User:James Salsman/BHDM

[Coordinating edits across projects and non-Foundation sites]

Black hole dark matter

Please see e.g.

1. https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.08275
2. http://cosmos.nautil.us/short/142/dark-matter-may-be-trapped-in-all-the-black-holes
3. https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.02544
4. https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.02529
5. https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.05207
6. https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04023 = http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8205/823/2/L25
7. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5V5YuiKYZ0#t=38m10s
8. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/418126/why-black-holes-may-constitute-all-dark-matter/
9. https://arxiv.org/abs/1001.2308
10. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45852809_Identification_of_All_Dark_Matter_as_Black_Holes
11. https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.07631
12. https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.07565
13. https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.05234
14. http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.05009
15. https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06077
16. https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.01853
17. https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.06920
18. https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.00017
19. https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.00541
20. https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.01853
21. https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.00907
22. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0004-637X/696/2/1798/pdf
23. https://arxiv.org/abs/1205.6467
24. https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1689
25. https://arxiv.org/abs/1201.3761
26. https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.4391
27. https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.2975
28. http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/view/14749
29. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2041-8205/720/1/L67/pdf
30. https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.04661
31. http://www.nao.ac.jp/en/news/science/2016/20160115-nro.html
32. https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.04716
33. https://arxiv.org/abs/1402.5975
34. https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0501345.pdf
35. https://arxiv.org/abs/1509.04899
36. http://i.imgur.com/WVMy3C0.png
37. https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.00464

Note, as of mid-2017, several papers predicated on black hole dark matter are being published per month, e.g.

1. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.05849.pdf
2. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.04206.pdf
3. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.03419.pdf
4. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.02441.pdf
5. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.01480.pdf

As of October 2017, this paper of outright black holes as dark matter advocacy has taken off, with 16 citations less than a month after publication

• https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.04825
• https://scholar.google.com/scholar?um=1&lr&cites=13640436686592228052

Perhaps the best peer-reviewed technical introduction as of April 2018 to why the idea was so controversial and why it shouldn't have been is at

• https://arxiv.org/pdf/1801.00808.pdf

Please see also

http://jensorensen.com/2014/03/17/corporate-cosmos/

http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.121303

How many astrophysics and cosmology technical staff, grad students, and graduate fellowships depend on postulated particle dark matter? The Stawell mine, Soudan mine, SNOLAB underground laboratory at Sudbury, Gran Sasso National Laboratory, Canfranc Underground Laboratory, Boulby Underground Laboratory, Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory, Particle and Astrophysical Xenon Detector, CDMS, CRESST, CoGeNT, EDELWEISS, EURECA, ZEPLIN, DEAP at SNOLAB, DarkSide, WARP at the LNGS, XENON, ArDM, WARP, PandaX, LUX, SIMPLE, PICASSO, DAMA/NaI, DAMA/LIBRA, Fermi-LAT, VERITAS ground-based gamma ray observatory, ANAIS, KIMS, DM-Ice, IceCube, AMANDA, ANTARES, DRIFT, DMTPC, Newage, MIMAC, Japans Super-Kamiokande, EGRET, PAMELA etc. And there are dozens of annihilation studies using time-shared observatories beyond those.