EarthSky\u2019s 2026 lunar calendar shows the moon phase for every day of the year. Available now. Get yours today!<\/p>\n
- \n
- An \u201cimpossible\u201d ultra-high-energy neutrino<\/strong> \u2013 detected in 2023 \u2013 might have come from the explosion of a tiny primordial black hole.<\/li>\n
- This led astronomers to a new dark-charge model.<\/strong> This model of primordial black holes could explain why one detector saw the high-energy event while another didn\u2019t.<\/li>\n
- If confirmed, such explosions could reveal new particles,<\/strong> help verify Hawking radiation and potentially explain the nature of dark matter.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
The University of Massachusetts Amherst published this original article on February 3, 2026. Edits by EarthSky.<\/p>\n
Did we see a black hole explode?<\/h3>\n
In 2023, a subatomic particle called a neutrino crashed into Earth with an impossibly huge amount of\u00a0energy. In fact, no known sources anywhere in the universe can produce that much energy, 100,000 times more than the highest-energy particle ever produced by the largest earthly particle accelerators.<\/p>\n
In 2023, a subatomic particle called a neutrino crashed into Earth with an impossibly huge<\/em> amount of energy. In fact, no known sources anywhere in the universe can produce that much energy, 100,000 times more than the highest-energy particle ever produced by the Large Hadron Collider, Earth\u2019s most powerful particle accelerator. However, a team of physicists at the University of Massachusetts Amherst recently hypothesized that something like this could happen when a special kind of black hole, called a quasi-extremal primordial black hole<\/em>, explodes.<\/p>\n
The journal Physical Review Letters<\/em> published the new research on December 18, 2025. The team not only accounts for the otherwise impossible neutrino but shows that the elementary particle could reveal the fundamental nature of the universe.<\/p>\n
Primordial black holes<\/h3>\n
Black holes exist, and we have a good understanding of their life cycle: an old, large star runs out of fuel, implodes in a massively powerful supernova, and leaves behind an area of spacetime with such intense gravity that nothing, not even light, can escape. These black holes are incredibly heavy and are essentially stable.<\/p>\n
But, as physicist Stephen Hawking pointed out in 1970, another kind of black hole \u2013 a primordial black hole \u2013 could be created not by the collapse of a star, but from the universe\u2019s primordial conditions shortly after the Big Bang. Primordial black holes exist only in theory so far. And, like standard black holes, they\u2019re so massively dense that almost nothing can escape them \u2026 which is what makes them black<\/em>. However, despite their density, primordial black holes could be much lighter than the black holes we have so far observed. Furthermore, Hawking showed that primordial black holes could slowly emit particles via what is now known as Hawking radiation if they got hot enough. <\/p>\n
Andrea Thamm, co-author of the new research and assistant professor of physics at UMass Amherst, said: <\/p>\n
\n
The lighter a black hole is, the hotter it should be and the more particles it will emit. As primordial black holes evaporate, they become ever lighter, and so hotter, emitting even more radiation in a runaway process until explosion. It\u2019s that Hawking radiation that our telescopes can detect.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/earthsky.org\/upl\/2026\/02\/Andrea-Thamm-UMASS-Amherst.png\")
Andrea Thamm of the University of Massachusetts Amherst is a co-author of the new study. Image via University of Massachusetts Amherst.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Observing a black hole explode<\/h3>\n
If such an explosion were to be observed, it would give us a definitive catalog of all the subatomic particles in existence. That would include the ones we have observed, such as electrons, quarks and Higgs bosons. And also the ones that we have only hypothesized, like dark matter particles, as well as everything else that is, so far, entirely unknown to science. The UMass Amherst team has previously shown that such explosions could happen with surprising frequency \u2013 every decade or so \u2013 and if we were to pay attention, our current cosmos-observing instruments could register these explosions.<\/p>\n
So far, so theoretical.<\/p>\n
Then, in 2023, an experiment called the KM3NeT Collaboration captured that impossible neutrino. It was exactly the kind of evidence the UMass Amherst team hypothesized we might soon see.<\/p>\n
But there was a hitch: A similar experiment, called IceCube, also set up to capture high-energy cosmic neutrinos, didn\u2019t register the event. Not only that, but it had never clocked anything with even one hundredth of its power. If the universe is relatively thick with primordial black holes, and they are exploding frequently, shouldn\u2019t we be showered in high-energy neutrinos? What can explain the discrepancy?<\/p>\n
The missing link<\/h3>\n
Co-author Joaquim Iguaz Juan, a postdoctoral researcher in physics at UMass Amherst, said:<\/p>\n
\n
We think that primordial black holes with a \u2018dark charge\u2019 \u2013 what we call quasi-extremal primordial black holes \u2013 are the missing link.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The dark charge is essentially a copy of the usual electric force as we know it. But it includes a very heavy, hypothesized version of the electron, which the team calls a dark electron<\/em>.<\/p>\n
Co-author Michael Baker, an assistant professor of physics at UMass Amherst, said: <\/p>\n
\n
There are other, simpler models of primordial black holes out there. Our dark-charge model is more complex, which means it may provide a more accurate model of reality. What\u2019s so cool is to see that our model can explain this otherwise unexplainable phenomenon.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Thamm added:<\/p>\n
\n
A primordial black hole with a dark charge has unique properties and behaves in ways that are different from other, simpler primordial black hole models. We have shown that this can provide an explanation of all of the seemingly inconsistent experimental data.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Dark matter explained?<\/h3>\n
The team is confident that, not only can their dark-charge model primordial black holes explain the neutrino, it can also answer the mystery of dark matter. Baker said: <\/p>\n
\n
Observations of galaxies and the cosmic microwave background suggest that some kind of dark matter exists.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Iguaz Juan added:<\/p>\n
\n
If our hypothesized dark charge is true, then we believe there could be a significant population of primordial black holes, which would be consistent with other astrophysical observations, and account for all the missing dark matter in the universe.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Baker concluded:<\/p>\n
\n
Observing the high-energy neutrino was an incredible event. It gave us a new window on the universe. But we could now be on the cusp of experimentally verifying Hawking radiation, obtaining evidence for both primordial black holes and new particles beyond the Standard Model, and explaining the mystery of dark matter.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Bottom line: Did we just witness a black hole explode? Astronomers observed a strange particle collide with Earth that could have been the result of a black hole exploding. It could help reveal new particles, help verify Hawking radiation and potentially explain the nature of dark matter.<\/p>\n
Source: Explaining the PeV neutrino fluxes at KM3NeT and IceCube with quasiextremal primordial black holes<\/p>\n
Via University of Massachusetts Amherst<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
- This led astronomers to a new dark-charge model.<\/strong> This model of primordial black holes could explain why one detector saw the high-energy event while another didn\u2019t.<\/li>\n