8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
1/42
Cosmological bounds on warm dark matterand astrophysical bounds on decaying dark
matter
Oleg Ruchayskiy Ecole Politechnique F ed erale de Lausanne
Alexey BoyarskyETH Z urich & CERN
4th Patras workshop on Axions, WIMPs, and WISPsDESY. June 18, 2008
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
2/42
Dark Matter in the Universe
Extensive astrophysical evidence for the presence of the dark non-baryonic matter in the Universe
Rotation curves of stars in galaxies andof galaxies in clustersDistribution of (X-ray bright) intracluster gas Gravitational lensing data
Galaxy cluster CL0024+1654 (z = 0 .39 )Courtesy of ESA-NASA
Left: Galaxy cluster CL0024+1654 as agravitational lense
Courtesy of HST
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 1
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
3/42
What is known about DM?
DM is not baryonic
DM is not a SM particle (neutrinos could be but . . . )
Any DM candidate must be
Produced in the early Universe and have correct relic abundance
Very weakly interacting with electromagnetic radiation (dark)
Be stable or cosmologically long-lived
What can be the mass of DM?
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 2
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
4/42
What can be the DM mass?
The model-independent lower limit on mass for fermionic DM: Tremaine,Gunn (1979)Dalcanton,Hogan (1990)The smaller is the DM mass the bigger is the number of particles
in a given DM-dominated object.
For fermions there is a maximal phase-space density (degenerateFermi gas). Hence, maximal number of fermions
Objects with highest phase-space density: dwarf spheroidalgalaxies Qobs = 10 4 105 M kpc
3 [km s 1 ] 3 .
Leads to the lower bound on the DM mass m 300 500 eV
Active neutrinos with m 300 eV have primordial phase-spacedensity Q Qobs . But DMh2 = m 94 eV Active neutrinos cannotconstitute 100% of DM
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 3
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
5/42
Phase-space density evolution
Collisionless disipationless dynamics can only lead to the decreaseof the coarse-grained phase-space density
N-body simulations show decrease of phase-space density duringthe collapse by O (102 103 )
WIMPs with M 100 GeV and decoupling temperature T d 10 MeV have primordial phase-space density Q 1021 Qobs
Can phase-space density decrease by 21 order during thegravitational collapse? Yes!
N-body simulations measure the change of phase-space densitybetween start of simulations z 102 and today z = 0 .
Start of the simulations: particles have peculiar (Zeldovich)velocities i 10 30 km/sec.
End of the simulations: particles have virial velocities f
100 km/sec. (f / i )3
102
103
.Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 4
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
6/42
What is known about DM?
DM is not baryonicDM is not a SM particle (neutrinos could be but . . . )
Any DM candidate must be
Produced in the early Universe and have correct relic abundance Very weakly interacting with electromagnetic radiation (dark)
Be stable or cosmologically long-lived
For fermionic DM mass 300 eVPossible interactions with SM matter?
Pessimistic scenario: DM interacts only in the early (very) hot
Universe (e.g. produced in inaton decays)Optimistic scenario: DM interact with ordinary matter Annihilation Decay possibility of indirect detection of DM
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 5
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
7/42
Searching for decayingdark matter
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 6
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
8/42
Decaying DM
DM with radiative signatures: DM + , + , e+ + e . . .
N s
e
W
W
(a)
p k
G p
k
R
(b)
p k
G
p
k
R
Appears in many models:
Sterile neutrino Dodelson & Widrow93;Asaka, Shaposhnikov et al.05
R Gravitino Takayama & Yamaguchi00Buchm uller et al.07
Volume Modulus Quevedo07
Decaying Majoron M. Lattanzi, J.W.F. Valle 07
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 7
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
9/42
Properties of decaying DM
WIMPs cannot decay. Their interaction strength with matter GF would lead to life-time of neutron in -decay: n p + e + e .
Decaying DM should interact superweakly GF and 1
Radiative decay channel : DM +
Photon energy E = m DM2Life-time = 1 / life-time of the Universe
Flux from DM decay:
F DM =E
m DM
M fovDM4D 2L
fov
8 line of sight
DM( r )dr (z 1 , fov 1)
DM(r )dr is roughly equal for a large class of objectsOleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 8
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
10/42
DM decay line search : advantages
Moore et al.2005
DM decay is an all sky signal
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 9
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
11/42
DM decay line search : advantages
Moore et al.2005
DM annihilation signal is concentrated on GC
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 10
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
12/42
DM decay line search : advantages
Decay signal DM(r )dr as compared to 2DM(r )dr forannihilation:Decay signal is not very sensitive to the precise form of DM prole(difference between cuspy and cored proles changes signal by afactor of 2 3)
For decay signal : freedom of choosing the observational targets(many targets of different nature have comparable signals). Do notneed to look at GC
If a DM decay line candidate is found can study its surface
brightness prole and its distribution over the sky
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 11
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
13/42
For decaying DM " indirect "
search becomes " direct " !
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 12
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
14/42
Where to look for DM decay line?
Extragalactic diffusebackground
Takayama & Yamaguchi, 2000
Dolgov & Hansen, 2000Boyarsky, Neronov, O.R., Shaposhnikov, 2005Buchm uller et al., 2007Bertone et al., 2007
Clusters of galaxies(Coma, Virgo)
Abazajian et al., 2001Boyarsky, Neronov, O.R., Shaposhnikov PRD 74, 2006
DM halo of the MilkyWay.
Signal increases as weincrease FoV!
Boyarsky, Neronov, O.R., Shaposhnikov, TkachevPRL 2006 [astro-ph/0603660]Riemer-Srense et al. ApJL 2006 [astro-ph/0603661]
Boyarsky, Nevalainen, O.R. A&A 2007Abazajian et al. [PRD 75, 2007]Boyarsky, Malyshev, Neronov, O.R., MNRAS 2008
Andromeda galaxy
(M31)
Watson et al. PRD 74, 2006 [astro-ph/0605424]Boyarsky, Iakubovsky, O.R., Savachenko 2007Bertone et al. 2007
Bullet cluster 1E 0657-56 Boyarsky, Markevitch, O.R. [ApJ 2008]
Soft XRB Boyarsky, den Herder, Neronov, O.R. [Astropart.Phys.07] S t r a t e g y
d e p e n d s o n
t h e o b j e c
t , e n e r g y r a n g e ,
i n s t r u m e n
t . . .
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 13
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
15/42
Restrictions on life-time of decaying DM MW (HEAO-1Boyarsky et al2005
Bullet clusterBoyarsky et al2006
LMC+MW(XMBoyarsky et al2006
MW(Chandra)Riemer-Srensen etal.; Abazajianet al.
MW (XMM)
Boyarsky et al2007
M31 Watsonet al. 2006;Boyarsky et al
2007
10 25
10 26
10 27
10 28
10 29
10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3
L i f e - t
i m e [ s e c
]
mDM [keV]
XMM, HEAO-1 SPI
= Universe life-time x 10 8
Chandra
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 14
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
16/42
What else do we know
about the DM?
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 15
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
17/42
Free-streaming DM and structure formation
DM particles erase primordial spectrum ofdensity perturbations on scales up to the DMparticle horizon free-streaming length
coFS = t0 v(t )dt a(t )Comoving free-streaming lengths peaks around t nr when p m
All DM models are thus divided into 3 groups:
CDM : free streaming is negligible WDM : free streaming at galaxy scales, tnr teq HDM : free streaming at cosmological scales tnr teq
HDM (e.g. active neutrinos with the mass 1 eV) is ruled out.Gives wrong large scale structure
CDM and WDM work equally well at large scales (CMB, SDSS,2dFG). CDM model could have been called WDM
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 16
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
18/42
Cold or warm ?
101
10010
6
107
108
109
r (kpc)
( M k p
c 3
)
Ursa MinorDracoCarina
Sextans1/r
CDM : success at large scalesAt galaxy scale predicts:
Cuspy proles. (cores observed?) Many satellites. (few detected?)
WDM : shares success of CDM atlarge scalesQualitatively explains small scalestructure
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 17
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
19/42
DM at small scales. Paris, Feb.13-15
Scientic organizers: A. Boyarsky, O. Ruchayskiy, J. Lesgourgues
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 18
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
20/42
CDM or WDM? A summary
1) Does CDM predictions contradict observations?
CDM simulations are pure DM . Pure N-body is not enoughAstronomers observe luminous matter.Baryonic feedback can be essentialExample: not all DM halos can acquire baryons
2) Any WDM simulations (N-body or hydrodynamical) should
properly include primordial velocities of the particlesuse correct power spectrum of initial density perturbations.
3) WDM is ruled out by Lyman- ?
No (discussion follows)
4) DM with keV mass still allowed?
Yes
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 19
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
21/42
Lyman- forest
To probe the DM properties at smallscales one can use Lyman- forestdata:
Red-shifted absorption Lyman- line in the spectra of distant QSOsNeutral hydrogen traces DMdistribution at red-shifts z 2 4.
Allows to measure one-dimensional non-linear powerspectrum:
P 1 D =
kP 3 D (k)kdk2
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 20
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
22/42
Lyman- forest : challenges
Need to compare measured non-linear 1D powerspectrum with thelinear 3D power spectrum, predicted by a cosmological model.
Simulations are needed! Each hydrodynamical simulation takesabout 36 hours (optimistic)
Need to t simultaneously 7+ cosmological parameters plus 20 astrophysical Lyman- parameters to the data (Lyman- pluspossible other experiments: CMB, 2dFG, SDSS, . . . ).
Try 2 values for each parameters. Have to explore 10 8 models,perform 108 simulations which would take 550 000 years
Honest processing of Lyman- data is computationallyprohibitive
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 21
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
23/42
Powerspectra of DM models
Solution? Perform numerical simulations only in a number of pointsin multi-D parameter space. Interpolate between them
But simulations depend on initial (linear) powerspectrum
In many WDM models: non-thermal momenta distribution powerspectra of complicated (non-universal) form
0.01
0.1
1
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
P W D M
( k ) / P
C D M
( k )
k [h/Mpc]
Example: mixture of colderand warmer components
Suppression startsearly, at F S of warmcomponent.But at smaler scales like CDM with smallernormalisation.This makes Ly- boundsweaker.
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 22
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
24/42
Bayesian approach to WDM bounds
To explore effectively a vast multi-D parameter space one usesBayesian approach
Frequentist approach (model rejection based on 2 ) can rule outa particular model
Bayesian approach can tell what model is the most likely one
Bayesian approach determines the 90% condence limit (CL) asa region into which 90% of the models would fall
This leads to the bounds, which are generically weaker than those
of frequentist approach
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 23
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
25/42
Lower DM mass bound in Bayesian approach
0.022 0.023 0.024 0.025 b h
20.1 0.11 0.12
c h2
0.94 0.96 0.98 1 1.02ns
0.7 0.75 0.8
13.2 13.4 13.6 13.8Age/GYr
0.2 0.25 0.3
m
0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9
8
8 10 12 14 16zre
70 75 80H0
Example: bayesiananalysis gives mDM 15.3 keV at 90% CL
Fixing the parameterof interest at 50%below this lowerbound (i.e. at 10 keV)
gives t with 2
5( 2.2)
In this case Bayesian
90% CL is weakerby 50% from theactual (frequentist)one
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 24
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
26/42
Summary: Lyman- bounds on WDM
Lyman- analysis of WDM is model-dependent (should be repeatedfor each new type of initial power spectrum )
Bayesian 2 bounds on the WDM parameters are narrower than theactual (frequentist) ones (i.e. lower bound can be lowered, upperbound can be raised)
Lyman- analysis suffers from a systematics which is hard toestimate (due to approximate ways of converting measured topredicted power spectra)
Upshot: Lyman- allows to probe mildly non-linear stage of
structure formation and can be very useful in determining the natureof DM. However, much more work should be done, until robustbounds are obtained
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 25
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
27/42
Sterile neutrinos:
decaying, (warm?) DMand much more
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 26
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
28/42
MSM: all masses below electroweak scale
Just add 3 right-handed (sterile) neutrinos N I to MSM:Asaka,ShaposhnikovPLB 620 , 17(2005)L MSM = L MSM + i N
I / N I L M DI N I + M I 2 N cI N I + h.c.
A very modest and simple modication of the SM which can explainwithin one consistent framework
. . . neutrino oscillations
. . . baryon asymmetry of the Universe
. . . provide a viable (warm or cold) dark matter candidate
. . . can incorporate ination
. . . can have a number of astrophysical applications
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 27
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
29/42
Choosing parameters of the MSM
Parameters of two sterile neutrinos are enough to explainbaryogenesis and t the oscillations data: If M 2 ,3 150 MeV 20 GeV and M 2 ,3 M 2 , 3 MSM explains
baryon asymmetry of the Universe.
Neutrino experiments can be explained within the same choiceof parameters. See-saw with masses below EW scale.The third (lightest) sterile neutrino can have cosmologically long life
time = 5 1026 sec keVM s5
10 8
2
2
Can be produced in the early Universe in the right amount: DodelsonWidrow93
Asaka, Laine,Shaposhnikov
(2006)
Via active-sterile neutrino oscillations Via resonant active-sterile neutrino oscillations in the presence
Shi, Fuller98
of lepton asymmetries . (Works well for sterile neutrinos in keV range. ) In inaton decays. ( Can produce sterile neutrinos up to the mass of few
Tkachev,Shaposhnikov(2006)
MeV)Can play the role of DM ( warm , cold or mixed )
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 28
d f l
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
30/42
Production of sterile neutrino DM
100
101
102
M1
/ keV
10-16
10-14
10-12
10-10
10-8
10-6
10-4
s i n
2 2
case 1
LMC
MW
MW
M3110
6n
e
/ s
2
4
8 1 2 1 6
0 .0
2 5 0 0
2 5
2 5 0
SPI
7 0
7 0 0
Sterile neutrino interactswith the rest of the SMmatter only via couplingwith active neutrinos,
parametrized by =m DM
Interaction is differentwith and without leptonasymmetry
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 29
Wi d f f il i DM
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
31/42
Window of parameters of sterile neutrino DM
S i n
2 ( 2
1 )
M1 [keV]
10 -16
10 -14
10-12
10 -10
10 -8
10 -6
0.3 1 10 100
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 30
Wi d f t f t il t i DM
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
32/42
Window of parameters of sterile neutrino DM Boyarsky, O.Ret al. 2008
S i n
2 ( 2
1 )
M1 [keV]
10 -16
10 -14
10-12
10 -10
10 -8
10 -6
0.3 1 10 100
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 31
Window of parameters of sterile neutrino DM
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
33/42
Window of parameters of sterile neutrino DM
S i n
2 ( 2
1 )
M1 [keV]
10 -16
10 -14
10-12
10 -10
10 -8
10 -6
0.3 1 10 100
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 32
Summary
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
34/42
Summary
A number of models provides decaying DM (sterile neutrino,gravitino, Majoron, volume modulus,. . . ). The DM candidates canbe light (keV MeV range)
Astrophysical search of decaying DM model is an experiment ofdirect detection type (if a line is detected, it can be distinguishedfrom the line of any other origin)
DM models can be warm (with various velocity distributionfunctions), this can be probed by the Lyman- data
So far the Lyman- data were obtained only for the models withthermally produced WDM particles. The 90% CL bounds should
be understood with at least 50% additional uncertainty
Improving on these results can rule out (or conrm) severalinteresting extensions of the SM ( MSM, volume moduli)
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 33
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
35/42
Thank you for yourattention
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 34
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
36/42
How to test this theory?
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 35
How to detect heavy sterile neutrinos
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
37/42
How to detect heavy sterile neutrinos
Missing energy signal in K, D and B decays ( 2 effect)
M N < M K : KLOE, NA48, E787 M N < 1 GeV : charm and factories
1 GeV < M N < M B : charm, and B-factories (plannedluminosity is not enough) Gorbunov &Shaposhnikov2007Decay processes N + , etc (nothing + ) (4 effect)
M N < M K : Any intense source of K-mesons (e.g. from protontargets of K2K, MiniBooNe or MINOS)
M N < M D : JPARC, MINOS, CNGS beams + very near detector
M N > M D : extremely difcult
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 36
Laboratory detection of sterile neutrino
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
38/42
Laboratory detection of sterile neutrino
Creation and detection in the lab: suppressed by 4
and hopeless.Creation somewhere and detection in the lab 2 effect. But the Bezrukov,
ShaposhnikovPRD 2007
only realistic possibility is to search for radiative decays of sterileneutrino in the DM clouds not a laboratory experiment.
Creation in the lab without subsequent detection the uniqueoption, 2 effect.
Possibilities:Forbidden decays, e.g.
0
N branching ratio is too small.
Hopeless.
-decay kinematics: 3 H 3 He + e + e is not the same as3 H 3 He + e + N !
Full kinematics event-by-event mass measurement: may work.COLTRIMS technology
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 37
MSM valid up to Planck scale?
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
39/42
MSM valid up to Planck scale?
For Higgs masses 129 GeV < M H < 189 GeV MSM can beconsistent quantum eld theory up to the Planck scale.
Thus MSM describes all particle physics experiments, explainsneutrino oscillations , provides the DM candidate and explains thebaryon asymmetry of the Universe without introduction of any newscale above the EW scale.
MSM (as well as MSM) suffers from the Landau pole in the Higgs self-coupling. Maiani et al.1978;Cabibbo et al.1979For Higgs mass M H < 189 GeV the Landau pole occurs above the Planck
Pirogov &
Zenin 1999;Hambye &Riesselmann1997
scale
For sufciently low Higgs masses the MSM vacuum is unstable. This does not
Altarelli &
Isidori 1994Casas et al.1995
happen (with the cut-off scale M Pl) for M H > 129 GeV.
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 38
MSM in LHC era
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
40/42
If LHC nds only Higgs boson the MSM can be an effectivetheory up to the Planck scale!
It introduces no new scale to explain physics there may be nohierachy problem.
If LHC nds Higgs + new physics it will not be possibleto e.g. to calculate the DM abundance. WDM/CDM/mixed,
decaying/annihilating and other properties of the DM still should betested.
other aspects of the MSM should be tested as well
If LHC does not nd Higgs the main predictions of the MSM arestill valid.
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 39
TOC
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
41/42
Dark Matter in the Universe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1What is known about DM? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2What can be the DM mass? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Phase-space density evolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4What is known about DM? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Decaying DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Properties of decaying DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8DM decay line search : advantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
DM decay line search : advantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0DM decay line search : advantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Where to look for DM decay line? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3
Restrictions on life-time of decaying DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4Free-streaming DM and structure formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6Cold or warm ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17DM at small scales. Paris, Feb.13-15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 8CDM or WDM? A summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 40
TOC
8/3/2019 Oleg Ruchayskiy and Alexey Boyarsky- Cosmological bounds on warm dark matter and astrophysical bounds on decaying dark matter
42/42
Lyman- forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0
Lyman- forest : challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1Powerspectra of DM models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2Bayesian approach to WDM bounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3Lower DM mass bound in Bayesian approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Summary: Lyman- bounds on WDM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 MSM: all masses below electroweak scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 7Choosing parameters of the MSM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8Production of sterile neutrino DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9Window of parameters of sterile neutrino DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 0Window of parameters of sterile neutrino DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1Window of parameters of sterile neutrino DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
How to detect heavy sterile neutrinos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6Laboratory detection of sterile neutrino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7 MSM valid up to Planck scale? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 8 MSM in LHC era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 9
Oleg Ruchayskiy D ARK MATTER BOUNDS 41