Dark Matter Indirect Detection amid hints & constraints Marco - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Marco Cirelli

(CNRS IPhT Saclay)

NewDark

15 April 2015 University of Oslo

Dark Matter Indirect Detection

amid hints & constraints

Marco Cirelli

(CNRS IPhT Saclay)

NewDark

Dark Matter Indirect Detection

amid hints & constraints

15 April 2015 University of Oslo

Introduction Introduction

Introduction Introduction

DM exists

Introduction

DM exists

galactic rotation curves weak lensing (e.g. in clusters) ‘precision cosmology’ (CMB, LSS)

Introduction

DM exists

galactic rotation curves weak lensing (e.g. in clusters) ‘precision cosmology’ (CMB, LSS)

DM is a neutral, very long lived, weakly interactingpa rticle. feebly- corpuscle

Introduction

Some of us believe in the WIMP miracle. DM is a neutral, very long lived, weakly interacting particle.

galactic rotation curves weak lensing (e.g. in clusters) ‘precision cosmology’ (CMB, LSS)

DM exists

• weak-scale mass (10 GeV - 1 TeV)
• weak interactions
• give automatically correct abundance

σv = 3 · 10−26cm3/sec

A matter of perspective: plausible mass ranges

DM Candidates

eV

(1 TeV)

A matter of perspective: plausible mass ranges

DM Candidates

‘only’ 90 orders of magnitude!

A matter of perspective: plausible mass ranges

PAMELA, Fermi, HESS excesses Fermi 135 GeV line GeV gamma excess at GC 3.5 KeV line lots of activity recently some activity recently

DM Candidates

‘only’ 90 orders of magnitude!

Light DM (‘Dama’) anomaly

Color code: ID, DD

PeV neutrinos Icecube

e+

DM detection

production at colliders direct detection indirect

from annihil in galactic halo or center from annihil in galactic halo or center

¯ p

ν, ¯ ν from annihil in massive bodies

from annihil in galactic halo or center

Xenon, CDMS, Edelweiss... (CoGeNT, Dama/Libra...) LHC PAMELA, Fermi, HESS, AMS, balloons... GAPS SK, Icecube, Km3Net

from annihil in galactic center or halo

and from synchrotron emission

Fermi, ICT, radio telescopes...

γ

¯ d

γ

DM detection

production at colliders direct detection indirect

from annihil in galactic halo or center from annihil in galactic halo or center

¯ p

ν, ¯ ν from annihil in massive bodies

from annihil in galactic halo or center

from annihil in galactic center or halo

and from synchrotron emission

¯ d

e+

PAMELA, Fermi, HESS, AMS, balloons... SK, Icecube, Km3Net Fermi, ICT, radio telescopes... GAPS

DM detection

production at colliders direct detection indirect

from annihil in galactic halo or center from annihil in galactic halo or center

¯ p

ν, ¯ ν from annihil in massive bodies

from annihil in galactic halo or center

from annihil in galactic center or halo

and from synchrotron emission

GAPS

γ

¯ d

e+

PAMELA, Fermi, HESS, AMS, balloons... SK, Icecube, Km3Net Fermi, ICT, radio telescopes...

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

8 k p c

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

N S N S N S N S

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

N S N S N S N S VC VC VC VC VC

• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

N S N S N S N S VC VC VC VC VC

• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

N S N S N S N S VC VC VC VC VC

• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

N S N S N S N S VC VC VC VC VC

• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC

∂f ∂t K(E) · ⇤2f ∂ ∂E (b(E)f) + ∂ ∂z (Vcf) = Qinj 2hδ(z)Γspallf

h

2L

diffusion energy loss convective wind source spallations

Salati, Chardonnay, Barrau, Donato, Taillet, Fornengo, Maurin, Brun... ‘90s, ‘00s

spectrum

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

[uncert]

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

• cfr. Evoli, Cholis, Grasso, Maccione, Ullio, 1108.0664

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

L

thickness diffusion

• diff. reacc.

{

p index convection solar mod.

Donato et al., 2003+

AMS-01 Caprice BESS Caprice

Solar wind Modulation of cosmic rays:

spectrum at Earth

dΦ¯

p⊕

dT⊕ = p2

⊕

p2 dΦ¯

p

dT , T = T⊕ + |Ze|φF

spectrum far from Earth Fisk potential φF 500 MV

PAMELA

(11 yr)

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

Solar wind Modulation of cosmic rays:

spectrum at Earth

dΦ¯

p⊕

dT⊕ = p2

⊕

p2 dΦ¯

p

dT , T = T⊕ + |Ze|φF

spectrum far from Earth Fisk potential φF 500 MV

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

φF ' 900 MV

E.g.

Boudard, Cirelli, Giesen, Salati, 1412.5696

N S N S N S N S VC VC VC VC VC

• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC

h

2L flux

What sets the overall expected flux?

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

∝ n2 σannihilation

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

N S N S N S N S VC VC VC VC VC

• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC

h

2L flux ∝ n2 σannihilation

What sets the overall expected flux?

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

astro& cosmo particle

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

N S N S N S N S VC VC VC VC VC

• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC
• VC

h

2L flux ∝ n2 σannihilation

What sets the overall expected flux?

and from DM annihilations in halo ¯ p

e+

astro& cosmo particle

reference cross section:

σv = 3 · 10−26cm3/sec

Indirect Detection: charged CRs

103 102 101 1 10 102 102 101 1 10 102 103 104 10⇤⇤ 30⇤⇤1⇤ 5⇤ 10⇤ 30⇤ 1o 2o 5o10o20o45o r kpc⇥ ⇥DM GeV⇤cm3⇥ Angle from the GC degrees⇥ NFW Moore Iso Einasto EinastoB Burkert r ⇥

DM halo profiles

From N-body numerical simulations: cuspy: NFW, Moore mild: Einasto smooth: isothermal, Burkert

At small r: ρ(r) ∝ 1/rγ

DM halo α rs [kpc] ρs [GeV/cm3] NFW − 24.42 0.184 Einasto 0.17 28.44 0.033 EinastoB 0.11 35.24 0.021 Isothermal − 4.38 1.387 Burkert − 12.67 0.712 Moore − 30.28 0.105 NFW : ρNFW(r) = ρs rs r ⇤ 1 + r rs ⌅−2 Einasto : ρEin(r) = ρs exp ⌥ − 2 α ⇧⇤ r rs ⌅α − 1 ⌃ Isothermal : ρIso(r) = ρs 1 + (r/rs)2 Burkert : ρBur(r) = ρs (1 + r/rs)(1 + (r/rs)2) Moore : ρMoo(r) = ρs rs r ⇥1.16 ⇤ 1 + r rs ⌅−1.84

EinastoB = steepened Einasto

(effect of baryons?)

6 profiles:

Cirelli et al., 1012.4515

W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . . W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . .

DM DM

Indirect Detection: basics

W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . . W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . primary channels

DM DM

Indirect Detection: basics

W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . . W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . primary channels decay

DM DM

Indirect Detection: basics

W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . . W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . primary channels final products decay

DM DM

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

10⇥5 10⇥4 10⇥3 10⇥2 10⇥1 1 10⇥2 10⇥1 1 10 x⇤KMDM dNd log x

e primary spectra

MDM ⇤ 1000 GeV

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

x

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

105 104 103 102 101 1 102 101 1 10 x⇥KMDM dNd log x

p primary spectra

MDM ⇥ 1000 GeV dNd log x 10

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

V⌥⇧ ⌅ g h115 Z W t b q ⌃ ⇧ e

Indirect Detection: basics

W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . . W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . primary channels final products decay

DM DM

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

10⇥5 10⇥4 10⇥3 10⇥2 10⇥1 1 10⇥2 10⇥1 1 10 x⇤KMDM dNd log x

e primary spectra

MDM ⇤ 1000 GeV

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

x

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

105 104 103 102 101 1 102 101 1 10 x⇥KMDM dNd log x

p primary spectra

MDM ⇥ 1000 GeV dNd log x 10

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

V⌥⇧ ⌅ g h115 Z W t b q ⌃ ⇧ e

Indirect Detection: basics

ElectroWeak corrections!

Sala et al., 1009.0224 Cirelli, Panci, Sala et al., 1012.4515

W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . . W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . primary channels final products decay

So what are the particle physics parameters?

• 1. Dark Matter mass
• 2. primary channel(s)

DM DM

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

10⇥5 10⇥4 10⇥3 10⇥2 10⇥1 1 10⇥2 10⇥1 1 10 x⇤KMDM dNd log x

e primary spectra

MDM ⇤ 1000 GeV

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

x

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

105 104 103 102 101 1 102 101 1 10 x⇥KMDM dNd log x

p primary spectra

MDM ⇥ 1000 GeV dNd log x 10

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

• x

spectra

V⌥⇧ ⌅ g h115 Z W t b q ⌃ ⇧ e

Indirect Detection: basics

production at colliders direct detection indirect

from annihil in galactic halo or center from annihil in galactic halo or center

¯ p

ν, ¯ ν from annihil in massive bodies

from annihil in galactic halo or center

from annihil in galactic center or halo

and from synchrotron emission

GAPS

γ

¯ d

e+

PAMELA, Fermi, HESS, AMS, balloons... SK, Icecube, Km3Net Fermi, ICT, radio telescopes...

Indirect Detection: gammas

from DM annihilations in galactic center

γ

W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . .

DM DM and and

γ γ

Indirect Detection: gammas

from DM annihilations in galactic center

γ

W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . .

DM DM and and

γ γ

a.

Indirect Detection: gammas

from DM annihilations in galactic center

γ

W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . .

DM DM and and

γ γ

a.

Indirect Detection: gammas

from DM annihilations in galactic center

γ

W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . .

DM DM and and

γ γ

‘prompt’ gamma rays a.

Indirect Detection: gammas

from DM annihilations in Satellite Galaxies

γ

W , Z, b, τ , t, h . . . e⇥,

()

p ,

()

D . . . W +, Z,¯ b, τ +, ¯ t, h . . . e±,

(−)

p ,

(−)

D . . .

DM DM and and

γ γ

b.

Indirect Detection: gammas

from Inverse Compton on in halo

e±

e±

γ

• upscatter of CMB, infrared and starlight photons on energetic
• probes regions outside of Galactic Center

e±

c.

Indirect Detection: gammas

Cirelli, Panci, 2009+

from Inverse Compton on in halo

e±

e±

γ

• upscatter of CMB, infrared and starlight photons on energetic
• probes regions outside of Galactic Center

e±

IR bkgd

c.

Indirect Detection: gammas

Cirelli, Panci, 2009+

from Inverse Compton on in halo

e±

e±

γ

• upscatter of CMB, infrared and starlight photons on energetic
• probes regions outside of Galactic Center

e±

Star Light

c.

Indirect Detection: gammas

Cirelli, Panci, 2009+

e±

soft gammas from bremsstrahlung of on ISM

e±

d.

H

• (very) relevant at low energy, in the disk and at the GC

Indirect Detection: gammas

Cirelli, Serpico, Zaharijas,1307.7152

N S N S

e±

radio-waves from synchro radiation of in GC

e±

e.

Indirect Detection: gammas

many many people, including: Cirelli, Taoso et al., 0811.3744

• 1b. line(s)
• 1c. sharp features

How does DM produce -rays?

γ

• 1. prompt emission
• 1a. continuum
• 2. secondary emission
• 2a. ICS
• 2b. bremsstrahlung
• 2c. synchrotron

• 1b. line(s)
• 1c. sharp features

How does DM produce -rays?

γ

• 1. prompt emission
• 1a. continuum
• 2. secondary emission
• 2a. ICS
• 2b. bremsstrahlung
• 2c. synchrotron

mDM mDM mDM mDM mDM mDM radio

soft gamma

• 1b. line(s)
• 1c. sharp features

How does DM produce -rays?

γ

• 1. prompt emission

environment-independent environment-dependent

• 1a. continuum
• 2. secondary emission
• 2a. ICS
• 2b. bremsstrahlung
• 2c. synchrotron

mDM mDM mDM mDM mDM mDM radio

soft gamma

Relative importance of secondary emissions

=> brem is the dominant energy loss for low energy e±!

Cirelli, Serpico, Zaharijas, 1307.7152

γ

GeV gamma excess?

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

A diffuse GeV excess from around the GC

Dan Hooper

Hooper, Goodenough 1010.2752

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

γ

A diffuse GeV excess from around the GC

Dan Hooper

GeV gamma excess?

Hooper, Goodenough 1010.2752

γ

Boyarsky et al., 1012.5839

add low-E SgrA spectrum

Abazajian 1011.4275

add msec pulsars

Objection: know your backgrounds!

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

GeV gamma excess?

A diffuse GeV excess from around the GC

Dan Hooper

Hooper, Goodenough 1010.2752

γ

Boyarsky et al., 1012.5839

add low-E SgrA spectrum

Abazajian 1011.4275

add msec pulsars

Hooper, Linden 1110.0006

Objection: know your backgrounds! Still works... No, too few

(and we should have seen them elsewhere)

and wrong spectra

Hooper et al. 1305.0830

Best fit: 8 GeV, τ+ τ-, ∼thermal σv

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

GeV gamma excess?

A diffuse GeV excess from around the GC

Dan Hooper

Hooper, Goodenough 1010.2752

γ

Boyarsky et al., 1012.5839

add low-E SgrA spectrum

Abazajian 1011.4275

add msec pulsars

Hooper, Linden 1110.0006

Objection: know your backgrounds! Still works...

Best fit: 8 GeV, τ+ τ-, ∼thermal σv

No, too few

(and we should have seen them elsewhere)

and wrong spectra

Hooper et al. 1305.0830

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

MSPs exist.

Yuan, Zhang 1404.2318

GeV gamma excess?

A diffuse GeV excess from around the GC

Dan Hooper

Caraveo 1312.2913

Hooper, Goodenough 1010.2752

γ

Boyarsky et al., 1012.5839

add low-E SgrA spectrum

Abazajian 1011.4275

add msec pulsars

Hooper, Linden 1110.0006

Objection: know your backgrounds! Still works...

Best fit: 8 GeV, τ+ τ-, ∼thermal σv

No, too few

(and we should have seen them elsewhere)

and wrong spectra

Hooper et al. 1305.0830

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

No no, MSPs can do.

Yuan, Zhang 1404.2318

GeV gamma excess?

A diffuse GeV excess from around the GC

Dan Hooper

(LMXB (tracers of MSP?) seen in M31 with this distribution)

Hooper, Goodenough 1010.2752

γ

Boyarsky et al., 1012.5839

add low-E SgrA spectrum

Abazajian 1011.4275

add msec pulsars

Hooper, Linden 1110.0006

Objection: know your backgrounds! Still works...

Best fit: 8 GeV, τ+ τ-, ∼thermal σv

No, too few

(and we should have seen them elsewhere)

and wrong spectra

Hooper et al. 1305.0830

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

they can give a large if not dominant contribution to the excess.

GeV gamma excess?

A diffuse GeV excess from around the GC

Dan Hooper

No no, MSPs can do:

Petrović, Serpico, Zaharijas 1411.2980

γ

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

bb 35.25 GeV 2.15 x 10-26 cm3/s

Best fit: ∼35 GeV, quarks, ∼thermal σv

GeV gamma excess?

A compelling case for annihilating DM

Daylan, Finkbeiner, Hooper, Linden, Portillo, Rodd, Slatyer 1402.6703

Using events with accurate directional reconstruction

An excess with respect to what? Extracting ‘data points’ is not trivial:

GeV gamma excess?

• i. choose a ROI (shape, extension, masking...) and harvest Fermi-LAT data
• ii. impose sensible cuts (Pass N, angles, CTBCORE...)
• iii. in each energy bin, fit to a sum of spatial templates:
• 1. Fermi Coll. diffuse
• 2. isotropic
• 3. unresolved point sources
• 4. features (bubbles...)
• 5. AOB (molecular gas...)
• iv. repeat the same, adding a template for:
• 6. Dark Matter, having chosen a certain profile!
• v. if iii. iv. improves χ2, there’s evidence for DM
• vi. the component fitted by 6 is the residual excess to be explained

Note: Adding 6 will in general change the recipe of 1...5 (you’ll need a bit more of x here, a bit less of y there...). Changing the profile of 6 too.

GeV gamma excess?

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

γ

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

Including secondary emission changes the conclusions

ICS brem prompt

GeV gamma excess?

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

γ

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

‘Best’ fit:

γ

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

GeV gamma excess?

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

Fermi-LAT excess

Antiproton constraints may be very relevant! But not robust.

20 40 60 80 100 10-27 10-26 10-25 10-24

MDM @GeVD Xsv\ @cm3 s-1D

THN CON KOL THK KRA Benchmark propagation models

best fit bb

propagation models

Antiproton constraints

Cirelli, Giesen 1301.7079

Antiproton constraints

Ë Ë ËËËËËËËËËËËËËË ËË Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë 1 10 102 103 104 10-7 10-6 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 Anti-proton kinetic energy Tp @GeVD anti-proton flux @1êHm2 sec sr GeVLD PAMELA 2010

D

cc Æ WW mDM = 400 GeV sv = 2.5 10-25cm3ês MED bkgd DM flux DM+bgd Ë Ë ËËËËËËËËËËËËËË ËË Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë 1 10 102 103 104 10-7 10-6 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 Anti-proton kinetic energy Tp @GeVD anti-proton flux @1êHm2 sec sr GeVLD PAMELA 2010

E

cc Æ WW mDM = 400 GeV sv = 2 10-24cm3ês MED bkgd DM flux DM+bgd

allowed excluded Constrain the DM flux on top of background 95% C.L. bound on annihilation cross section hσ vi

γ

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

GeV gamma excess?

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

Fermi-LAT excess

Antiproton constraints may be very relevant! But not robust.

20 40 60 80 100 10-27 10-26 10-25 10-24

MDM @GeVD Xsv\ @cm3 s-1D

THN CON KOL THK KRA Benchmark propagation models

Assumption: fixed solar modulation Result: hooperon excluded (except unrealistic THN)

φ¯

p Fisk = φp Fisk

γ

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

GeV gamma excess?

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

Fermi-LAT excess

20 40 60 80 100 10-27 10-26 10-25 10-24

MDM @GeVD Xsv\ @cm3 s-1D

THN CON KOL THK KRA Benchmark propagation models

Antiproton constraints may be very relevant! But not robust. Assumption: flexible solar modulation Result: hooperon may be excluded or not

φ¯

p Fisk = φp Fisk ± 50%

γ

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

GeV gamma excess?

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

Fermi-LAT excess

20 40 60 80 100 10-27 10-26 10-25 10-24

MDM @GeVD Xsv\ @cm3 s-1D

THN CON KOL THK KRA Benchmark propagation models

Antiproton constraints may be very relevant! But not robust. Assumption: conservative solar modulation Result: hooperon probably reallowed (except THK models)

φ¯

p Fisk = 0.1 → 1.1 GV

γ

What if a signal of DM is already hidden in Fermi diffuse data from the GC?

GeV gamma excess?

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

Fermi-LAT excess

20 40 60 80 100 10-27 10-26 10-25 10-24

MDM @GeVD Xsv\ @cm3 s-1D

THN CON KOL THK KRA Benchmark propagation models

Antiproton constraints may be very relevant! But not robust.

NB Conclusion differs from Bringmann, Vollmann, Weniger 1406.6027 which finds exclusion / strong tension

Assumption: conservative solar modulation Result: hooperon probably reallowed (except THK models)

Antiproton constraints compared:

GeV gamma excess?

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

20 40 60 80 100 10-27 10-26 10-25 10-24

MDM @GeVD Xsv\ @cm3 s-1D

THN CON KOL THK KRA Benchmark propagation models

May be very relevant! But not robust.

Bringmann, Vollmann, Weniger 1406.6027

‘Rule out’ or ‘considerable tension’.

Hooper, Linden, Mertsch 1410.1527

‘Significantly less stringent’.

How come?!?

Antiproton constraints compared:

GeV gamma excess?

Cirelli, Gaggero, Giesen, Taoso, Urbano 1407.2173

20 40 60 80 100 10-27 10-26 10-25 10-24

MDM @GeVD Xsv\ @cm3 s-1D

THN CON KOL THK KRA Benchmark propagation models

May be very relevant! But not robust.

Bringmann, Vollmann, Weniger 1406.6027

‘Rule out’ or ‘considerable tension’.

Hooper, Linden, Mertsch 1410.1527

‘Significantly less stringent’.

How come?!? The devil is in the (CR propagation) details:

solar modulation, convection, primary injection spectrum, tertiaries...

Gamma constraints

from DM annihilations in Satellite Galaxies

γ

FERMI

1503.02641 Fermi coll., Ackermann et al.

6 years data, PASS 8

Gamma constraints

from DM annihilations in Satellite Galaxies

γ

FERMI

1503.02641 Fermi coll., Ackermann et al.

6 years data, PASS 8

a SN explosion spits protons 5000 yrs ago and they do spallations + bremsstrahlung as well as e± which do ICS... fits spectrum & morphology

Astrophysical interpretation

Abazajian 1011.4275

add msec pulsars

Hooper et al. 1305.0830 Yuan, Zhang 1404.2318

Millisec pulsars A transient phenomenon:

Boyarsky et al., 1012.5839

add low-E SgrA spectrum

Non-trivial SgrA spectrum

Petrović, Serpico, Zaharijas 1405.7928 Carlson, Profumo 1405.7685

the GC spit 1052 ergs in e± 1 mln yrs ago and they do ICS on ambient light, ‘fits’ both spectrum and morphology but: can one really get everything right? but: why correlation with gas density not seen?

Petrović, Serpico, Zaharijas 1411.2980

Conclusions & Outlook

Hints Constraints Hopes

e±

PAMELA FERMI HESS

γ

FERMI XMM-Newton

X

XMM-Newton

X γ

Conclusions & Outlook

Hints Constraints Hopes

γ e±

PAMELA FERMI HESS FERMI, HESS, VERITAS etc SK, ICECUBE Cosmology

¯ p

PAMELA

ν

FERMI

XMM-Newton

X γ

Conclusions & Outlook

Hints Constraints Hopes

¯ p γ

¯ d

e±

PAMELA FERMI HESS FERMI, HESS, VERITAS etc SK, ICECUBE GAPS, AMS-02

AMS-02

γ

Cosmology

¯ p

PAMELA

ν ν

FERMI

• new theory

directions

• ‘enhancements’

XMM-Newton

X γ

Conclusions & Outlook

Hints Constraints Hopes

¯ p γ

¯ d

e±

PAMELA FERMI HESS FERMI, HESS, VERITAS etc SK, ICECUBE GAPS, AMS-02

AMS-02

γ

• new theory

directions

Cosmology

• ‘enhancements’

¯ p

PAMELA

ν ν

FERMI

The GC GeV excess (a.k.a. hooperon) is a typical example

XMM-Newton

X γ

Conclusions & Outlook

Hints Constraints Hopes

¯ p γ

¯ d

e±

PAMELA FERMI HESS FERMI, HESS, VERITAS etc SK, ICECUBE GAPS, AMS-02

AMS-02

γ

Cosmology

¯ p

PAMELA

ν ν

Old wise remarks:

FERMI

• new theory

directions

• ‘enhancements’

The GC GeV excess (a.k.a. hooperon) is a typical example

XMM-Newton

X γ

Conclusions & Outlook

Hints Constraints Hopes

¯ p γ

¯ d

e±

PAMELA FERMI HESS FERMI, HESS, VERITAS etc SK, ICECUBE GAPS, AMS-02

AMS-02

γ

Cosmology

¯ p

PAMELA

ν ν

Old wise remarks:

• any convincing result must be multimessenger

FERMI

• new theory

directions

• ‘enhancements’

The GC GeV excess (a.k.a. hooperon) is a typical example

XMM-Newton

X γ

Conclusions & Outlook

Hints Constraints Hopes

¯ p γ

¯ d

e±

PAMELA FERMI HESS FERMI, HESS, VERITAS etc SK, ICECUBE GAPS, AMS-02

AMS-02

γ

Cosmology

¯ p

PAMELA

ν ν

Old wise remarks:

• any convincing result must be multimessenger
• beware of uncertainties, beware of astrophysics

FERMI

• new theory

directions

• ‘enhancements’

The GC GeV excess (a.k.a. hooperon) is a typical example