A more model independent argument (which does have loopholes) goes as
follows. The weaker WIMPS interact with themselves and with baryons, the
sooner after the Big Bang they decouple, leading to a higher present-day
abundance. Then with the present-day abundance fixed, this implies
limits on the parameters describing WIMPS. And it becomes more and more
difficult to accommodate for WIMS with smaller and smaller small
cross-sections. But dark matter that has extremely weak interactions and
self-interactions would never have been in thermal equilibrium, which is
a possible loophole out of this no-go argument.
Saibal
>>> [1]
>>>
>>> They theorized in the early universe Dark Matter, whatever it is,
>>> must've been much more densely concentrated than it is today, and
>>> if Dark Matter particles are their own antiparticles as many think
>>> then their annihilation could provide a heat source, they could
>>> keeping star in thermal and hydrodynamic equilibrium and prevent
>>> it from collapsing. They hypothesized something they called a
>>> "Dark Star '', it would be a star with a million times the mass of
>>> the sun and would be composed almost entirely of hydrogen and
>>> helium but with 0.1% Dark Matter. A Dark Star would not be dark
>>> but would be 10 billion times as bright as the sun and be powered
>>> by dark matter not nuclear fusion.
>>>
>>> Astronomers were puzzled by pictures taken with the James Webb
>>> telescope that they interpreted to be bright galaxies just 320
>>> million years after the Big Bang that were much brighter than most
>>> expected them to be that early in the universe, a recent paper by
>>> the same people that theorized existence of Dark Stars claim they
>>> could solve this puzzle. They claim 3 of the most distant objects
>>> that the Webb telescope has seen are point sources, as you'd
>>> expect from a Dark Star, and their spectrum is consistent with
>>> what they predicted a Dark Star should look like. With a longer
>>> exposure and a more detailed spectrum, Webb should be able to tell
>>> for sure if it's a single Dark Star or an early galaxy made up of
>>> tens of millions of population 3 stars.
>>>
>>> Supermassive Dark Star candidates seen by JWST [2]
>>>
>>> John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis [3]
>> [4].
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to
everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAPCWU3LvD%3DBUJH8hNeWGbM6p%2BSfriLZr3JP82PiUbGKaxqUg%2BA%40mail.gmail.com
> [5].
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
>
https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/422/3/2164/1043351?login=false
> [2]
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2305762120
> [3]
https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis
> [4]
>
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e8e41a06-7e91-4ac2-a636-b7481ffd1398n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
> [5]
>
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAPCWU3LvD%3DBUJH8hNeWGbM6p%2BSfriLZr3JP82PiUbGKaxqUg%2BA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer