on the direct searching for cold dark matter n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
On the direct Searching for Cold Dark Matter - PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
On the direct Searching for Cold Dark Matter -

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 95

On the direct Searching for Cold Dark Matter - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 163 Views
  • Updated on

On the direct Searching for Cold Dark Matter -. Exploiting the signatures of the WIMP interaction J.D. Vergados University of Ioannina, Greece. EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF DARK MATTER. Gravitational effects around galaxies Cosmological Observations.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

On the direct Searching for Cold Dark Matter -


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Presentation Transcript
    1. On the direct Searching for Cold Dark Matter- Exploiting the signatures of the WIMP interaction J.D. Vergados University of Ioannina, Greece HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    2. EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF DARK MATTER • Gravitational effects around galaxies • Cosmological Observations HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    3. I. The Rotational Velocities (υ2 does not fall as 1/r outside the galaxies) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    4. Cosmological Constraints in the (Ω,Λ) Plane HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    5. Slicing the Pie of the CosmosWMAP3:ΩCDM =0.24±0.02,ΩΛ=0.72±0.04, Ωb =0.042±0.003WMAP1: As follows: HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    6. What is the nature of dark matter? It is not known. However: • It possesses gravitational interactions (from the rotation curves) • No other long range interaction is allowed. Otherwise it would have formed “atoms” and , hence, stars etc. So It iselectrically neutral • It does not interact strongly(if it did, it should have already been detected) • It may (hopefully) posses some very weak interaction This will depend on the assumed theory • Such an interaction may be exploited for its direct detection • The smallness of the strength of such an interaction makes its direct detection extremely difficult. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    7. DARK MATTER CANDIDATES • The axion:10-6 eV<ma <10-3 eV • The neutrino: It is not dominant. It is not cold, not CDM. • Supersymmetric particles. Three possibilities: i) s-νετρίνο: Excluded on the basis of results of underground experiments and accelerator experiments(LEP) ii) Gravitino: Not directly detectable iii) Αxino: Not directly detectable iv)AMajorana fermion, the neutralino orLSP (The lightest supersymmetric particle): A linear combination of the2 neutral gauginos and the 2 neutral Higgsinos. MOST FAVORITE CANDIDATE! • Particles from theories in extra dimensions (Kaluza-Klein WIMPS) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    8. A. SUSY MODELS WITH R-PARITY: The neutralino χ • Standard model particles have R-parity=1 • All SUSY particles have R-parity -1 • Lightest SUSY particle absolutely stable • A linear combination of the 4 neutral fermions (two gauginos and two Higgsinos) i.e. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    9. A1. SUSY MODELS: The neutralino(Z-exchange  Axial current) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    10. A2. SUSY MODELS: The neutralino(squark-exchange Axial +scalar) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    11. A3. SUSY MODELS: The neutralino(Higgs-exchangeScalar coherent cross section) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    12. B. Universal Extra Dimension Theories • Kaluza-Klein Theories: A tower of new particles • Postulate a discreet symmetry: K-K parity • The even modes (ordinaryparticles) have K-K parity +1 • The odd modes (exotic) have K-K parity -1 • The lightest odd mode is absolutely stable • The interactions of the new particles are the same with those of SM • Only the particle’s mass is unknown parameter HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    13. B1 Kaluza-Klein theoriesThe lightest particle is the brother of the B boson, the B(1).K-K quark exchange. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    14. B1 K-K theories WIMP: B(1). K-K q(1) exchange. (with Moustakides and Oikonomou) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    15. B1. Kaluza-Klein theories (cont.)The lightest particle is the B(1).Higgs-Exchange. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    16. B1. Kaluza-Klein theories (cont.)WIMP is the B(1).Higgs-Exchange. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    17. B1. Kaluza-Klein theories (cont.)WIMP is the B(1). Δ=0.05. mh invisibleσp on the left, σn on the right. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    18. B1. Kaluza-Klein theories (cont.)WIMP is the B(1). Δ=0.8mh 100-200 GeVσp on the left, σn on the right. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    19. B2. Kaluza-Klein theories The lightest particle is the brother of neutrino, the ν(1).Ζ-Exchange & Higgs Exchange. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    20. B2 WIMP is the ν(1).Ζ-Exchange Dominates. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    21. B2. Kaluza-Klein theories WIMP is the ν(1).Ζ(1) -Exchange • ν(1)->νconversion! HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    22. B2.ν(1)->νconversionExotic! Energy transfer: About half the mass of the WIMP!Could observations have missed it? HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    23. Nuclear Recoil after the LSP-nucleus collision ( Elastic for SUSY WIMPS) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    24. Conversion of the energy of the recoiling nucleus into detectable form (light, heat, ionization etc.) • The neutralino (LSP) is non relativistic. • With few exceptions, it cannot excite the nucleus. It only scatters off elastically: • Measuring the energy of the recoiling nucleus is extremely hard: -Low event rate (much less than 30 per Kg of target per year are expected). -Bothersome backgrounds (the signal is not very characteristic). -Threshold effects. -Quenching factors. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    25. Novel approaches: Exploitation ofother signatures of the reaction • The modulation effect: The seasonal dependence of the rate due to the motion of the Earth. • The excitationof the nucleus (in some rare cases that this is realistic) anddetection of the subsequently emitted de-excitation γ rays. • Asymmetry measurements in directional experiments (the direction of the recoilingnucleus must also be measured). • Detection of other particles (electrons, X-rays), produced during the LSP-nucleus collision HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    26. The SUSY INPUT • Allowed parameter space: Universality at GUT scale: - One mass m0for the scalars-One mass m1/2 for the fermions -Tanβ, the ratio of vacuum expectation values of the Higss Hu ,Hd ,i.e. <vu>/ <vd> -The cubic coupling A0 (or mt) -The sign of μ, in μHu Hd • These parameters are constrained via the renormalization group equations from the observable low energy quantities (all related to the above five parameters). • (see, e.g.,: Ellis, Arnowitt, Nath, Bottino, Lazarides and collaborators) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    27. From the quark level to the nucleon level (coherent) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    28. The Differential cross section at the nuclear level. • υ is the neutralino velocity and u stands essentially for the energy transfer Q: • u=Q/Q0 , Q0=40A-4/3MeV • F(u): The nuclear form factor • F11 (u):The isovector spin response function HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    29. Expressions for the nuclear cross section (continued) With • ΣS=σps(μr/mp)2A2 (scalar interaction) • σps is the scalar proton-LSP cross section • μr isthe LSP-nucleus reduced mass • A is the nuclear mass • ΣSpin is the expression for the spin induced cross section (to be discussed later). HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    30. LSP Velocity Distributions • Conventional: Isothermal models • (1) Maxwell-Boltzmann (symmetric or axially symmetric) with characteristic velocity equal to the sun’s velocity around the galaxy, v0 =220 km/s, and escape velocity vesc =2.84v0 put in by hand. • (2)Modification of M-B characteristic velocity: nv0 , n>>1 (Tetradis and JDV ) • Adiabatic models employingEddington’s theory: ρ(r)Φ(r) f(r,v) (JDV-Owen) • Non-thermal models: • Caustic rings (Sikivie , JDV), wimps in bound orbits etc • Sgr Dwarf galaxy, anisotropic flux, (Green & Spooner) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    31. Theevent ratefor the coherent mode • Can be cast in the form: • Where: ρ(0):the local neutralino density≈0.3 GeV/cm3. σSp,χ: the neutralino-nucleon cross section. It can be extracted from the data once fcoh (A,mχ), which will be plotted below, is known. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    32. The factorfcoh(A,mχ) for A=127 (I) vs the LSP mass(The dashed for threshold 10keV) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    33. The factorfcoh(A,mχ) for A=19 (F)(The Dashed for threshold 10keV) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    34. Current Limits on coherent proton cross section (astro-ph/0509259) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    35. THE MODULATION EFFECTvJune=235+15=250km/svDec=235-15=220km/s HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    36. THEMODULATION EFFECT*(continued) • α=phase of the Earth (α=0 around June 3nd) • γ=π/3 is the angle between the axis of galaχy and the axis of the ecliptic. • h=modulation amplitude. • R0 =average rate. • * with N. Tetradis (calculations with non standard M-B) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    37. TheModulation Amplitudeh for 127IQth=0, Isothermal model (M-B),On theleft n=1, on the right n=3 HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    38. TheModulation Amplitudeh for 127IQth=10keV, Isothermal model (M-B),On theleft n=1, on the right n=3 HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    39. TheModulation Amplitudeh for 127IQth=0thick, Qth=5keVfine Qth=10dash; Eddington Theory HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    40. BR for transitions to thefirst excited stateat 50 keV for Ivs LSP mass (Ejiri; Quentin, Strottman and JDV) Note: quenching of recoil ignored HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    41. The Relative (with respect to recoil) rate of ionization per electron vs: a) Ethreshold for mχ =100Gev (left)and b) mχ for Ethreshold = 0.2 keV (right) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    42. But, there are Z electrons in an atom! HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    43. Detection ofhard X-rays • After the ionization there is a probability for a K or L hole • This hole de-excites via emitting X-rays or Auger electrons. • Indicating with bnℓthe fluorecence ratio (determined experimentally) • the fraction of X-rays per recoil is: σX(nℓ) /σr = bnl(σnℓ/σr) with σnℓ/σr the relative ionization rate to be discussed next HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    44. Relative rate forinner electron hole productionin the case of 132Xe. • nℓεnℓ(keV) (σnℓ/σr)L (σnℓ/σr)M (σnℓ/σr)H • is34.560.0340.2210.255 • 2s 5.45 1.2111.4611.463 • 2p 4.89 3.796 4.506 4.513 • WIMP masses indicated by subscript: L30GeV, M100GeV, H300GeV HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    45. The K Xray rates in WIMP interactions in 132 Xe for masses: L30GeV, M100GeV, H300GeV HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    46. Conclusions: Experimental ambitions for Recoils HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    47. CONCLUSIONS A: K-K WIMPS • Theoretical advantages: Only the masses are unknown parameters • Experimental advantages: The WIMP energy is an order of magnitude bigger The energy transfer to the nucleus is in the MeV region. WIMPS need not be detected via the hard recoil measurements. One can excite the nucleus • Limits K-K Nucleon cross sectionscan be extracted fromcurrent limits via: • σ(K-K)(coh) ≈10(-6)pb[m(K-K)/200GeV](1/2) • σ(K-K)(spin) ≈10(-2)pb[m(K-K)/200GeV](1/2) HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    48. CONCLUSIONS- SUSY WIMPS Standard Rates (theory) • Most of the uncertainties come the fact that the allowed SUSY parameter space has not been sufficiently sharpened. • The other uncertainties (nuclear form factor, structure of the nucleon, quenching factor, energy threshold) could affect the results by an order of magnitude. • Most of the parameter space yields undetectable rates. • The coherent contribution due to the scalar interaction is the most dominant. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    49. CONCLUSIONS-Modulation (theory) • The modulation amplitude h is small less than 2% and depends on the LSP mass. • It crucially depends on the velocity distribution • Its sign is also uncertain for intermediate and heavy nuclei. • It may increase as the energy cut off remains big (as in the DAMA experiment), but at the expense of the number of counts. The DAMA experiment maybe consistent with the other experiments, if the spin interaction dominates. HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006

    50. CONCLUSIONS-Transitions to excited states • For neutralino transitions to excited states are possible in few odd A nuclei*. • When allowed, are kinematically suppressed • The branching ratio depends on the structure of the nucleus and the LSP mass • In the case of Iodine, a popular target for recoils, it can be as high as 7% for LSP mass higher than 200 GeV • * For K-K WIMPS it is quite easy HEP2006 Ioannina 13/04/2006