the standard model of cosmology: cdm - mcgill patscott/talks/ps_oslo.pdfthe standard model of...
Post on 14-Mar-2018
222 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Pat Scott
Department of Physics, McGill University
Slides available fromwww.physics.mcgill.ca/ patscott
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Outline
1 Cosmological Models2 CDM – Background
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
3 CDM – Selected resultsIndirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Outline
1 Cosmological Models2 CDM – Background
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
3 CDM – Selected resultsIndirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
The Friedmann Equation
Take the Einstein Equation from General Relativity:
Gµν = 8πTµν + Λgµν . (1)
Assume the Universe to be isotropic and homogeneous=⇒ Friedmann-Robertson Walker (FRW) metric:
gµνxµxν = dt2 + R(t)2(
dr2
1− kr2 + r2dΩ2). (2)
Solve µ = 0, ν = 0 of (1) =⇒ Friedmann Equation:
H(t) ≡ R(t)R(t)
=8πG
3ρ(t)− k
R(t)2 . (3)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
The Friedmann Equation
Take the Einstein Equation from General Relativity:
Gµν = 8πTµν + Λgµν . (1)
Assume the Universe to be isotropic and homogeneous=⇒ Friedmann-Robertson Walker (FRW) metric:
gµνxµxν = dt2 + R(t)2(
dr2
1− kr2 + r2dΩ2). (2)
Solve µ = 0, ν = 0 of (1) =⇒ Friedmann Equation:
H(t) ≡ R(t)R(t)
=8πG
3ρ(t)− k
R(t)2 . (3)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
The Friedmann Equation
Take the Einstein Equation from General Relativity:
Gµν = 8πTµν + Λgµν . (1)
Assume the Universe to be isotropic and homogeneous=⇒ Friedmann-Robertson Walker (FRW) metric:
gµνxµxν = dt2 + R(t)2(
dr2
1− kr2 + r2dΩ2). (2)
Solve µ = 0, ν = 0 of (1) =⇒ Friedmann Equation:
H(t) ≡ R(t)R(t)
=8πG
3ρ(t)− k
R(t)2 . (3)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
The Friedmann Equation
Solve µ = 0, ν = 0 of (1) =⇒ Friedmann Equation:
H(t) ≡ R(t)R(t)
=8πG
3ρ(t)− k
R(t)2 . (4)
Solving this gives Hubble parameter H(t) for someenergy density-scalefactor relation R(t) = f (ρ(t))
curvature k ∈ +1,0,−1H(t) encodes the dynamic evolution of the Universe
Critical density:For a flat Universe k = 0. This defines
critical density: ρc = 3H(t)8πG
cosmological density: Ωx ≡ ρxρc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
The Friedmann Equation
Solve µ = 0, ν = 0 of (1) =⇒ Friedmann Equation:
H(t) ≡ R(t)R(t)
=8πG
3ρ(t)− k
R(t)2 . (4)
Solving this gives Hubble parameter H(t) for someenergy density-scalefactor relation R(t) = f (ρ(t))
curvature k ∈ +1,0,−1
H(t) encodes the dynamic evolution of the Universe
Critical density:For a flat Universe k = 0. This defines
critical density: ρc = 3H(t)8πG
cosmological density: Ωx ≡ ρxρc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
The Friedmann Equation
Solve µ = 0, ν = 0 of (1) =⇒ Friedmann Equation:
H(t) ≡ R(t)R(t)
=8πG
3ρ(t)− k
R(t)2 . (4)
Solving this gives Hubble parameter H(t) for someenergy density-scalefactor relation R(t) = f (ρ(t))
curvature k ∈ +1,0,−1H(t) encodes the dynamic evolution of the Universe
Critical density:For a flat Universe k = 0. This defines
critical density: ρc = 3H(t)8πG
cosmological density: Ωx ≡ ρxρc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
The Friedmann Equation
Solve µ = 0, ν = 0 of (1) =⇒ Friedmann Equation:
H(t) ≡ R(t)R(t)
=8πG
3ρ(t)− k
R(t)2 . (4)
Solving this gives Hubble parameter H(t) for someenergy density-scalefactor relation R(t) = f (ρ(t))
curvature k ∈ +1,0,−1H(t) encodes the dynamic evolution of the Universe
Critical density:For a flat Universe k = 0. This defines
critical density: ρc = 3H(t)8πG
cosmological density: Ωx ≡ ρxρc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Equations of state
Equations of state:1st law of thermodynamics (µ = 0 in conservation of Tµν) is
d(ρR3) = −pd(R3), i.e. ∆E = −p∆V (5)
with a constant equation of state ρ = wp, we get energydensity-scalefactor relations
ρ ∝ R−3(1+w) (6)
For different types of energy:Matter: w = 0 =⇒ ρ ∝ R−3
Radiation: w = 1/3 =⇒ ρ ∝ R−4
Vacuum (Λ): w = −1 =⇒ ρ ∝ constant
This is basically enough to solve the Friedmann Equation.Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Ingredients of ΛCDM
Ingredients required Choices in ΛCDMfor a cosmological model
A theory of gravity GR+ associated assumptions +isotropy,homogeneity
Types of energy radiation,matter, vacuum/dark energy
their equations of state w = 1/3, 0, −1/other
their (self−)interactions photons,baryonic (SM) matter+cold dark matter (CDM), ??
An initial spectrum approximately scale invariantof perturbations on large scales
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Ingredients of ΛCDM
Ingredients required Choices in ΛCDMfor a cosmological model
A theory of gravity GR+ associated assumptions +isotropy,homogeneity
Types of energy radiation,matter, vacuum/dark energy
their equations of state w = 1/3, 0, −1/other
their (self−)interactions photons,baryonic (SM) matter+cold dark matter (CDM), ??
An initial spectrum approximately scale invariantof perturbations on large scales
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
An aside: inflation
QuestionIsn’t inflation part of the ΛCDM model?
AnswerNot really, no.
Approximately scale-invariant spectrum of perturbations to startwith, on CMB scales (small k )? Yes.Due to inflation by definition? No.
Pδ(k) ∝ PR(k) ∝ kns−1
+α log k/k0
(7)
ΛCDM does not demand inflation, just as it does not demandany particular CDM−inflation is just an idea for getting the required spectrum on CMB scales−any particular DM model is just an idea for getting CDM
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
An aside: inflation
QuestionIsn’t inflation part of the ΛCDM model?
AnswerNot really, no.
Approximately scale-invariant spectrum of perturbations to startwith, on CMB scales (small k )? Yes.Due to inflation by definition? No.
Pδ(k) ∝ PR(k) ∝ kns−1
+α log k/k0
(7)
ΛCDM does not demand inflation, just as it does not demandany particular CDM−inflation is just an idea for getting the required spectrum on CMB scales−any particular DM model is just an idea for getting CDM
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
An aside: inflation
QuestionIsn’t inflation part of the ΛCDM model?
AnswerNot really, no.
Approximately scale-invariant spectrum of perturbations to startwith, on CMB scales (small k )? Yes.Due to inflation by definition? No.
Pδ(k) ∝ PR(k) ∝ kns−1
+α log k/k0
(7)
ΛCDM does not demand inflation, just as it does not demandany particular CDM−inflation is just an idea for getting the required spectrum on CMB scales−any particular DM model is just an idea for getting CDM
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
An aside: inflation
QuestionIsn’t inflation part of the ΛCDM model?
AnswerNot really, no.
Approximately scale-invariant spectrum of perturbations to startwith, on CMB scales (small k )? Yes.Due to inflation by definition? No.
Pδ(k) ∝ PR(k) ∝ kns−1+α log k/k0 (7)
ΛCDM does not demand inflation, just as it does not demandany particular CDM−inflation is just an idea for getting the required spectrum on CMB scales−any particular DM model is just an idea for getting CDM
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
An aside: inflation
QuestionIsn’t inflation part of the ΛCDM model?
AnswerNot really, no.
Approximately scale-invariant spectrum of perturbations to startwith, on CMB scales (small k )? Yes.Due to inflation by definition? No.
Pδ(k) ∝ PR(k) ∝ kns−1+α log k/k0 (7)
ΛCDM does not demand inflation, just as it does not demandany particular CDM−inflation is just an idea for getting the required spectrum on CMB scales−any particular DM model is just an idea for getting CDM
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Cosmological probes & ‘concordance cosmology’
Joint fit to multiplecosmological observablesgives a consistent set ofparameter values:
ΩΛ ≈ 0.73Ωmatter ≈ 0.27
=
ΩCDM ≈ 0.23 + Ωbaryons ≈ 0.04→ΛCDM
(I follow a similar global fitstrategy to hunt for DM andparticle theories beyond the SM)
23
Fit !M !k w
SNe 0.287+0.029+0.039!0.027!0.036 0 (fixed) -1 (fixed)
SNe+BAO 0.285+0.020+0.011!0.020!0.009 0 (fixed) !1.011+0.076+0.083
!0.082!0.087
SNe+CMB 0.265+0.022+0.018!0.021!0.016 0 (fixed) !0.955+0.060+0.059
!0.066!0.060
SNe+BAO+CMB 0.274+0.016+0.013!0.016!0.012 0 (fixed) !0.969+0.059+0.063
!0.063!0.066
SNe+BAO+CMB 0.285+0.020+0.011!0.019!0.011 !0.009+0.009+0.002
!0.010!0.003 -1 (fixed)
SNe+BAO+CMB 0.285+0.020+0.010!0.020!0.010 !0.010+0.010+0.006
!0.011!0.004 !1.001+0.069+0.080!0.073!0.082
TABLE 6Fit results on cosmological parameters !M, !k and w. The parameter values are followed by their statistical (!stat) andsystematic (!sys) uncertainties. The parameter values and their statistical errors were obtained from minimizing the "2 ofEq. 3. The fit to the SNe data alone results in a "2 of 310.8 for 303 degrees of freedom with a ""2 of less than one forthe other fits. The systematic errors were obtained from fitting with extra nuisance parameters according Eq. 5 and
subtracting from the resulting error, !w/sys, the statistical error: !sys = (!2w/sys
! !2stat)
1/2.
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
mm
w 0.2 0.3 0.4
-1.0
-0.7
w
0.2 0.3 0.4
w/ sys
w/o NB99
-1.3
-1.0
-0.7
w
-1.3
SNe
BAO
CMB
Fig. 14.— 68.3 %, 95.4 % and 99.7% confidence level contours onw and !M, for a flat Universe. The top plot shows the individualconstraints from CMB, BAO and the Union SN set, as well as thecombined constraints (filled gray contours, statistical errors only).The upper right plot shows the e#ect of including systematic errors.The lower right plot illustrates the impact of the SCP Nearby 1999data.
straints from combining SNe, CMB and BAO are consis-tent with a flat !CDM Universe (as seen in Table 6). Fig.15 shows the corresponding constraints in the "M ! "!
plane.Finally, one can attempt to investigate constraints on
a redshift dependent equation of state (EOS) parameterw(z). Initially we consider this in terms of
w(z) = w0 + waz
1 + z, (10)
shown by Linder (2003) to provide excellent approxima-tion to a wide variety of scalar field and other dark en-ergy models. Later, we examine other aspects of timevariation of the dark energy EOS. Assuming a flat Uni-verse and combining the Union set with constraints fromCMB, we obtain constraints on w0, the present valueof the EOS, and wa, giving a measure of its time vari-ation, as shown in Fig. 16. (A cosmological constanthas w0 = !1, wa = 0.) Due to degeneracies within theEOS and between the EOS and the matter density "M,the SN dataset alone does not give appreciable leverageon the dark energy properties. By adding other mea-surements, the degeneracies can be broken and currentlymodest cosmology constraints obtained.
Fig. 16 (left) shows the combination of the SN datawith either the CMB constraints or the BAO constraints.
0.0 0.5 1.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
FlatBAO
CMB
SNe
No Big Bang
Fig. 15.— 68.3 %, 95.4 % and 99.7% confidence level contourson !! and !M obtained from CMB, BAO and the Union SN set,as well as their combination (assuming w = !1).
The results are similar; note that including either one re-sults in a sharp cut-o# at w0+wa = 0, from the physics asmentioned in regards to Eq. 9. Since w(z " 1) = w0+wa
in this parameterization, any model with more positivehigh-redshift w will not yield a matter-dominated earlyUniverse, altering the sound horizon in conflict with ob-servations.
Note that BAO do not provide a purely “low” redshiftconstraint, because implicit within the BAO data anal-ysis, and hence the constraint, is that the high redshiftUniverse was matter dominated (so the sound horizon
Kowalski et al ApJ 2008
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Cosmological probes & ‘concordance cosmology’
Joint fit to multiplecosmological observablesgives a consistent set ofparameter values:
ΩΛ ≈ 0.73Ωmatter ≈ 0.27
=
ΩCDM ≈ 0.23 + Ωbaryons ≈ 0.04→ΛCDM
(I follow a similar global fitstrategy to hunt for DM andparticle theories beyond the SM)
23
Fit !M !k w
SNe 0.287+0.029+0.039!0.027!0.036 0 (fixed) -1 (fixed)
SNe+BAO 0.285+0.020+0.011!0.020!0.009 0 (fixed) !1.011+0.076+0.083
!0.082!0.087
SNe+CMB 0.265+0.022+0.018!0.021!0.016 0 (fixed) !0.955+0.060+0.059
!0.066!0.060
SNe+BAO+CMB 0.274+0.016+0.013!0.016!0.012 0 (fixed) !0.969+0.059+0.063
!0.063!0.066
SNe+BAO+CMB 0.285+0.020+0.011!0.019!0.011 !0.009+0.009+0.002
!0.010!0.003 -1 (fixed)
SNe+BAO+CMB 0.285+0.020+0.010!0.020!0.010 !0.010+0.010+0.006
!0.011!0.004 !1.001+0.069+0.080!0.073!0.082
TABLE 6Fit results on cosmological parameters !M, !k and w. The parameter values are followed by their statistical (!stat) andsystematic (!sys) uncertainties. The parameter values and their statistical errors were obtained from minimizing the "2 ofEq. 3. The fit to the SNe data alone results in a "2 of 310.8 for 303 degrees of freedom with a ""2 of less than one forthe other fits. The systematic errors were obtained from fitting with extra nuisance parameters according Eq. 5 and
subtracting from the resulting error, !w/sys, the statistical error: !sys = (!2w/sys
! !2stat)
1/2.
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
mm
w 0.2 0.3 0.4
-1.0
-0.7
w
0.2 0.3 0.4
w/ sys
w/o NB99
-1.3
-1.0
-0.7
w
-1.3
SNe
BAO
CMB
Fig. 14.— 68.3 %, 95.4 % and 99.7% confidence level contours onw and !M, for a flat Universe. The top plot shows the individualconstraints from CMB, BAO and the Union SN set, as well as thecombined constraints (filled gray contours, statistical errors only).The upper right plot shows the e#ect of including systematic errors.The lower right plot illustrates the impact of the SCP Nearby 1999data.
straints from combining SNe, CMB and BAO are consis-tent with a flat !CDM Universe (as seen in Table 6). Fig.15 shows the corresponding constraints in the "M ! "!
plane.Finally, one can attempt to investigate constraints on
a redshift dependent equation of state (EOS) parameterw(z). Initially we consider this in terms of
w(z) = w0 + waz
1 + z, (10)
shown by Linder (2003) to provide excellent approxima-tion to a wide variety of scalar field and other dark en-ergy models. Later, we examine other aspects of timevariation of the dark energy EOS. Assuming a flat Uni-verse and combining the Union set with constraints fromCMB, we obtain constraints on w0, the present valueof the EOS, and wa, giving a measure of its time vari-ation, as shown in Fig. 16. (A cosmological constanthas w0 = !1, wa = 0.) Due to degeneracies within theEOS and between the EOS and the matter density "M,the SN dataset alone does not give appreciable leverageon the dark energy properties. By adding other mea-surements, the degeneracies can be broken and currentlymodest cosmology constraints obtained.
Fig. 16 (left) shows the combination of the SN datawith either the CMB constraints or the BAO constraints.
0.0 0.5 1.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
FlatBAO
CMB
SNe
No Big Bang
Fig. 15.— 68.3 %, 95.4 % and 99.7% confidence level contourson !! and !M obtained from CMB, BAO and the Union SN set,as well as their combination (assuming w = !1).
The results are similar; note that including either one re-sults in a sharp cut-o# at w0+wa = 0, from the physics asmentioned in regards to Eq. 9. Since w(z " 1) = w0+wa
in this parameterization, any model with more positivehigh-redshift w will not yield a matter-dominated earlyUniverse, altering the sound horizon in conflict with ob-servations.
Note that BAO do not provide a purely “low” redshiftconstraint, because implicit within the BAO data anal-ysis, and hence the constraint, is that the high redshiftUniverse was matter dominated (so the sound horizon
Kowalski et al ApJ 2008
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Outline
1 Cosmological Models2 CDM – Background
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
3 CDM – Selected resultsIndirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
How we know dark matter exists
The only way to consistently explain:1 rotation curves + vel. dispersions2 gravitational lensing3 cosmological data
Large-scale structure (2dF/Chandra/SDSS-BAO) saysΩmatter ≈ 0.27BBN says that Ωbaryonic ≈ 0.04=⇒ Ωnon−baryonic ≈ 5× ΩbaryonsCMB (WMAP) and SN1a agree; also indicate that Ωtotal ≈ 1=⇒ universe is 23% dark matter, 4% baryonic (visible)matter, 73% something else
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
(Clowe et al., ApJL 2006)
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
What we know about it
Must be:massive (gravitationally-interacting)
unable to interact via the electromagnetic force (dark)
non-baryonic
“cold(ish)” (in order to allow structure formation)
stable on cosmological timescales
produced with the right relic abundance in the early Universe.
Good options:Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs)
sterile neutrinos
gravitinos
axions
axinos
hidden sector dark matter (e.g. WIMPless dark matter)Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
What we know about it
Must be:massive (gravitationally-interacting)
unable to interact via the electromagnetic force (dark)
non-baryonic
“cold(ish)” (in order to allow structure formation)
stable on cosmological timescales
produced with the right relic abundance in the early Universe.
Good options:Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs)
sterile neutrinos
gravitinos
axions
axinos
hidden sector dark matter (e.g. WIMPless dark matter)Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Bad options:primordial black holes
MAssive Compact Halo Objects (MACHOs)
standard model neutrinos
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
What we know about it
Must be:massive (gravitationally-interacting)
unable to interact via the electromagnetic force (dark)
non-baryonic
“cold(ish)” (in order to allow structure formation)
stable on cosmological timescales
produced with the right relic abundance in the early Universe.
Good options:Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs)
sterile neutrinos
gravitinos
axions
axinos
hidden sector dark matter (e.g. WIMPless dark matter)Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Bad options:primordial black holes
MAssive Compact Halo Objects (MACHOs)
standard model neutrinos
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
WIMPs at a glance
Dark because no electromagnetic interactionsCold because very massive (∼10 GeV to ∼10 TeV)Non-baryonic and stable - no problems with BBN or CMBWeak-scale annihilation cross-sections naturally lead to arelic abundance of the right order of magnitude
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
(Kolb & Turner1990)
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
WIMPs at a glance
Many theoretically well-motivated particle candidatesSupersymmetric (SUSY) neutralinos χ if R-parity is conserved -lightest mixture of neutral higgsinos and gauginosInert Higgses - extra Higgs in the Standard ModelKaluza-Klein particles - extra dimensionsright-handed neutrinos, sneutrinos, other exotic things. . .
Weak interaction means scattering with nuclei→ detectionchannelMany WIMPs are Majorana particles (own antiparticles)=⇒ self-annihilation cross-section
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Outline
1 Cosmological Models2 CDM – Background
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
3 CDM – Selected resultsIndirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNT
Direct production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,TevatronIndirect detection – annihilations producing
gamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNT
Direct production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,TevatronIndirect detection – annihilations producing
gamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNT
Direct production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,TevatronIndirect detection – annihilations producing
gamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNT
Direct production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,TevatronIndirect detection – annihilations producing
gamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNTDirect production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,Tevatron
Indirect detection – annihilations producinggamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNTDirect production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,Tevatron
Indirect detection – annihilations producinggamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNTDirect production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,TevatronIndirect detection – annihilations producing
gamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNTDirect production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,TevatronIndirect detection – annihilations producing
gamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNTDirect production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,TevatronIndirect detection – annihilations producing
gamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
Ways to detect WIMPs
Direct detection – nuclear collisions and recoils – CDMS,XENON, DAMA, CRESST, CoGeNTDirect production – missing ET or otherwise – LHC,TevatronIndirect detection – annihilations producing
gamma-rays – Fermi, HESS, CTAanti-protons – PAMELA, AMSanti-deuterons – GAPSneutrinos – IceCube, ANTARESe+e− – PAMELA, Fermi, ATIC, AMS→ secondary radiation: Compton−1,synchrotron, bremsstrahlungsecondary impacts on the CMB
Dark stars – JWST, VLT
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Outline
1 Cosmological Models2 CDM – Background
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
3 CDM – Selected resultsIndirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Finding dark matter with neutrino telescopes
The cartoon version:
1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,
convert into muons in ice/water6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from the
muons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Finding dark matter with neutrino telescopes
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun
2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter tobe gravitationally bound
3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,
convert into muons in ice/water6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from the
muons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Finding dark matter with neutrino telescopes
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound
3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,
convert into muons in ice/water6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from the
muons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Finding dark matter with neutrino telescopes
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core
4 Annihilate with each other, producingneutrinos
5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,convert into muons in ice/water
6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from themuons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Finding dark matter with neutrino telescopes
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos
5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,convert into muons in ice/water
6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from themuons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Finding dark matter with neutrino telescopes
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,
convert into muons in ice/water
6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from themuons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Finding dark matter with neutrino telescopes
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,
convert into muons in ice/water6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from the
muons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
The IceCube Neutrino Observatory
86 strings1.5–2.5 km deep inAntarctic ice sheet∼125 m spacingbetween strings∼70 m in DeepCore(10× higher opticaldetector density)1 km3 instrumentedvolume (1 Gton)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
The IceCube Neutrino Observatory
86 strings1.5–2.5 km deep inAntarctic ice sheet∼125 m spacingbetween strings∼70 m in DeepCore(10× higher opticaldetector density)1 km3 instrumentedvolume (1 Gton)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
MeanTrue value
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo & Hultqvist 2012
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0 200 400 600 800mχ0
1(GeV)
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Pre
dict
edsi
gnal
even
ts
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
IC22× 100flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo & Hultqvist 2012
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0 200 400 600 800mχ0
1(GeV)
−43
−42
−41
−40
−39
−38lo
g 10
( σSD,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
IC22× 100flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
PS, Savage, Edsjö & TheIceCube Collaboration,arxiv:1207.0810
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Gamma-rays from dark matter
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
3 main gamma-ray channels:
monochromatic linesinternal bremsstrahlung (FSR + VIB)continuum from secondary decay
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Gamma-rays from dark matter
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
3 main gamma-ray channels:monochromatic lines
internal bremsstrahlung (FSR + VIB)continuum from secondary decay
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Gamma-rays from dark matter
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
3 main gamma-ray channels:monochromatic linesinternal bremsstrahlung (FSR + VIB)
continuum from secondary decay
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Gamma-rays from dark matter
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
2 photons (or Z+photon):
monochromatic lines
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
γ/Z
Internal bremsstrahlung:
hard gamma-ray spectrum
Secondary decay:
soft(er) continuum spectrum
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
γ
χ 0
1
χ 0
1
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
π
γ
γ
γ
3 main gamma-ray channels:monochromatic linesinternal bremsstrahlung (FSR + VIB)continuum from secondary decay
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BGGalactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BGclusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BGGalactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BGclusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BGGalactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BGclusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BGGalactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BGclusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BGGalactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BGclusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BGGalactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BGclusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BG
Galactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BGclusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Counts
p-value=0.85, χ 2red=14.3/21
Signal counts: 53.4 (4.26σ) 80.5 - 208.5 GeV
Reg3 (ULTRACLEAN), Eγ =129.6 GeV
100 150 200
E [GeV]
-10
0
10
Counts - Model
Weniger, arXiv:1204.1971Hooper & Linden, arXiv:1110.0006
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BGGalactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BG
clusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM101 102 103
WIMP mass [GeV]
10-26
10-25
10-24
10-23
10-22
10-21
10-20
10-19
WIM
P c
ross
sect
ion [
cm3
/s]
Upper limits, bb channel
3 ·10−26
Bootes I
Carina
Coma Berenices
Draco
Fornax
Sculptor
Segue 1
Sextans
Ursa Major II
Ursa Minor
Joint Likelihood, 10 dSphs
mχ1
0 (TeV)
log 10
[ <
σ v>
(cm
3 s−
1 ) ]
Profile likelihood
Flat priors
CMSSM, µ>0
Segue 9 mth + All, BF=50
Scott et al. 2009
0 0.5 1−30
−28
−26
−24
Fermi-LAT Collab., Phys. Rev. Lett 2011PS, Conrad, Edsjö et al, JCAP 2010
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Targets
Φ ∝ annihilation rate ∝ ρ2DM
Likely targets:Galactic centre - large signal, large BGGalactic halo - moderate signal, moderate BGdwarf galaxies - low statistics, low BGclusters/extragalactic diffuse - large modellinguncertainties, low signal, low BGdark clumps - low statistics, low BG
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
An example of dark clumps: Ultracompact minihalos
QuestionWhat is an ultracompact minihalo (UCMH)?
AnswerA DM halo that collapses shortly after matter-radiation equality
‘Shortly’ means zcollapse is O(100) or more (vs zeq ∼ 3000)
=⇒ isolated collapse
=⇒ formation by radial infall
=⇒ very steep density profile→ ρ ∝ r−9/4
=⇒ excellent indirect detection targets
Also good lensing prospects Ricotti & Gould ApJ 2009; Li et al Phys. Rev. D 2012
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Scott & SivertssonPhys. Rev. Lett. 2009Lacki & Beacom ApJL 2010
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
An example of dark clumps: Ultracompact minihalos
QuestionWhat is an ultracompact minihalo (UCMH)?
AnswerA DM halo that collapses shortly after matter-radiation equality
‘Shortly’ means zcollapse is O(100) or more (vs zeq ∼ 3000)
=⇒ isolated collapse
=⇒ formation by radial infall
=⇒ very steep density profile→ ρ ∝ r−9/4
=⇒ excellent indirect detection targets
Also good lensing prospects Ricotti & Gould ApJ 2009; Li et al Phys. Rev. D 2012
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Scott & SivertssonPhys. Rev. Lett. 2009Lacki & Beacom ApJL 2010
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
An example of dark clumps: Ultracompact minihalos
QuestionWhat is an ultracompact minihalo (UCMH)?
AnswerA DM halo that collapses shortly after matter-radiation equality
‘Shortly’ means zcollapse is O(100) or more (vs zeq ∼ 3000)
=⇒ isolated collapse
=⇒ formation by radial infall
=⇒ very steep density profile→ ρ ∝ r−9/4
=⇒ excellent indirect detection targets
Also good lensing prospects Ricotti & Gould ApJ 2009; Li et al Phys. Rev. D 2012
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Scott & SivertssonPhys. Rev. Lett. 2009Lacki & Beacom ApJL 2010
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
An example of dark clumps: Ultracompact minihalos
QuestionHow would UCMHs be created?
AnswerLarge amplitude density perturbations in the early Universe(e.g. on small scales)
Small-scale power in primordial perturbation spectrum(e.g. features in the potential associated with inflation)
Phase transitions
Other seeds (e.g. cosmic strings)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
An example of dark clumps: Ultracompact minihalos
QuestionHow would UCMHs be created?
AnswerLarge amplitude density perturbations in the early Universe(e.g. on small scales)
Small-scale power in primordial perturbation spectrum(e.g. features in the potential associated with inflation)
Phase transitions
Other seeds (e.g. cosmic strings)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Primordial power spectrum
Limits on PR from gamma-ray searches for UCMHs ∼5 ordersbetter than from PBHs=⇒ strong limits on inflationary models
k (Mpc−1)
P δ(k
)
WIMP kinetic decoupling
P R(k
)
10−9
10−8
10−7
10−6
10−5
10−4
10−3
10−2
10−1
10−3
10−2
10−1 1 10 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 101
0101
1101
2101
3101
4101
5101
6101
7101
8101
9
10−9
10−8
10−7
10−6
10−5
10−4
10−3
10−2
Allowed regions
Ultracompact minihalos (gamma rays, Fermi -LAT)
Ultracompact minihalos (reionisation, WMAP5 τe)
Primordial black holes
CMB, Lyman-α, LSS and other cosmological probes
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Bringmann, PS, Akrami, Phys. Rev. D 2012
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Implications for cosmology
Impacts on inflation:
Notvisible
Visiblein γ rays
Slow rollWMAP5
Slow rollWMAP7+SPT
Scale-free spectrumWMAP7 best fit
zc = 50
zc = 200
Scott, Adams, Bringmann & Easther 2012
0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10ns
−0.04
−0.03
−0.02
−0.01
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
α≡
[ dn
sdlnk
]
UCMHs
mχ = 10 GeV
mχ = 1 TeV
Limits on non-Gaussianities:
k = 2× 103 Mpc−1
Hierarchical Scaling
Excluded by UCMHszc = 200 zc = 1000
Excludedby PBHs
App
roxi
mat
esc
ale-
inva
rian
tam
plit
ude
−8 −6 −4 −2log10 [Pδ,Gaussian (k)]
−0.2
0.0
0.2
M3(k
)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
PS, Adams, Bringmann, Easther, in prep.Shandera, Erickcek, PS, in prep
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Outline
1 Cosmological Models2 CDM – Background
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
3 CDM – Selected resultsIndirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Putting it all together
Base Observables
+ XENON-100
(relic density, B-physics, LEP, etc.)
Grey contours correspond to Base Observables only
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5m 1
2(TeV)
1
2
3
m0
(TeV
)
Relative
probabilityP/P
maxOld data
flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0mχ0
1(TeV)
−46
−45
−44
−43
−42
log 1
0
( σSI,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
Old dataflat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0mχ0
1(TeV)
−43
−42
−41
−40
−39
−38
log 1
0
( σSD,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
Old dataflat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Contours indicate 1σ and 2σ credible regionsShading+contours indicate relative probability only, not overall goodness of fit
IceCube-22 with 100× boosted effective area (kinda like final IceCube)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
PS, Savage, Edsjö & The IceCubeCollaboration, arxiv:1207.0810
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Putting it all together
Base Observables + XENON-100
+ CMS 5 fb−1+ IC22×100
Grey contours correspond to Base Observables only
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5m 1
2(TeV)
1
2
3
m0
(TeV
)
Relative
probabilityP/P
maxXENON100
flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0mχ0
1(TeV)
−46
−45
−44
−43
−42
log 1
0
( σSI,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
XENON100flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0mχ0
1(TeV)
−43
−42
−41
−40
−39
−38
log 1
0
( σSD,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
XENON100flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Contours indicate 1σ and 2σ credible regionsShading+contours indicate relative probability only, not overall goodness of fit
IceCube-22 with 100× boosted effective area (kinda like final IceCube)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
PS, Savage, Edsjö & The IceCubeCollaboration, arxiv:1207.0810
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Putting it all together
Base Observables + XENON-100+ CMS 5 fb−1
+ IC22×100
Grey contours correspond to Base Observables only
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5m 1
2(TeV)
1
2
3
m0
(TeV
)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
XENON100+CMS 5 fb−1
flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0mχ0
1(TeV)
−46
−45
−44
−43
−42
log 1
0
( σSI,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
XENON100+CMS 5 fb−1
flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0mχ0
1(TeV)
−43
−42
−41
−40
−39
−38
log 1
0
( σSD,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
XENON100+CMS 5 fb−1
flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Contours indicate 1σ and 2σ credible regionsShading+contours indicate relative probability only, not overall goodness of fit
IceCube-22 with 100× boosted effective area (kinda like final IceCube)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
PS, Savage, Edsjö & The IceCubeCollaboration, arxiv:1207.0810
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Putting it all together
Base Observables + XENON-100+ CMS 5 fb−1+ IC22×100Grey contours correspond to Base Observables only
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5m 1
2(TeV)
1
2
3
m0
(TeV
)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
IC22× 100+XENON100+CMS 5 fb−1
flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0mχ0
1(TeV)
−46
−45
−44
−43
−42
log 1
0
( σSI,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
IC22× 100+XENON100+CMS 5 fb−1
flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Mean
Scott, Danninger, Savage, Edsjo, Hultqvist & The IceCube Collab. (2012)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0mχ0
1(TeV)
−43
−42
−41
−40
−39
−38
log 1
0
( σSD,p/c
m2)
Relative
probabilityP/P
max
IC22× 100+XENON100+CMS 5 fb−1
flat priorsCMSSM µ > 0Marg. posterior
Contours indicate 1σ and 2σ credible regionsShading+contours indicate relative probability only, not overall goodness of fit
IceCube-22 with 100× boosted effective area (kinda like final IceCube)
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
PS, Savage, Edsjö & The IceCubeCollaboration, arxiv:1207.0810
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Outline
1 Cosmological Models2 CDM – Background
Evidence and modelsDark matter detection
3 CDM – Selected resultsIndirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Reminder:
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,
convert into muons in ice/water6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from the
muons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Reminder:
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun stars2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos
5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,convert into muons in ice/water
6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from themuons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Reminder:
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun stars2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos + other energetic particles
5 Propagate+oscillate their way to the Earth,convert into muons in ice/water
6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from themuons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Reminder:
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun stars2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos + other energetic particles5 Particles dump their energy in the stellar
core
6 Look for Cerenkov radiation from themuons in IceCube, ANTARES, etc
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Reminder:
The cartoon version:1 Halo WIMPs crash into the Sun stars2 Some lose enough energy in the scatter to
be gravitationally bound3 Scatter some more, sink to the core4 Annihilate with each other, producing
neutrinos + other energetic particles5 Particles dump their energy in the stellar
core6 Stellar structure responds, star evolves
accordingly
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Stellar evolution with dark matter annihilation
Effective (surface) temperature, log10
(TeffK
)
Lum
inos
ity,
log 1
0(L
/L
)
Z = 0.01
3.653.703.75
−0.
6−
0.4
−0.
20.
00.
20.
40.
6
log10
( ρχ
GeV cm−3
)= −5
log10
( ρχ
GeV cm−3
)= 9
log10
( ρχ
GeV cm−3
)= 10
ZAMS
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Finding ‘dark stars’
Best candidates have low masses, near Galactic CentreFirst stars also good targetsMaybe visible with JWST (if lensed), or by impacts onreionisationDARKSTARS stellar evolution code publicly available fromhttp://www.physics.mcgill.ca/ patscott/darkstars
10−1
100
101
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
Wavelength (µm)
Fλ (
W µ
m−
1 )
Planck 1σ, 14 months
WMAP 1σ, 7 years
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Dar
kst
arfr
acti
onf D
S
0 100 200 300 400 500
DSP lifetime tDSP (Myr)
PS, Venkatesan, Roebber et al ApJ 2011Zackrisson, PS, Rydberg et al ApJ 2010; MNRAS Lett. 2010PS, Fairbairn, Edsjö, MNRAS 2009Fairbairn, PS, Edsjö, Phys. Rev. D 2008
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Summary
ΛCDM currently rests on CDM being some new particle –but what??There are many complementary ways to find out!Indirect detection generally probes masses andannihilation channelsStellar evolution can test both annihilation and interactionswith quarksUltracompact minihalos present an exciting way to alsoprobe cosmology at the same timeThe different probes can (and should) be put together intoglobal fits to gain a consistent picture. This will berequired for a credible detection to be claimed!
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Summary
ΛCDM currently rests on CDM being some new particle –but what??There are many complementary ways to find out!Indirect detection generally probes masses andannihilation channelsStellar evolution can test both annihilation and interactionswith quarksUltracompact minihalos present an exciting way to alsoprobe cosmology at the same timeThe different probes can (and should) be put together intoglobal fits to gain a consistent picture. This will berequired for a credible detection to be claimed!
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Summary
ΛCDM currently rests on CDM being some new particle –but what??There are many complementary ways to find out!Indirect detection generally probes masses andannihilation channelsStellar evolution can test both annihilation and interactionswith quarksUltracompact minihalos present an exciting way to alsoprobe cosmology at the same timeThe different probes can (and should) be put together intoglobal fits to gain a consistent picture. This will berequired for a credible detection to be claimed!
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Summary
ΛCDM currently rests on CDM being some new particle –but what??There are many complementary ways to find out!Indirect detection generally probes masses andannihilation channelsStellar evolution can test both annihilation and interactionswith quarksUltracompact minihalos present an exciting way to alsoprobe cosmology at the same timeThe different probes can (and should) be put together intoglobal fits to gain a consistent picture. This will berequired for a credible detection to be claimed!
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Summary
ΛCDM currently rests on CDM being some new particle –but what??There are many complementary ways to find out!Indirect detection generally probes masses andannihilation channelsStellar evolution can test both annihilation and interactionswith quarksUltracompact minihalos present an exciting way to alsoprobe cosmology at the same timeThe different probes can (and should) be put together intoglobal fits to gain a consistent picture. This will berequired for a credible detection to be claimed!
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Summary
ΛCDM currently rests on CDM being some new particle –but what??There are many complementary ways to find out!Indirect detection generally probes masses andannihilation channelsStellar evolution can test both annihilation and interactionswith quarksUltracompact minihalos present an exciting way to alsoprobe cosmology at the same timeThe different probes can (and should) be put together intoglobal fits to gain a consistent picture. This will berequired for a credible detection to be claimed!
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Extras 1: DarkStars code
Lots of options and switches: different velocitydistributions, widths, stellar orbits, WIMP conductivetransport / internal distribution schemes, particle data,stellar masses and metallicities, numerical options. . .Save and restart - good for evolving part-way then tryingdifferent late-stage scenariosDARKSTARS 2.0 coming soon: conversion to full Z = 0(new opacities, equation of state) – DARKSTARS 1.03 canonly do Z = 0 on pre-MSFuture options for expansion to include alternative formfactors and/or WIMP evaporationDARKSTARS 1.03 publicly available fromhttp://www.physics.mcgill.ca/ patscott/darkstars
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
Cosmological ModelsCDM – Background
CDM – Selected results
Indirect detectionMultimessenger particle physics: global fitsEffects of dark matter on stars
Extras 2: CMSSM
Model: focus has mostly been on the Constrained MSSM(CMSSM)
GUT boundary conditions on soft SUSY breaking parameters such thatonly 4 free parameters and 1 sign remain
includes the simplest implementation of mSUGRA
m0 scalar mass parameterm 1
2gaugino mass parameter
tan β ratio of Higgs VEVsA0 trilinear couplingsgn µ Higgs mass parameter
(+ve in our scans)
Just a testbed framework – all techniques are applicable to anyMSSM parameterisation
Pat Scott – Oct 5 – University of Oslo The standard model of cosmology: ΛCDM
top related