arxiv:astro-ph/ v1 3 Jun 2002

Transcription

1 Gamma-Ray Constraints on Neutralino Dark Matter Clumps in the Galactic Halo Roberto Aloisio a,b,1 Pasquale Blasi c,b,2 Angela V. Olinto d,b,3 arxiv:astro-ph/ v1 3 Jun 2002 Abstract a INFN, Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso SS. 17bis, Assergi (AQ), ITALY b Center for Cosmological Physics The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA c INAF/Osservatorio Astrofisico di Arcetri Largo E. Fermi, Firenze, ITALY d Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics, & Enrico Fermi Institute, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA According to high resolution cold dark matter (CDM) simulations, galaxy and cluster halos are formed by the constant merging of many smaller halos that survive to the present. The presence of smaller mass halos in our Galactic halo has important consequences for the γ-ray emission from the annihilation of CDM particles. We find that the contribution to the diffuse γ-ray background from clumps overwhelms the contribution of the smooth halo component and that neutralino parameters are severely constrained by EGRET bounds. We model the density profile of clumps by three representative dark matter profiles: singular isothermal spheres (SIS), Moore et al., and the Navarro, Frenk and White (NFW) density profiles and calculate the spectrum and angular distribution in the sky of the γ-ray flux due to neutralino annihilation in the clumpy halo of the Galaxy. If we model clumps as SIS, the flux of γ-rays for neutralinos with masses between 50 GeV and a few TeV and σv > (m χ /100GeV) 2 cm 3 /s are ruled out by EGRET. If clumps are best described by the Moore et al. profile, neutralinos less massive than a few TeV and σv > (m χ /100GeV) 1.5 cm 3 /s are also ruled out by EGRET. The less concentrated NFW clumps are constrained to have σv < (m χ /100GeV) 1.5 cm 3 /s for m χ < 3 TeV and can be further constrained by future GLAST measurements of the diffuse γ-ray background. In addition, GLAST will easily detect the angular anisotropy from a clumpy halo as it varies by orders of magnitude from the Galactic center to the anti-center. The γ-ray emission from the clumpy Galactic halo already places severe constraints either on the neutralino parameters or on the dark matter density structure. The clumpy neutralino halo is an ideal target for future γ-ray experiments such as GLAST. Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 29 February 2008

2 1 Introduction Most of the matter in the universe has yet to be observed in any frequency band, thus the name, dark matter. The evidence for the predominance of dark over visible matter comes mainly from the gravitational effects of the dark matter component. However, gravitational studies have been unable to shed light on the nature of the dark matter. Big bang nucleosynthes constrains most of the dark matter to be of non-baryonic origin. This has encouraged the study of plausible new particle candidates for the dark matter. The best motivated among these candidates is the lightest supersymmetric particle, named the neutralino, χ. Given the requirements of neutralino production in the early universe, it is possible to study the phenomenology of such dark matter candidates in detail (see, e.g., [1]). In particular, the annihilation of neutralinos has often been considered a potential source of detectable secondaries: high energy particles and electromagnetic radiation. In this sense, dark matter can be visible through the radiation caused by the annihilation secondaries [2 12]. Recent advances in cold dark matter (CDM) simulations have shown that the large scale structure of the universe can be explained in terms of a hierarchical scenario in which large halos of dark matter are generated by the continuous merging of smaller halos [13 15]. In this picture, a dark matter halo is the superposition of a smooth component on a scale comparable with the virial radius of the forming structure in addition to a clumped structure made of thousands of small scale halos. As we discuss below, this scenario has very important consequences for the detection of signals from neutralinoantineutralino (χ χ) annihilation. CDM simulations also show that most halos are well described by a density distribution which forms cusps at the center of an individual halo. The exact shape of the central cusp is still a matter of debate. Most recent simulations favor profiles with density cusps varying from the Moore et al. profile [14] where ρ DM (r 0) r 1.5 to a Navarro, Frenk, and White (NFW) profile [16] where ρ DM (r 0) r 1 (see also [17]). The more concentrated the central cusp, the easier to detect annihilation products since the annihilation rate is proportional to ρ 2 DM. The debate is exacerbated by observations of galaxy rotation curves that seem to provide no evidence of central cusps (see, e.g., [18]). However, the survival of cusps in galactic centers is highly dependent on the galaxy s merger history in particular on the history of formation of galactic center black holes [19]. The central regions of small mass dark matter halos, i.e., DM clumps, are less affected by the dynamics of baryonic matter and less likely to have black hole mergers at their centers. Thus, a cuspy profile may well describe the density of DM clumps. Here, we study the γ-ray emission from the clumpy halo of our Galaxy. 1 aloisio@lngs.infn.it 2 blasi@arcetri.astro.it 3 olinto@oddjob.uchicago.edu 2

3 We calculate the spectrum of γ-rays for 400 realizations of clumpy dark matter halos and for a range of minimum masses for the smallest clumps, M c,min, between 10 5 M and 10 8 M. We confirm the finding of Calcáneo- Roldan and Moore [8] that the clumped component of the halo emission overwhelms the contribution from the smooth halo component. In addition, we find that clumped halos with highly concentrated profiles in the range between Moore et al. profiles and singular isothermal spheres (SIS) are already ruled out by EGRET bounds up to 10 GeV. More specifically, clumps with SIS profiles are ruled out for neutralinos masses, m χ, between 50 GeV and 10 TeV, with σv > (m χ /100GeV) 2 cm 3 /s. This corresponds to the entire neutralino parameter space for this process (for a recent study of the γ-ray parameter space for neutralinos, see [11]). If clumps are best described by the Moore et al. profile, neutralinos less massive than a few TeV and σv > (m χ /100GeV) 1.5 cm 3 /s are also ruled out by EGRET. NFW clumps are constrained to have σv < (m χ /100GeV) 1.5 cm 3 /s for m χ < 3 TeV. Future GLAST studies [20] of the diffuse contribution of NFW clumps can make use of the large angular anisotropy from the clumpy halo emission to rule out the remaining parameter space for neutralinos. 2 Gamma-rays from Dark Matter Clumps in the Halo The contribution to the diffuse γ-ray background from χ χ annihilation in the clumpy halo depends on the distribution of clumps in the halo and the density profile of the clumps. For the distribution of clumps, we follow [21] and place in random directions N c clumps of mass M c at a distance d from the Galactic Center with ( ) α ( ) 2 Mc d N c (d, M c ) = N c,0 1 + M H d sc 3/2, (1) where N c,0 is a normalization constant and d sc is the scale radius of the clump distribution. Simulations find α 1.9 where a halo like ours with M H M contains about 500 clumps with mass larger than M c,min 10 8 M [13]. In order to study a range of possible clump radial profiles, we consider the most concentrated case of clumps described by singular isothermal spheres (SIS), the medium concentration Moore et al. profile, and the less concentrated NFW profile. SIS is a simpler and somewhat idealized profile that may not be realized in most realistic situations. In contrast, the Moore et al. and the NFW profiles were both derived as fits to different high resolution simulations [14,17]. Although there is ongoing debate over which profile is most accurate, it is presently believed that a realistic descriptions of the dark matter distribution in halos will follow a profile in the range defined by the Moore et al. and NFW fits (see, e.g. [22]). 3

4 The SIS density profile is given by ρ χ,sis (r) = ρ DM (d c ) ( ) rc 2. (2) r where r is the distance from the center of a clump, r c is the radius of the clump, d c is the radial position of the center of the clump with respect to the Galactic center, and ρ DM (d c ) is the density of dark matter in the position of the clump. The clump density profile follows (2) down to a minimum radius, r min. Inside r min neutralino annihilations are faster than the cusp formation timescale such that ρ SIS (r r min ) = ρ SIS (r min ) remains constant. To estimate r min we set the annihilation timescale equal to the free-fall timescale [2], so that [ ] 1 r min = r c σv 1 2 ρdm 4 χ χ, (3) 4πGm 2 χ where σv χ χ is the χ χ annihilation cross-section. The Moore et al. profile can be written as ρ χ,moore (r) = ρ DM (d c ) ( ) [ rc 3/2 r 3/2 s + r 3/2 ] c r rs 3/2 + r 3/2 (4) where the radial scale r s sets the concentration of a given clump. Analogously, the NFW profile can be written as ρ χ,nfw (r) = ρ DM (d c ) ( ) [ rc rs 2 + ] r2 c r rs 2 + r2 We model the smooth Galactic halo density ρ DM (d) with a NFW profile for the case of SIS and NFW clumps and with a Moore et al. profile for the case of Moore et al. clumps. Thus, ρ DM (d) is given by (4) or (5) with the substitutions: r d, r s d s, r c d, and ρ DM (d c ) ρ DM (d ), where d = 8.5 kpc is the position of the Solar System with respect to the Galactic Center and ρ DM (d ) = g/cm 3 is the dark matter density in the solar neighborhood. The concentration of the halo is set by the ratio of the scale radius d s to the size of the Galactic halo d H, where d h is such that the dark matter mass inside d H, M H (d d H ) = M. Throughout our calculations, we choose to set the concentration of halos to 10%, i.e, d s /d H = r s /r c = 0.1. This approximation is in the middle of the range of concentrations observed in CDM simulations that span a range from 5% to 20% [16]. Neutralinos in DM clumps annihilate mostly into quark-anti-quark pairs which hadronize mostly into pions (1/3 into neutral pions and 2/3 into charged pions) [23]. The charged pions decay into leptons while the neutral pions give rise to the gamma-ray emission via π 0 γγ. The number of photons produced (5) 4

5 with energy E γ resulting from a single χ χ annihilation is dn γ de γ = E π,max E π,min P(E π, E γ ) dn π de π de π, (6) where P(E π, E γ ) = 2(E 2 π m2 π ) 1/2 is the probability per unit energy to produce a γ-ray with energy E γ out of a pion with energy E π and for the pion fragmentation function we take the simple form dn π = 15 de π 16 (1 x) 2 x 3/2 m χ, (7) with x = E π /m χ [24]. The maximum pion energy E π,max = m χ, while E π,min = E γ + m 2 π /4E γ. Finally, dn γ = 5 de γ 4m χ 1 (1 x)2 dx, (8) x 3/2 (x 2 η 2 ) 1/2 x m where η = m π /m χ, and x m = E γ /m χ + m χ η 2 /4E γ. The neutralino annihilation rate per unit volume, Γ χ χ = ρ 2 χ σv /m2 χ, multiplied by the spectrum (8) gives the γ-ray emissivity j γ (s, E) = Γ χ χ dn γ /de γ, where s(θ) = (d 2 + d 2 2dd cosθ) 1/2 is the distance along the line of sight to a point at a distance d from the Galactic Center and θ is the angle between the direction s and the Galactic Center. The γ-ray flux per unit solid angle in some direction defined by (θ, φ) is Φ(θ, φ) = 1 4π s max(θ) 0 j γ (s, E)ds. (9) Figure 1 shows a map in Galactic coordinates of the γ-ray flux as a function of direction in the sky for one of the 100 realizations of the clumpy halo we studied with M min = 10 6 M. In this realization, we chose NFW clumps and m χ = 100 GeV. In this picture the Galactic anti-center is at the center of the map and the Galactic center is at the edge. As can be seen in this picture, the contribution from the clumpy component strongly overwhelms the smooth halo contribution to the diffuse γ-ray background. For a terrestrial observer, the clumpy halo has a large anisotropy given the position of the Solar System relative to the Galactic Center. This anisotropy is shown in Figure 2, where we plot I/I AV as a function of θ, where I I AV = Φ dφ Φ dφdcosθ. (10) The anisotropy was calculated by averaging over 100 configuration like the one shown in Fig. 1, i.e., NFW clumps with M min = 10 6 M. The anisotropy is 5

6 strong and should be easily detected by future observatories such as GLAST. In addition, it has a distinguishable structure from Galactic emissions, the clump contribution is symmetric in φ and mostly dipolar while the Galactic emission shown the disk structure of the Galaxy. In Figure 3, we show the flux of gamma-rays in units of (GeV cm 2 s sr) 1 arriving on Earth averaged in all directions for m χ = 100 GeV (dark lines) and 1 TeV (gray lines) both with σv < cm 3 /s. The highest flux is for SIS profiles followed by Moore et al. and NFW profiles. Each set of lines (from solid to dashed and dot-dashed) shows the variation of M c,min = 10 5, 10 6, 10 7, 10 8 M. Also shown is the EGRET data on extragalactic diffuse gamma-ray background which can be fit from 30 MeV to 30 GeV by [25] dn eg dωde = ( ) E 2.10 GeV 1 cm 2 s 1 sr 1. (11) GeV The behavior of the γ-ray spectra from clumpy halos in Fig. 3 has a generic shape: starts flat at lower energies, then follows a (E/m χ ) 3/2 up to energies close to m χ when it goes to zero. The shape scales with m χ and σv in a profile dependent way. By fitting this scaling, we can map the σv versus m χ neutralino parameter space with models that are ruled out by the EGRET data. It is clear from Fig. 3, that SIS clumps with the parameters chosen for the figure have fluxes which greatly exceed the EGRET data on extragalactic diffuse γ-ray emission. Given the SIS profile parameters, the γ-ray flux is Fig. 3 scales as Φ SIS σv 1/2 mχ 5/2. Thus, we find by using EGRET data at 10 GeV that SIS clumps in our halo are ruled out for m χ, between 50 GeV and 3 TeV with σv > (m χ /100GeV) 2 cm 3 /s and for m χ > 3 TeV, σv > (m χ /100GeV) 5 cm 3 /s. These bounds are shown in Fig. 4. Moore et al. clumps in a Moore halo are also strongly constrained. The flux in this case scales as: Φ Moore σv m 3 χ. For m χ = 50 GeV to 3 TeV, the 10 GeV EGRET data requires that σv < (m χ /100GeV) 3/2 cm 3 /s and for m χ > 3 TeV, σv < (m χ /100GeV) 3 cm 3 /s. These limits are also shown in Fig. 4. If we extrapolate the EGRET measurement of the extragalactic diffuse γ-ray background to 100 GeV, the bounds get tighter: for m χ = 50 GeV to 30 TeV, the flux from clumps is below eq. (11) if σv < (m χ /100GeV) 3/2 cm 3 /s and for m χ > 30 TeV, σv < (m χ /100GeV) 3 cm 3 /s. Finally, the least concentrated NFW clumps in an NFW smooth halo can more easily accommodate the EGRET data. The bounds that can be placed by EGRET at 10 GeV are: if m χ = 50 GeV to 3 TeV, σv < (m χ /100GeV) 3/2 cm 3 /s and for m χ > 3 TeV, σv < (m χ /100GeV) 3 cm 3 /s (shown in Fig. 4). If we extrapolate (11) to 100 GeV, the bounds become: for m χ = 50 GeV to 30 TeV, σv < (m χ /100GeV) 3/2 cm 3 /s and for m χ > 30 TeV, σv < (m χ /100GeV) 3 cm 3 /s. Being less constrained at this point, NFW clumps are the most promising in terms of future detections. These 6

7 clumps would generate anisotropies that can be easily detected by GLAST for reasonable choices of all the parameters and a relatively massive individual clump can be easily studied by future Atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes [11]. 3 Conclusion As we have shown above, the γ-ray emission from the clumpy Galactic halo already places severe constraints either on the neutralino parameters or on the dark matter density structure. We used 400 realizations of clumpy dark matter halo to show that the spectrum of γ-rays can easily overwhelm EGRET data with a negligible dependence on the minimum clump mass M c,min. Not only the clumped component of the halo overwhelms the contribution from the smooth halo component but the most concentrated profiles such as SIS are strongly ruled out for all reasonable neutralino parameters. In addition, we find that clumped halos with profile concentrations in the range between Moore et al. and SIS profiles are also ruled out by EGRET bounds up to 10 GeV for most of the neutralino parameter space. The extension of the extragalactic diffuse γ-ray emission by GLAST to 100 GeV and above would be able to explore the remaining regions of neutralino parameters. Some regions of neutralino parameter space are also constrained by EGRET and will be enlarged by GLAST. In this less concentrated case, the best way to explore the remaining parameters for neutralinos would be to place bounds on the expected anisotropy for the clumpy halo γ-ray emission or to search for individual clumps with Atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes [11]. Alternatively, the less concentrated NFW clumps have a distinctive signature at microwave frequencies [9] and can be constrained by the angular distribution in this frequency range [12]. Acknowledgments This work was supported in part by the NSF through grant AST and DOE grant DE-FG0291-ER40606 at the University of Chicago and at the Center for Cosmological Physics by grant NSF PHY References [1] G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, and K. Griest, Phys. Rep. 267, 195, [2] V. Berezinsky, A.V. Gurevich, and K.P. Zybin, Phys. Lett. B 294, 221, [3] V. Berezinsky, A. Bottino, and G. Mignola, Phys. Lett. B 325, 136, [4] P. Gondolo and J. Silk, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1719, [5] P. Gondolo, preprint hep-ph/

8 [6] G. Bertone, G. Sigl, and J. Silk, MNRAS 326 (2001) [7] L. Bergström, J. Edsjö, P. Gondolo, and P. Ullio, Phys. Rev. D 59, , [8] C. Calcáneo Roldán and B. Moore, astro-ph/ [9] P. Blasi, A.V. Olinto, C. Tyler, Astrop. Phys. (2002) astro-ph/ [10] C. Tyler, astro-ph/ [11] A. Tasitsiom and A. V. Olinto (2002). [12] R. Aloisio, P. Blasi, and A.V. Olinto, in preparation (2002). [13] Ghigna, S., Moore, B., Governato, F., Lake, G., Quinn, T., Stadel, J., MNRAS 300, 146, [14] B. Moore, S. Ghigna, F. Governato, G. Lake, T. Quinn, J. Stadel, P. Tozzi, 524,L19 (1999) [15] A. Klypin, A.V. Kravtsov, O. Valenzuela, F. Prada, Ap.J., 522, 82 (1999) [16] J.F. Navarro, C.S. Frenk, and S.D.M. White, Ap. J. 462, 563, 1996; ibid. 490, 493, [17] C. Power, J.F. Navarro, A. Jenkins, C.S. Frenk, S.D.M. White, V. Springel, J. Stadel, and T. Quinn, MNRAS (2002), astro-ph/ [18] P. Salucci, MNRAS 320, L1-L5 (2001). [19] D. Merritt and M. Milosavljevic, in DARK 2002: 4th International Heidelberg Conference on Dark Matter in Astro and Particle Physics, 4-9 Feb 2002, Cape Town, South Africa, H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, R. Viollier (eds.) and astroph/ [20] Kniffen, D.A., Bertsch, D.L. and Gehrels, N. GeV-TeV Gamma Ray Astrophysics Workshop, Snowbird, UT. AIP Proc. Conf. 515, 492 (1999) [21] P. Blasi, and R. K. Sheth, Phys. Lett. B 486, 233, [22] A. Tasitsiomi, astro-ph/ [23] Lars Bergstrom, Joakim Edsjo, Piero Ullio, Phys.Rev.Lett. 87 (2001) [24] C.T. Hill, Nucl. Phys. B224, 469 (1983). [25] P. Sreekumar et al., Ap.J. 494, 523 (1998). 8

9 Fig. 1. Map of gamma-ray flux in Galactic coordinates for one realization of NFW clumps with m χ = 100 GeV and M c,min = 10 6 M. The Galactic Anti-center is in the center of the map while the Galactic Center is at the edges. Fig. 2. Gamma-ray flux as a function of θ divided by the average flux, I AV. The anisotropy between the Galactic Center (θ = 0 o ) and Anti-center (θ = 180 o ) reaches 100 for NFW clumps with m χ = 100 GeV and M c,min = 10 6 M. 9

10 Fig. 3. Flux of gamma-rays in units of (GeV cm 2 s sr) 1 arriving on Earth averaged in all directions for m χ = 100 GeV (dark lines) and 1 TeV (gray lines). Each set of lines labeled by the clump profiles (SIS, Moore, and NFW) shows the variation of M c,min = 10 5,10 6,10 7,10 8 M by the solid line, dshed and dot-dashed. Also shown is the EGRET data on extragalactic diffuse gamma-ray background [25]. 10

11 . Fig. 4. Limits on the neutralino parameter space 11

12 This figure "mappa6.jpg" is available in "jpg" format from: