Did Dark Matter Power Early Stars?

by Nancy Atkinson on January 2, 2009

The galaxy cluster Cl 0024+17 (ZwCl0024+1652) as seen by Hubble’s Advanced Camera for Surveys. Credit: NASA, ESA, M.J. Jee and H. Ford (Johns Hopkins University)

The galaxy cluster Cl 0024+17 (ZwCl0024+1652) as seen by Hubble’s Advanced Camera for Surveys. Credit: NASA, ESA, M.J. Jee and H. Ford (Johns Hopkins University)


The first stars to light the early universe may have been powered by dark matter, according to a new study. Researchers from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor call these very first stars “Dark Stars,” and propose that dark matter heating provided the energy for these stars instead of fusion. The researchers propose that with a high concentration of dark matter in the early Universe, the theoretical particles called Weakly Interacting Massive Particles(WIMPs), collected inside the first stars and annihilated themselves to produce a heat source to power the stars. “We studied the behavior of WIMPs in the first stars,” said Katherine Freese and her team in their paper, “and found that they can radically alter the stellar evolution. The annihilation products of the dark matter inside the star can be trapped and deposit enough energy to heat the star and prevent it from further collapse.”

The philosophy behind this research is that 95% of the mass in galaxies and clusters of galaxies is in the form of an unknown type of matter and energy. The researchers say, “The first stars to form in the universe are a natural place to look for significant amounts of dark matter annihilation, because they form at the right place and the right time. They form at high redshifts, when the universe was still substantially denser than it is today, and at the high density centers of dark matter haloes.”

The concentration of dark matter at that time would have been extremely high meaning that any ordinary stars would naturally contain large amounts of dark matter.

Dark stars would have been driven by the annihilation of dark matter particles releasing heat but only in stars larger than 400 solar masses. That turns out to be quite feasible since stars containing smaller amounts of dark matter would naturally grow as they swept up dark matter from nearby space.

The stars continued, and may still continue to be powered by dark matter annihilation as long as there is dark matter for fuel. When the dark matter runs out, they simply collapse to form black holes.

If they exist, Dark Stars should be able to be detected with future telescopes, and if found, would enable the study of WIMPs, and therefore be able to prove the existence of dark matter.

Sources: arXiv, arXiv blog


  • http://blog.chungyc.org/ Yoo

    A couple of questions that pop to mind are:

    1) How would the dark matter have been condensed into the appropriate concentrations in early stars?

    2) What would have propped up the dark matter from gravitational collapse into black holes long enough for them to annihilate?

  • craigR

    Interesting, but…….I’m w/ Feenixx. I find it hard to assume DM (aka WIMPS) are their own annihlation partners. Sort of a big assumption; ie., if everyone in the world were nice…

  • Alex Jones

    “What would have propped up the dark matter from gravitational collapse into black holes long enough for them to annihilate?”

    Good question. Astrophysicists say, that most of the time stars built out of normal matter are in an equilibrium between gravity – which tries to compress the star – and radiation pressure – which tries to expand the star. Dark matter, by definition, does not react to radiation (electro-magnetic interaction). So what does the dark matter inside a star – where these particles are near to each other already – keep from collapsing more and more rather rapidly?

    A similar question comes to mind: What does a neutron star keep from collapsing? As far as I know, electro-magnetic interaction is not needed for the stability of a neutron star. I have read something about “configuration pressure”, which has to do with quantum physics.

  • pantzov

    “buster” is correct. it’s unreasonable to base a new theory on top of an other unproven theory. it is fun to imagine though and makes for a good read.

  • sachidananda

    The statement written above on Jan’4th 2009 at 4.42am is not a comment. it is real & can be seen.

  • troy

    in response to Yoo

    1) How would the dark matter have been condensed into the appropriate concentrations in early stars?

    2) What would have propped up the dark matter from gravitational collapse into black holes long enough for them to annihilate?

    it’s obvious. dark energy????

    Dark Matter – existance proven but unkown
    WIMPs – unproven existance

    These are the basis of their statements?

    How are we to believe these conclusions??

  • Olaf

    I don’t know if there is a direct link between dark matter and dark energy. I thought these were completely different things and had nothing in common with that fact that it is unknown.

  • maudyfish

    God i feel real stupid about asking anything about physiscs. Please bear with me?!?

    If a ball is put in a spin in space it will spin forever right. But the law of physics says for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. What is the reaction in this case? Black matter?

  • Alex Jones

    “God i feel real stupid about asking anything about physiscs. Please bear with me?!?”
    No problem. Asking questions is a sign of intelligence in many cases.

    “If a ball is put in a spin in space it will spin forever right. But the law of physics says for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. What is the reaction in this case? Black matter?”

    As long as you are on the way to “put” the ball in a spin, you exert a force on the ball, increasing its torque. The inert mass of the ball _re-acts_ with a force against your force. Have you ever accelerated a merry-go-round with children on it? You can _feel_ the resistant force of the mass of the apparatus plus the children.

    After having stopped exerting the force on the ball – and assuming there are not _other_ influences (e.g. from gravitation) –, the ball remains in its current state, i.e. spins forever. This is a basic principle of classical physics, invented (some say: discovered) by Isaac Newton.

    In modern physics, of course, it’s a little bit different. After certain periods of time there will be some radioactive decay of some elementary particles in the ball, and there will be some quantum fluctuations too. This will change the torque of the ball a little bit.

  • Ronald White

    I don’t like this theory, there are to many if’s.
    1> what is dark matter? No one knows!
    2> what is dark energy? No one knows!
    3>If dark energy and dark matter exist where did it come from?
    4> If the first stars were made from dark matter, did these stars create normal matter?
    5> If stars created from dark matter exist, can can you tell the difference from stars that are created from normal matter?
    Ronald White

Previous post:

Next post: