19 Jun 099 Oct 08Feng 1 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN DARK MATTER AND IMPLICATIONS FOR COLLIDERS Fermilab Wine & Cheese 19 June 2009 Jonathan Feng UC Irvine.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WIMPs and superWIMPs Jonathan Feng UC Irvine MIT Particle Theory Seminar 17 March 2003.
Advertisements

MSSM in view of PAMELA and Fermi-LAT Ts. Enkhbat 2 nd workshop on LHC physics, CYCU, Chungli Based on: arXiv: B. BajcB. Bajc, Ts. E, D. K. Ghosh,
Constraining Dark Matter Hai-Bo Yu University of Michigan, Ann Arbor USTC, 06/17/2011.
WIMPless Miracle and Relics in Hidden Sectors Hai-Bo Yu University of California, Irvine Talk given at KITPC 09/16/2008 with Jonathan L. Feng and Huitzu.
Dark Matter Explanation For e^\pm Excesses In Cosmic Ray Xiao-Gang He CHEP, PKU and Physics, NTU.
DARK PARTICLES: WIMPS AND BEYOND Cornell Colloquium 7 November 2011 Jonathan Feng UC Irvine 7 Nov 11Feng 1.
WIMPS AND BEYOND Princeton Colloquium 24 February 2011 Jonathan Feng
27 Oct 08Feng 1 WIMPS AND THEIR RELATIONS Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine 27 October 2008 MIT Nuclear and Particle Physics Colloquium.
17 Dec 09 Feng 1 LHC PROSPECTS FOR COSMOLOGY Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine Annual Theory Meeting IPPP, Durham 17 December 2009.
WIMPs and superWIMPs Jonathan Feng UC Irvine SUGRA20 18 March 2003.
IMPLICATIONS OF RECENT DATA FOR THEORIES OF DARK MATTER
WIMP PARADIGM: CURRENT STATUS 23 Mar 11Feng 1 FNAL Colloquium International Symposium on Experiments on the Cosmic Frontier Jonathan Feng UC Irvine 23.
WIMPLESS DARK MATTER Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine 13 May 2009 UCI Joint Particle Seminar Work with Manoj Kaplinghat, Jason Kumar, John.
DARK MATTER CANDIDATES AND SIGNALS SLAC Colloquium 1 June 2009 Jonathan Feng UC Irvine.
2 June 05Feng 1 DARK MATTERS Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine 2 June 2005 UCSC Colloquium Graphic: N. Graf.
WHAT’S THE MATTER? THE SEARCH FOR CLUES IN OUR COLD, DARK UNIVERSE Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine Heinz R. Pagels Memorial Public Lecture.
WIMPS AND THEIR RELATIONS Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine CIFAR, Mont Tremblant 7 March 2009 Work with Jose Ruiz Cembranos 1, Manoj Kaplinghat.
DARK MATTERS Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine Physics Department Colloquium University of Chicago 2 December 2004.
WIMPs and superWIMPs from Extra Dimensions Jonathan Feng UC Irvine Johns Hopkins Theory Seminar 31 January 2003.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN PARTICLE DARK MATTER KISS Dark Matter Workshop 15 July 2009 Jonathan Feng UC Irvine 15 Jul 09Feng 1.
The LC and the Cosmos: Connections in Supersymmetry Jonathan Feng UC Irvine Arlington LC Workshop January 2003.
20 June 07Feng 1 MICROPHYSICS AND THE DARK UNIVERSE Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine CAP Congress 20 June 2007.
The LC and the Cosmos: Connections in Supersymmetry Jonathan Feng UC Irvine American Linear Collider Physics Group Seminar 20 February 2003.
THE DARK UNIVERSE Jonathan Feng Department of Physics and Astronomy UCI Distinguished Faculty Lecture 26 October 2004.
DARK PARTICLES Jonathan Feng, UC Irvine APS April Meeting Garden Grove, California 3 May 2011.
DARK MATTER Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine University of Colorado, Boulder 21 June 2011 Credit: John Kormendy.
20 June 06Feng 1 DARK MATTER AND SUPERGRAVITY Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine 20 June 2006 Strings 2006, Beijing.
DARK MATTER PHENOMENOLOGY CIPANP Jonathan Feng San Diego
The Dark Universe Progress, Problems, and Prospects Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine APS April Meeting, Denver 1 May 2004.
Feng 1 LHC PROSPECTS FOR COSMOLOGY Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine COSMO 09, CERN 7 September 2009.
DARK MATTERS Hawaii Colloquium 9 September 2010 Jonathan Feng UC Irvine 9 Sep 10Feng 1.
9 Oct 08Feng 1 DARK MATTERS 9 October 2008 Caltech Physics Colloquium Jonathan Feng UC Irvine.
19 Mar 099 Oct 08Feng 1 DARK MATTER CANDIDATES AND SIGNALS 19 March 2009 UCSC Physics Colloquium Jonathan Feng UC Irvine.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN DARK MATTER: THEORY PERSPECTIVE Jonathan Feng, UC Irvine 2010 Phenomenology Symposium University of Wisconsin 12 May 2010.
WIMP AND RELATED MIRACLES Jonathan Feng, UC Irvine Manoj Kaplinghat, Jason Kumar, Huitzu Tu, Haibo Yu Inaugural Workshop, Center for Particle Cosmology.
DARK MATTER MEETS THE SUSY FLAVOR PROBLEM Jonathan Feng University of California, Irvine SLAC NAL 18 March 2009 Work with Manoj Kaplinghat, Jason Kumar,
Significant enhancement of Bino-like dark matter annihilation cross section due to CP violation Yoshio Sato (Saitama University) Collaborated with Shigeki.
Quintessino model and neutralino annihilation to diffuse gamma rays X.J. Bi (IHEP)
Luminous Dark Matter Brian Feldstein arXiv: B.F., P. Graham and S. Rajendran.
The Dark Side of the Universe What is dark matter? Who cares?
24 Sep 2013 DaMaSC 2 Feng 1 DARK MATTER AND ITS PARTICLE PROPERTIES Jonathan Feng, UC Irvine Dark Matter in Southern California (DaMaSC 2) Keck Institute.
24 April 14 Feng 1 DARK MATTER AND THE LHC 24 April 2014 Technion Colloquium UC Irvine Jonathan Feng.
Neutralino Dark Matter in Light Higgs Boson Scenario (LHS) The scenario is consistent with  particle physics experiments Particle mass b → sγ Bs →μ +
DARK MATTER CANDIDATES Cody Carr, Minh Nguyen December 9 th, 2014.
Dark matter in split extended supersymmetry in collaboration with M. Quiros (IFAE) and P. Ullio (SISSA/ISAS) Alessio Provenza (SISSA/ISAS) Newport Beach.
1 Supersymmetry Yasuhiro Okada (KEK) January 14, 2005, at KEK.
Dark Matter Expect Unexpected outside LHC Jingsheng Li.
15 Apr 15 Feng 1 COMPLEMENTARITY OF INDIRECT DARK MATTER DETECTION AMS Days at CERN Jonathan Feng, UC Irvine 15 April 2015.
Neutrino mass and DM direct detection Daijiro Suematsu (Kanazawa Univ.) Erice Sept., 2013 Based on the collaboration with S.Kashiwase PRD86 (2012)
Dark Matter Detection in Space Jonathan Feng UC Irvine SpacePart 03, Washington, DC 10 December 2003.
Collider searchIndirect Detection Direct Detection.
Dark matter and hidden U(1) X (Work in progress, In collaboration with E.J. Chun & S. Scopel) Park, Jong-Chul (KIAS) August 10, 2010 Konkuk University.
Yu-Feng Zhou KITPC/ITP-CAS
Supersymmetry Basics: Lecture II J. HewettSSI 2012 J. Hewett.
SUSY BENCHMARKS FOR SNOWMASS 2013 Jonathan Feng with Patrick Draper, Jamie Gainer, Philipp Kant, Konstantin Matchev, Stefano Profumo, David Sanford, and.
Jonathan Nistor Purdue University 1.  A symmetry relating elementary particles together in pairs whose respective spins differ by half a unit  superpartners.
DARK MATTER FROM THE EARLY UNIVERSE AND PARTICLE PHYSICS CANDIDATES Jonathan Feng, UC Irvine Dark Matter Universe: On the Threshold of Discovery NAS Sackler.
Phys. Lett. B646 (2007) 34, (hep-ph/ ) Non-perturbative effect on thermal relic abundance of dark matter Masato Senami (University of Tokyo, ICRR)
19 May 14 Feng 1 WIMPS: AN OVERVIEW, CURRENT CONSTRAINTS, AND WIMP-LIKE EXTENSIONS Debates on the Nature of Dark Matter The 8 th Harvard-Smithsonian Conference.
An interesting candidate?
Direct Detection of Vector Dark Matter
DARK MATTER Jonathan Feng, UC Irvine SLAC 50th Anniversary Celebration
DARK MATTER AND THE LHC 7 July 2014 Munich Physics Colloquium
John Kelley IceCube Journal Club 27 February 2008
MSSM4G: MOTIVATIONS AND ALLOWED REGIONS
PARTICLE DARK MATTER CANDIDATES
DARK MATTER AND INDIRECT DETECTION IN COSMIC RAYS
GOLDILOCKS COSMOLOGY Work with Ze’ev Surujon, Hai-Bo Yu (1205.soon)
THE WIMPLESS MIRACLE Jason Kumar Louie Strigari Huitzu Tu Haibo Yu
Dark Matter Explanation in Singlet Extension of MSSM
Presentation transcript:

19 Jun 099 Oct 08Feng 1 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN DARK MATTER AND IMPLICATIONS FOR COLLIDERS Fermilab Wine & Cheese 19 June 2009 Jonathan Feng UC Irvine

EVIDENCE FOR DARK MATTER There is now overwhelming evidence that normal (standard model) matter is not all the matter in the Universe: Dark Matter: 23% ± 4% Dark Energy: 73% ± 4% Normal Matter: 4% ± 0.4% Neutrinos: 0.2% (  m /0.1eV) To date, all evidence is from dark matter’s gravitational effects. We would like to detect it in other ways to learn more about it. 19 Jun 09Feng 2

A PRECEDENT In 1821 Alexis Bouvard found anomalies in the observed path of Uranus and suggested they could be caused by dark matter In Urbain Le Verrier determined the expected properties of the dark matter and how to find it. With this guidance, Johann Gottfried Galle discovered dark matter in Jun 09Feng 3 Le Verrier wanted to call it “Le Verrier,” but it is now known as Neptune, the farthest known planet ( , , 2006-present)

19 Jun 09Feng 4 DARK MATTER CANDIDATES There are many Masses and interaction strengths span many, many orders of magnitude Here focus on candidates with mass around m weak ~ 100 GeV HEPAP/AAAC DMSAG Subpanel (2007)

19 Jun 09Feng 5 THE WIMP MIRACLE (1)Assume a new (heavy) particle  is initially in thermal equilibrium:  ↔  f f (2) Universe cools:   f f (3)  s “freeze out”:  f f (1) (2) (3) → ← / → ← / / Zeldovich et al. (1960s)

THE WIMP MIRACLE The resulting relic density is For a WIMP, m X ~ 100 GeV and g X ~ 0.6   X  Jun 09Feng 6 Remarkable coincidence: particle physics independently predicts particles with the right density to be dark matter X X f f̅f̅

19 Jun 09Feng 7 RELIC DENSITY CONSTRAINTS  DM = 23% ± 4% stringently constrains new physics models Feng, Matchev, Wilczek (2003) Focus point region Co-annihilation region Bulk region Yellow: pre-WMAP Red: post-WMAP Too much dark matter Cosmology excludes many possibilities, favors certain regions with distinctive collider signatures CHAMP region Minimal Supergravity

19 Jun 09Feng 8 WIMP DETECTION Correct relic density  “lower bound” on DM-SM interactions  qq Efficient annihilation now (Indirect detection) Efficient scattering now (Direct detection) Efficient production now (Particle colliders)

19 Jun 09Feng 9 DIRECT DETECTION WIMP properties –v ~ c –Kinetic energy ~ 100 keV –Local density ~ 1 / liter Detected by nuclear recoil in underground detectors; two leading methods Background-free detection –Spin-independent scattering is typically the most promising –Theory and experiment compared in the (m X,  proton ) plane –Expt: CDMS, XENON, … –Theory: SUSY region – WHAT ARE WE TO MAKE OF THIS?

19 Jun 09Feng 10 DARK MATTER VS. FLAVOR PROBLEM Squark and slepton masses receive many contributions The gravitino mass m G̃ characterizes the size of gravitational effects, which generically violate flavor and CP For ~ 100 GeV sfermions, these violate low energy constraints (badly) –Flavor: Kaon mixing,   e  –Flavor and CP:  K –CP: neutron EDM, electron EDM

19 Jun 09Feng 11 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CM 2 Some possible solutions –Set flavor violation to 0 by hand –Make sleptons and squarks heavy (few TeV or more) The last eliminates many annihilation diagrams, collapses predictions Summary: The flavor problem   SI ~ cm 2 (focus point SUSY, inverted hierarchy models, more minimal SUSY, 2-1 models, split SUSY,…)

Annual modulation: Collision rate should change as Earth’s velocity adds constructively/destructively with the Sun’s. Drukier, Freese, Spergel (1986) 19 Jun 09Feng 12 DAMA (2008) DAMA: 8  signal with T ~ 1 year, max ~ June 2 DIRECT DETECTION

CHANNELING DAMA’s result is puzzling, in part because the favored region was considered excluded by others This may be ameliorated by –Astrophysics –Channeling: in crystalline detectors, efficiency for nuclear recoil energy  electron energy depends on direction Gondolo, Gelmini (2005) Drobyshevski (2007), DAMA (2007) Channeling reduces threshold, shifts allowed region to –Rather low WIMP masses (~GeV) –Very high  SI (~ cm 2 ) 19 Jun 09Feng 13 TEXONO (2007)

DAMA AND SUPER-K Ways forward –Examine channeling –Other low threshold direct detection experiments Super-K indirect detection –DM captured in the Sun –Annihilates to neutrinos –Neutrinos seen at Super-K 19 Jun 09Feng 14 Comparing apples to oranges? No! The Sun is full, so  SI  capture rate  annihilation rate Current bound: through-going events, extends to m X = 18 GeV Ongoing analysis: fully contained events, sensitive to m X ~ 5 GeV? Hooper, Petriello, Zurek, Kamionkowski (2008); Feng, Kumar, Learned, Strigari (2008) Feng, Kumar, Learned, Strigari (2008)

19 Jun 09Feng 15 Dark Matter annihilates in to a place, which are detected by. some particles an experiment PAMELA INDIRECT DETECTION the halo positrons PAMELA/ATIC/Fermi… ATIC Fermi

PAMELA AND ATIC Jun 09Feng 16 PAMELA (2008) ATIC (2008) e + + e - Solid lines are the predicted spectra from GALPROP (Moskalenko, Strong)

ARE THESE DARK MATTER? Must fit spectrum, not violate other constraints (photons, anti-protons, …) Neutralinos in supersymmetry –   e + e  suppressed by angular momentum conservation –   WW  e+ gives softer spectrum, also accompanied by large anti-proton flux Kaluza-Klein dark matter in UED Appelquist, Cheng, Dobrescu (2001) –B 1 B 1  e  e  unsuppressed, hard spectrum –B 1 couples to hypercharge, B(e + e - ) = 20% –B 1 mass ~ GeV to get right  BUT: flux is a factor of too big for a thermal relic; requires enhancement –astrophysics (very unlikely) –particle physics 19 Jun 09Feng 17 KK dark matter with m ~ 600 GeV ATIC (2008) Cheng, Feng, Matchev (2002)

Hooper et al. (2008) Fermi (2009) FERMI AND HESS 2009 Fermi and HESS do not confirm ATIC: no feature, consistent with background with modified spectral index 19 Jun 09Feng 18 Pulsars can explain PAMELA Zhang, Cheng (2001); Hooper, Blasi, Serpico (2008) Yuksel, Kistler, Stanev (2008) Profumo (2008) ; Fermi (2009) Fermi (2009)

19 Jun 09Feng 19 BEYOND WIMPS The anomalies (DAMA, PAMELA, …) are not easily explained by canonical WIMPs Start over: What do we really know about dark matter? –All solid evidence is gravitational –Also solid evidence against strong and EM interactions A reasonable 1 st guess: dark matter has no SM gauge interactions, i.e., it is hidden Kobsarev, Okun, Pomeranchuk (1966); many others What one seemingly loses Connections to central problems of particle physics The WIMP miracle Signals

19 Jun 09Feng 20 CONNECTIONS TO CENTRAL PROBLEMS IN PARTICLE PHYSICS We want hidden sectors Consider SUSY –Connected to the gauge hierarchy problem –new sectors are already required to break SUSY Hidden sectors appear generically, each has its own –particle content –mass scale m X –Interactions, gauge couplings g X

19 Jun 09 What can we say about hidden sectors in SUSY? Generically, nothing. But the flavor problem motivates models in which squark and slepton masses are determined by gauge couplings (and so flavor blind): m X ~ g X 2 (Gauge mediation, anomaly- mediation, …) This leaves the relic density invariant! Feng 21

The thermal relic density constrains only one combination of g X and m X These models map out the remaining degree of freedom; candidates have a range of masses and couplings, but always the right relic density The flavor problem becomes a virtue Naturally accommodates multi-component DM, all with relevant  THE WIMPLESS MIRACLE 19 Jun 09Feng 22 WIMPs WIMPless DM Feng, Kumar (2008); Feng, Tu, Yu (2008)

HOW LARGE CAN HIDDEN SECTORS BE? Hidden sectors contribute to expansion rate BBN: N = 3.24 ± 1.2, excludes an identical copy of the MSSM Cyburt et al. (2004) But this is sensitive to temperature differences; even a factor of 2 makes a hidden MSSM viable  RH = ratio of reheat temperatures MSSM MSSM (1 gen) 19 Jun 09Feng 23

SIGNALS Hidden DM has no SM gauge interactions, but may interact through non- gauge couplings For example, introduce connectors Y with both MSSM and hidden charge 19 Jun 09Feng 24 Y particles mediate both annihilation to and scattering off SM particles

EXAMPLE Assume WIMPless DM X is a scalar, add fermion connectors Y, interacting through For f=b, Y’s are b’, t’ with hidden charge Kribs, Plehn, Spannowsky, Tait (2007) Explains DAMA easily – b ~ –m X ~ 5 GeV (WIMPless miracle) –m Y ~ 400 GeV (large  SI ) Any such DAMA explanation  exotic b’, t’ at Tevatron, LHC 19 Jun 09Feng 25 Feng, Kumar, Learned, Strigari (2008) X bLbL YLYL b b bRbR YRYR X

How is dark matter stabilized? Conventional answer is by a parity conservation, but there are no such SM examples HIDDEN CHARGED DM MSSM m w sparticles, W, Z, t ~GeV q, l 0 p, e, ,, G̃ Hidden, flavor-free MSSM m X sparticles, W, Z, q, l,  ̃  or  0 g, ,, G̃ If the hidden sector is a flavor-free MSSM, natural DM candidate is any hidden charged particle, stabilized by exact U(1) EM symmetry, just like the SM electron 19 Jun 09Feng 26

HIDDEN CHARGED DM DM with hidden charge requires a re-thinking of the standard cold DM picture: Bound states form (and annihilate) in the early Universe  relic density Sommerfeld enhanced annihilation  decays in protohalo Compton scattering X  h  X  h delays kinetic decoupling  small scale structure Rutherford scattering XX  XX: self-interacting, collisional dark matter Feng, Kaplinghat, Tu, Yu (2009) 19 Jun 09Feng 27

BOUNDS ON COLLISIONAL DM Hidden charged particles exchange energy through Rutherford scattering Constraints on collisions –Bullet cluster –Non-spherical halos  DM can’t be too collisional Consistent with WIMPless miracle for 1 GeV < m DM < 10 TeV Interesting astrophysics Many interesting, related ideas Pospelov, Ritz (2007); Hooper, Zurek (2008) Ackerman, Buckley, Carroll, Kamionkowski (2008) Kamionkowski, Profumo (2008), … 19 Jun 09Feng 28

19 Jun 09Feng 29 CONCLUSIONS Rapid experimental progress –Direct detection –Indirect detection –Colliders (LHC) Proliferation of new classes of candidates with widely varying properties and implications for particle physics and astrophysics In the next few years, many DM models will be stringently tested; we will either see something or be forced to rethink some of our most cherished prejudices