How a rare Gaussian tail sets the number of primordial black holes
Sandbox Physics ·
The collapsed fraction is the area of a Gaussian tail lying seven or more standard deviations out. Its logarithm scales as the inverse of the variance, so a 15% lower spectrum peak removes about 99% of the black holes. Each collapsed patch then gains weight relative to radiation as the universe expands, which converts a fraction near 10−13 into all of the dark matter.
From the curvature spectrum to the density variance
Inflation-type models describe early fluctuations by the curvature power spectrum Pζ(k): the variance of the curvature perturbation per logarithmic interval of wavenumber. The Lab uses a lognormal peak of amplitude A and width Δ at wavenumber k∗.
What decides collapse is the density contrast smoothed over the horizon scale R at re-entry. In the radiation era the density contrast is (4/9)(kR)2 times the curvature perturbation near horizon crossing, so the density power carries a factor (16/81)(kR)4. With a Gaussian window the variance follows the integral below (Young, Byrnes and Sasaki). Modes much longer than R are suppressed by (kR)4; modes much shorter are cut off by the window.
Horizon entry happens when k=aH. Because a∝t1/2 and H=1/(2t), aH∝t−1/2, so the horizon mass scales as MH∝t∝k−2. Writing M∗ for the horizon mass when k∗ enters gives k∗R=(MH/M∗)1/2.
Pζ(k)=2πΔAexp[−2Δ2ln2(k/k∗)]
Integrating over lnk gives A: the amplitude is the total power in the peak.
For a very narrow peak, replace the spectrum by Aδ(lnk−lnk∗). The integral collapses to one point, and with r=MH/M∗ the variance becomes (16/81)Ar2e−r. Setting the derivative of r2e−r to zero gives r=2: the variance, and hence collapse, peaks at twice the horizon mass of the peak scale. That is why the Lab writes the most common black hole mass as Mc=2γM∗.
For a very broad peak, Pζ is nearly constant over the window. The remaining integral is ∫0∞x3e−x2dx=1/2, so σ2=8Pζ/81. The reference code reproduces the flat limit to 6 parts in 105 and the narrow limits to 3 parts in 105.
σnarrow2=8116Ar2e−r,σflat2=818Pζ
Both limits follow from the same integral with no further assumption.
If the smoothed density contrast is Gaussian with variance σ2, the Press–Schechter estimate of the mass fraction collapsing at horizon mass MH is twice the probability above threshold. The factor two is a convention from Press–Schechter theory. Young, Byrnes and Sasaki compare it with other choices.
At the Lab’s default peak, σ=0.0616 and δc=0.45, so the threshold is ν=δc/σ=7.31 standard deviations out and β=2.74×10−13. The asymptotic form on the right is 1.8% high at this ν; the Lab and the reference code both evaluate the full function.
Lower the amplitude from A=0.0608 to 0.0516, a factor 0.849. The peak variance falls by the same factor, so σ drops from 0.0616 to 0.0568 and ν rises from 7.31 to 7.93.
The exponent ν2/2 goes from 26.7 to 31.4. The difference, 4.74, is 2.06 decades; the prefactor 1/ν adds 0.04 decades. The predicted drop is 2.10 decades and the full calculation at the peak gives 2.09. Integrated over all masses, the dark-matter share falls from 0.986 to 0.0074, a factor of 133. A modest change in the early spectrum moves the answer by orders of magnitude, so a claimed abundance is only as good as the threshold, window and statistics behind it.
dlnσ2dlnβ≈2ν2
At ν≈7, a 1% change in the variance changes β by about 27%.
From the collapsed fraction to today’s dark-matter share
At formation the black holes carry a fraction γβ of the energy density. Afterwards their density falls as a−3 while radiation falls as a−4, so their share grows in proportion to a until matter domination. A patch formed earlier has more growing to do. Since a∝t1/2∝MH1/2 at formation, the share today scales as γβMH−1/2.
Collecting the constants gives the mass function ψ, the dark-matter fraction per logarithmic mass interval. Its integral is the total fraction f. With g∗=106.75 relativistic degrees of freedom, ΩDM=0.264 and H0=67.4kms−1Mpc−1, the coefficient is C=3.77×108. Evaluated at their reference value g∗=10.75 and rewritten in the form of Sasaki et al.’s Eq. 27, it comes out 11% above their rounded 2.7×108. The difference comes from the cosmological parameters; it is reported, not tuned away.
At the default peak, MH=1.58×10−10M⊙, so γCMH−1/2=6.0×1012. Multiplying by β=2.74×10−13 gives ψ≈1.6 at the peak. The spread of masses has an effective width of about 0.6 in lnM, so f≈1.
Every step above assumes Gaussian statistics and a linear map from curvature to density. The 2026 review stresses that both fail in realistic cases: the nonlinear relation between curvature and density, and curvature that is non-Gaussian from the start, both change the tail exponentially. The threshold also depends on the profile, and critical collapse spreads the masses formed at one time. Use this chapter’s formulas to see how the pieces fit, then read the review before trusting a number.
Predict how much the dark-matter share will fall if the peak amplitude drops by 15%.
Choose “Lower the peak by 15%” and compare the collapsed fraction and the share of dark matter with your prediction.
Return to the default, then raise the threshold from 0.45 to 0.47 and explain why the change is about as large as an 8% change in amplitude.
Exercises with explanations
For a flat spectrum with δc=0.5, what amplitude gives β=10−20? Compare with the bound printed by Young, Byrnes and Sasaki.
Read the explanation
Solve erfc(0.5/2σ)=10−20 with σ2=8Pζ/81. This needs ν=9.34, so σ=0.0535 and Pζ=0.0290, matching their printed 0.029.
At σ=0.0616, raise the threshold from 0.45 to 0.47. By how much does β change?
Read the explanation
ν goes from 7.31 to 7.63 and log10β from −12.56 to −13.63: a factor of 12. A 4% change in the threshold acts like an 8% change in the variance, because ν2 depends on δc2/σ2.
Why is the peak of ψ(M) slightly lighter than the black hole mass Mc=2γM∗ set by the narrow-peak limit?
Read the explanation
ψ multiplies β by MH−1/2, which favours lighter masses, and a finite width Δ changes where the variance peaks. At the default the slider reads 3.98×10−11M⊙, while on the Lab’s 0.05-decade grid the mass function peaks at 3.16×10−11M⊙, about 0.1 decade lighter.
Review; arXiv lists the journal reference Riv. Nuovo Cim. (2026). Read in full: Sec. II.A.2 on non-Gaussianity, Sec. IV.C (gravitational waves), IV.E (accretion), V (asteroid-mass window), VI (Eqs. 25–29) and the captions of Figs. 2–6; parts of Sec. II and III.
Sections 1–4.2: the smoothed density variance with a Gaussian window, the Press–Schechter tail and the printed bound of Eq. 28 used as an independent check.