We normally think of interstellar flight in terms of reaching a single target. The usual destination is one of the Alpha Centauri stars, and because we know of a terrestrial-mass planet there, Proxima Centauri emerges as the best candidate. I don’t recall Proxima ever being named as the destination Breakthrough Starshot officially had in mind, but there is such a distance between it (4.2 light years) and the next target, Barnard’s Star at some 5.96 light years, that it seems evident we will give the nod to Proxima. If, that is, we decide to go interstellar.
Let’s not forget, though, that if we build a beaming infrastructure either on Earth or in space that can accelerate a sail to a significant percentage of lightspeed, we can use it again and again. That means many possible targets. I like the idea of exploring other possibilities, which is why Cosimo Bambi’s ideas on black holes interest me. Associated with Fudan University in Shanghai as well as New Uzbekistan University in Tashkent, Bambi has been thinking about the proliferation of black holes in the galaxy, and the nearest one to us. I’ve been pondering his notions ever since reading about them last August.
Black holes are obviously hard to find as we scale down to solar mass objects, and right now the closest one to us is GAIA-BH1, some 1560 light years out. But reading Bambi’s most recent paper, I see that one estimate of the number of stellar mass black holes in our galaxy is 1.4 X 109. Bambi uses this number, but as we might expect, estimates vary widely, from 10 million to 1 billion. These numbers are extrapolated from the population of massive stars and to a very limited extent on clues from observational astronomy.
Image: The first image of Sagittarius A*, or Sgr A*, the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy. Given how hard it was to achieve this image, can we find ways to locate far smaller solar-mass black holes, and possibly send a mission to one? Credit: Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration.
Bambi calculates a population of 1 black hole and 10 white dwarfs for every 100 stars in the general population. If he’s anywhere close to right, a black hole might well exist within 20 to 25 light years, conceivably detected in future observations by its effects upon the orbital motion of a companion star, assuming we are so lucky as to find a black hole in a binary system. The aforementioned GAIA-BH1 is in such a system, orbiting a companion star.
Most black holes, though, are thought to be isolated. One black hole (OGLE-2011-BLG-0462) has been detected through microlensing, and perhaps LIGO A+, the upgrade to the two LIGO facilities in Hanford, Washington, and Livingston, Louisiana, can help us find more as we increase our skills at detecting gravitational waves. There are other options as well, as Bambi notes:
Murchikova & Sahu (2025) proposed to use observational facilities like the Square Kilometer Array (SKA), the Atacama Large Millimiter/Submillimiter Array (ALMA), and James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). Isolated black holes moving through the interstellar medium can accrete from the interstellar medium itself and such an accretion process produces electromagnetic radiation. Murchikova & Sahu (2025) showed that current observational facilities can already detect the radiation from isolated black holes in the warm medium of the Local Interstellar Cloud within 50 pc of Earth, but their identification as accreting black holes is challenging and requires multi-telescope observations.
If we do find a black hole out there at, say, 10 light years, we now have a target for future beamed sailcraft that offers an entirely different mission concept. We’re now probing not simply an unknown planet, but an astrophysical object so bizarre that observing its effects on spacetime will be a primary task. Sending two nanocraft, one could observe the other as it approaches the black hole. A signal sent from one to the other will be affected by the spacetime metric – the ‘geometry’ of spacetime – which would give us information about the Kerr solution to the phenomenon. The latter assumes a rotating black hole, whereas other solutions, like that of Schwarzschild, describe a non-rotating black hole.
Also intriguing is Bambi’s notion of testing fundamental constants. Does atomic physics change in gravitational fields this strong? There have been some papers exploring possible variations in fundamental constants over time, but little by way of observation studying gravitational fields much stronger than white dwarf surfaces. Two nanocraft in the vicinity of a black hole may offer a way to emit photons whose energies can probe the nature of the fine structure constant. The latter sets the interactions between elementary charged particles.
For that matter, is a black hole inevitably possessed of an event horizon, or is it best described as an ‘horizonless compact object’ (Bambi’s term)?
In the presence of an event horizon, the signal from nanocraft B should be more and more redshifted (formally without disappearing, as an observer should never see a test-particle crossing the event horizon in a finite time, but, in practice, at some point the signal leaves the sensitivity band of the receiver on nanocraft A). If the compact object is a Kerr black hole, we can make clear predictions on the temporal evolution of the signal emitted by nanocraft B. If the compact object is a fuzzball [a bound state without event horizon], the temporal evolution of the signal should be different and presumably stop instantly when nanocraft B is converted into fuzzball degrees of freedom.
There are so many things to learn about black holes that it is difficult to know where to begin, and I suspect that if many of our space probes have returned surprising results (think of the remarkable ‘heart’ on Pluto), a mission to a black hole would uncover mysteries and pose questions we have yet to ask. What an intriguing idea, and to my knowledge, no one else has made the point that if we ever reach the level of launching a mission to Proxima Centauri, we should be capable of engineering the same sort of flyby of a nearby black hole.
And on the matter of small black holes, be aware of a just released paper examining the role of dark matter in their formation. This one considers black holes on a much smaller scale, possibly making the chances of finding a nearby one that much greater. Let me quote the abstract (the italics are mine). The citation is below:
Exoplanets, with their large volumes and low temperatures, are ideal celestial detectors for probing dark matter (DM) interactions. DM particles can lose energy through scattering with the planetary interior and become gravitationally captured if their interaction with the visible sector is sufficiently strong. In the absence of annihilation, the captured DM thermalizes and accumulates at the planet’s center, eventually collapsing into black holes (BHs). Using gaseous exoplanets as an example, we demonstrate that BH formation can occur within an observable timescale for superheavy DM with masses greater than 106 GeV and nuclear scattering cross sections. The BHs may either accrete the planetary medium or evaporate via Hawking radiation, depending on the mass of the DM that formed them. We explore the possibility of periodic BH formation within the unconstrained DM parameter space and discuss potential detection methods, including observations of planetary-mass objects, pulsed high-energy cosmic rays, and variations in exoplanet temperatures. Our findings suggest that future extensive exoplanet observations could provide complementary opportunities to terrestrial and cosmological searches for superheavy DM.
The paper is Bambi, “An interstellar mission to test astrophysical black holes,” iScience Volume 28, Issue 8113142 (August 15, 2025). Full text. The paper on black holes and dark matter is Phoroutan-Mehr & Fetherolf, “Probing superheavy dark matter with exoplanets,” Physical Review D Vol. 112 (20 August 2025), 036012 (full text).
If DM could form a BH at the center of a planet, wouldn’t that then collapse the planet into that BH, consuming it? Wouldn’t the same apply to stars, extinguishing them?
The physics of different particles is way above my head, but I would question whether the particles that comprise DM would influence what could happen.
If DM is only subject to gravity, wouldn’t DM eventually collapse in on itself, much as denser interstellar clouds eventually collapse into star-forming clusters? Why do they form “halos” around galaxies rather than slowly collapse in toward the galaxy and potentially accrete into a supermassive BH at the galactic center, which then attracts stars to further grow?
If BH’s are 1% of all stars, would the same logic apply to BH binaries? [Multiple-star systems comprise around 85% of all star systems.]
If so, a BH binary would be relatively near us, and useful for interstellar propulsion as examined in this CD post from 2019: Pondering the ‘Dyson Slingshot’.
Rather than exotic “wormhole travel” beloved of SciFi (e.g., the wormhole at Star Trek’s Deep Space 9 station), we could have a potent natural way to accelerate spacecraft to very high velocities. Coupled with another BH binary to decelerate, you have an “interstellar highway” which becomes a network when all these binaries are mapped.
There would need to be some accurate navigation to be able to target the decelerating BH binary as it moves during the travel time. Shorter hops are feasible, but perhaps not long-distance hops, as the predicted position of the BH binary might be somewhat chaotic over many millennia. Nevertheless, an interesting speculation that somewhat mitigates the tyranny of the rocket equation.
But if there are beamers everywhere for the “last mile” connection to star systems, then maybe Jim Benford has a point about detecting such beam leakage in our direction. They might be rare, but like ocean-going ships that occasionally happen to pass by an observer nowhere near the main shipping lanes, indicative that many more ships could be traveling in the [interstellar] shipping lanes positioned as a slowly changing network of BM binaries, with the BH binary to regular star systems as the equivalent of surface roads extending from the “entry and exit ramps”.
Beam-driven sails are being taken up here as a way of doing astrophysics! Might such encourage further development of beam-driven sails? Let’s hope so!
We can point to Cyg-X1, as the posterchild binary of a black hole and a normal star. The latter is a O9.7 Iab spectral type. The black hole is a bright X-ray source, in a well-determined nearly circular orbit that has a radius about twice the estimated diameter of the primary. This close proximity means the black hole is dragging a stream of material from the primary that emits X-rays as it approaches the event horizon. It would be a great thing to study up close but the latest study puts it at 7,200 light years away.