Cosmological Probes of Cosmological Probes of Dark Matter - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶

cosmological probes of cosmological probes of dark matter

Cosmological Probes of Cosmological Probes of Dark Matter - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 03, 2022 131 likes •629 views

Cosmological Probes of Cosmological Probes of Dark Matter Interactions Dark Matter Interactions Vera Gluscevic Vera Gluscevic Princeton / USC New Directions in the Search for Light Dark Matter Particles Fermilab/KICP (Jun 7, 2019) 1

slide-1

SLIDE 1

Cosmological Probes of Cosmological Probes of Dark Matter Interactions Dark Matter Interactions

Vera Gluscevic Vera Gluscevic

Princeton / USC

New Directions in the Search for Light Dark Matter Particles Fermilab/KICP (Jun 7, 2019)

1

slide-2

SLIDE 2

Cosmological direct detection Cosmological direct detection

Direct detection

?

SM DM DM SM

Indirect detection Production (colliders) Cosmology

2

slide-3

SLIDE 3

Observables

VG et al, Astro2020 (2019)

3

slide-4

SLIDE 4

VG et al, Astro2020 (2019)

~200 M yrs ~370 k yrs ~14 G yrs (today)

4

slide-5

SLIDE 5

VG et al, Astro2020 (2019)

~200 M yrs ~370 k yrs ~14 G yrs (today)

5

slide-6

SLIDE 6

CMB power spectrum CMB power spectrum

∼ C

[μK ]

ℓ TT 2

Planck Collaboration 2015

Variance

6

slide-7

SLIDE 7

CMB with DM-baryon scattering CMB with DM-baryon scattering

fluids + gravity = baryonic acoustic oscillations

7

slide-8

SLIDE 8

CMB with DM-baryon scattering CMB with DM-baryon scattering

fluids + gravity + drag = damped baryonic acoustic oscillations

8

slide-9

SLIDE 9

CMB with DM-baryon scattering CMB with DM-baryon scattering

fluids + gravity + drag = damped baryonic acoustic oscillations angular scale Variance

9

slide-10

SLIDE 10

Planck limits on DM- Planck limits on DM-proton proton scattering scattering

VG and Boddy, PRL (2018)

See also: Boehm+ (2002), Chen+ (2002), Dubovsky+ (2004), Sigurdson+ (2004), Dvorkin+ (2014).

[velocity-independent spin-independent interaction]

10

slide-11

SLIDE 11

And beyond... And beyond...

Boddy and VG (2018)

momentum-transfer rate time

σ

(v )

MT n

momentum-transfer cross section

R

χ

momentum-transfer rate momentum dependance of the interaction operator

11

slide-12

SLIDE 12

Interaction physics in cosmological context Interaction physics in cosmological context

signal shape angular scale

Boddy and VG (2018)

O

i

perator

C

(m , c )

ℓ χ i

signal

Fan et al, 2010; Fitzpatrick et al, 2012; Anand et al, 2013

12

slide-13

SLIDE 13

CMB limits on DM EFT CMB limits on DM EFT

Boddy and VG (2018)

13

slide-14

SLIDE 14

CMB limits on DM EFT CMB limits on DM EFT

Boddy and VG (2018)

Age of the Universe ~1000 years: less than 1 in 100 000 scatterings is with DM.

13

slide-15

SLIDE 15

Planck limits on DM- Planck limits on DM-electron electron scattering scattering

Boddy and VG, in prep. (2019)

PRELIMINARY

14

slide-16

SLIDE 16

Next-generation ground-based CMB observatories => high resolution measurements.

15

slide-17

SLIDE 17

Next-generation ground-based CMB observatories => high resolution measurements. Proposed: CMB-S4

15

slide-18

SLIDE 18

Next-generation ground-based CMB observatories => high resolution measurements. Proposed: CMB-S4 Funded: Simons Observatory

15

slide-19

SLIDE 19

[2016]

16

slide-20

SLIDE 20

17

slide-21

SLIDE 21

Forecasts Forecasts

Li, VG, + (2018)

See also: SO collaboration science goals [1808.07445]

velocity-independent scattering

DM interactions do NOT look like other science targets, given well-measured CMB lensing.

18

slide-22

SLIDE 22

today

19

slide-23

SLIDE 23

scale

Dark matter interactions suppress structure on small scales.

Variance

20

slide-24

SLIDE 24

scale

Dark matter interactions suppress structure on small scales.

Variance

20

slide-25

SLIDE 25

Near-field cosmology Near-field cosmology

Bullock and Boylan-Kolchin (2017)

Galaxy surveys: SDSS, DES; Upcoming: LSST,DESI,...

21

slide-26

SLIDE 26

Near-field cosmology Near-field cosmology

Bullock and Boylan-Kolchin (2017)

Galaxy surveys: SDSS, DES; Upcoming: LSST,DESI,... Big Question: Can we use small-scale structure to study fundamental physics?

21

slide-27

SLIDE 27

Near-field cosmology Near-field cosmology

Bullock and Boylan-Kolchin (2017)

Challenges: Galaxy surveys: SDSS, DES; Upcoming: LSST,DESI,... Big Question: Can we use small-scale structure to study fundamental physics?

21

slide-28

SLIDE 28

Near-field cosmology Near-field cosmology

Bullock and Boylan-Kolchin (2017)

Challenges: Galaxy surveys: SDSS, DES; Upcoming: LSST,DESI,... Big Question: Can we use small-scale structure to study fundamental physics? Observational: smaller halos host fainter galaxies [completeness correction]

21

slide-29

SLIDE 29

Near-field cosmology Near-field cosmology

Bullock and Boylan-Kolchin (2017)

Challenges: Galaxy surveys: SDSS, DES; Upcoming: LSST,DESI,... Big Question: Can we use small-scale structure to study fundamental physics? Observational: smaller halos host fainter galaxies [completeness correction] Theoretical: baryonic physics and non-linear evolution [galaxy-halo connection]

21

slide-30

SLIDE 30

Near-field cosmology: Analytic estimate Near-field cosmology: Analytic estimate

Horizon size

z

(σ , m )

crit χ k

(σ , m )

crit χ

decoupling redshift: proxy for halo mass

∼ 10 M

8 sun

Nadler, VG,+ (ApJ Letters 2019; )

22

slide-31

SLIDE 31

Near-field cosmology: Analytic estimate Near-field cosmology: Analytic estimate

Horizon size

z

(σ , m )

crit χ k

(σ , m )

crit χ

Population of Milky Way satellite galaxies => no lack of structure => limits on DM scattering.

decoupling redshift: proxy for halo mass

∼ 10 M

8 sun

Nadler, VG,+ (ApJ Letters 2019; )

22

slide-32

SLIDE 32

Population of smallest galaxies in Milky Way's orbit => no lack of structure on corresponding scales => limits on DM scattering. Nadler, VG,+ (ApJ Letters 2019; ) Promise: 3 orders of magnitude better than Planck.

Near-field cosmology: Probabilistic inference Near-field cosmology: Probabilistic inference

23

slide-33

SLIDE 33

Broader scope Broader scope

24

slide-34

SLIDE 34

Broader scope Broader scope

Lots of data coming: Simons Observatory, CMB-S4, LSST, DESI, HERA, SKA, EDGES, SARAS, DD experiments,...

24

slide-35

SLIDE 35

Towards the future Towards the future

25

slide-36

SLIDE 36

26

slide-37

SLIDE 37

~200 M yrs

27

slide-38

SLIDE 38

21-cm cosmology 21-cm cosmology

time

28

slide-39

SLIDE 39

Case study: EDGES Case study: EDGES

Bowman, + (2018). [Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of reionization Signature]

29

slide-40

SLIDE 40

Case study: EDGES Case study: EDGES

Bowman, + (2018).

NB: Is it in the sky? Is it cosmological?

[Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of reionization Signature]

29

slide-41

SLIDE 41

Case study: EDGES Case study: EDGES

Bowman, + (2018).

NB: Is it in the sky? Is it cosmological?

[Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of reionization Signature]

29

slide-42

SLIDE 42

Case study: EDGES Case study: EDGES

Bowman, + (2018).

NB: Is it in the sky? Is it cosmological?

[Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of reionization Signature]

29

slide-43

SLIDE 43

Baryons are cold!

Case study: EDGES Case study: EDGES

Bowman, + (2018) and Barkana (2018); see also: Munoz, + (2016)

Dark matter-baryon interactions?!

σ ∼ v−4

Millicharge:

30

slide-44

SLIDE 44

What does CMB have to say? What does CMB have to say?

31

slide-45

SLIDE 45

Boddy, VG, + (2018) Kovetz, Poulin, VG, + (2018)

σ(v) ∼ v−4

Fractional charge Dark matter mass [MeV]

Excluded

See also: Xu, + (2018); Slatyer, + (2018); Wu, + (2018); Dvorkin, + (2014).

Planck limits on millicharge Planck limits on millicharge

32

slide-46

SLIDE 46

Limits on interacting DM sub-component Limits on interacting DM sub-component

Boddy, VG, + (2018).

33

slide-47

SLIDE 47

Limits on interacting DM sub-component Limits on interacting DM sub-component

EDGES signal is inconsistent with Planck, if more than 0.5% of DM is millicharged. Boddy, VG, + (2018).

33

slide-48

SLIDE 48

Cosmological probes are already very sensitive. Comprehensive analyses are essential to establish a discovery.

34