[oersted]

Well, it seems that the question still remains somewhat open. There are theories that fit the data as well or better than the black-hole model.

My naive intuition is that this is mostly just physicist publishing papers and throwing some exotic ideas out (we still don't know enough about dark matter), and that the black-hole model will remain as the consensus. But it's not as unquestionable as you say it is.

> An alternative to the black hole (BH) scenario has been recently proposed in terms of a supermassive compact object composed of self-gravitating fermionic dark matter (DM).

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/546/1/staf1854/843111...

> Sagittarius A* Might Not Be a Black Hole

https://youtu.be/7tRww03EKlk?si=0XcJ1yw-gPj1IzQW

[jambalaya8]

I am one of those people that feel that dark matter is not something humans should be studying too much. Just like hadrons, wormholes, and those people interested in creating lab-based little black holes. It strikes me as naive and dangerous to assume all physics is meant to be studied. Just because we know splitting atoms can make really big explosions, for instance, doesn't mean it might not have had other effects on the fabric of the universe we lack the mental facilities, advanced knowledge, or context to fathom.