1 / 27

Diffuseγ-rays and antiprotons

This study by Toru Shibata from Aoyama Gakuin University delves into the internal consistency of cosmic ray (CR) observables, exploring potential novel sources for gamma rays (γ) and antiprotons (p). It discusses primary and secondary CR components, including heavy elements and isotopes, while analyzing uncertainties in calculations and data quality. The research compares emissions from gamma rays and antiprotons, aiming to discern whether CR data indicates unique astronomical or extragalactic origins. The findings highlight key Galactic parameters relevant to current cosmic ray data.

jon
Download Presentation

Diffuseγ-rays and antiprotons

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. - --- Is there any signal of novel source inγ’s and/or p’s ?--- Diffuseγ-rays and antiprotons Toru ShibataAoyama-Gakuin Univ. (14/Sep/2007)

  2. Modeling check of CR propagation Estimation ofGalactic parameters - --- Is there any signal of novel source inγ’sand/or p’s ?--- (and ine+’s) (I) Internal consistency in CR observables: ◎1-ry rich components (p, He, . . . Fe) ◎1-ry poor components (ultra-heavy elements) ◎1-ry electron components ◎2-ry stable components (Li, Be, B, . . . , ) ◎2-ry unstable components (10Be, 26Al, . . . , )

  3. - (II) Comparison betweenγ’s,p’s, e+’sand other CRs ● how about the uncertainty in calculations ? ● how about the data quality in ⊿E,σ ? N ● how much enhanced from those expected ? ● how about an astronomical origin ? ● how about an extragalactic contribution ? ● how about . . . . . ? ◎consistent or not ? ◎if not,

  4. - key inputs for the numerical approach toγ’sand p’s: cosmic-raydensity renormalized at SS gas density ApJ 2004, 2006, 2007 production cross-section 1) emissivity at r - P ≡ p, He, . . . Fe; S ≡γ, p Astrop. Phys 2005 for p-p γ - Astrop. Phys in press for p-p p

  5. emissivity atr structure function for 2) intensity at SS

  6. but slightly cumbersome for antiprotons : straightforward for gamma-rays

  7. cross-section for gamma-rays in p-p collision Astrop. Phys. 23(2005)510

  8. cross-section for antiprotons in p-p collision Astrop. Phys. in press - p-p collision

  9. rapidity distribution by ISR

  10. normalized CR density atSS Q∝R-g D∝vRa 2.7-2.8 1) Energy spectra for 1-ry components

  11. 180 mbarn possibly reacceleration occurs with a= 1/3, and 10 g cm-2 or 2) secondary-to-primary ratio

  12. ◎, normalized to : halo thickness isotope spread Galactic plane 3) radionuclide abundance ratios

  13. ◎ ◎ ◎ ◎ - How about γ’s and p’s? compatible or imcompatible ? ◎ Summary of Galactic parameters in our model expected from CR data nowadays available

  14. from spatial dist. ＝180 mbarn; reacceleration with a=1/3, the intensity is not affected by the choices of these parameters as long as 1-ry-CR-fluxes at SS are normalized at 100 GeV/n diffusive g–rays (energy spectrum) Astrop. Phys. 27(2007)411

  15. Boer, W. 2005 CERN COURIER 45, 17

  16. Stecker, Hunter, & Kniffen, arXiv:0705.4311 [astro-ph]29, May 2007

  17. longitudinal distribution

  18. latitudinal distribution

  19. popular versions of empirical propagation model with no Galactic wind flux of antiprotons; model parameters obtained from B/C ratio Sina et al. 2001 Ptuskin Rapp.Talk at 29th ICRR problem in antiproton spectrum

  20. novel source ?

  21. Tang & Ng (1983) Duperray et al. (2003)

  22. Tang & Ng (1983) Duperray et al. (2003)

  23. Diffusion + reacceleration with α=1/3 • consistent with CR data (1-ry, 2-ry, isotope, e- ? ) => 2) Revised EGRET data (E, l,b-dist) arein harmony with CR data, both in shape and absolute value forE< 10GeV γ ～ =>constraint for WIMPS (await GALST data) - 3) BESSp data => consistent with CR data for > 1GeV but not yet clear for < 1GeV (signal of PBH ?) ～ ～ (await BESS-PPB, AMS02, PAMELA) Summary

  24. Thank you

More Related