W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, We don’t know it, because we don’t see it! Indirect Evidence for Dark Matter from Galactic Gamma Rays WdB, C. Sander, V. Zhukov, A. Gladyshev, D. Kazakov, EGRET excess of diffuse Galactic Gamma Rays as Tracer of DM, astro-ph/ , A&A, 444 (2005) 51 DM what is it?

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Do we have Dark Matter in our Galaxy? Rotationcurve Solarsystem rotation curve Milky Way

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, How much Dark Matter in Universe? If it is not dark, it does not matter Dark Matter: Grav. attractive Dark Energy: Grav. repulsive (if dρ/dt=0!)  = ρ / ρ crit =  B +  DM +   =1 23±4% of energy in Universe = DM (WIMPS) SNIa sensitive to acceleration, i.e.   - (  SM +  DM ) CMB sensitive to overall density, i.e.   +  SM +  DM )

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Expansion rate of universe determines WIMP annihilation cross section Thermal equilibrium abundance Actual abundance T=M/22 Comoving number density x=m/T Jungmann,Kamionkowski, Griest, PR 1995 WMAP ->  h 2 =0.113  > = cm 3 /s DM increases in Galaxies:  1 WIMP/coffee cup  DMA (  ρ 2 ) restarts again.. T>>M: f+f->M+M; M+M->f+f T f+f T=M/22: M decoupled, stable density (wenn Annihilationrate  Expansions- rate, i.e.  = n  (x fr )  H(x fr ) !) Annihilation into lighter particles, like Quarks and Leptons ->  0 ’s -> Gammas! Only assumption in this analysis: WIMP = THERMAL RELIC!

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Example of DM annihilation (SUSY) Dominant  +   A  b bbar quark pair Sum of diagrams should yield = cm 3 /s to get correct relic density Quark-Fragmentation known! Hence spectra of positrons, gammas and antiprotons known! Relative amount of ,p,e+ known as well.           f f f f f f Z Z W W  00 f ~ AZ ≈37 gammas

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Idea of analysis WdB, C. Sander, V. Zhukov, A. Gladyshev, D. Kazakov, EGRET excess of diffuse Galactic Gamma Rays as Tracer of DM, astro-ph/ , A&A, 444 (2005) 51 Idea: Thermal relics disappeared by annihilation. (From WMAP Annihilation cross section = /Ωh 2 ) Annihilation into Quarks with this x-section should yield large amount of Gamma Rays (37γ’s/Annihilation from LEP data) Gamma spectrum from DMA significantly harder than dominant background from inelastic pp collisions (Cosmic Rays on H-gas) Background shape KNOWN from fixed target experiments, DMA Gamma Ray shape KNOWN from LEP data EGRET Data indeed shows such an expected excess with expected spectral SHAPE IN ALL SKY directions and INTENSITY of excess allows to measure DM distribution in GALAXY. Then one knows MASS distribution of DM and visible matter and can calculate ROTATION CURVE (RC). IF GAMMA RAYS indeed originate from DMA, then this can be proven by calculating shape of RC from Gamma Rays!

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Instrumental parameters: Energy range: GeV Energy resolution: ~20% Effective area: 1500 cm 2 Angular resol.: <0.5 0 Data taking: Main results: Catalogue of point sources Excess in diffuse gamma rays This talk: Excess consistent with DMA of 60 GeV WIMP in ALL sky directions Excess distribution explains peculiar shape of rotation curve (A&A, 444 (2005) 51) EGRET on CGRO (Compton Gamma Ray Observ.) Data publicly available from NASA archive

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, The EGRET excess of diffuse galactic gamma rays without and with DM annihilation π0π0 π0π0 WIMPS IC Brems IC Brems If normalization free, only relative point-to-point errors of ≤7% important, not absolute normalization error of 15%. Statistical errors negligible. Fit only KNOWN shapes of BG + DMA, i.e. 1 or 2 parameter fit NO GALACTIC models needed. Propagation of gammas straightforward

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, No SM Electrons No SM Protons Quarks from WIMPS Quarks in protons What about background shape? Background from nuclear interactions (mainly p+p-> π 0 + X ->  + X inverse Compton scattering (e-+  -> e- +  ) Bremsstrahlung (e- + N -> e- +  + N) Shape of background KNOWN if Cosmic Ray spectra of p and e- known

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, PYTHIA processes: 11 f+f' -> f+f' (QCD) f+fbar -> f'+fbar' 0 13 f+fbar -> g + g 0 28 f+g -> f + g g+g -> g + g g+g -> f + fbar Single diffractive (XB) Single diffractive (AX) Double diffractive Low-pT scattering 0 Prompt photon production: 14 f+fbar -> g+γ 0 18 f+fbar -> γ +γ 0 29 f+g -> f +γ g+g -> g + γ g+g -> γ + γ 0 Contribution from various hadronic processes 2 GeV diff.

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Background + signal describe EGRET data!

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Analysis of EGRET Data in 6 sky directions A: inner Galaxy (l=±30 0, |b|<5 0 ) B: Galactic plane avoiding A C: Outer Galaxy D: low latitude ( ) E: intermediate lat. ( ) F: Galactic poles ( ) A: inner Galaxy B: outer disc C: outer Galaxy D: low latitude E: intermediate lat.F: galactic poles Total  2 for all regions :28/36  Prob.= 0.8 Excess above background > 10σ.

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Fits for 180 instead of 6 regions 180 regions: 8 0 in longitude  45 bins 4 bins in latitude  0 0 <|b|< <|b|< <|b|< <|b|<90 0  4x45=180 bins bulge disk sun

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, x y z 2002,Newberg et al. Ibata et al, Crane et al. Yanny et al. 1/r 2 profile and rings determined from inde- pendent directions xy xz Expected Profile v 2  M/r=cons. and  (M/r)/r 2  1/r 2 for const. rotation curve Divergent for r=0? NFW  1/r Isotherm const. Dark Matter distribution Halo profile Observed Profile xy xz Outer Ring Inner Ring bulge totalDM 1/r 2 halo disk Rotation Curve Normalize to solar velocity of 220 km/s

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Honma & Sofue (97) Schneider &Terzian (83) Brand & Blitz(93) Rotation curve of Milky Way

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Do other galaxies have bumps in rotation curves? Sofue & Honma

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Possible origin of ring like structure Infall of dwarf galaxy in gravitational potential of larger galaxy into elliptical orbit start precessions, if matter is not distributed homogeneous. Tidal forces  gradient of field, i.e.  1/r 3. This means tidal disruption only effective at pericenter for large ellipticity! Apocenter Pericenter Could tidal disruption of dwarf galaxy lead to ringlike structure of solar masses? N-body simulations no clear answer. All depends on initial conditions. Also no clear explanation for ring of stars of 10 9 solar masses.

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Tidal disruption of satellite in potential of larger galaxy Hayashi et al., astro-ph/

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Enhancement of inner (outer) ring over 1/r 2 profile 6 (8). Mass in rings 0.3 (3)% of total DM Inner Ring coincides with ring of dust and H 2 -> gravitational potential well! H2H2 4 kpc coincides with ring of neutral hydrogen molecules! H+H->H 2 in presence of dust-> grav. potential well at 4-5 kpc.

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Physics Questions answered SIMULTANEOUSLY if WIMP = thermal relic Astrophysicists: What is the origin of “GeV excess” of diffuse Galactic Gamma Rays? Astronomers: Why a change of slope in the galactic rotation curve at R 0 ≈ 11 kpc? Why ring of stars at 14 kpc? Why ring of molecular hydrogen at 4 kpc? Cosmologists: How is DM annihilating? A: into quark pairs How is Cold Dark Matter distributed? Particle physicists: Is DM annihilating as expected in Supersymmetry? A: DM substructure A: DM annihilation A: standard profile + substructure A: Cross sections perfectly consistent with mSUGRA for light gauginos, heavy squarks/sleptons

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, (wrong) objections against DMA interpretation 1)Proton spectra only measured locally. Spectra near center of galaxy, where protons are accelerated, can be different and produce harder gamma spectrum, as observed by EGRET. Answer: proton energy loss times larger than age of universe, so proton energy spectra will become equal by diffusion This is PROVEN by the fact that we see same spectrum and same excess in inner and outer galaxy. 2) Is background known well enough to make such strong statements? A: Background SHAPE is known, since mainly from pp collisions. Analysis does not depend on absolute fluxes from propagation models. Propagation.of gammas is straightforward. 3) Can unresolved point sources be responsible for excess? Answer: NO, if they have similar spectra as the many resolved point sources, they would reduce the data points at low energy, thus increasing the DMA contribution if shapes are fitted. Also do not expect 1/r 2 profile for point sources.

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Bergstrom et al. astro-ph/ , Abstract: we investigate the viability of the model using the DarkSUSY package to compute the gamma-ray and antiproton fluxes. We are able to show that their (=WdB et al) model is excluded by a wide margin from the measured flux of antiprotons. Problem with DarkSUSY (DS): 1)Flux of antiprotons/gamma in DarkSUSY:  O(1) from DMA. However, O(10 -3 ) from LEP data Reason: DS has diffusion box with isotropic diffusion -> DMA fills up box with high density of antiprotons 2) More realistic models have anisotropic diffusion. E.g. spiral galaxies have magnetic fields perpendicular to disk-> antiprotons may spiral quickly out of Galaxy. 10 (wrong) objections against DMA interpretation 4) Does antiproton rate exclude interpretation of EGRET data? (L.B.)

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Magnetic fields observed in spiral galaxies A few uG perpendicular to disc: Diffusion preferentially  to disc? Alternativ: strong convection A few µG along spiral arms: Can lead to slow radial diffusion Isotropic diffusion assumes randomly oriented magnetic turbulences. Preferred magnetic field directions -> anisotropic diffusion disk fieldline

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Antiprotons B/C ratio Preliminary results from GALPROP with isotropic and anisotropic propagation Summary: with anisotropic propagation you can send charged particles whereever you want and still be consistent with B/C and 10 Be/ 9 Be

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Cosmic clocks: 10 Be/ 9 Be

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, (wrong) objections against DMA interpretation 5) Rotation curves in outer galaxy measured with different method than inner rotation curve. Can you combine? Also it depends on R 0. Answer: first points of outer RC have same negative slope as inner RC so no problem with method. Change of slope seen for every R 0. 6) Ringlike structures have enhanced density of hydrogen, so you expect excess of gamma radiation there. Why you need DMA? Answer: since we fit only the shapes of signal and BG, a higher gas density is automatically taken into account and DMA is needed to fit the spectral shape of the data. 7) Is EGRET data reliable enough to make such strong statements? Answer: EGRET spectrometer was calibrated in photon beam at SLAC. Calibration carefully monitored in space. Impossible to get calibration wrong in such a way that it fakes DMA. R 0 =8.3 kpc R 0 =7.0 v R/R 0 Inner rotation curve Outer RC Black hole at centre: R 0 =8.0  0.4 kpc Sofue &Honma Statistical errors only EGRET EXCESS

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, (wrong) objections against DMA interpretation 7) How can you be sure that this outer ring is from the tidal disruption of satellite galaxy, so one can expect DM there? Answer: one observes rings for all three ingredients of a galaxy: gas, stars and DM. The stars cannot be part of the disk, since the thickness of the ring is a factor 20 larger than the thickness of the disk. Furthermore, very small velocity dispersion of stars 8) Is it not peculiar that the rings are in the plane of the disk? Answer: the angular momenta of halo and disk tend to align after a certain time of precession, so rings end up in plane of the disk.. 9) The inner ring was not observed as a ring of stars. How can you be sure DM concentrates there? Answer: The density of stars and dust is to high to obtain substructure in the star population. However, the ring of dust and molecular hydrogen are proof of a graviational well, which indicates DM. 10) How can one reconstruct 3D halo profiles, if one observes gamma rays only along the line of sight without knowing the distance? Answer: if one observes in ALL directions, one can easily unfold, see rings of Saturn (same problem).

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, What about Supersymmetry?

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Symmetry between Fermions  Bosons (Matter particles)(exchange particles) Comparison with SUPERSYMMETRY SUSY masses: GeV ! Lightest Supersymmetric Particle (LSP) is stable, heavy and weakly interacting  excellent Weakly Interacting Massive Particle (WIMP)  DM candidate! R-Parity conservation: TWO SUSY particles at each vertex! LSP mostly photinolike in MSSM  DM = supersymmetric partner of CMB

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, EGRET? Cross sections for Direct DM detection in mSUGRA

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Gauge unification perfect with SUSY spectrum from EGRET With SUSY spectrum from EGRET + WMAP data and start values of couplings from final LEP data perfect gauge coupling unification! Update from Amaldi, dB, F ü rstenau, PLB SM SUSY Also b->s  and g-2 in agreement with SUSY spectrum from EGRET

W. de Boer, Univ. Karlsruhe Heidelberg, July 11, Summary EGRET excess shows that WIMP is thermal relic with expected annihilation into quark pairs SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION of annihilation signal is signature for DMA which clearly shows that EGRET excess is tracer of DM by fact that one can CONSTRUCT ROTATION CURVE FROM GAMMA RAYS. DM becomes visible by gamma rays from fragmentation (30-40 gamma rays of few GeV pro annihilation from π0 decays) Conventional models CANNOT explain above points SIMULTANEOUSLY, especially spectrum of gamma rays in all directions, 1/r 2 profile, shape of rotation curve, ring of stars at 14 kpc and ring of H 2 at 4 kpc, …. Results rather model independent, since only KNOWN spectral shapes of signal and background used, NO model dependent calculations of abs.fluxes. Different models or unknown experimental problems may change boost factor and/or WIMP mass, BUT NOT the distribution in the sky.