Black Holes I

Welcome! You are encouraged to register with the site and login (for free). When you register, you support the site and your question history is saved.

     Physical theory implies that the existence of astronomical entities above a certain mass is evidence for the existence of black holes. The Earth does not itself collapse upon itself under gravitational force because gravity is countered by the outward pressure generated by the electromagnetic repulsion between the atoms making up the planet. But if these forces are overpowered, gravity will always lead to the formation of a black hole. Assuming the validity of general relativity, we can calculate the upper bound for a star, the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit, to be 3.6 solar masses; any object heavier than this will be unable to resist collapse under its own mass and must be a black hole.
     The search for entities more massive than the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit brings us to the examination of X-ray binary systems. In an X-ray binary, two bodies rotate around their center of mass, a point between them, while one component, usually a normal star, sheds matter to the other more massive component known as the accretor. The shedding matter is released as observable X-ray radiation. Since binary stars rotate around a common center of gravity, the mass of the accetor can be calculated from the orbit of the visible one. By 2004, about forty X-ray binaries that contained candidates for black holes had been discovered. The accretors in these binary systems did not appear visible, as is to be expected of black holes, but that fact alone does not distinguish them from very dense and hence less luminescent stars, such as neutron stars. More to the point is that these accretors were of mass far in excess of 3.6 solar masses. Famously, Cygnus X-1, an X-ray binary in the constellation Cygnus, has an accretor whose mass has been calculated to be 14 solar masses, plus or minus 4 solar masses. While does not rule out other phenomena without further interpretation, it provides strong proof that black holes exist.
     The conclusion that black holes exist depends on the reliability of the general-relativistic calculations involved. If more generous assumptions are made, the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit can be calculated to be as high as 10 solar masses. The finding also establishes plausibility, if not direct evidence, for the existence of supermassive black holes hypothesized to exist at the center of some galaxies.                

The passage is primarily concerned with

Review: Black Holes I


Explanation

In this question, as usual, we will attempt to formulate a prediction of the correct answer choice, to the extent possible. As we've said, the primary business of the author is to explain an element of black hole theory and then observations that try to apply the theory to find black holes. Very well; on to the answer choices. The author does not "defend" or "criticize," actions of a higher level of opinion than the passage contains. (A) and (B) are out. Only one theory is discussed, so (D) is out. We are down to (C) and (E). One is more accurate, while the other has an objective flaw. "Summarizing research findings" emphasizes the second paragraph over the first, but it is accurate. For example, the point, as in lines 39-40, is that "it provides strong evidence that black holes exist." Meanwhile, there is not an "innovative technique" described in the passage. There is a certain technique in observing the binary stars to infer the presence of black holes, but there is more emphasis on the findings and on the theory than on this technique, and we have no idea whether this technique is new, according to the author.

The correct answer is (C).


If you believe you have found an error in this question or explanation, please contact us and include the question title or URL in your message.
Continue »