Dark Matter in the Universe

Transcription

1 [] Dark Matter in the Universe

2 Prehistory: Zwicky 1933: estimates mass of Coma cluster with virial theorem, E kin = 1 2 E grav

3 Prehistory: Zwicky 1933: estimates mass of Coma cluster with virial theorem, E kin = 1 2 E grav virial mass a factor 10 larger than luminous mass.

4 Prehistory: Zwicky 1933: estimates mass of Coma cluster with virial theorem, E kin = 1 2 E grav virial mass a factor 10 larger than luminous mass. Rubin, Ford 1970: rotation curves of galaxies are flat

5 Prehistory: Zwicky 1933: estimates mass of Coma cluster with virial theorem, E kin = 1 2 E grav virial mass a factor 10 larger than luminous mass. Rubin, Ford 1970: rotation curves of galaxies are flat

6 Prehistory: Zwicky 1933: estimates mass of Coma cluster with virial theorem, E kin = 1 2 E grav virial mass a factor 10 larger than luminous mass. Rubin, Ford 1970: rotation curves of galaxies are flat DM stars gas

7 The standard lore: inflation suggests Ω ρ/ρ cr = 1 (Ṙ ) 2 H 2 = 8π R 3 Gρ k R 2 + Λ 3 with ρ cr = 3H 2 0 /(8πG): During inflation (Ω tot 1) = k Ṙ 2 exp( 2Ht)

8 The standard lore: inflation suggests Ω ρ/ρ cr = 1 BBN constrains baryon content, Ω b h 2 = ± 0.001

9 The standard lore: inflation suggests Ω ρ/ρ cr = 1 BBN constrains baryon content, Ω b h 2 = ± Large-scale structure requires that DM is dissipation-less cold, i.e. non-relativistic already for z dec < z < z eq SCDM z=1 CDM Jeans criterion: CDM OCDM ( 4πGρ0 k J = v 2 s ) 1/2 The VIRGO Collaboration 1996

10 The standard lore: inflation suggests Ω ρ/ρ cr = 1 BBN constrains baryon content, Ω b h 2 = ± Large-scale structure requires that DM is dissipation-less cold, i.e. non-relativistic already for z dec < z < z eq -3 3 P ( k ) ( h Mpc ) COBE d ( h -1 Mpc ) Microwave Background Superclusters Clusters Galaxies HDM n = 1 CDM n = 1 MDM n = 1 TCDM n = k ( h Mpc )

11 Some dark matter candidates with Ω 1: 0 5 SM neutrinos 10 WIMP log(σ/pbarn) axion axino gravitino SHDM log(m/gev)

12 Some dark matter candidates with Ω 1: 0 5 SM neutrinos 10 WIMP log(σ/pbarn) axion axino gravitino SHDM log(m/gev) why such a large variability? Different production mechanism thermal relics: WIMPs production in phase transitions: axions gravitational production: superheavy dark matter (SHDM)

13 Thermal relics: expansion of universe freezes out annihilation reactions, when Γ ann = n σ ann v H

14 Thermal relics: expansion of universe freezes out annihilation reactions, when Γ ann = n σ ann v H freeze-out temperature x f = m/t f distinguishes Hot Dark Matter (HDM): x f < 3 Cold Dark Matter (CDM): x f > 3

15 Thermal relics: expansion of universe freezes out annihilation reactions, when Γ ann = n σ ann v H freeze-out temperature x f = m/t f distinguishes Hot Dark Matter (HDM): x f < 3 Cold Dark Matter (CDM): x f > 3

16 Thermal relics: expansion of universe freezes out annihilation reactions, when Γ ann = n σ ann v H freeze-out temperature x f = m/t f distinguishes Hot Dark Matter (HDM): x f < 3 Cold Dark Matter (CDM): x f > 3 Ω X h cm 3 /s σ ann v suggests weakly interacting DM particle with mass m m Z

17 Connection of Ω X and σ ann v Gamov criterion fixes n X at freeze-out Γ ann = n σ ann v! = H = 1.66g 1/2 n X (T f ) T2 f σ ann v T 2 M Pl

18 Connection of Ω X and σ ann v Gamov criterion fixes n X at freeze-out abundance today Γ ann = n σ ann v! = H = 1.66g 1/2 n X (T f ) T2 f σ ann v T 2 M Pl Ω X m X n X (T f ) T3 0 T 3 f x f σ ann v

19 Connection of Ω X and σ ann v Gamov criterion fixes n X at freeze-out abundance today Γ ann = n σ ann v! = H = 1.66g 1/2 n X (T f ) T2 f σ ann v T 2 M Pl Ω X m X n X (T f ) T3 0 T 3 f only log. dependence on m x f σ ann v

20 Connection of Ω X and σ ann v Gamov criterion fixes n X at freeze-out abundance today Γ ann = n σ ann v! = H = 1.66g 1/2 n X (T f ) Ω X m X n X (T f ) T3 0 T 3 f only log. dependence on m T2 f σ ann v x f σ ann v thermally averaged annihilation cross section σ ann v = σ 0 + σ 1 v 2 + σ 2 v T 2 M Pl = σ 0 + σ 1 T/m+ σ 2 (T/m)

21 Connection of Ω X and σ ann v thermally averaged annihilation cross section σ ann v = σ 0 + σ 1 v 2 + σ 2 v

22 Connection of Ω X and σ ann v thermally averaged annihilation cross section σ ann v = σ 0 + σ 1 v 2 + σ 2 v today (Milky Way): v = 10 3, while at freeze-out v 2 /4 1/16

23 Connection of Ω X and σ ann v thermally averaged annihilation cross section σ ann v = σ 0 + σ 1 v 2 + σ 2 v today (Milky Way): v = 10 3, while at freeze-out v 2 /4 1/16 p-wave hopeless for indirect detection for s-wave, same σ ann v

24 Connection of Ω X and σ ann v thermally averaged annihilation cross section σ ann v = σ 0 + σ 1 v 2 + σ 2 v today (Milky Way): v = 10 3, while at freeze-out v 2 /4 1/16 p-wave hopeless for indirect detection for s-wave, same σ ann v known value of Ω X fixes σ 0 today

25 Unitarity induces upper limit on thermal M X Unitarity of S-matrix restricts annihilations into l.th partial wave, σ annv (l) rel 4π 2l+1 v rel MX 2

26 Unitarity induces upper limit on thermal M X Unitarity of S-matrix restricts annihilations into l.th partial wave, σ annv (l) rel 4π 2l+1 v rel MX 2 partial wave expansion: l v 2 rel /4

27 Unitarity induces upper limit on thermal M X Unitarity of S-matrix restricts annihilations into l.th partial wave, σ annv (l) rel 4π 2l+1 v rel MX 2 partial wave expansion: l v 2 rel /4 non-relativistic point-particles: l > 1 suppressed

28 Unitarity induces upper limit on thermal M X Unitarity of S-matrix restricts annihilations into l.th partial wave, σ annv (l) rel 4π 2l+1 v rel MX 2 partial wave expansion: l v 2 rel /4 non-relativistic point-particles: l > 1 suppressed observed Ω CDM h 2 = / σ ann v M X < 35TeV

29 The standard WIMP candidate: SM: no baryogenesis, dark matter, structure formation

30 The standard WIMP candidate: SM: no baryogenesis, dark matter, structure formation SUSY as a well-motivated extension of the SM

31 The standard WIMP candidate: SM: no baryogenesis, dark matter, structure formation SUSY as a well-motivated extension of the SM gauge coupling unfication and hierarchy problem as evidence for low-scale SUSY

32 The standard WIMP candidate: SM: no baryogenesis, dark matter, structure formation SUSY as a well-motivated extension of the SM gauge coupling unfication and hierarchy problem as evidence for low-scale SUSY R parity R = ( 1) 3B+L+2s reduces proton decay problem of SUSY GUTs

33 The standard WIMP candidate: SM: no baryogenesis, dark matter, structure formation SUSY as a well-motivated extension of the SM gauge coupling unfication and hierarchy problem as evidence for low-scale SUSY R parity R = ( 1) 3B+L+2s reduces proton decay problem of SUSY GUTs LSP is stable

34 The standard WIMP candidate: Neutralino SM: no baryogenesis, dark matter, structure formation SUSY as a well-motivated extension of the SM gauge coupling unfication and hierarchy problem as evidence for low-scale SUSY R parity R = ( 1) 3B+L+2s reduces proton decay problem of SUSY GUTs LSP is stable neutralino possible WIMP candidate χ = Z 11 B+Z 12 W + Z 13 H 1 + Z 14 H 2

35 Status of neutralino DM after LEPII: 800 tan β = 10, µ > m h = 114 GeV m 0 (GeV) m χ ± = GeV m 1/2 (GeV)

36 Status of neutralino DM after LEPII: 3500 m t = 171 GeV, tan β = 10, µ > m 0 (GeV) 2000 m h = 114 GeV m 1/2 (GeV)

37 Status of neutralino DM after LEPII: after LEP: some fine-tuning in (C)MSSM required: m 2 Z 2 = m2 2 m2 1 tan2 β tan 2 µ 2 β 1

38 Status of neutralino DM after LEPII: after LEP: some fine-tuning in (C)MSSM required: m 2 Z 2 = m2 2 m2 1 tan2 β tan 2 µ 2 β 1 similiar: σ ann typically too small

39 Status of neutralino DM after LEPII: after LEP: some fine-tuning in (C)MSSM required: m 2 Z 2 = m2 2 m2 1 tan2 β tan 2 µ 2 β 1 similiar: σ ann typically too small possible solutions: extend MSSM, adding singlet

40 Status of neutralino DM after LEPII: after LEP: some fine-tuning in (C)MSSM required: m 2 Z 2 = m2 2 m2 1 tan2 β tan 2 µ 2 β 1 similiar: σ ann typically too small possible solutions: extend MSSM, adding singlet or split supersymmetry, or minimal DM, or...

41 Minimal DM: [Cirelli, Fornengo, Strumia 05 ] add to SM extra multiplets X +h.c. with minimal spin, isospin and hypercharge quantum numbers, choose QN that provide most of the following: 1 Lightest component is automatically stable on cosmological time-scales. 2 Only renormalizable interactions of X to other SM particles are of gauge type 3 Quantum corrections generate mass splitting M such that the lightest component of X is neutral. 4 DM candidate is still allowed by DM searches, right abundance.

42 Minimal DM: [Cirelli, Fornengo, Strumia 05 ] Quantum numbers DM can DM mass m ± X m X Events at LHC σ SI in SU(2) L U(1) Y Spin decay into in TeV in MeV R Ldt =100/fb cm 2 2 1/2 0 EL 0.54 ± /2 1/2 EH 1.1 ± HH 2.0 ± /2 LH 2.4 ± HH, LL 1.6 ± /2 LH 1.8 ± /2 0 HHH 2.4 ± /2 1/2 (LHH ) 2.4 ± /2 0 HHH 2.9 ± /2 1/2 (LHH) 2.6 ± (HHH H ) 5.0 ± /2 4.4 ± ±

43 WIMP detection direct detection: most experiments are exclusion experiments annual modulation directional signal

44 WIMP detection direct detection: most experiments are exclusion experiments annual modulation directional signal indirect detection: HE neutrinos from Sun and Earth HE photons from Milky Way, dwarf galaxies,... anti-protons and positrons

45 WIMP detection direct detection: most experiments are exclusion experiments annual modulation directional signal indirect detection: HE neutrinos from Sun and Earth HE photons from Milky Way, dwarf galaxies,... anti-protons and positrons accelerator searches: p T as easy signal test couplings,... probes only short lifetimes

46 Non-thermal DM: Axions

47 Non-thermal DM: Axions Strong CP problem: L = α s 8π (θ arg det M q) G G }{{} θ<10 9

48 Non-thermal DM: Axions Strong CP problem: L = α s 8π (θ arg det M q) G G }{{} θ<10 9 interpretate θ as field θ a/f a, introduce potential such that a 0

49 Non-thermal DM: Axions Strong CP problem: L = α s 8π (θ arg det M q) G G }{{} θ<10 9 interpretate θ as field θ a/f a, introduce potential such that a 0 axions couple to gluons and mix with pions L = α s a G G 8π f a

50 Non-thermal DM: Axions Strong CP problem: L = α s 8π (θ arg det M q) G G }{{} θ<10 9 interpretate θ as field θ a/f a, introduce potential such that a 0 axions couple to gluons and mix with pions axions are like pions, thus i.e. light axions decouple L = α s a G G 8π f a m a = m π f π f a 0.6eV 107 GeV f a

51 Non-thermal DM: Axions coupling to photons L = 1 4 g aγaf µν F µν, g aγ = α 2πf a C γ

52 Non-thermal DM: Axions coupling to photons L = 1 4 g aγaf µν F µν, g aγ = α 2πf a C γ Primakoff effect:

53 Detection of Axions

54 Detection of Axions ) g aγ (GeV 10-8 Lazarus et al SOLAX, COSME DAMA Tokyo helioscope CAST 2003 CAST prospects globular clusters Axion models m axion (ev)

55 Cosmological Production of Axions light axions, m a < 1 ev, were never in thermal equilibrium, possible CDM candidate two production mechanisms:

56 Cosmological Production of Axions light axions, m a < 1 ev, were never in thermal equilibrium, possible CDM candidate two production mechanisms: misalignment mechanism: axion mass is switched on at the QCD phase transition, T 200 MeV. If axion field wasn t at minimum, coherent oscillations will be excited, Ω a h ±1 (µev/m a ) 1.2 θ 2 i

57 Cosmological Production of Axions light axions, m a < 1 ev, were never in thermal equilibrium, possible CDM candidate two production mechanisms: misalignment mechanism: axion mass is switched on at the QCD phase transition, T 200 MeV. If axion field wasn t at minimum, coherent oscillations will be excited, Ω a h ±1 (µev/m a ) 1.2 θ 2 i axionic strings form during the PQ phase transition and emit axions later on.

58 Stellar evolution limits: virial theorem: E kin = 1 2 E grav star has negative specific heat contraction heating & heating expansion

59 Stellar evolution limits: virial theorem: E kin = 1 2 E grav star has negative specific heat contraction heating & heating expansion self-regulated nuclear burning via interplay of thermal pressure and gravitation

60 Stellar evolution limits: virial theorem: E kin = 1 2 E grav star has negative specific heat contraction heating & heating expansion self-regulated nuclear burning via interplay of thermal pressure and gravitation novel energy loss leaves stellar structure nearly unchanged, but leads to heating and thus to increased consumption of nuclear fuel

61 Stellar evolution limits: virial theorem: E kin = 1 2 E grav star has negative specific heat contraction heating & heating expansion self-regulated nuclear burning via interplay of thermal pressure and gravitation novel energy loss leaves stellar structure nearly unchanged, but leads to heating and thus to increased consumption of nuclear fuel reduction of stellar lifetime: δτ τ L a L γ < 1 upper limit on g aγ, m a ; lower limit on f a

62 Summary of (old) axion limits:

63 Axion limits II: cosmology and CAST sensitivity overlap now, [Hannestad, Raffelt, Mirizzi 05 ]

64 Axion limits II: cosmology and CAST sensitivity overlap now, [Hannestad, Raffelt, Mirizzi 05 ] global symmetries broken by gravity: power/exp. suppressed?

65 Axion limits II: cosmology and CAST sensitivity overlap now, [Hannestad, Raffelt, Mirizzi 05 ] global symmetries broken by gravity: power/exp. suppressed? PVLAS: m a 1 mev and f PQ = (2 6) 10 5 GeV ) -1 g aγ (GeV PVLAS Lazarus et al SOLAX, COSME DAMA Tokyo helioscope CAST 2003 CAST prospects globular clusters Axion models m axion (ev)

66 Axion limits II: cosmology and CAST sensitivity overlap now, [Hannestad, Raffelt, Mirizzi 05 ] global symmetries broken by gravity: power/exp. suppressed? PVLAS: m a 1 mev and f PQ = (2 6) 10 5 GeV new light vector particle ( µ a B µ ) [Antoniadis, Boyarsky, Ruchayskiy 06 ]

67 Superheavy matter

68 Gravitational creation of superheavy matter Small fluctuations of field Φ obey φ k + [ k 2 + m 2 eff(τ) ] φ k = 0

69 Gravitational creation of superheavy matter Small fluctuations of field Φ obey φ k + [ k 2 + m 2 eff(τ) ] φ k = 0 If m eff is time dependent, vacuum fluctuations will be transformed into real particles. expansion of Universe leads to particle production

70 Gravitational creation of superheavy matter Small fluctuations of field Φ obey φ k + [ k 2 + m 2 eff(τ) ] φ k = 0 If m eff is time dependent, vacuum fluctuations will be transformed into real particles. expansion of Universe leads to particle production In inflationary cosmology ( ) 2 Ω X h 2 MX T RH GeV 10 9 GeV independent of details of particle physics, for any M X < H I

71 Properties of superheavy matter: was never in thermal (chemical) equilibrium: unitarity limit M < 35 TeV does not apply

72 Properties of superheavy matter: was never in thermal (chemical) equilibrium: unitarity limit M < 35 TeV does not apply can be strongly interacting and dissipation-less: small relative energy transfer de/(edt) per time requires: either small σ or small energy transfer y m/m X any DM particle with m X > 10 TeV is dissipation-less

73 Properties of superheavy matter: was never in thermal (chemical) equilibrium: unitarity limit M < 35 TeV does not apply can be strongly interacting and dissipation-less: small relative energy transfer de/(edt) per time requires: either small σ or small energy transfer y m/m X any DM particle with m X > 10 TeV is dissipation-less lifetime: metastable τ > T 0 or stable due to some (gauged) R symmetry

74 Detection of superheavy matter: direct detection: density 1/M X, recoil energy is constant large σ XN required log σ (cm 2 ) log M χ (GeV)

75 Connection SHDM and UHECRs: UHECR above the GZK cutoff via photon, nucleon secondaries 1e+26 E 3 J(E)/m 2 s 1 ev 2 1e+25 1e+24 1e+23 1e+18 1e+19 1e+20 1e+21 E/eV

76 Exclusion of superheavy matter: [%] Photon Fraction for E>E HP A FD limits at 95% CL Y A Y HP SHDM SHDM TD Z Burst GZK Photons Limit (E>E 0 ) A2 AY E 0 [ev]

77 Experimental anomalies: WMAP haze: synchrotron radiation around GC Fermi haze: gamma radiation around GC

78 Experimental anomalies: WMAP haze: synchrotron radiation around GC Fermi haze: gamma radiation around GC Integral: positron annihilation line from the Galactic bulge Fermi: excess from GC

79 Experimental anomalies: WMAP haze: synchrotron radiation around GC Fermi haze: gamma radiation around GC Integral: positron annihilation line from the Galactic bulge Fermi: excess from GC EGRET excess, surplus of diffuse γ-rays

80 Experimental anomalies: WMAP haze: synchrotron radiation around GC Fermi haze: gamma radiation around GC Integral: positron annihilation line from the Galactic bulge Fermi: excess from GC EGRET excess, surplus of diffuse γ-rays PAMELA anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons

81 Experimental anomalies: WMAP haze: synchrotron radiation around GC Fermi haze: gamma radiation around GC Integral: positron annihilation line from the Galactic bulge Fermi: excess from GC EGRET excess, surplus of diffuse γ-rays PAMELA anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons ATIC anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons

82 Experimental anomalies: WMAP haze: synchrotron radiation around GC Fermi haze: gamma radiation around GC Integral: positron annihilation line from the Galactic bulge Fermi: excess from GC EGRET excess, surplus of diffuse γ-rays PAMELA anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons ATIC anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons HESS: TeV γ-rays from GC

83 Experimental anomalies: WMAP haze: synchrotron radiation around GC Fermi haze: gamma radiation around GC Integral: positron annihilation line from the Galactic bulge Fermi: excess from GC EGRET excess, surplus of diffuse γ-rays PAMELA anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons ATIC anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons HESS: TeV γ-rays from GC DAMA/Libra modulation signal

84 Experimental anomalies: WMAP haze: synchrotron radiation around GC Fermi haze: gamma radiation around GC Integral: positron annihilation line from the Galactic bulge Fermi: excess from GC EGRET excess, surplus of diffuse γ-rays PAMELA anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons ATIC anomaly: positrons, but no anti-protons HESS: TeV γ-rays from GC DAMA/Libra modulation signal CDMS and CoGeNT hints

85 Direct detection: Method: scattering of DM particle in a crystal/gas Recoil = energy deposition measured as ionisation scintillation light cryogenic discrimination of some backgrounds possible others (neutrons) irreducible most experiments are not detection but exclusion experiments

86 Direct detection: Method: scattering of DM particle in a crystal/gas Recoil = energy deposition measured as ionisation scintillation light cryogenic discrimination of some backgrounds possible others (neutrons) irreducible most experiments are not detection but exclusion experiments Possible signature annual modulation directional sensitivity

87 Direct detection signals: DAMA + CDMS

88 Direct detection signals: DAMA + CDMS + CoGeNT

89 Direct detection signals: + Xenon100 Cross Section [cm 2 ] DAMA CoGeNT DAMA (with channeling) CDMS XENON100 Trotta et al. CMSSM 95% c.l. Trotta et al. CMSSM 68% c.l Mass [GeV/c 2 ]

90 Direct vs. indirect detection: msugra scan, 3σ WMPA plus collider constraints: Bergström, Bringmann & Edsjö WMAP, allowed 16 CDMS excl. 17 SuperCDMS XENON 1t log10σsi pb! log10 Σv" m cm3 s 1 GeV Χ Kachelrieß Nordic Winterschool, Gausdal 2011 Michael Dark!Matter: Candidates and their properties [ ]

91 Direct vs. indirect detection: msugra scan, 3σ WMPA plus collider constraints: CTA/DM-CTA Bergström, Bringmann & Edsjö ! WMAP, log10σsi pb! {!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 10!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 12!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 13!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 15!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! allowed 16!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CDMS excl.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 17 SuperCDMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! XENON 1t!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 18!! Fermi 5y!!!!!!!!!!!!! CTA!!!!! 19!!!! DMA!!!! 6 GC, NFW BF Nordic Winterschool, Gausdal Michael 2 Kachelrieß Dark 2Matter: Candidates and their properties

92 Earlier indirect detection claims: [Elsässer, Mannheim 04 ] Signal from extragalactic χχ annihilations in the diffuse photon background:

93 Earlier indirect detection claims: [Elsässer, Mannheim 04 ] Signal from extragalactic χχ annihilations in the diffuse photon background: E 2 x Gamma Ray Intensity / (GeV cm -2 s -1 sr -1 ) EGRET µ = 978GeV m 2 = -1035GeV m A = 1036GeV tan β = 6.6 m S = 1814GeV A t = 0.88 A b = Ωh 2 = 0.1 α = Salamon & Stecker Blazar Model m χ = 520 GeV <σv> χ = 3.1 x cm 3 s -1 Straw Person's Blazar Model: χ 2 /ν =1.05 Dark Matter Scenario (Total) χ 2 /ν =0.74 0, Observed Gamma Ray Energy / GeV

94 Earlier indirect detection claims: [de Boer et al ] Signal from Galactic χχ annihilations in the diffuse photon flux: E 2 * flux [GeV cm -2 s -1 sr -1 ] tot. background Pion decay Inverse Compton Bremsstrahlung EGRET bg sig signal extragalactic 10-6 m 0 = 1400 GeV m 1/2 = 175 GeV tan β = Nordic Winterschool, Gausdal 2011 Michael Kachelrieß Dark Matter: E [GeV] Candidates and their properties

95 Earlier indirect detection claims: [de Boer et al ] Signal from Galactic χχ annihilations in the diffuse photon flux: E 2 * flux [GeV cm -2 s -1 sr -1 ] tot. background Pion decay Inverse Compton Bremsstrahlung EGRET bg sig signal extragalactic 10-6 Bump not seen by Fermi m 0 = 1400 GeV m 1/2 = 175 GeV tan β = Nordic Winterschool, Gausdal 2011 Michael Kachelrieß Dark Matter: E [GeV] Candidates and their properties

96 PAMELA anomaly - )) )+ φ(e ) / (φ(e Positron fraction φ(e Muller & Tang 1987 MASS 1989 TS93 HEAT94+95 CAPRICE94 AMS98 HEAT00 Clem & Evenson 2007 PAMELA Energy (GeV)

97 Astrophysical sources for anti-matter: CR secondaries standard secenario for Galactic CRs: sources are SNRs: kinetic energy output of SNe: 10M ejected with v cm/s every 30 yr L SN,kin erg/s explains local energy density of CR ε CR 1 ev/cm 3 for a escape time from disc τ esc yr

98 Astrophysical sources for anti-matter: CR secondaries standard secenario for Galactic CRs: sources are SNRs: kinetic energy output of SNe: 10M ejected with v cm/s every 30 yr L SN,kin erg/s explains local energy density of CR ε CR 1 ev/cm 3 for a escape time from disc τ esc yr 1.order Fermi shock acceleration dn/de E γ with γ = diffusion with D(E) τ esc (E) E δ and δ 0.5 explains observed spectrum E 2.6

99 Astrophysical sources for anti-matter: CR secondaries standard secenario for Galactic CRs: sources are SNRs: kinetic energy output of SNe: 10M ejected with v cm/s every 30 yr L SN,kin erg/s explains local energy density of CR ε CR 1 ev/cm 3 for a escape time from disc τ esc yr 1.order Fermi shock acceleration dn/de E γ with γ = diffusion with D(E) τ esc (E) E δ and δ 0.5 explains observed spectrum E 2.6 electrons, positrons: τ loss τ esc and τ loss 1/E

100 Astrophysical sources for anti-matter: CR secondaries standard secenario for Galactic CRs: sources are SNRs: kinetic energy output of SNe: 10M ejected with v cm/s every 30 yr L SN,kin erg/s explains local energy density of CR ε CR 1 ev/cm 3 for a escape time from disc τ esc yr 1.order Fermi shock acceleration dn/de E γ with γ = diffusion with D(E) τ esc (E) E δ and δ 0.5 explains observed spectrum E 2.6 electrons, positrons: τ loss τ esc and τ loss 1/E electrons dn /de E γ 1 positrons dn + /de E γ δ 1

101 Astrophysical sources for anti-matter: CR secondaries standard secenario for Galactic CRs: sources are SNRs: kinetic energy output of SNe: 10M ejected with v cm/s every 30 yr L SN,kin erg/s explains local energy density of CR ε CR 1 ev/cm 3 for a escape time from disc τ esc yr 1.order Fermi shock acceleration dn/de E γ with γ = diffusion with D(E) τ esc (E) E δ and δ 0.5 explains observed spectrum E 2.6 electrons, positrons: τ loss τ esc and τ loss 1/E electrons dn /de E γ 1 positrons dn + /de E γ δ 1 ratio n + n E δ CR secondaries can not explain increasing positron fraction

102 Possible explanations for the PAMELA anomaly: Astrophysics: as primaries from pulsars supernova remnants (SNR)

103 Possible explanations for the PAMELA anomaly: Astrophysics: as primaries from pulsars supernova remnants (SNR) Dark matter requires large boost factors 100 Sommerfeld enhancement dense, cold clumps

104 Possible explanations for the PAMELA anomaly: Astrophysics: as primaries from pulsars supernova remnants (SNR) Dark matter requires large boost factors 100 Sommerfeld enhancement dense, cold clumps exclusive coupling to leptons

105 Astrophysical explanations I: Pulsars Pulsar: (fast) rotating, stronly magnetized neutron star

106 Astrophysical explanations I: Pulsars Pulsar: (fast) rotating, stronly magnetized neutron star suggested as source of CRs up-to ev

107 Astrophysical explanations I: Pulsars Pulsar: (fast) rotating, stronly magnetized neutron star suggested as source of CRs up-to ev produce hard spectrum, dn/de E 1.5

108 Astrophysical explanations I: Pulsars Pulsar: (fast) rotating, stronly magnetized neutron star suggested as source of CRs up-to ev produce hard spectrum, dn/de E 1.5 old pulsars (> 10 5 yr) lost nebula positrons can escape

109 Astrophysical explanations I: Pulsars Pulsar: (fast) rotating, stronly magnetized neutron star suggested as source of CRs up-to ev produce hard spectrum, dn/de E 1.5 old pulsars (> 10 5 yr) lost nebula positrons can escape few sources (Geminga, B ) may dominate HE part anisotropy or peaks possible

110 Astrophysical explanations I: Pulsars

111 Astrophysical explanations: Pulsars if Geminga and B dominate HE part:

112 Astrophysical explanations: Pulsars if Geminga and B dominate HE part: implies anisotropy from Fick s law F a (E) = D ab b n(e,x) anisotropy δ = I max I min = 3D 1 n I max + I min n n z

113 Astrophysical explanations: Pulsars

114 Astrophysical explanations II: SNR [P. Blasi 09 ] N CR (E) N e (E) for energies E m p in acceleration region

115 Astrophysical explanations II: SNR [P. Blasi 09 ] N CR (E) N e (E) for energies E m p in acceleration region significant e ± production even for small τ pp in source

116 Astrophysical explanations II: SNR [P. Blasi 09 ] N CR (E) N e (E) for energies E m p in acceleration region significant e ± production even for small τ pp in source secondary e ± are accelerated, spectra becomes harder

117 Astrophysical explanations II: SNR [P. Blasi 09 ] N CR (E) N e (E) for energies E m p in acceleration region significant e ± production even for small τ pp in source secondary e ± are accelerated, spectra becomes harder several important implications for CR physics predicts also increase of p/p, B/C,...

118 Astrophysical explanations II: SNR [P. Blasi 09 ] N CR (E) N e (E) for energies E m p in acceleration region significant e ± production even for small τ pp in source secondary e ± are accelerated, spectra becomes harder several important implications for CR physics predicts also increase of p/p, B/C,... not confirmed by MC simulations

119 Positron ratio from SNR: [Blasi 09 ]

120 Antiproton ratio from SNR: [Blasi, Serpico 09 ] Bohm-like ISM ISM+B term Total p - /p e-05 B term A term Kinetic Energy, T [GeV]

121 Antiproton ratio from SNR:

122 Time-dependent calculation with amplification/damping E 2 F x F p B 10 3 F e A E (ev)

123 Time-dependent calculation with amplification/damping F - p / F p+p A B A+B E (ev)

124 Time-dependent calculation with amplification/damping F x - / F - x+x e + /(e + +e - ) p/(p+p) E (ev)

125 Neutralino annihilations CDM velocitities v 2 v p-wave annihilations strongly suppressed

126 Neutralino annihilations CDM velocitities v 2 v p-wave annihilations strongly suppressed for Majorana particles: s-wave σ m 2 f annihilations into b, t quarks and W, Z, h, H, A

127 Neutralino annihilations CDM velocitities v 2 v p-wave annihilations strongly suppressed for Majorana particles: s-wave σ m 2 f annihilations into b, t quarks and W, Z, h, H, A typical hadronization spectra with φ ν (E)/2 φ γ (E) 3φ e (E) 10φ N (E)

128 Neutralino annihilations CDM velocitities v 2 v p-wave annihilations strongly suppressed for Majorana particles: s-wave σ m 2 f annihilations into b, t quarks and W, Z, h, H, A typical hadronization spectra with φ ν (E)/2 φ γ (E) 3φ e (E) 10φ N (E) photon signal I sm (E,ψ) = dn i de Z σv 2m 2 X l.o.s. ds ρ2 [r(s,ψ)], 4π

129 Neutralino annihilations CDM velocitities v 2 v p-wave annihilations strongly suppressed for Majorana particles: s-wave σ m 2 f annihilations into b, t quarks and W, Z, h, H, A typical hadronization spectra with φ ν (E)/2 φ γ (E) 3φ e (E) 10φ N (E) photon signal I sm (E,ψ) = dn i de Z σv 2m 2 X l.o.s. ds ρ2 [r(s,ψ)], 4π main uncertainty: boost factor = enhancement compared to σv = cm 3 /s and ρ = ρ sm

130 DM annihilations and PAMELA/ATIC standard branching ratios and mass: overproduction of anti-protons

131 DM annihilations and PAMELA/ATIC non-standard branching ratios: only leptons best-fit to ATIC boost factor 1000 needed but minimal γ-ray flux from Bremsstrahlung, not seen

132 DM annihilations and PAMELA/ATIC standard branching ratios: hide p above E max of Pamela happy with M = 10 TeV?

133 Boost factor particle physics: σv 1/v allowed by unitarity requires s-channel resonances or bound states

134 Boost factor particle physics: σv 1/v allowed by unitarity requires s-channel resonances or bound states Sommerfeld enhancement in Coulomb limit S 0 = πx 1 exp( πx), x = g2 β

135 Boost factor particle physics: σv 1/v allowed by unitarity requires s-channel resonances or bound states Sommerfeld enhancement in Coulomb limit S 0 = πx 1 exp( πx), x = g2 β for Coulomb limit, add new light boson

136 Boost factor particle physics: σv 1/v allowed by unitarity requires s-channel resonances or bound states Sommerfeld enhancement in Coulomb limit S 0 = πx 1 exp( πx), x = g2 β for Coulomb limit, add new light boson astrophysics: clumpy substructure of DM halo

137 Boost factor particle physics: σv 1/v allowed by unitarity requires s-channel resonances or bound states Sommerfeld enhancement in Coulomb limit S 0 = πx 1 exp( πx), x = g2 β for Coulomb limit, add new light boson astrophysics: clumpy substructure of DM halo DM in clumps may be colder both effects magnify each other

138 Summary Cosmology probes only generic properties of DM: abundance, cold, dissipation-less

139 Summary Cosmology probes only generic properties of DM: abundance, cold, dissipation-less various candidates with these properties: neutralino, gravitino, axion, axino, SHDM,...

140 Summary Cosmology probes only generic properties of DM: abundance, cold, dissipation-less various candidates with these properties: neutralino, gravitino, axion, axino, SHDM,... only a combination of accelerator, direct and/or indirect searches can identify the DM particle

141 Summary Cosmology probes only generic properties of DM: abundance, cold, dissipation-less various candidates with these properties: neutralino, gravitino, axion, axino, SHDM,... only a combination of accelerator, direct and/or indirect searches can identify the DM particle even in the best-case scenario (SUSY at LHC), confirmation of LSP as DM by (in-) direct searches necessary all sorts of data are coming! Also for DM: ego test may be useful...