1 / 29

Dark Matter Searches in Space Xin Wu

Dark Matter Searches in Space Xin Wu. Evidence for Dark Matter. Mass determined by light emission ≠ mass determined by motion ⇒ Dark “Mass”!. Visible objects in the universe moves faster than expected Velocities of stars in the Milky Way (1932, Oort)

dlittle
Télécharger la présentation

Dark Matter Searches in Space Xin Wu

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. Dark Matter Searches in SpaceXin Wu

  2. Evidence for Dark Matter Mass determined by light emission ≠ mass determined by motion ⇒ Dark “Mass”! • Visible objects in the universe moves faster than expected • Velocities of stars in the Milky Way (1932, Oort) • Velocities of galaxies in clusters (1933, Zwicky) • Rotational speeds of galaxies (galactic rotation curves) (1970, Rubin) -> Dark Matter halo • Gravitational lensing • Mass-to-light ratios obtained from strong and weak lensing effect correspond to dynamical measurements • The bullet cluster No other evidence that the Newton dynamics is invalid at large scales

  3. Dark Matter Searches SM DM indirect • Dark matter searches rely on interactions between DM and SM particles • Has not yet been seen! SM DM direct collider • “Direct searches”: DM-SM scattering • Look for nuclear recoil from galactic DM scattering • Very weak signal → deep underground, cryogenic DPNC participations! • “Indirect searches”: DM-DM annihilating to SM particles • Look for edges/bumps in SM particle spectrums in cosmic rays with ground-based or space observatories • “Collider searches”: production of DM particles via SM interactions • signature: missing Et (MET) (Johanna’s analysis in ATLAS) • Astronomical observations (“gravitational probes”) continue to explore the nature of the DM

  4. Indirect searches • DM-DM annihilations in our galaxy might give detectable signature of SM particles • n, g, e+, antiproton, antinuclei • Sensitive to high masses and different couplings ⇒ complementary to direct searches • challenges: astrophysical background and propagation • Annihilation rate ∝ r2DM⇒ more flux from regions of dense DM: galaxy clusters, galactic center, Sun, earth • BUT only neutrino (and somewhat g) can easily escape from these regions • Indirect signature depend on DM mass, annihilation cross section, DM-SM couplings • Very model dependent! ⇒ lots of fun for signal/limit interpretation

  5. Indirect search experiments • Ground-based detectors • Large acceptance (with arrays) • Resolution Is good for very high energies • Space detectors • Can detect all signatures except n • small acceptance

  6. Indirect search with neutrinos • Ground-based neutrino telescope • MACRO, SuperK, ANTARES, AMANDA/IceCube, … • Detect upward going muons from muon neutrinos interacting in the Earth • Setting limits on muon flux or annihilation cross section as function of mass • Model dependent, typically use MSSM with WW, bb, tt, mm, nn channels • s(annihilation) ∝ s(scattering) in the Sun because of equilibrium • ⇒ Relate result to direct searches Setting upper limit to s(annihilation) using some models of SUSY and halo profile

  7. Indirect search with gamma-ray • Ground-based Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes • MAGIC, HESS, VERITAS, CTA, … • sensitive to g’s from 50 GeV – 50 TeV (>100 TeV for CTA) • Gamma-ray space telescopes • EGRET, FERMI/LAT, GAMMA-400, … • sensitive to g’s 20 MeV - 300 GeV, excellent pointing, mapping capability • Signature: Mono-energetic g-line from direct annihilation or continuum through annihilation into intermediate states • search in galactic dark matter halo, dwarf galaxies, galaxy clusters, galactic dark matter satellites, …

  8. Some results from gamma-ray telescopes Fermi/LAT dwarf galaxy search excluded WIMP below 25 GeV annihilating to b-bbar or t+t-, assume the DarkSUSY models No “smoking gun” (yet) in Fermi/LAT photon line search ⇒ constrain the gg and Zg annihilation cross section HESS J1745-290 Ground-based telescope has sensitivity for high energy (multi-TeV)

  9. Indirect search with charged particles • Annihilation of DM can add extra (stable) antiparticles (e+, pbar, antinuclei) to the cosmic ray but their detection can be done best above the atmosphere • high altitude balloons: BESS, CAPRICE, HEAT, BEST, ATIC, CREAM • satellites: PAMELA, GAMMA-400, … • space station: AMS2, CALET, … • Not always possible to put a magnet into the space • Look for structures in total spectra: e++e-, p+pbar, etc • Challenge: understand the galactic (charged) cosmic ray background • e-/p produced in SN explosion and accelerated in the shocks of the remnants • diffused in the galactic magnetic fields (mG): directions randomized • secondary e+/pbar produced in the collisions of primary proton with matter in the galactic disk • primary cosmic ray has a (broken) power law energy spectrum • Charged DM flux is affected by diffusion and, for e±, energy loss from synchrotron radiation and inverse Compton scattering on CMB and star-light

  10. Antiproton flux and ratio • Sensitivity reached 100 GeV (PAMELA) • In good agreement with cosmic ray models ⇒ can be used to ruled out some MSSM dark matter models AMS2 hurry up!

  11. Positron fraction e+/(e++e-) • Growing excess above 10 GeV • first observed in 1970’s, confirmed by PAMELA, Fermi/LAT, waiting for AMS2 • Astrophysical sources? • Pulsars? Primary e+? • DM? • would require very large annihilation cross section (or boost factor) and leptophilic models in order to to reconcile with the antiproton data of PAMELA • In general not favored • Multiple origins? remains a great puzzle!

  12. e++e- spectrum • “bump” at ~300-600 GeV reported first by ATIC, also seen by PPB-BETS • Fermi/LAT sees more like a “hardening” at ~100GeV and “softening” at ~1TeV • More data and new space detectors with thicker calorimeter will help to understand the high energy region • AMS2, CALET, DAMPE, … another puzzle!

  13. DAMPE • DAMPE: DArk Matter Particle Explorer • Chinese satellite experiment to be launched in 2015, mission time > 3 years • financed by the Chinese Academy of Sciences • High energy (GeV – 10 TeV) e/g detector to search for DM, also for cosmic ray studies and high energy g-ray astronomy • Baseline Detector Design: • Si-PIN charge detector (2.5x2.5 cm2) matrix, measure Z up to 20, DZ/Z~ 10% • Plastic Scintillatior strip telescope, cross section 2x1 cm2, 2 double layers (X,Y) • Interleaved with Tungsten plates • BGO imaging calorimeter • 305 crystal of 2.5x2.5x60 (cm3) • 14 layers, 31 X0 (total 33 X0) • multi dynode PMT+VA32 chip • Neutron detector (Boron doped plastic scintillator) for additional e/p separation

  14. DAMPE • Detector performance requirement • Detection of e/g of 5 GeV-10 TeV, energy resolution <1.5%@800GeV, pointing resolution <0.5°@800GeV, e/p separation >105, of e/g separation >20 • Detection of high energy cosmic ray 100 GeV – 100 TeV, energy resolution <40%@800GeV, pointing resolution <1°@1 TeV • Geometrical factor: e: >0.3 cm2∙sr, g: >0.2 cm2∙sr, p: >0.2 cm2∙sr • Collaborating institutes • Purple Mountain Observatory (PMO), Nanjing • University of Sci. & Tech. of China (USTC), Hefei • Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing • Institute of Modern Physics (IMP), Lanzhou • DPNC, Université de Genève • Participation of DPNC (Xin) • Coordination of test beam activities at CERN • Oct-Nov 2012 on H4 beam, calibration unit ~1/4 of full detector • Calibration and data analysis • Stepping stone to a more ambitious project ➯

  15. HERD • HERD: High Energy cosmic Radiation Detection facility • On board of the Chinese Space Station (~2020) • Proposed by the same community of the DAMPE • Much bigger GF, better energy and pointing resolutions, sensitive to very high energy cosmic rays (“knee region” ~1 PeV) • Two main goals: DM search and origin of galactic cosmic rays P (<A>~ 1) He (<A>~ 4) L (<A>~ 8) M (<A>~ 14) H (<A>~ 25) VH (<A>~ 35) Fe (<A>~ 56) • 305 crystal of 2.5x2.5x60 (cm3) • 14 layers, 31 X0 (total 33 X0) • multi dynode PMT+VA32 chip • Except for L (<A> ~ 8), PeV spectra feasible with GF~2-3 in several years. • Neutron detector (Boron doped plastic scintillator) for additional e/p separation s_yqxu 1986born 10-event sensitivities 1 PeV

  16. HERD conceptual detector design • Shower Tracker • W: 10x3.5mm + 2x17.5mm + 2x35mm (4X0 = 1.6l) • Scin. Fibers: 14 X-Y double layers, 1x1mm2, 1m long • Charge detector: Si-PIN (1cm×1cm×500mm) • Top: 2x(1mx1m), 4 Sides: 2x(1mx40cm) • Nucleon Tracker with Scin. Fibers • ECAL: 16X0 = 0.7l • PWO bar: 2.5x2.5x70cm3 • 6 layers alternate in X-Y PWO W+ CsI(Na) + Fiber + ICCD • HCAL: 30 layers of W plates + CsI cells • W: 30x3.5mm, 3X0 = 1.2 l • CsI cell:2.5x2.5cm2x0.2cm • Neutron detector: B-doped plastic scintillator with delayed signals

  17. Comparison of missions • The mains goals of the HERD detector design • Better energy resolution (e/g), larger geometrical factor (cosmic ray) and high energy reach (e/g and cosmic ray)

  18. Current Status of HERD • Mission concept (science goals with requirements) selected by JESSA of CAS • General Establishment of Space Science and Application, agency in charge of the selection of scientific mission • Conceptual detector design reviewed in Feb 2012, further technical review • final selection decision expected later this year • Simulation and detector optimization are just started • international collaborations are welcome at all levels • DPNC (Martin, Xin) have expressed interest in participating in the project • detector optimization, in particular using Si strips instead of scintillating fibers for the shower tracker • ECAL and Trigger electronics also potential collaboration areas • Swiss Industrial participation • Intention well received by GESSA • Good contact already exist through POLAR and DAMPE • By associating early, we can hope to play a major role in the project once it is concretized

  19. Conclusions • The nature of the DM is on of the most fundamental questions in astronomy, astrophysics, astroparticle physics, cosmology and particle physics • There is a small industry of DM search • Underground, underwater, under-ice, on the ground, in the space, … • DPNC has already involved in many of these experiments and a transverse synergy is emerging • IceCube, AMS, ATLAS, CTA • Also DPT • Can further develop this synergy by participating in the new space based projects (DAMPE and HERD) • People interested are very welcome to join

  20. Extra slides

  21. How much dark matter in the Universe? • Can be estimated from observations of clusters of galaxies • radial velocities, hot gas distribution, gravitational lensing → relic density: WDM ~ 0.2-0.3 (WX ≡rX/rcrit, rcrit : density of a flat Universe) • Can be obtained by a global fit of cosmological parameters assuming the “standard model of big bang cosmology” (LCDM) • observations: anisotropy of CMB (WMAP), large-scale structure (galaxy surveys) , Type Ia supernovae survey • → WL ≈ 0.72, WDM ≈ 0.23, Wb ≈ 0.05

  22. Nature of Dark Matter • Dark matter unlikely to be baryonic (MACHOs: Massive Compact Halo Objects) • Neutron stars, brown dwarf, planets, primordial black holes • ruled out by anisotropy of CMB, large-scale structure and big-bang nucleosynthesis (BBN) • Not observed by direct searches with microlesing (MACHO, EROS, OGLE) • Dark Matter is unlikely to be “hot” • Thermally produced ultrarelativistic particles (m<keV) prevent early formation of small structure of the Universe • inconsistent with the observed age of galaxies • SM neutrino severely constrained by CMB + large-scale structure observation • Wnh2 ≤ 0.0062 @ 95%CL (WMAP+BAO+H0) • Favored candidates: “non-baryonic cold dark matter” (CDM) ⇒ BSM physics! • Massive (~10 GeV-TeV) : Weakly Interacting massive particles (WIMP) • Created thermally in the early universe: SUSY LSP, KK states, … • Light: axion, keV sterile neutrino, … • Created non-thermally through phase transition or mixing

  23. DM-SM interaction • The strength of DM-SM interaction is constrained by the observed present DM relic density • WIMP pair annihilation cross section into SM particles determines the time at which WIMPs dropped out of thermal equilibrium (annihilation rate < expansion rate) ⇒ ~1 pb annihilation cross section gives correct relic density Number density time

  24. Direct Searches • Assume stationary DM halo in the galactic frame • The earth traverses the DM halo at ~230±15 km/s • At this speed DM-SM scattering is mainly elastic • Typical nuclear recoil energy is ~1-100 keV for WIMP of 10 GeV – 10 TeV • Recoil energy spectrum is approximately exponential • Resulting from the convolution of the Maxwellian distribution of the DM velocity and the model dependent DM-nuclei cross section ⇒ low threshold detectors (eg. Ge) more sensitive to WIMP of low mass • Cross section depends on the nature of DM-SM coupling • Spin-independent (SI) and spin-dependent (SD) • SI cross section scales as A2⇒ use heavy target nuclei, eg. Xe • Event rate depends on WIMP flux (~rv/M) and scattering cross section • Typically < 1 event/day/kg ⇒ need large target and low background site • Detection of the recoil energy • Ionization and/or scintillation and/or heat

  25. (Many) Direct Search Experiments • Starting from a 0.8 kg Ge ionization detector at Homestake Mine in 1986 … • sensitivity is reaching ~1 event/100kg/year (for 60 GeV WIMP) From Gaitskell

  26. Examples of direct search experiments • Pure germanium detector for ionization detection • Homestake, Heidelberg-Moscow, IGEX, (GERDA, MAJORANA) • CoGeNT, CDEX/TEXONO: very low energy threshold (sub-keV) • CoGeNT observed excess at 7-11 GeV • Crystal (NaI) detector for scintillation detection • DAMA/LIBRA, NaIAD, DM-Ice ⇒ DAMA/LIBRA observed annual modulation • Cryogenic detector for heat (vibration) detection • Heat and ionization detection with semiconductor: CDMS, Edelweiss • Heat detection with CaWO4crystal: CRESST ⇒ observed some excess • Nobel liquid detector for ionization and scintillation detection • ZEPLIN, XENON, XMASS, PANDA-X, LUX, ArDM … • Best DM limit from XENON100 ⇒ ruled out all positive claims above! • TPC to measure the direction of the nuclear recoils • DRIFT, MIMAC, DMTPC, …

  27. Current results of direct searches • Expressed as contour or excluded region in the WIMP mass – cross section plane • For fixed density, WIMP flux scales with inverse mass • SI cross section, normalized to nucleon assuming sN = A2sSI

  28. Collider searches • DM can be produced at the colliders if √s is sufficient • coupling is unknown, but cross section constrained by DM relic density • signature is MET (or nothing if pair produced back-to-back!) • Two main strategies of searches • “model” search: if a BSM model contains a DM candidate, search for all signatures (typically involving MET) → constrain the model → constrain DM phenomenology → compatibility with the relic density • SUSY, ED, Little Higgs, … • “generic” search: look for events with large MET, balanced by one ISR jet/photon → constrain rate → constrain “effective coupling” (vector, axial-vector, scalar) → constrain DM-nucleon cross section (SI and SD) • effective theory is only valid for heavy mediators; light mediators needs to be included explicitly with assumption on their masses (typically better limits for masses ≥ 100 GeV)

  29. Results from collider searches • But experimentalist are catching up fast! • Many DM interpretations of collider searches are done by phenomenologists

More Related