1 / 32

Astronomical Solutions to Galactic Dark Matter

Astronomical Solutions to Galactic Dark Matter. Will Sutherland Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge. Overview:. Cosmological parameters Distribution of DM “locally” Astrophysical DM candidates: MACHOs etc. Overview of microlensing results. Implications for particle DM searches.

Download Presentation

Astronomical Solutions to Galactic 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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Astronomical Solutions to Galactic Dark Matter Will Sutherland Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge

  2. Overview: • Cosmological parameters • Distribution of DM “locally” • Astrophysical DM candidates: MACHOs etc. • Overview of microlensing results. • Implications for particle DM searches.

  3. WMAP: CMB power spectrum

  4. 2dFGRS galaxy power spectrum – Cole et al 2005

  5. SDSS galaxy correlation function: Eisenstein et al 2005.

  6. Dark Matter distribution • Solar neighbourhood (disk): 80-100% visible. • Solar radius, ≤ 8 kpc from Galactic centre: 50% - 80% visible. • 50 kpc from Galactic centre: 10-20% visible. • DM in our Galaxy less well known than other galaxies ! – unfavourable location. • Universe average: baryons 15%, stars ~ 2%.

  7. Astrophysical DM candidates: • Various candidates excluded: • Neutral HI : 21cm • Hot gas : X-rays • Low mass stars : visible. • “Rocks” : nucleosynthesis, impacts • Solid H “snowballs” evaporate • Two main remaining candidates: • Cold molecular hydrogen • MACHOs (also primordial black holes): tested via microlensing.

  8. Microlensing: basic definitions Einstein radius : √M dependence → optical depth independent of M, event durations ~ √M, event rates ~ 1/√M Magnification:

  9. Microlensing lightcurves

  10. Milky Way + satellites

  11. LMC with MACHO fields

  12. Mt Stromlo 50-inch telescope

  13. MACHO LMC 5.7 yr event selection

  14. MACHO project 5.7-yr LMC summary: • 11 million stars, ~ 500 data points each. • 13 microlensing candidates in “A” sample, 17 in “B” sample. • Predict 2 – 4 events from lensing by “known” stars (mostly LMC self-lensing). • Event durations too long for substellar lenses.

  15. Event distributions.

  16. MACHO LMC 5.7-yr : assuming halo lenses.

  17. Limits on low-mass MACHOs

  18. EROS 95% CL limits(preliminary) – Glicenstein, 2004 ML workshop excluded by EROS (95% CL)

  19. Possible sources of LMC microlensing excess signal:

  20. Ancient halo white dwarfs: Creze et al 2004

  21. Wide halo binaries:Yoo, Chaname & Gould, ApJ 2004

  22. CDM small-scale structure “crisis” ? • Several manifestations : • CDM predicts “cuspy” central density profile • CDM predicts numerous low-mass dwarf galaxies • Possible resolutions : • Extrapolation below limits of simulations • Observational issues: resolution, non-circular motions • Baryonic feedback affecting DM distribution.

  23. Recent progress in Galaxy-scale DM distribution: • Galaxy-galaxy lensing: new wide-area imaging surveys – SDSS, COMBO-17, Red-Sequence Cluster Survey (RCS). • Satellite galaxies: large new samples from 2dFGRS + SDSS redshift surveys. • Both probe galaxy DM halos on scales ~ 100 -500 kpc : results broadly consistent with ΛCDM simulations.

  24. RCS: Hoekstra, Yee & Gladders ApJ 2004.

  25. 2dFGRS satellites Brainerd 2004, astro-ph/0409381

  26. Summary: • Microlensing + wide binaries + disk thinness: • → Limits on MACHO fraction below 30% over almost entire mass range above 10-7 MSun • Origin of LMC microlensing events remains unclear: ancient white dwarfs excluded (assuming H atmospheres). • τ(EROS) < τ(MACHO), hint of LMC “self-lensing” ?? • New-generation microlensing projects (OGLE-3, SuperMACHO, MEGA, AGAPE, DIME) may resolve. • Prospects very good for particle DM searches. • Halo substructure probably the dominant astrophysical uncertainty: annual modulation very uncertain, directionality more robust.

  27. GAIA satellite

More Related