Cygnus X-1 is indeed a black hole, known for being one of the strongest X-ray sources seen from Earth, and it's part of a binary system with a massive star. However, the concept of considering the neutrons within it as black holes themselves is a misunderstanding of both the nature of black holes and the structure of neutron stars.

First, it's important to clarify that before a star collapses into a black hole, it may go through a phase where it becomes a neutron star (if its mass is below a certain threshold). Neutron stars and black holes represent two distinct outcomes of stellar evolution, dependent on the original mass of the star. Neutron stars are formed from the remnants of supernova explosions of stars that were not massive enough to form black holes. They are incredibly dense, with their mass primarily composed of neutrons packed closely together, but they do not possess an event horizon, which is a defining feature of black holes.

A black hole, on the other hand, is a region of spacetime where gravity is so strong that nothing, not even light, can escape from it. This is because the matter has been compressed into a singularity, a point of infinite density, according to classical general relativity. The surrounding event horizon marks the boundary beyond which nothing can return.

The concept of "neutrons within a black hole" being individual black holes themselves does not apply because once matter crosses the event horizon of a black hole, it contributes to the mass of the black hole and becomes part of the singularity (or whatever the true nature of the core of a black hole may be, as singularities are theoretical constructs that indicate our physics breaks down at that point). In the environment of a black hole, the distinction between different particles loses its meaning as we understand it.

Furthermore, for something to be considered a black hole, it must have enough mass to cause a collapse to a point (or a state in quantum gravity theories) where its escape velocity exceeds the speed of light. Individual neutrons (or any subatomic particle) do not have nearly enough mass for this to occur under our current understanding of physics.

To directly address the question, once a star collapses into a black hole, its composition is no longer described in terms of neutrons, protons, electrons, or any matter as we know it. The concept of matter as we understand it ceases to exist, and all that remains is a singularity enveloped by an event horizon. Thus, it wouldn't be correct to consider neutrons within a black hole as individual black holes.

Rivage de Harri,

Many thanks.

Jamil Kooli

anytime

good question you raised

Harri Shore,

I wanted to clarify that we can only make a hole with other black holes which here are the neutron black holes. I'm using common language here is that we can't use hay to make a pretty monstrous black hole as Cygnus x-1 or others that's logical, right? I think that in physics in general there is a bad choice to explain this or that thing for example Bohr did not use a purely relativistic method to determine the radius as well as the energy of hydrogen. I have a purely relativistic method which allowed me to determine the exact radius of H as well as the energy of H but I have never attempted to assimilate the hydrogen atom as bicycle wheel as has done Bohr to finally be able to find the radius and the energy of H whose results are not completely false but they are only approximate. My idea of the neutron as a black hole is a very correct idea I think people should build something on it.