Dark Matter A Particle Theorist s Perspective Lecture 2

Transcription

1 Dark Matter A Particle Theorist s Perspective Lecture 2 Leszek Roszkowski Univ. of Sheffield, England and Soltan Institute for Nuclear Studies, Warsaw, Poland L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.1

2 Outline Lecture 1: evidence for DM DM candidates and particle physics models strategies for DM detection: direct, indirect, LHC prospects for direct detection new results from CDMS L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.2

3 Outline Lecture 1: evidence for DM DM candidates and particle physics models strategies for DM detection: direct, indirect, LHC prospects for direct detection new results from CDMS Lecture 2: SUSY neutralino - most popular candidate direct detection indirect detection (PAMELA, Fermi/GLAST, the LHC) EWIMPs/superWIMPs and the LHC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.2

4 Outline Lecture 1: evidence for DM DM candidates and particle physics models strategies for DM detection: direct, indirect, LHC prospects for direct detection new results from CDMS Lecture 2: SUSY neutralino - most popular candidate direct detection indirect detection (PAMELA, Fermi/GLAST, the LHC) EWIMPs/superWIMPs and the LHC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.2

5 Outline Lecture 1: evidence for DM DM candidates and particle physics models strategies for DM detection: direct, indirect, LHC prospects for direct detection new results from CDMS Lecture 2: SUSY neutralino - most popular candidate direct detection indirect detection (PAMELA, Fermi/GLAST, the LHC) EWIMPs/superWIMPs and the LHC axion summary L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.2

6 The Big Picture well motivated particle candidates such that Ω 0.1 neutrino ν hot DM neutralino χ generic WIMP axion a axino ã gravitino G???? L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.3

7 Strategies for WIMP Detection L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.4

8 Strategies for WIMP Detection direct detection (DD): measure WIMPs scattering off a target go underground to beat cosmic ray bgnd L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.4

9 Strategies for WIMP Detection direct detection (DD): measure WIMPs scattering off a target indirect detection (ID): go underground to beat cosmic ray bgnd L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.4

10 Strategies for WIMP Detection direct detection (DD): measure WIMPs scattering off a target indirect detection (ID): HE neutrinos from the Sun (or Earth) go underground to beat cosmic ray bgnd WIMPs get trapped in Sun s core, start pair annihilating, only ν s escape L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.4

11 Strategies for WIMP Detection direct detection (DD): measure WIMPs scattering off a target indirect detection (ID): HE neutrinos from the Sun (or Earth) go underground to beat cosmic ray bgnd WIMPs get trapped in Sun s core, start pair annihilating, only ν s escape antimatter (e +, p, D) from WIMP pair-annihilation in the MW halo from within a few kpc L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.4

12 Strategies for WIMP Detection direct detection (DD): measure WIMPs scattering off a target indirect detection (ID): HE neutrinos from the Sun (or Earth) go underground to beat cosmic ray bgnd WIMPs get trapped in Sun s core, start pair annihilating, only ν s escape antimatter (e +, p, D) from WIMP pair-annihilation in the MW halo from within a few kpc gamma rays from WIMP pair-annihilation in the Galactic center depending on DM distribution in the GC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.4

13 Strategies for WIMP Detection direct detection (DD): measure WIMPs scattering off a target indirect detection (ID): HE neutrinos from the Sun (or Earth) go underground to beat cosmic ray bgnd WIMPs get trapped in Sun s core, start pair annihilating, only ν s escape antimatter (e +, p, D) from WIMP pair-annihilation in the MW halo from within a few kpc gamma rays from WIMP pair-annihilation in the Galactic center depending on DM distribution in the GC other ideas: traces of WIMP annihilation in dwarf galaxies, in rich clusters, etc more speculative L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.4

14 Strategies for WIMP Detection direct detection (DD): measure WIMPs scattering off a target indirect detection (ID): HE neutrinos from the Sun (or Earth) go underground to beat cosmic ray bgnd WIMPs get trapped in Sun s core, start pair annihilating, only ν s escape antimatter (e +, p, D) from WIMP pair-annihilation in the MW halo from within a few kpc gamma rays from WIMP pair-annihilation in the Galactic center depending on DM distribution in the GC other ideas: traces of WIMP annihilation in dwarf galaxies, in rich clusters, etc (the LHC) more speculative L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.4

15 Go underground/ ice/ water... or to space L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.5

16 Go underground/ ice/ water... or to space L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.5

17 Go underground/ ice/ water... or to space L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.5

18 Go underground/ ice/ water... or to space L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.5

19 Go underground/ ice/ water... or to space L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.5

20 Go underground/ ice/ water... or to space impressive experimental effort L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.5

21 Neutralino of SUSY Prime Suspect L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.6

22 Neutralino of SUSY Prime Suspect neutralino χ = lightest mass eigenstate of neutral gauginos e B (bino), f W 0 3 (wino) and neutral higgsinos f H 0 t, f H 0 b Majorana fermion (χ c = χ) most popular candidate L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.6

23 Neutralino of SUSY Prime Suspect neutralino χ = lightest mass eigenstate of neutral gauginos e B (bino), f W 0 3 (wino) and neutral higgsinos f H 0 t, f H 0 b Majorana fermion (χ c = χ) most popular candidate part of a well-defined and well-motivated framework of SUSY calculable relic density: Ω χ h from freeze-out (...more like ) stable with some discrete symmetry (e.g., R-parity or baryon parity) testable with today s experiments (DD, ID, LHC)...no obviously superior competitor (both to SUSY and to χ) exists L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.6

24 Neutralino of SUSY Prime Suspect neutralino χ = lightest mass eigenstate of neutral gauginos e B (bino), f W 0 3 (wino) and neutral higgsinos f H 0 t, f H 0 b Majorana fermion (χ c = χ) most popular candidate part of a well-defined and well-motivated framework of SUSY calculable relic density: Ω χ h from freeze-out (...more like ) stable with some discrete symmetry (e.g., R-parity or baryon parity) testable with today s experiments (DD, ID, LHC)...no obviously superior competitor (both to SUSY and to χ) exists Don t forget: multitude of SUSY-based models: general MSSM, CMSSM, split SUSY, MNMSSM, SO(10) GUTs, string inspired models, etc, etc neutralino properties often differ widely from model to model L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.6

25 Neutralino of SUSY Prime Suspect neutralino χ = lightest mass eigenstate of neutral gauginos e B (bino), f W 0 3 (wino) and neutral higgsinos f H 0 t, f H 0 b Majorana fermion (χ c = χ) most popular candidate part of a well-defined and well-motivated framework of SUSY calculable relic density: Ω χ h from freeze-out (...more like ) stable with some discrete symmetry (e.g., R-parity or baryon parity) testable with today s experiments (DD, ID, LHC)...no obviously superior competitor (both to SUSY and to χ) exists Don t forget: multitude of SUSY-based models: general MSSM, CMSSM, split SUSY, MNMSSM, SO(10) GUTs, string inspired models, etc, etc neutralino properties often differ widely from model to model neutralino = stable, weakly interacting, massive WIMP L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.6

26 General MSSM: Expectations for σ SI p µ > 0 Kim, Nihei, LR & Ruiz de Austri (02) σ SI p WIMP proton SI elastic scatt. c.s. (elastic c.s. for χp χp at zero momentum transfer) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.7

27 General MSSM: Expectations for σ SI p µ > 0 Kim, Nihei, LR & Ruiz de Austri (02) σ SI p WIMP proton SI elastic scatt. c.s. (elastic c.s. for χp χp at zero momentum transfer) MSSM: vast ranges! Lacks real predictive power! L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.7

28 Add grand unification... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.8

29 Constrained MSSM (CMSSM)... benchmark framework for the LHC Kane, Kolda, LR, Wells (1993) (...e.g., msugra) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.9

30 Constrained MSSM (CMSSM)... benchmark framework for the LHC At M GUT GeV: Kane, Kolda, LR, Wells (1993) (...e.g., msugra) gauginos M 1 = M 2 = m eg = m 1/2 scalars m 2 eq i = m 2 e li = m 2 H b = m 2 H t = m linear soft terms A b = A t = A 0 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.9

31 Constrained MSSM (CMSSM)... benchmark framework for the LHC At M GUT GeV: Kane, Kolda, LR, Wells (1993) (...e.g., msugra) gauginos M 1 = M 2 = m eg = m 1/2 scalars m 2 eq i = m 2 e li = m 2 H b = m 2 H t = m linear soft terms A b = A t = A 0 radiative EWSB µ 2 = m2 H b m 2 H t tan 2 β tan 2 β 1 m2 Z 2 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.9

32 Constrained MSSM (CMSSM)... benchmark framework for the LHC Kane, Kolda, LR, Wells (1993) (...e.g., msugra) At M GUT GeV: gauginos M 1 = M 2 = m eg = m 1/2 scalars m 2 eq i = m 2 e li = m 2 H b = m 2 H t = m linear soft terms A b = A t = A 0 radiative EWSB µ 2 = m2 H b m 2 H t tan 2 β tan 2 β 1 m2 Z independent parameters: m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β, sgn(µ) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.9

33 Constrained MSSM (CMSSM)... benchmark framework for the LHC Kane, Kolda, LR, Wells (1993) (...e.g., msugra) At M GUT GeV: gauginos M 1 = M 2 = m eg = m 1/2 scalars m 2 eq i = m 2 e li = m 2 H b = m 2 H t = m linear soft terms A b = A t = A 0 radiative EWSB µ 2 = m2 H b m 2 H t tan 2 β tan 2 β 1 m2 Z independent parameters: m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β, sgn(µ) well developed machinery to compute masses and couplings L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.9

34 Constrained MSSM (CMSSM)... benchmark framework for the LHC Kane, Kolda, LR, Wells (1993) (...e.g., msugra) At M GUT GeV: gauginos M 1 = M 2 = m eg = m 1/2 scalars m 2 eq i = m 2 e li = m 2 H b = m 2 H t = m linear soft terms A b = A t = A 0 radiative EWSB µ 2 = m2 H b m 2 H t tan 2 β tan 2 β 1 m2 Z independent parameters: m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β, sgn(µ) well developed machinery to compute masses and couplings neutralino χ mostly bino L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.9

35 Constrained MSSM (CMSSM)... benchmark framework for the LHC Kane, Kolda, LR, Wells (1993) (...e.g., msugra) At M GUT GeV: gauginos M 1 = M 2 = m eg = m 1/2 scalars m 2 eq i = m 2 e li = m 2 H b = m 2 H t = m linear soft terms A b = A t = A 0 radiative EWSB µ 2 = m2 H b m 2 H t tan 2 β tan 2 β 1 m2 Z independent parameters: m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β, sgn(µ) some useful mass relations: bino: m χ 0.4m 1/2 well developed machinery to compute masses and couplings neutralino χ mostly bino gluino eg: m eg 2.7m 1/2 supersymmetric tau (stau) eτ 1 : m eτ1 q 0.15m 2 1/2 + m2 0 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.9

36 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM Apply to the CMSSM: new development, led by 2 groups L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.10

37 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM Apply to the CMSSM: m = (θ, ψ) model s all relevant parameters new development, led by 2 groups L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.10

38 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM Apply to the CMSSM: m = (θ, ψ) model s all relevant parameters CMSSM parameters θ = m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β new development, led by 2 groups relevant SM param s ψ = M t, m b (m b ) MS, α MS s, α em (M Z ) MS L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.10

39 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM Apply to the CMSSM: m = (θ, ψ) model s all relevant parameters CMSSM parameters θ = m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β new development, led by 2 groups relevant SM param s ψ = M t, m b (m b ) MS, α MS s, α em (M Z ) MS ξ = (ξ 1, ξ 2,..., ξ m ): set of derived variables (observables): ξ(m) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.10

40 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM Apply to the CMSSM: m = (θ, ψ) model s all relevant parameters CMSSM parameters θ = m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β new development, led by 2 groups relevant SM param s ψ = M t, m b (m b ) MS, α MS s, α em (M Z ) MS ξ = (ξ 1, ξ 2,..., ξ m ): set of derived variables (observables): ξ(m) d: data (Ω CDM h 2, b sγ, m h, etc) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.10

41 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM Apply to the CMSSM: m = (θ, ψ) model s all relevant parameters CMSSM parameters θ = m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β new development, led by 2 groups relevant SM param s ψ = M t, m b (m b ) MS, α MS s, α em (M Z ) MS ξ = (ξ 1, ξ 2,..., ξ m ): set of derived variables (observables): ξ(m) d: data (Ω CDM h 2, b sγ, m h, etc) Bayes theorem: posterior pdf p(θ, ψ d) = p(d ξ)π(θ,ψ) p(d) p(d ξ) = L: likelihood π(θ, ψ): prior pdf p(d): evidence (normalization factor) posterior = likelihood prior normalization factor L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.10

42 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM Apply to the CMSSM: m = (θ, ψ) model s all relevant parameters CMSSM parameters θ = m 1/2, m 0, A 0, tan β new development, led by 2 groups relevant SM param s ψ = M t, m b (m b ) MS, α MS s, α em (M Z ) MS ξ = (ξ 1, ξ 2,..., ξ m ): set of derived variables (observables): ξ(m) d: data (Ω CDM h 2, b sγ, m h, etc) Bayes theorem: posterior pdf p(θ, ψ d) = p(d ξ)π(θ,ψ) p(d) p(d ξ) = L: likelihood π(θ, ψ): prior pdf p(d): evidence (normalization factor) posterior = likelihood prior normalization factor usually marginalize over SM (nuisance) parameters ψ p(θ d) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.10

43 Impact of varying SM parameters L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.11

44 Impact of varying SM parameters fix tan β, A 0 + all SM param s m 0 (GeV) m 1/2 (GeV) tanβ=50 A 0 = Relative probability density L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.11

45 Impact of varying SM parameters fix tan β, A 0 + all SM param s vary M t m 0 (GeV) m 0 (GeV) m 1/2 (GeV) tanβ=50 A 0 = m 1/2 (GeV) M t varied tanβ=50 A 0 = Relative probability density Relative probability density L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.11

46 Impact of varying SM parameters fix tan β, A 0 + all SM param s vary α s m 0 (GeV) m 0 (GeV) α s varied m 1/2 (GeV) tanβ=50 A 0 = m 1/2 (GeV) tanβ=50 A 0 = Relative probability density Relative probability density L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.11

47 Impact of varying SM parameters fix tan β, A 0 + all SM param s vary α s m 0 (GeV) m 0 (GeV) α s varied m 1/2 (GeV) tanβ=50 A 0 = m 1/2 (GeV) tanβ=50 A 0 = Relative probability density Relative probability density residual errors in SM parameters strong impact on favoured SUSY ranges effect of varying A 0, tan β also substantial L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.11

48 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.12

49 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM θ = (m 0, m 1/2, A 0,tan β): CMSSM parameters ψ = (M t, m b (m b ) M S, α em (M Z ) M S, α M s S ): SM (nuisance) parameters L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.12

50 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM θ = (m 0, m 1/2, A 0,tan β): CMSSM parameters ψ = (M t, m b (m b ) M S, α em (M Z ) M S, α M s S ): SM (nuisance) parameters priors assume flat distributions and ranges as: CMSSM parameters θ 50 GeV < m 0 < 4TeV 50 GeV < m 1/2 < 4TeV A 0 < 7 TeV 2 < tan β < 62 flat priors: SM (nuisance) parameters ψ 160 GeV < M t < 190 GeV 4 GeV < m b (m b ) M S < 5 GeV 0.10 < α M S s < < 1/α em (M Z ) M S < L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.12

51 Bayesian Analysis of the CMSSM θ = (m 0, m 1/2, A 0,tan β): CMSSM parameters ψ = (M t, m b (m b ) M S, α em (M Z ) M S, α M s S ): SM (nuisance) parameters priors assume flat distributions and ranges as: CMSSM parameters θ 50 GeV < m 0 < 4TeV 50 GeV < m 1/2 < 4TeV A 0 < 7 TeV 2 < tan β < 62 flat priors: SM (nuisance) parameters ψ 160 GeV < M t < 190 GeV 4 GeV < m b (m b ) M S < 5 GeV 0.10 < α M S s < < 1/α em (M Z ) M S < vary all 8 (CMSSM+SM) parameters simultaneously, apply MCMC include all relevant theoretical and experimental errors L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.12

52 Experimental Measurements (assume Gaussian distributions) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.13

53 Experimental Measurements (assume Gaussian distributions) SM (nuisance) parameter Mean Error µ σ (expt) M t GeV 1.4 GeV m b (m b ) M S 4.20 GeV 0.07 GeV α s /α em (M Z ) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.13

54 Experimental Measurements (assume Gaussian distributions) SM (nuisance) parameter Mean Error µ σ (expt) M t GeV 1.4 GeV m b (m b ) M S 4.20 GeV 0.07 GeV α s /α em (M Z ) new BR( B X s γ) 10 4 : SM: 3.15 ± 0.23 (Misiak & Steinhauser, Sept 06) used here L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.13

55 Experimental Measurements SM (nuisance) parameter Mean Error (assume Gaussian distributions) µ σ (expt) M t GeV 1.4 GeV m b (m b ) M S 4.20 GeV 0.07 GeV α s new BR( B X s γ) 10 4 : SM: 3.15 ± 0.23 (Misiak & Steinhauser, Sept 06) used here 1/α em (M Z ) Derived observable Mean Errors µ σ (expt) τ (th) M W GeV 25 MeV 15 MeV sin 2 θ eff δa SUSY µ BR( B X s γ) M Bs Ω χ h Ω χ h 2 take w/o error: M Z = (21) GeV, G F = (1) 10 5 GeV 2 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.13

56 Experimental Limits Derived observable upper/lower Constraints limit ξ lim τ (theor.) BR(B s µ + µ ) UL % m h LL GeV (91.0 GeV) 3 GeV ζ 2 h g2 ZZh /g2 ZZH SM UL f(m h ) 3% m χ LL 50 GeV 5% m χ ± 1 LL GeV (92.4 GeV) 5% mẽr LL 100 GeV (73 GeV) 5% m µr LL 95 GeV (73 GeV) 5% m τ1 LL 87 GeV (73 GeV) 5% m ν LL 94 GeV (43 GeV) 5% m t 1 LL 95 GeV (65 GeV) 5% m b1 LL 95 GeV (59 GeV) 5% m q LL 318 GeV 5% m g LL 233 GeV 5% (σ SI p UL WIMP mass dependent 100%) Note: DM direct detection σ SI p not applied due to astroph l uncertainties (eg, local DM density) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.14

57 The Likelihood: 1-dim case Take a single observable ξ(m) that has been measured (e.g., M W ) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.15

58 The Likelihood: 1-dim case Take a single observable ξ(m) that has been measured c central value, σ standard exptal error (e.g., M W ) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.15

59 The Likelihood: 1-dim case Take a single observable ξ(m) that has been measured c central value, σ standard exptal error (e.g., M W ) define χ 2 = [ξ(m) c]2 σ 2 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.15

60 The Likelihood: 1-dim case Take a single observable ξ(m) that has been measured c central value, σ standard exptal error (e.g., M W ) define χ 2 = [ξ(m) c]2 σ 2 assuming Gaussian distribution (d (c, σ)): L = p(σ, c ξ(m)) = 1 2πσ exp [ χ2 2 ] L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.15

61 The Likelihood: 1-dim case Take a single observable ξ(m) that has been measured c central value, σ standard exptal error (e.g., M W ) define χ 2 = [ξ(m) c]2 σ 2 assuming Gaussian distribution (d (c, σ)): L = p(σ, c ξ(m)) = 1 2πσ exp [ χ2 2 when include theoretical error estimate τ (assumed Gaussian): σ s = σ 2 + τ 2 TH error smears out the EXPTAL range ] L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.15

62 The Likelihood: 1-dim case Take a single observable ξ(m) that has been measured c central value, σ standard exptal error (e.g., M W ) define χ 2 = [ξ(m) c]2 σ 2 assuming Gaussian distribution (d (c, σ)): L = p(σ, c ξ(m)) = 1 2πσ exp [ χ2 2 when include theoretical error estimate τ (assumed Gaussian): σ s = σ 2 + τ 2 TH error smears out the EXPTAL range for several uncorrelated observables (assumed Gaussian): [ L = exp i χ 2 i 2 ] ] L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.15

63 Probability maps of the CMSSM L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.16

64 Probability maps of the CMSSM arxiv: Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) MCMC scan Bayesian analysis m 0 (TeV) relative probability density fn flat priors 68% total prob. inner contours 1 95% total prob. outer contours 0.5 m 1/2 (TeV) CMSSM µ> dim pdf p(m 0, m 1/2 d) favored: m 0 m 1/2 (FP region) Relative probability density L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.16

65 Probability maps of the CMSSM arxiv: Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) MCMC scan Bayesian analysis m 0 (TeV) relative probability density fn flat priors 68% total prob. inner contours 1 95% total prob. outer contours 0.5 m 1/2 (TeV) CMSSM µ> dim pdf p(m 0, m 1/2 d) favored: m 0 m 1/2 (FP region) Relative probability density similar study by Allanach+Lester(+Weber) see also, Ellis et al (EHOW, χ 2 approach, no MCMC, they fix SM parameters!) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.16

66 Probability maps of the CMSSM arxiv: Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) MCMC scan Bayesian analysis m 0 (TeV) relative probability density fn flat priors 68% total prob. inner contours 1 95% total prob. outer contours 0.5 m 1/2 (TeV) CMSSM µ> dim pdf p(m 0, m 1/2 d) favored: m 0 m 1/2 (FP region) Relative probability density unlike others (except for A+L), we vary also SM parameters L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.16

67 Light Higgs in the CMSSM Bayesian analysis, relative probability density fn (pdf), flat priors, µ > 0 computed with SoftSusy v2.08 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.17

68 Light Higgs in the CMSSM Bayesian analysis, relative probability density fn (pdf), flat priors, µ > 0 computed with SoftSusy v2.08 posterior pdf relative pdf p(m h d) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.17

69 Light Higgs in the CMSSM Bayesian analysis, relative probability density fn (pdf), flat priors, µ > 0 computed with SoftSusy v GeV < m h < GeV (68%) GeV < m h < GeV (95%) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.17

70 Light Higgs in the CMSSM Bayesian analysis, relative probability density fn (pdf), flat priors, µ > 0 computed with SoftSusy v GeV < m h < GeV (68%) GeV < m h < GeV (95%) sharp drop-off on rhs from no solutions at large m 1/2 and/or cutoff at m 0 < 4TeV L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.17

71 Light Higgs in the CMSSM Bayesian analysis, relative probability density fn (pdf), flat priors, µ > 0 computed with SoftSusy v GeV < m h < GeV (68%) GeV < m h < GeV (95%) sharp drop-off on rhs from no solutions at large m 1/2 and/or cutoff at m 0 < 4TeV Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2006) 125 m h (GeV) m (TeV) 0 if m 0 < 8 TeV then m h < GeV (95% CL) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.17

72 SUSY: Prospects for direct detection global Bayesian analysis, MCMC scan of 8 params (4 SUSY+4 SM) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.18

73 SUSY: Prospects for direct detection global Bayesian analysis, MCMC scan of 8 params (4 SUSY+4 SM) Constrained MSSM (msugra) 4 5 Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) CMSSM, µ > 0 EDELWEISS I (pb)] Log[σ p SI XENON 10 ZEPLIN III CDMS II m χ (TeV) internal (external): 68% (95%) region L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.18

74 SUSY: Prospects for direct detection global Bayesian analysis, MCMC scan of 8 params (4 SUSY+4 SM) Constrained MSSM (msugra) (pb)] Log[σ p SI Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) CMSSM, µ > 0 EDELWEISS I XENON 10 ZEPLIN III CDMS II XENON-10 and CDMS-II: σp SI < 10 7 pb: also Zeplin III already explore 68% region (large m 0 m 1/2 heavy squarks) largely beyond LHC reach m χ (TeV) internal (external): 68% (95%) region L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.18

75 SUSY: Prospects for direct detection global Bayesian analysis, MCMC scan of 8 params (4 SUSY+4 SM) Constrained MSSM (msugra) (pb)] Log[σ p SI Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) CMSSM, µ > 0 EDELWEISS I XENON 10 ZEPLIN III CDMS II XENON-10 and CDMS-II: σp SI < 10 7 pb: also Zeplin III already explore 68% region (large m 0 m 1/2 heavy squarks) largely beyond LHC reach 4 Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) m χ (TeV) m 0 (TeV) LHC internal (external): 68% (95%) region 0.5 m 1/2 (TeV) CMSSM µ> L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.18

76 SUSY DM: Experimental reach Constrained MSSM (msugra),...huge volume of studies L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.19

77 SUSY DM: Experimental reach Constrained MSSM (msugra),...huge volume of studies e.g., Baer, et al. (2004) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.19

78 SUSY DM: Experimental reach Constrained MSSM (msugra),...huge volume of studies e.g., Baer, et al. (2004) cosmologically favored (for fixed slices of CMSSM parameters): A funnel (AF) focus point (FP) τ coannihilation (SC) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.19

79 SUSY DM: Experimental reach Constrained MSSM (msugra),...huge volume of studies e.g., Baer, et al. (2004) cosmologically favored (for fixed slices of CMSSM parameters): A funnel (AF) focus point (FP) τ coannihilation (SC) DD: probe all FP and lower m χ part of AF and CA LHC: probe lower m χ part of AF and CA, poorer in FP ID strongly dependent on halo model L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.19

80 SUSY DM: Experimental reach Constrained MSSM (msugra),...huge volume of studies e.g., Baer, et al. (2004) cosmologically favored (for fixed slices of CMSSM parameters): A funnel (AF) focus point (FP) τ coannihilation (SC) DD: probe all FP and lower m χ part of AF and CA LHC: probe lower m χ part of AF and CA, poorer in FP ID strongly dependent on halo model L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.19

81 SUSY models and DM direct detection Bayesian analysis, flat priors L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.20

82 SUSY models and DM direct detection Bayesian analysis, flat priors Constrained MSSM (msugra) 4 5 Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) CMSSM, µ > 0 EDELWEISS I (pb)] Log[σ p SI XENON 10 ZEPLIN III CDMS II m χ (TeV) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.20

83 SUSY models and DM direct detection Bayesian analysis, flat priors Constrained MSSM (msugra) SI Log[σ (pb)] p Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) CMSSM, µ > 0 EDELWEISS I XENON 10 ZEPLIN III CDMS II m χ (TeV) Constrained Next-to-MSSM (CNMSSM) Higgs: H u, H d and singlet S; λs 3 (pb)] Log[σ p SI Lopez Fogliani, Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri, Varley (2009) XENON 10 m χ (TeV) EDELWEISS I ZEPLIN II ZEPLIN III CDMS II CNMSSM µ>0 flat prior singlino DM very rare fairly similar pattern L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.20

84 SUSY models and DM direct detection Bayesian analysis, flat priors Constrained MSSM (msugra) SI Log[σ (pb)] p Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) CMSSM, µ > 0 EDELWEISS I XENON 10 ZEPLIN III CDMS II m χ (TeV) Constrained Next-to-MSSM (CNMSSM) Higgs: H u, H d and singlet S; λs 3 (pb)] Log[σ p SI Lopez Fogliani, Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri, Varley (2009) XENON 10 m χ (TeV) EDELWEISS I ZEPLIN II ZEPLIN III CDMS II CNMSSM µ>0 flat prior singlino DM very rare fairly similar pattern many collider signatures also (likely to be) similar LHC, DM expt: it may be hard to discriminate among models L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.20

85 SUSY models and DM direct detection Bayesian analysis, flat priors Constrained MSSM (msugra) SI Log[σ (pb)] p Roszkowski, Ruiz & Trotta (2007) CMSSM, µ > 0 EDELWEISS I XENON 10 ZEPLIN III CDMS II m χ (TeV) Constrained Next-to-MSSM (CNMSSM) Higgs: H u, H d and singlet S; λs 3 (pb)] Log[σ p SI Lopez Fogliani, Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri, Varley (2009) XENON 10 m χ (TeV) EDELWEISS I ZEPLIN II ZEPLIN III CDMS II CNMSSM µ>0 flat prior singlino DM very rare fairly similar pattern many collider signatures also (likely to be) similar LHC, DM expt: it may be hard to discriminate among models L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.20

86 Impact of priors CMSSM: L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.21

87 Impact of priors CMSSM: flat in m 0, m 1/2 5 6 Trotta et al (2008) ZEPLIN II CMSSM, µ>0, flat priors XENON 10 log(σ p SI ) (pb) CDMS II m (GeV) χ L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.21

88 Impact of priors CMSSM: flat in m 0, m 1/2 5 6 Trotta et al (2008) ZEPLIN II CMSSM, µ>0, flat priors XENON 10 flat in log(m 0 ), log(m 1/2 ) 5 6 Trotta et al (2008) ZEPLIN II CMSSM, µ>0, log priors XENON 10 log(σ p SI ) (pb) CDMS II log(σ p SI ) (pb) CDMS II m (GeV) χ m (GeV) χ L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.21

89 Impact of priors CMSSM: flat in m 0, m 1/2 5 6 Trotta et al (2008) ZEPLIN II CMSSM, µ>0, flat priors XENON 10 flat in log(m 0 ), log(m 1/2 ) 5 6 Trotta et al (2008) ZEPLIN II CMSSM, µ>0, log priors XENON 10 log(σ p SI ) (pb) CDMS II log(σ p SI ) (pb) CDMS II m (GeV) χ m (GeV) χ still strong prior dependence (data not yet constraining enough) both priors: most regions above some pb good news for DM expt LHC reach: m χ < GeV additional vital info L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.21

90 Bayesian vs frequentist CMSSM: L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.22

91 Bayesian vs frequentist CMSSM: 5 6 Trotta et al (2008) ZEPLIN II log prior CMSSM, µ>0, log priors XENON 10 log(σ p SI ) (pb) CDMS II m (GeV) χ L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.22

92 Bayesian vs frequentist CMSSM: log prior Trotta et al (2008) CMSSM, µ>0, log priors 5 Buchmueller, et al (09) ZEPLIN II 6 XENON 10 log(σ p SI ) (pb) CDMS II m (GeV) χ (10 44 cm 2 = 10 8 pb) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.22

93 Bayesian vs frequentist CMSSM: log prior Trotta et al (2008) CMSSM, µ>0, log priors 5 Buchmueller, et al (09) ZEPLIN II 6 XENON 10 log(σ p SI ) (pb) CDMS II m (GeV) χ (10 44 cm 2 = 10 8 pb) reasonable agreement L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.22

94 Indirect detection L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.23

95 Indirect detection look for traces of WIMP annihilation in the MW halo (γ s, e + s, p,...) detection prospects often strongly depend on astrophysical uncertainties (halo models, astro bgnd,...) Much activity in connection with: L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.23

96 Indirect detection look for traces of WIMP annihilation in the MW halo (γ s, e + s, p,...) detection prospects often strongly depend on astrophysical uncertainties (halo models, astro bgnd,...) Much activity in connection with: Fermi (GLAST) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.23

97 Indirect detection look for traces of WIMP annihilation in the MW halo (γ s, e + s, p,...) detection prospects often strongly depend on astrophysical uncertainties (halo models, astro bgnd,...) Much activity in connection with: Fermi (GLAST) PAMELA L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.23

98 Indirect detection look for traces of WIMP annihilation in the MW halo (γ s, e + s, p,...) detection prospects often strongly depend on astrophysical uncertainties (halo models, astro bgnd,...) Much activity in connection with: Fermi (GLAST) PAMELA H.E.S.S, ATCs,... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.23

99 Fermi in orbit since 2008 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.24

100 Fermi full sky map in γ-ray spectrum, 20 MeV to 300 GeV superior energy and angular resolution in orbit since 2008 improve accuracy/energy range of EGRET by an order of magnitute preliminary mid-latitude LAT data on diffuse γ-radiation presented in Spring 09 1st year LAT data released in August 09, more to come L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.24

101 Gamma Rays From DM Annihilation L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.25

102 Gamma Rays From DM Annihilation WIMP pair-annihilation WW, ZZ, qq,... diffuse γ radiation (+ γγ, γz lines) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.25

103 Gamma Rays From DM Annihilation WIMP pair-annihilation WW, ZZ, qq,... diffuse γ radiation (+ γγ, γz lines) diffuse γ radiation from direction ψ from the GC: l.o.s - line of sight dφ γ de γ (E γ, ψ) = P i σ i v 8πm 2 χ dn i γ de γ Rl.o.s. dlρ2 χ (r(l,ψ)) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.25

104 Gamma Rays From DM Annihilation WIMP pair-annihilation WW, ZZ, qq,... diffuse γ radiation (+ γγ, γz lines) diffuse γ radiation from direction ψ from the GC: l.o.s - line of sight dφ γ de γ (E γ, ψ) = P i σ i v 8πm 2 χ dn i γ de γ Rl.o.s. dlρ2 χ (r(l,ψ)) separate particle physics and astrophysics inputs; define: J(ψ) = kpc GeV/ cm 3 «2 Z l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ)) J(ψ) Ω = 1 Ω R Ω J(ψ)dΩ Ω - finite point spread function (resolution) of GR detector, or some wider angle L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.25

105 Gamma Rays From DM Annihilation WIMP pair-annihilation WW, ZZ, qq,... diffuse γ radiation (+ γγ, γz lines) diffuse γ radiation from direction ψ from the GC: l.o.s - line of sight dφ γ de γ (E γ, ψ) = P i σ i v 8πm 2 χ dn i γ de γ Rl.o.s. dlρ2 χ (r(l,ψ)) separate particle physics and astrophysics inputs; define: J(ψ) = kpc GeV/ cm 3 «2 Z l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ)) DM density (GeV/cm 3 ) Klypin et al NFW Einasto Burkert J(ψ) Ω = 1 Ω R Ω J(ψ)dΩ Ω - finite point spread function (resolution) of GR detector, or some wider angle radius (kpc) some representative halo profiles L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.25

106 Diffuse GRs from the GC use Fermi/GLAST parameters Bayesian posterior probability maps L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.26

107 Diffuse GRs from the GC use Fermi/GLAST parameters CMSSM, flat priors Bayesian posterior probability maps L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.26

108 Diffuse GRs from the GC use Fermi/GLAST parameters CMSSM, flat priors Bayesian posterior probability maps NUHM, flat priors Log[Φ γ (cm 2 s 1 )] Roszkowski, Ruiz, Trotta, Tsai & Varley (2009) Klypin Fermi/GLAST reach (1yr) NFW isothermal m χ (TeV) Φ γ from GC NUHM, µ > 0 flat prior Ω = 10 5 sr E thr = 10 GeV L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.26

109 Diffuse GRs from the GC use Fermi/GLAST parameters CMSSM, flat priors Bayesian posterior probability maps NUHM, flat priors Log[Φ γ (cm 2 s 1 )] Roszkowski, Ruiz, Trotta, Tsai & Varley (2009) Klypin Fermi/GLAST reach (1yr) NFW isothermal m χ (TeV) Φ γ from GC NUHM, µ > 0 flat prior Ω = 10 5 sr E thr = 10 GeV WIMP signal at Fermi/GLAST: outcome depends on halo cuspiness at GC a conclusion of several different studies L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.26

110 Tests of DM in the Galactic Center ratio of fluxes is independent of particle physics input R GC dφ γ /de γ = dφγ deγ (E γ,ψ) dφγ = J(ψ) Ω = deγ (E J(ψ=0) γ,ψ=0) Ω R l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ)) R l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ=0)) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.27

111 Tests of DM in the Galactic Center ratio of fluxes is independent of particle physics input R GC dφ γ /de γ = dφγ deγ (E γ,ψ) dφγ = J(ψ) Ω = deγ (E J(ψ=0) γ,ψ=0) Ω R l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ)) R l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ=0)) arxiv: <J(ψ)> / <J(ψ=0)> 0 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays from MW ψ (degree) Einasto NFW Klypin et al solid: Ω=10 4 sr dash: Ω=10 5 sr L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.27

112 Tests of DM in the Galactic Center ratio of fluxes is independent of particle physics input R GC dφ γ /de γ = dφγ deγ (E γ,ψ) dφγ = J(ψ) Ω = deγ (E J(ψ=0) γ,ψ=0) Ω R l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ)) R l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ=0)) arxiv: <J(ψ)> / <J(ψ=0)> 0 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays from MW ψ (degree) Einasto NFW Klypin et al solid: Ω=10 4 sr dash: Ω=10 5 sr Signal of DM if: data follows one of the curves measured ratio remains the same in the Galactic plane and the plane normal to the Galactic plane astro sources (bgnd): bigger contribution from the MW disk DM can possibly dominate within 2 3 of the GC data can get handle on DM halo density slope in the GC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.27

113 Tests of DM in the Galactic Center ratio of fluxes is independent of particle physics input R GC dφ γ /de γ = dφγ deγ (E γ,ψ) dφγ = J(ψ) Ω = deγ (E J(ψ=0) γ,ψ=0) Ω R l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ)) R l.o.s. dl ρ 2 χ (r(l,ψ=0)) arxiv: <J(ψ)> / <J(ψ=0)> 0 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays from MW ψ (degree) Einasto NFW Klypin et al solid: Ω=10 4 sr dash: Ω=10 5 sr Signal of DM if: data follows one of the curves measured ratio remains the same in the Galactic plane and the plane normal to the Galactic plane astro sources (bgnd): bigger contribution from the MW disk DM can possibly dominate within 2 3 of the GC data can get handle on DM halo density slope in the GC would provide an unambiguous signal of DM origin reason: only DM distribution around GC is (likely to be) spherical and ρ 2 χ L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.27

114 Tests of DM in the Galactic Center enhance signal by integrating over energy and solid angle L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.28

115 Tests of DM in the Galactic Center enhance signal by integrating over energy and solid angle arxiv: Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) 10 Φ γ ( Ω)/Φ γ (10 5 sr) γ rays from GC Einasto NFW Klypin et al Ω (sr) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.28

116 Tests of DM in the Galactic Center enhance signal by integrating over energy and solid angle arxiv: Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) 10 Φ γ ( Ω)/Φ γ (10 5 sr) γ rays from GC Einasto NFW Klypin et al Ω (sr) total flux Φ γ ( Ω) = R m χ E th de γ dφ γ de γ (E γ, Ω) Signal of DM if: data follows one of the curves data can get handle on DM halo density slope in GC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.28

117 Tests of DM in the Galactic Center enhance signal by integrating over energy and solid angle arxiv: Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) 10 Φ γ ( Ω)/Φ γ (10 5 sr) γ rays from GC Einasto NFW Klypin et al Ω (sr) total flux Φ γ ( Ω) = R m χ E th de γ dφ γ de γ (E γ, Ω) Signal of DM if: data follows one of the curves data can get handle on DM halo density slope in GC would provide an unambiguous signal of DM origin L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.28

118 Fermi LAT mid-latitude data diffuse γ-rays from 10 b 20 and 0 l < 360, 0.1 GeV E γ 10 GeV Porter, ICRC, L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.29

119 Fermi LAT mid-latitude data diffuse γ-rays from 10 b 20 and 0 l < 360, 0.1 GeV E γ 10 GeV Porter, ICRC, LAT data: spectrum softer than claimed by EGRET L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.29

120 Fermi LAT mid-latitude data diffuse γ-rays from 10 b 20 and 0 l < 360, 0.1 GeV E γ 10 GeV Porter, ICRC, LAT data: spectrum softer than claimed by EGRET LAT data and GALPROP agree rather well L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.29

121 Fermi LAT mid-latitude data diffuse γ-rays from 10 b 20 and 0 l < 360, 0.1 GeV E γ 10 GeV Porter, ICRC, LAT data: spectrum softer than claimed by EGRET LAT data and GALPROP agree rather well little room for DM contribution L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.29

122 Upper bound on DM halo slope Fermi LAT mid-latitude diffuse γ-radiation little room for DM contribution L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.30

123 Upper bound on DM halo slope Fermi LAT mid-latitude diffuse γ-radiation little room for DM contribution (E 2 dφ/de) γ (GeV cm 2 s 1 sr 1 ) 3 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays (no bgnd) from: 10 o < b <20 o, 0 o <l<360 o Ω = sr solid: m χ = 25 GeV dash: m χ = 50 GeV dot dash: m χ = 100 GeV E γ (GeV) Klypin et al Einasto Fermi LAT χ: neutralino of minimal SUSY L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.30

124 Upper bound on DM halo slope Fermi LAT mid-latitude diffuse γ-radiation little room for DM contribution (E 2 dφ/de) γ (GeV cm 2 s 1 sr 1 ) 3 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays (no bgnd) from: 10 o < b <20 o, 0 o <l<360 o Ω = sr solid: m χ = 25 GeV dash: m χ = 50 GeV dot dash: m χ = 100 GeV E γ (GeV) Klypin et al Einasto Fermi LAT χ: neutralino of minimal SUSY upper limit on <J> (mid latitude) 3 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays from 10 o < b <20 o, 0 o < l <360 o 0.1 GeV < E γ < 10.0 GeV Klypin et al. Einasto NFW Burkert m χ (GeV) scan over MSSM parameters, average over mid-latitude area L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.30

125 Upper bound on DM halo slope Fermi LAT mid-latitude diffuse γ-radiation little room for DM contribution (E 2 dφ/de) γ (GeV cm 2 s 1 sr 1 ) 3 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays (no bgnd) from: 10 o < b <20 o, 0 o <l<360 o Ω = sr solid: m χ = 25 GeV dash: m χ = 50 GeV dot dash: m χ = 100 GeV E γ (GeV) Klypin et al Einasto Fermi LAT χ: neutralino of minimal SUSY upper limit on DM halo slope upper limit on <J> (mid latitude) 3 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays from 10 o < b <20 o, 0 o < l <360 o 0.1 GeV < E γ < 10.0 GeV Klypin et al. Einasto NFW Burkert m χ (GeV) scan over MSSM parameters, average over mid-latitude area L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.30

126 Upper bound on DM halo slope Fermi LAT mid-latitude diffuse γ-radiation little room for DM contribution (E 2 dφ/de) γ (GeV cm 2 s 1 sr 1 ) 3 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays (no bgnd) from: 10 o < b <20 o, 0 o <l<360 o Ω = sr solid: m χ = 25 GeV dash: m χ = 50 GeV dot dash: m χ = 100 GeV E γ (GeV) Klypin et al Einasto Fermi LAT χ: neutralino of minimal SUSY upper limit on DM halo slope upper limit on <J> (mid latitude) 3 Roszkowski & Tsai (2009) γ rays from 10 o < b <20 o, 0 o < l <360 o 0.1 GeV < E γ < 10.0 GeV Klypin et al. Einasto NFW Burkert m χ (GeV) scan over MSSM parameters, average over mid-latitude area still weak. Can be improved with GC data? L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.30

127 e + data from PAMELA & DM L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

128 e + data from PAMELA & DM PAMELA satelite (since 2007) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

129 e + data from PAMELA & DM e + /(e + + e ) ratio, p flux,... O. Adriani et al., arxiv: L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

130 e + data from PAMELA & DM no excess in p flux puzzling: growth at large e + energy O. Adriani et al., arxiv: L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

131 e + data from PAMELA & DM no excess in p flux puzzling: growth at large e + energy e + : difficult measurement p contamination of sufficient? Schubnell, Feb. 09 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

132 e + data from PAMELA & DM no excess in p flux puzzling: growth at large e + energy If excess genuine, explanations: pulsars Hooper+Serpico, Profumo,... Geminga pulsar Yuksel+Kistler+Stanev, L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

133 e + data from PAMELA & DM no excess in p flux puzzling: growth at large e + energy If excess genuine, explanations: pulsars Hooper+Serpico, Profumo,... DM (stable or not), leptophilic,... many theoretical speculations L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

134 e + data from PAMELA & DM no excess in p flux puzzling: growth at large e + energy If excess genuine, explanations: pulsars Hooper+Serpico, Profumo,... DM (stable or not), leptophilic,... many theoretical speculations case for DM origin of PAMELA e + excess is weak L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

135 e + data from PAMELA & DM no excess in p flux puzzling: growth at large e + energy If excess genuine, explanations: pulsars Hooper+Serpico, Profumo,... DM (stable or not), leptophilic,... many theoretical speculations case for DM origin of PAMELA e + excess is weak...pulsar explanation seems sufficient L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.31

136 SUSY and positron flux Bayesian posterior probability maps BF=1 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.32

137 SUSY and positron flux Bayesian posterior probability maps BF=1 CMSSM, flat priors, NFW Roszkowski, Ruiz, Silk & Trotta (2008) 10 1 Φ e+ /(Φ e+ +Φ e ) Moore+ac 68% NFW+ac NFW NFW profile, BF = 1 CMSSM, µ > 0 PAMELA 08 HEAT 00 HEAT CAPRICE % E e+ (GeV) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.32

138 SUSY and positron flux Bayesian posterior probability maps CMSSM, flat priors, NFW Φ e+ /(Φ e+ +Φ e ) Roszkowski, Ruiz, Silk & Trotta (2008) Moore+ac 68% 95% NFW+ac NFW NFW profile, BF = 1 CMSSM, µ > 0 E e+ (GeV) PAMELA 08 HEAT 00 HEAT CAPRICE NUHM, flat priors, NFW Φ e+ /(Φ e+ +Φ e ) BF= Roszkowski, Ruiz, Trotta, Tsai & Varley (2009) 0.62< m χ /TeV <1.1 (68% range) NUHM, µ >0 NFW, BF=1 flat prior E e+ (GeV) bgnd. CAPRICE 94 HEAT HEAT 00 PAMELA m χ (GeV) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.32

139 SUSY and positron flux Bayesian posterior probability maps CMSSM, flat priors, NFW Φ e+ /(Φ e+ +Φ e ) Roszkowski, Ruiz, Silk & Trotta (2008) Moore+ac 68% 95% NFW+ac NFW NFW profile, BF = 1 CMSSM, µ > 0 E e+ (GeV) PAMELA 08 HEAT 00 HEAT CAPRICE NUHM, flat priors, NFW Φ e+ /(Φ e+ +Φ e ) BF= Roszkowski, Ruiz, Trotta, Tsai & Varley (2009) 0.62< m χ /TeV <1.1 (68% range) NUHM, µ >0 NFW, BF=1 flat prior E e+ (GeV) bgnd. CAPRICE 94 HEAT HEAT 00 PAMELA m χ (GeV) simple unified SUSY models are inconsistent with PAMELA s e + result...even for unrealistically large boost factors (flux scales linearly with boost factor) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.32

140 The great tragedy of Science the slying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact T.H. Huxley L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.33

141 The great tragedy of Science the slying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact T.H. Huxley One should never believe any experiment until it has been confirmed by theory A. Eddington L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.33

142 Dark matter and the LHC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.34

143 Dark matter and the LHC Assume SUSY as a popular and well-motivated framework... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.35

144 A few years from now: Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.35

145 A few years from now: Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC champagne, Stockholm, SUSY model reconstruction, WIMP astronomy, the ILC... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.35

146 A few years from now: Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.35

147 Determining m χ and Ω χ h 2 at LHC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.36

148 Determining m χ and Ω χ h 2 at LHC mass m χ : up to some GeV (from missing mass and missing energy) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.36

149 Determining m χ and Ω χ h 2 at LHC mass m χ : up to some GeV (from missing mass and missing energy) relic abundance Ω χ h 2 (assuming stable neutralino): need to measure m χ, Higgs, gluino and lightest squark masses, several BRs and tan β (depending on SUSY framework): Nojiri, Polesello, Tovey 04: SPA point: 5-10% error achievable L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.36

150 Add info about DM abundance assume Planck-like error: reduce WMAP error on Ω χ h 2 by 5 ( < ) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.37

151 Add info about DM abundance assume Planck-like error: reduce WMAP error on Ω χ h 2 by 5 ( < ) m 0 (GeV) %, 95% contours Black: ATLAS only Blue: ATLAS+Planck true value Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri & Trotta (2009) Posterior pdf Log priors CMSSM, µ>0 ATLAS SU3 point m 1/2 (GeV) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.37

152 Add info about DM abundance assume Planck-like error: reduce WMAP error on Ω χ h 2 by 5 ( < ) m 0 (GeV) %, 95% contours Black: ATLAS only Blue: ATLAS+Planck true value Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri & Trotta (2009) Posterior pdf Log priors CMSSM, µ>0 ATLAS SU3 point tanβ %, 95% contours Black: ATLAS alone Blue: ATLAS+Planck true value Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri & Trotta (2009) Posterior pdf Log priors CMSSM, µ>0 ATLAS SU3 point m 1/2 (GeV) A 0 (TeV) similar result for flat prior and profile likelihood determination of m 1/2, m 0 spot on! tan β resolved reasonably well determination of A 0 remains poor still cannot resolve sign of A 0 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.37

153 Determination of the relic abundance ATLAS SU3 point L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.38

154 Determination of the relic abundance ATLAS SU3 point Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri & Trotta (2009) Probability %, 95% contours best fit mean true value Ω χ h 2 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.38

155 Determination of the relic abundance ATLAS SU3 point Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri & Trotta (2009) Probability %, 95% contours best fit mean true value Ω χ h 2 use only ATLAS data similar result for log prior and profile likelihood red diamond: SU3 point green cross in circle: best-fit value big dot: posterior mean L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.38

156 Determination of the relic abundance ATLAS SU3 point Roszkowski, Ruiz de Austri & Trotta (2009) Probability %, 95% contours best fit mean true value Ω χ h 2 use only ATLAS data similar result for log prior and profile likelihood red diamond: SU3 point green cross in circle: best-fit value big dot: posterior mean Ω χ h 2 = ± relative accuracy of 10% L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.38

157 Dark matter and the LHC Assume SUSY as a popular and well-motivated framework... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

158 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

159 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

160 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

161 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... DM detected in DD/ID expts, but no SUSY at the LHC or at least not enough (or no) info on WIMP mass, couplings L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

162 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... DM detected in DD/ID expts, but no SUSY at the LHC or at least not enough (or no) info on WIMP mass, couplings The nature of DM WIMP would remain a mystery L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

163 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... DM detected in DD/ID expts, but no SUSY at the LHC or at least not enough (or no) info on WIMP mass, couplings The nature of DM WIMP would remain a mystery a stable state (χ or charged τ 1 ) found at the LHC... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

164 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... DM detected in DD/ID expts, but no SUSY at the LHC or at least not enough (or no) info on WIMP mass, couplings The nature of DM WIMP would remain a mystery a stable state (χ or charged τ 1 ) found at the LHC... even reconstructed density (neutralino or even stau!) can give Ωh L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

165 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... DM detected in DD/ID expts, but no SUSY at the LHC or at least not enough (or no) info on WIMP mass, couplings The nature of DM WIMP would remain a mystery a stable state (χ or charged τ 1 ) found at the LHC but no signal in DM DD/ID searches a particle lighter than χ (and for sure τ 1 ) is the DM? especially if DM axion excluded, or axion found but cosmologically not important L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

166 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... DM detected in DD/ID expts, but no SUSY at the LHC or at least not enough (or no) info on WIMP mass, couplings The nature of DM WIMP would remain a mystery a stable state (χ or charged τ 1 ) found at the LHC but no signal in DM DD/ID searches a particle lighter than χ (and for sure τ 1 ) is the DM? especially if DM axion excluded, or axion found but cosmologically not important LHC may (indirectly) point to E-WIMPs as DM favored regions of PS often very different from neutralino LSP L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

167 Dark matter and the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC mass reconstruction, an estimate of the neutralino abundance Ω χ h 2,... DM detected in DD/ID expts, but no SUSY at the LHC or at least not enough (or no) info on WIMP mass, couplings The nature of DM WIMP would remain a mystery a stable state (χ or charged τ 1 ) found at the LHC but no signal in DM DD/ID searches a particle lighter than χ (and for sure τ 1 ) is the DM? especially if DM axion excluded, or axion found but cosmologically not important LHC may (indirectly) point to E-WIMPs as DM favored regions of PS often very different from neutralino LSP The LHC will be crucial in clarifying the nature of DM. L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.39

168 The Big Picture well motivated particle candidates such that Ω 0.1 neutrino ν hot DM neutralino χ generic WIMP axion a axino ã gravitino G WIMP (neutralino, weakly int ing states,...): discoverable now EWIMP/superWIMP (axino, gravitino, super-weakly int ing states,...): hopeless in direct detection, but hints possible at LHC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.40

169 E WIMPs: G and ã (extremely weakly interacting massive particles) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.41

170 E WIMPs: G and ã (extremely weakly interacting massive particles) historically first: eg: Pagels+Primack, Weinberg ( 82) ea: Tamvakis+Wyler ( 82, pheno only) eγ: Goldberg ( 83) χ: Ellis, et al (EHNOS) ( 84) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.41

171 E WIMPs: G and ã (extremely weakly interacting massive particles) neutral, Majorana, chiral fermions historically first: eg: Pagels+Primack, Weinberg ( 82) ea: Tamvakis+Wyler ( 82, pheno only) eγ: Goldberg ( 83) χ: Ellis, et al (EHNOS) ( 84) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.41

172 E WIMPs: G and ã (extremely weakly interacting massive particles) neutral, Majorana, chiral fermions (assume usual gravity mediated SUSY breaking) axino ã historically first: eg: Pagels+Primack, Weinberg ( 82) ea: Tamvakis+Wyler ( 82, pheno only) eγ: Goldberg ( 83) χ: Ellis, et al (EHNOS) ( 84) gravitino G spin 1/2 3/2 interaction 1/f 2 a 1/M 2 P mass M SUSY M SUSY mass model dependent take it as free parameter f a GeV PQ scale M P = GeV reduced Planck mass M SUSY 100 GeV 1 TeV soft SUSY mass scale L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.41

173 E WIMPs: G and ã (extremely weakly interacting massive particles) neutral, Majorana, chiral fermions (assume usual gravity mediated SUSY breaking) axino ã historically first: eg: Pagels+Primack, Weinberg ( 82) ea: Tamvakis+Wyler ( 82, pheno only) eγ: Goldberg ( 83) χ: Ellis, et al (EHNOS) ( 84) gravitino G spin 1/2 3/2 interaction 1/f 2 a 1/M 2 P mass M SUSY M SUSY mass model dependent take it as free parameter f a GeV PQ scale M P = GeV reduced Planck mass M SUSY 100 GeV 1 TeV soft SUSY mass scale R-parity can but does not have to be conserved cf. recent work by Buchmuller et al; Ibarra; Bomark, et al,,... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.41

174 Producing Relic Axinos L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.42

175 Producing Relic Axinos consider: Covi+J.E. Kim+Roszkowski, PRL 99 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.42

176 Producing Relic Axinos consider: Covi+J.E. Kim+Roszkowski, PRL 99 ã =LSP χ =NLSP (LOSP) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.42

177 Producing Relic Axinos consider: Covi+J.E. Kim+Roszkowski, PRL 99 ã =LSP χ =NLSP (LOSP) χ first freezes out L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.42

178 Producing Relic Axinos consider: Covi+J.E. Kim+Roszkowski, PRL 99 ã =LSP χ =NLSP (LOSP) χ first freezes out and next decays: χ ã γ L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.42

179 Producing Relic Axinos consider: Covi+J.E. Kim+Roszkowski, PRL 99 ã =LSP χ =NLSP (LOSP) χ first freezes out and next decays: χ ã γ ( ) 3 τ(χ ã γ) 0.3 sec 100 GeV m χ... (for χ bino)...before BBN! L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.42

180 Producing Relic Axinos consider: Covi+J.E. Kim+Roszkowski, PRL 99 ã =LSP χ =NLSP (LOSP) χ first freezes out and next decays: χ ã γ ( ) 3 τ(χ ã γ) 0.3 sec 100 GeV m χ... (for χ bino)...before BBN! NTP: n ea = n χ Ω NTP ea h 2 = m ea m χ Ω χ h 2 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.42

181 Producing Relic Axinos consider: Covi+J.E. Kim+Roszkowski, PRL 99 ã =LSP χ =NLSP (LOSP) χ first freezes out and next decays: χ ã γ ( ) 3 τ(χ ã γ) 0.3 sec 100 GeV m χ... (for χ bino)...before BBN! NTP: n ea = n χ Ω NTP ea h 2 = m ea m χ Ω χ h 2 can have Ω ea 1 while Ω χ 1 (NTP: non thermal production) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.42

182 Producing Relic Axinos consider: Covi+J.E. Kim+Roszkowski, PRL 99 ã =LSP χ =NLSP (LOSP) χ first freezes out and next decays: χ ã γ ( ) 3 τ(χ ã γ) 0.3 sec 100 GeV m χ... (for χ bino)...before BBN! NTP: n ea = n χ Ω NTP ea h 2 = m ea m χ Ω χ h 2 can have Ω ea 1 while Ω χ 1 (NTP: non thermal production) plus TP processes: q q ã g, q ã q,... (TP: thermal production) ( ) Ω TP ea h2 5.5 gs 6 ln ( m ea ) ( ) 2 ( GeV T R ) g s 0.1 GeV f a 10 4 GeV TP dominance T Covi+J.E. Kim+H.-B. Kim+LR, JHEP 01 R fa/m 2 ea Brandenburg and L. Roszkowski, Steffen Warsaw, ( 04) Feb 10 p.42

183 Hints for axino DM from LHC? ea is too feebly interacting for any DM searches but LHC measurements may point to ã LSP and DM L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.43

184 Hints for axino DM from LHC? ea is too feebly interacting for any DM searches but LHC measurements may point to ã LSP and DM CMSSM, (standard) χ LSP L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.43

185 Hints for axino DM from LHC? ea is too feebly interacting for any DM searches but LHC measurements may point to ã LSP and DM CMSSM, (standard) χ LSP CMSSM, ea LSP, m ea m χ L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.43

186 Hints for axino DM from LHC? ea is too feebly interacting for any DM searches but LHC measurements may point to ã LSP and DM CMSSM, (standard) χ LSP CMSSM, ea LSP, m ea m χ both neutralino χ and stau τ 1 regions are now allowed NLSP lifetime 10 7 sec at LHC either will appear stable L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.43

187 Hints for axino DM from LHC? ea is too feebly interacting for any DM searches but LHC measurements may point to ã LSP and DM CMSSM, (standard) χ LSP CMSSM, ea LSP, m ea m χ both neutralino χ and stau τ 1 regions are now allowed NLSP lifetime 10 7 sec at LHC either will appear stable if χ NLSP: standard missing energy signature at LHC, but DM search unsuccessful L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.43

188 Hints for axino DM from LHC? ea is too feebly interacting for any DM searches but LHC measurements may point to ã LSP and DM CMSSM, (standard) χ LSP CMSSM, ea LSP, m ea m χ both neutralino χ and stau τ 1 regions are now allowed NLSP lifetime 10 7 sec at LHC either will appear stable if χ NLSP: standard missing energy signature at LHC, but DM search unsuccessful if τ 1 NLSP: charged, apparently stable striking signature at LHC L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.43

189 The Gravitino G in gravity mediated SUSY breaking models spin 3/2 partner of the graviton m eg = F 3MP F GeV SUSY breaking scale M P = GeV reduced Planck mass soft masses F/M P natural to expect: m eg GeV TeV L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.44

190 The Gravitino G in gravity mediated SUSY breaking models spin 3/2 partner of the graviton m eg = F 3MP F GeV SUSY breaking scale M P = GeV reduced Planck mass soft masses F/M P natural to expect: m eg GeV TeV if it is the LSP... can G give Ω CDM h 2 0.1? eg: cold (not warm) DM L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.44

191 Example: m G = m 0 Cerdeño+K.-Y. Choi+Jedamzik+L.R.+Ruiz de Austri apply all BBN: D/H + Y p + 7 Li/H + 3 He/D + 6 Li/ 7 Li L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.45

192 Example: m G = m 0 Cerdeño+K.-Y. Choi+Jedamzik+L.R.+Ruiz de Austri apply all BBN: D/H + Y p + 7 Li/H + 3 He/D + 6 Li/ 7 Li only τ 1 NLSP region remains allowed at LHC see charged stable LOSP τ 1 (instead of expected neutral χ) confirmed Feng, et al (Apr 04) low T R basically excluded (NTP part only), must include TP contribution to Ω eg h 2 m eg = O(100GeV): (typically) need high T R 10 9 GeV L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.45

193 EWIMPs ã and G as DM? L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.46

194 EWIMPs ã and G as DM? both ã and G are viable DM candidates (cold, warm) L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.46

195 EWIMPs ã and G as DM? both ã and G are viable DM candidates (cold, warm) LSP \ NLSP neutralino χ stau τ 1 ã G X : unless m eg < 1GeV L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.46

196 EWIMPs ã and G as DM? both ã and G are viable DM candidates (cold, warm) LSP \ NLSP neutralino χ stau τ 1 ã G X : unless m eg < 1GeV LHC: seemingly stable charged state ( τ 1 ): hint for EWIMP DM, either ã or G L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.46

197 EWIMPs ã and G as DM? both ã and G are viable DM candidates (cold, warm) LSP \ NLSP neutralino χ stau τ 1 ã G X : unless m eg < 1GeV LHC: seemingly stable charged state ( τ 1 ): hint for EWIMP DM, either ã or G LHC: seemingly stable neutral state (χ) but no signal in DD/ID DM searches (also Ω χ h 2 0.1): hint for only ã DM L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.46

198 EWIMPs ã and G as DM? both ã and G are viable DM candidates (cold, warm) LSP \ NLSP neutralino χ stau τ 1 ã G X : unless m eg < 1GeV LHC: seemingly stable charged state ( τ 1 ): hint for EWIMP DM, either ã or G LHC: seemingly stable neutral state (χ) but no signal in DD/ID DM searches (also Ω χ h 2 0.1): hint for only ã DM LHC can give strong indications for EWIMP DM possible L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.46

199 The Big Picture well motivated particle candidates such that Ω 0.1 neutrino ν hot DM neutralino χ generic WIMP axion a axino ã gravitino G???? L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.47

200 Dark matter and the LHC Assume SUSY as a popular and well-motivated framework... DM detected in DD/ID expts, SUSY found at the LHC DM detected in DD/ID expts, but no SUSY at the LHC The nature of DM WIMP would remain a mystery a stable state (χ or charged τ 1 ) found at the LHC but no signal in DM DD/ID searches a particle lighter than χ (and for sure τ 1 ) is the DM? LHC may (indirectly) point to E-WIMPs as DM The LHC will be crucial in clarifying the nature of DM. L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.48

201 Axions L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.49

202 Axions a pseudo-goldstone boson by product of PQ solution of strong CP problem global U(1) group spontaneously broken at scale f a GeV L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.49

203 Axions a pseudo-goldstone boson by product of PQ solution of strong CP problem global U(1) group spontaneously broken at scale f a GeV two main frameworks: DFSZ axion: add two doublets KSVZ axion: add heavy single quark with mass m Q f a L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.49

204 Axions a pseudo-goldstone boson by product of PQ solution of strong CP problem global U(1) group spontaneously broken at scale f a GeV two main frameworks: DFSZ axion: add two doublets KSVZ axion: add heavy single quark with mass m Q f a L aγ = 1 4 g aγf µν F µν a = g aγ E B a m a 10 5 ev Ω a 1 L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.49

205 Axions a pseudo-goldstone boson by product of PQ solution of strong CP problem global U(1) group spontaneously broken at scale f a GeV two main frameworks: DFSZ axion: add two doublets KSVZ axion: add heavy single quark with mass m Q f a L aγ = 1 4 g aγf µν F µν a = g aγ E B a (detection scheme) m a 10 5 ev Ω a 1 DM axion search: resonant cavity aγ aγ L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.49

206 Axions a pseudo-goldstone boson by product of PQ solution of strong CP problem global U(1) group spontaneously broken at scale f a GeV two main frameworks: DFSZ axion: add two doublets KSVZ axion: add heavy single quark with mass m Q f a L aγ = 1 4 g aγf µν F µν a = g aγ E B a current status m a 10 5 ev Ω a 1 DM axion search: resonant cavity aγ aγ solar axion search: γγ a γγ expt sensitive to cosmologically subdominant a L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.49

207 Axions a pseudo-goldstone boson by product of PQ solution of strong CP problem global U(1) group spontaneously broken at scale f a GeV two main frameworks: DFSZ axion: add two doublets KSVZ axion: add heavy single quark with mass m Q f a L aγ = 1 4 g aγf µν F µν a = g aγ E B a current status m a 10 5 ev Ω a 1 DM axion search: resonant cavity aγ aγ solar axion search: γγ a γγ expt sensitive to cosmologically subdominant a search continues, a possibly cosmologically subdominant? L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.49

208 The bottom line: L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.50

209 The bottom line: DM WIMP will be detected L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.50

210 The bottom line: DM WIMP will be detected this year L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.50

211 The bottom line: DM WIMP will be detected this year or this decade L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.50

212 The bottom line: DM WIMP will be detected this year or this decade or this century... L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.50

213 The bottom line: DM WIMP will be detected this year or this decade or this century... FOR SURE! L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.50

214 The bottom line: DM WIMP will be detected this year or this decade or this century... FOR SURE! L. Roszkowski, Warsaw, Feb 10 p.50