1 / 27

Luminous Dark Matter

Luminous Dark Matter. Brian Feldstein. arXiv:1008.1988. -B.F., P. Graham and S. Rajendran. Dark Matter- The Standard Story. -Roughly 23% of the universe seems to consist of some form of non-baryonic dark matter. -A compelling possibility: Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs)

alissa
Download Presentation

Luminous 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. Luminous Dark Matter Brian Feldstein arXiv:1008.1988 -B.F., P. Graham and S. Rajendran

  2. Dark Matter- The Standard Story -Roughly 23% of the universe seems to consist of some form of non-baryonic dark matter. -A compelling possibility: Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs) -Weak Scale cross sections give approximately the right relic abundance:

  3. Dark Matter Direct Detection -Look for nuclear recoils due to dark matter scattering. -Many such experiments: CDMS, XENON, CRESST, etc.. -Limits placed on cross section vs mass. -modified from arxiv:1005.0380

  4. The DAMA Mystery - DAMA sees an 8.9σ annual modulation in its nuclear recoil events. -arxiv:0804.2741 - Phase is consistent with Dark Matter induced recoils.

  5. -There is no recognized standard model explanation for the DAMA signal. -DAMA looked at: Neutron flux, temperature variation, muons, neutrinos, etc.. -All calculated signal rates are much too small to explain the signal. -But: standard WIMPs capable of explaining DAMA also seem completely ruled out!

  6. Meanwhile... • CoGeNT reports an excess of events over background predictions.. • CRESST reports an excess of Oxygen band events (not yet published, exposure not specified)... • CDMS-II reports 2 events in signal region with a background of 1 event...

  7. Looking for an explanation… -No experiment can rule out a dark matter origin for the DAMA signal in a model independent way. -Many Experimental Uncertainties… Present Status: - Various Light Dark Matter Possibilities.. • May be able to incorporate CoGeNT, but probably ruled out • by Xenon10 (see talks by Peter Sorensen). - Inelastic Dark Matter? - More exotic alternatives...

  8. Electromagnetic Energy Deposit - A tantalizing possibility.. • Most experiments discard electromagnetic • events as background.. DAMA does not. • DAMA’s annual modulation search is • precisely what allows them to do this!

  9. - But.. purely electronic interactions don’t work..  Scattering gives a bad spectrum.. -arxiv:0907.3159  Absorption gives negligible annual modulation. -Pospelov, Ritz, Voloshin

  10. Enter Luminous Dark Matter...  Energy is deposited directly through photons.  Upscatter, and then decay to a ~3keV photon. - A line fits the DAMA spectrum well:

  11.  A single magnetic dipole operator. - A very simple possibility: - Can mediate both the upscattering and the decay. • Requires only a Dirac fermion with amagnetic dipole • interaction, plus a Majorana mass splitting. - We take

  12. Note: Upscatter and decay do not both have to occur inside the detector! • Excited state can travel a very large distance. • As long as the decay length is << , • Upscatter Rate ≈ Signal Rate. • Signal rates depend only on detector volume... - Can boost the modulation fraction as in usual inelastic dark matter.

  13. - Composition of the Earth.. Simplifying assumptions... - Angular (in)dependence of the scattering.. • true cross sections are angular independent • at threshold anyway.. - assume nuclei are infinitely heavy..

  14. Calculate the Event Rate... σ ~ e2Z2 / 4πΛ2 Γ ~ δ3/πΛ2

  15. Constraints.. • The upscattering events are undetected at direct detection experiments, for dark matter lighter than a couple of GeV.. • But.. it’s no longer really true that experiments other than DAMA are insensitive to electromagnetic events!! • Our only freedom to avoid problems is the • annual modulation fraction. - XENON100, in particular, is fairly constraining.

  16. - XENON100 has low electromagnetic background.. XENON10: ~300kg days: XENON100: ~400kg days:

  17. It is actually relevant that XENON100 has only • presented data from the winter!  XENON100 constrains the modulation fraction to be larger than about 50%. • This puts an upper bound on the allowed dark matter • masses.. scattering must be near threshold.  As usual, there may be large experimental uncertainty..

  18. X-Ray Satellites - Generally, Earth based experiments have large radioactive background... What about satellite experiments?  Potentially dangerous, since they can probe long distances:

  19. - The satellites measure the photon flux in terms of photons/ cm2 s sr.  We predict roughly ~ L / 4π. Typical decay length ~ vf / Γ  Essentially limits the allowed decay lengths from above.

  20. Compare with the cosmic x-ray background measurements of e.g. the SWIFT or RTXE satellites. -arxiv:0811.1444  Requires decay lengths less than ~1000km.

  21. Parameter Space Blue: Xenon100 Red: SWIFT Yellow: relic density  DM proton cross sections of

  22. Less Important Constraints.. - Collider searches require Λ > TeV. • CDMS analysis of electromagnetic events requires modulation fractions > 25%.

  23. CMB Constraint - Galli, Iocco, Bertone, Melchiorri • 1 GeV dark matter with thermal relic annihilation • cross section to photons seems ruled out.. but…

  24.  Luminous dark matter has a built in mechanism to avoid this constraint! • In the early universe, both the dark matter particle and • its excited state are present in the thermal bath. - Before recombination, however, the excited state is gone… • A single magnetic dipole moment vertex • no longer mediates annihilation.  Need two of them… much more suppressed! (perhaps this is a useful mechanism outside the context of this model)

  25. Other constraints we checked.. .. but which are irrelevant: - CoGeNT: • Sensitive to electromagnetic events, but their background • is ~10 times too high. (We have nothing to say about a possible signal at CoGeNT.. the energy range is wrong..) - CAST (axion telescope): • Searching for x-rays, but their background is more than • ~100 times too high.

  26. The dark matter particle can upscatter off of, e.g., • Hydrogen throughout the galaxy. The subsequent decays • contribute to the x-ray background, but are safe by ~7 orders • of magnitude. - X-ray line emission: - Neutrino detectors, e.g. SuperK:  Trigger thresholds are too high.. ~ MeV. - Directional dark matter detectors:  Thresholds also currently too high.

  27. Conclusions • DAMA is still a compelling mystery, but one which is becoming harder to explain as time goes on.. • Unlike most other direct detection experiments, DAMA does not throw away purely electromagnetic events. • Upscattering of dark matter to an excited state which decays via emission of a photon can explain the DAMA result without contradicting other experiments. • Only a single magnetic dipole interaction is needed for both the upscattering and decay. • XENON100 should be able to essentially rule out or confirm the scenario very soon.

More Related