

"We were not expecting to see something like this," team leader Anna Trindade Falcão of the Center for Astrophysics|Harvard & Smithsonian said in a statement. "This view is not a common occurrence in the nearby universe, and told us there's something else going on inside the galaxy."

To solve the mystery of what is occurring in MCG-03-34-64, Falcão and colleagues turned to Chandra to examine the same region, this time using X-rays. 

"When we looked at MCG-03-34-64 in the X-ray band, we saw two separated, powerful sources of high-energy emission coincident with the bright optical points of light seen with Hubble," Falcão continued. "We put these pieces together and concluded that we were likely looking at two closely spaced supermassive black holes."

Hubble pictured from the space shuttle Atlantis (STS-125) in May 2009. (Image credit: NASA)

The team didn't stop there. They drafted in some help for this space telescope tag team in the form of archival data from the Earth-based Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) located near Socorro, New Mexico. This revealed that the supermassive black hole pairing at the heart of this AGn are also belting out powerful radiowaves.

"When you see bright light in optical, X-rays, and radio wavelengths, a lot of things can be ruled out, leaving the conclusion these can only be explained as close black holes," Falcão continued. "When you put all the pieces together, you get a picture of the AGN duo."

RELATED STORIES:

— How do some black holes get so big? The James Webb Space Telescope may have an answer

— Brightest quasar ever seen is powered by black hole that eats a 'sun a day'

—Record breaker! Milky Way's most monstrous stellar-mass black hole is sleeping giant lurking close to Earth (Video)

Hubble saw a third bright light source in the AGN, which remains somewhat mysterious. The team suggests that this could be gas that has been "shocked" by a jet of high-speed plasma launched by one of the supermassive black holes, almost like a jet of water from a garden hose blasting a mound of sand.

The findings prove that even after three decades in space, Hubble is still delivering cutting-edge science results. 

"We wouldn't be able to see all of these intricacies without Hubble's amazing resolution," Falcão concluded.

The team's research was published on Monday (Sept. 9) in The Astrophysical Journal.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Robert Lea
Robert Lea
Senior Writer

Robert Lea is a science journalist in the U.K. whose articles have been published in Physics World, New Scientist, Astronomy Magazine, All About Space, Newsweek and ZME Science. He also writes about science communication for Elsevier and the European Journal of Physics. Rob holds a bachelor of science degree in physics and astronomy from the U.K.’s Open University. Follow him on Twitter @sciencef1rst.

7 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Questioner
    If as i propose the Schwarzschild-radius/event horizon is actually a dimensionless point embedded in the contracted space of BH's mass fields
    then i think byenlarge these BHs are solely following the geometry of space-time and unafflicted by the gravitation effect mechanics.

    It would mean they have no geometric extent in space-time & be without variable mass distribution and therefore not subject to mutual acceleration towards one another.

    When they say & measure their distances apart these observers are doing so from the outside with outside measurements,
    but from within the non-Euclidean shrunken space of the BH's mass fields the BHs are a good deal closer together than that.

    BHs are closer to everything around them because space is so contracted radially around them.

    Without gravitational acceleration mutual BH mergers may tend to be more drawn out in time.

    This doesn't mean non-singularity objects don't still have one-sided gravitational acceleration towards a BH in its mass field.
    Reply
  • Questioner
    Odd thought,
    Could the acceleration energy of matter colliding with each of the BHs tend to push them together,
    since there is more matter outside of their pairing than between them?
    In effect shepherding them together?
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    Plasma inertia can be 1000s of time stronger than neutral mass inertia. Two different acting inertias.

    Plasma inertia is EM inertia. Not “mass” inertia.

    I don’t believe you will ever find a black hole. Mass can not superposition. CERN proves this over and over.

    I’m betting what you think is a black hole, is really a ringed star. Instead of a globed star, a ringed star.

    I believe that a sufficient amount with a sufficient velocity of plasma inertia could form a ring instead of a gravity ball. That ring would spin, helix as it rotated. It would look braided. And it would blow out particles from the center in both directions.

    I look at it in that manner, not a black hole. The strength of the magnetic dipole in the center, would depend and follow the net alignment of circling plasma. It could even oscillate. And wobble. Stir. And structure huge bellows. Huge bubbles. Sound familiar?

    We will see with better resolution as to what develops.

    I say a ringed star is far more likely than a black hole.

    A toroidal star.

    If two toroidal stars get their active dipoles lined up…….. if they happen to rotate in same direction they will join and grow. But if they are rotating in opposite directions, find a deep hole. A galactic CERN.
    Reply
  • Questioner
    The shepherding effect of matter falling into the outer sides of a pair of proximate black holes may be greater than my initial thought.

    Each BH has a massfield 'shadow' that is much bigger and any matter encountering those MFs IS subject to gravitational acceleration.
    Gravitational acceleration actual curving is extreme compared to the apparent seeming curving trajectories of space-time geometry alone.

    So matter falling in a path that might have driven the BH pair apart if space were Euclidean normal is either curved collided into the opposite BH or at least deflected from a head on collision with the interior side of the BH.

    The closer the BHs get together the slimmer the chances of a direct interior stike driving them apart because of the other BH's massfield shadow.

    So i think the preponderance of gravity accelerated matter will tend to nudge a pair of proximate BHs together.

    Space-time geometry has no power to draw a pair of BHs together because neither is subject to the active gravitational effect since they have no extent of space to distribute their mass across the tidal gradient of an external mass field.

    So the ONLY thing pushing two BHs together IS external matter collisions.
    Reply
  • Questioner
    Aside thought,

    a galactic collision is actively only a function of stars responding to the stars and the other BH and the BHs themselves are only shepherded along by matter collisions?

    Something to think about.
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    I think that a gravity field is always in a state of collapse. In order to release the gravitational pressure, one needs to either turn off the gravity, or reverse it. I wouldn’t know how to reverse it, and I don’t think one can reverse it. Gravity doesn't have a reverse. I believe that if we could invert the ingredient of gravity……..we would still have gravity. I think gravity is the kind of miss-balance….. where if you were to try and reverse it…….it would give you the same effect. In other words even if you reverse the balance the effect is the same…. An attraction.

    Kinda hard to explain. Gravity is a one way street, no matter which way the car is pointed.

    From what I’ve been able to glean, gravity is a neutral dipole function. Every property of a dipole bond is highly asymmetrical. I believe that one or more of those asymmetric properties is the cause of gravity. And some how that attraction is trying to nullify that asymmetry. Which can not be nullified.

    Ans so, if one could disassociate all of the dipole bonds, tripole bonds quadpole bonds and all nuclei bonds at the same time……. then gravity would disappear. And let the pressure go. It would take a very massive gamma strike to disassociate all the bonds. At the same time, or close to the same time.

    But I totally disagree of any particle or mass/matter superposition. Can not happen.

    CERN shows this. Matter breaks, fragments and dissolves when squeezed together. It burns up into fragment sparks. Fragments are NOT components of matter. One left handed and one right handed particle is all there is. That and the photons from them.

    Gives us a cosmos. And that cosmos is locked and synchronized with time and length.

    Light shift is duty cycle shift, not wave frequency shift. All velocities have a constant relevancy. Because of constant time and constant length.

    Kinda ironic. Relativity gives you spacetime. But the relevancy of relativity or relativity squared ha ha………...gives us constant time and constant length. Think about it. How could you have a consistent relativity without constant time and length. Back at yeah.

    If that made any sense. Sometimes I forget which side I’m on.

    Gravity is weak and indirect, not fundamental of e. Two unbalanced e’s are needed for gravity. Only then does it shine. A sucking shine.

    And of course I have no references, because no one knows any of this.

    I’ll bet an anti matter dipole, an inverted dipole, where the asymmetric bond is reversed…...has the same gravitational attraction as a normal dipole.

    But those things have to wait for better measuring instruments. Measuring down that small has the same kind of problems as measuring 13 billion years. Size and distance.

    Not only that, when you stimulate or hold a charge, that charge can shrink so fast and small, it seems to disappear.

    Huge size changes are common at the atomic level. This is only beginning to be realized. My model showed this dynamic one hundred years ago. Another big problem for fusion. Fusion is long off.

    It’s going to be hard to hold a charge still. And when you stimulate a charge, you change the charge you’re trying to measure. OR try to target. A delicate touch will be needed.

    Particles are very sensitive and delicate to handle. Without changing them. Especially the electron. An electron is a UN-loaded spring and does not like to be loaded. It will avoid you at all cost. The proton has the opposite personality. It’s a strong but very small pig, and it isn’t going anywhere. It will dare you, not run from you. And when you smack it, it takes what you give it and shrinks down to keep it. The more energy a charge has, the smaller it gets. The proton swallows and the electron pukes energy. There are not just dipoler in the electrical sense, they are bipolar in the property sense.

    VERY asymmetric. In all ways. Different personalities. Resulting in gravity.

    Dipole gravity theory. Incomplete. Supposition stage. Last on my list. Matter and light is resolved.

    Gravity is still a ponderment. The last physical mystery. And handedness might be the missing pillar for gravity and entanglement. I believe dipole asymmetry comes from handedness. And I think that handedness is involved with gravity and entanglement. Entanglement is going to be hard, until we can passively measure. Or find an indicator.

    It’s hard to verify when you don’t know the starting condition. But handedness is there. And it seems to flip. Gravity might be able to phase and synchronize a flip. Just a spitball.

    There might be a handedness law. Or an effect we haven’t noticed. Or detected. Handedness is not energy or mass related, so it goes UN-noticed. But it’s a big deal.

    A particle does not have a radius. It only has a circumference. That circumference is a closed helix that spins. That helical spin is at c acceleration. Which gives the entire helix a RELATIVE c spin.

    Did you catch that? The small helical spin is at c. Making the entire close helical structure rotate at a RELATIVE c speed. The absolute length of the helix can not be changed. But the helical length can be change by adding or subtracting turns in the helix. This shrinks or expands the circumference. And that changes the relative structure rotation spin.

    Did you catch that? An EM field thru the center of the charge at the right rate, can induce another turn in the helix. More energy and it shrinks in size. When the charge emits, it relaxes turns in the helix, and the circumference expands, the charge gets larger and slower relative c.

    A charge has two spins. The helical spin is always at c and the structure rotation is at relative c.

    I know, no one has heard of this.

    It’s a method of modulating a constant. Without losing the constant. Chunking a constant. The c constant. With the e constant.

    I don’t know maybe one has to be nuts to understand and explain this stuff.

    Do I qualify?
    Reply
  • Questioner
    Further on the matter shepherding of proximate black holes,

    Any direct vector hit driving a pair of BHs directly apart has to first take a circuitous path around the other BH's massfield & then be redirected to go straight at one of the BHs from inner side.

    So the total of acceleration energy driving them directly apart has less ability to accumulate speed/energy in that particular direction than matter with a long, unobstructed path directly towards a BH's center of mass.

    And the matter acceleration energies driving the BHs together is relatively unobstructed and faster, & more energetic.
    Reply