1. Dark Matter in the Universe
Katherine Freese
Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics
University of Michigan

2. OUTLINE I) Review of Evidence for Dark Matter
II) Dark Matter Detection: Are any of three claimed detections right?
DAMA, HEAT, gamma-rays from galactic center
Effect of mass distribution in Halo on detection: Sagittarius stream can be a smoking gun for WIMP detection
III) DARK STARS: dark matter in the first stars produces a new phase of stellar evolution!

3. Pie Chart of the Universe

4. The Dark Matter Problem:
90% of the mass in galaxies and clusters of galaxies are made of an unknown dark matter component
Known from: rotation curves,
gravitational lensing,
hot gas in clusters.

5. Our Galaxy:
The Milky Way
The mass of the galaxy:
solar masses

6. Schematic
of Milky Way

7. Galaxies have Dark Matter Haloes

8. Solar System Rotation Curve
Average Speeds of the Planets
As you move out from
the Sun, speeds of the
planets drop.

9. Tyco Brahe (1546-1601) Lost his nose in a duel, and wore a gold and
silver replacement.
Studied planetary orbits.
Died of a burst bladder
at a dinner with the king.

10. Rotation Curves of Galaxies
Orbit of a star in a
Galaxy: speed is
Determined by
Mass

11. Speed is determined by Mass
The speed at distance
r from the center of
the galaxy is determined
by the mass interior to
that radius. Larger mass
causes faster orbits.

12. Vera Rubin Studied rotation curves of galaxies, and found
that they are FLAT

13. 95% of the matter in galaxies is unknown dark matter
Rotation Curves of Galaxies:
OBSERVED:
FLAT ROTATION
CURVE
EXPECTED
FROM STARS

14. Sun’s orbit is sped up by dark matter in the Milky Way

15. Lensing: Another way to detect dark matter: it makes light bend

16. Lensing by dark matter

17. Dark Matter in a Rich Cluster

18. Hot Gas in Clusters: The Coma Cluster
Without dark matter, the hot gas would evaporate.
Optical Image
X-ray Image from the ROSAT satellite

19. Dark Matter Candidates
MACHOs (massive compact halo objects)
WIMPs
Axions
Neutrinos (too light)
Primordial black holes
WIMPzillas
Kaluza Klein particles

20. Baryonic Dark Matter is NOT enough

21. The Dark Matter is NOT Diffuse Hot Gas (would produce x-rays)
Cool Neutral Hydrogen (see in quasar absorption lines)
Small lumps or snowballs of hydrogen (would evaporate)
Rocks or Dust (high metallicity)
(Hegyi and Olive 1986)

22. MACHOS (Massive Compact Halo Objects)
Faint stars
Planetary Objects (Brown Dwarfs)
Stellar Remnants:
White Dwarfs
Neutron Stars
Black Holes

23. Is Dark Matter Made of Stars? NO!
Faint Stars: Hubble Space Telescope
Planetary Objects:
parallax data
microlensing experiments
Together, these objects make up less than 3% of the mass of the Milky Way.
(Graff and Freese 96)

24. MACHO AND EROS

25. Is Dark Matter made of Stellar Remnants (white dwarfs, neutron stars, black holes)? partly
Their progenitors overproduce infrared radiation.
Their progenitors overproduce element abundances (C, N, He)
Enormous mass budget.
Requires extreme properties to make them.
NONE of the expected signatures of a stellar remnant population is found.
AT MOST 20% OF THE HALO CAN BE MADE OF STELLAR REMNANTS
[Fields, Freese, and Graff (ApJ 2000, New Astron. 1998); Graff, KF, Walker and Pinsonneault (ApJ Lett. 1999)]

26. Candidate MACHO microlensing event in M87 (giant elliptical galaxy in VIRGO cluster, 14 Mpc away)
Baltz, Gondolo,
and Shara
(ApJ 2004)
Consistent with
MACHO data in
Milky Way (to LMC)

27. DESPERATELY LOOKING FOR WIMPS!
I HATE MACHOS!
DESPERATELY LOOKING FOR WIMPS!

28. Good news: cosmologists don't need to "invent" new particle:
Axions
ma~10-(3-6) eV
arises in Peccei-Quinn
solution to strong-CP
problem
Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPS). e.g.,neutralinos

29. AXIONS

30. Axion masses

31. AXION BOUNDS from ADMX RF cavity experiment (1998)

32. Overall status of axion bounds

33. Inflation with the QCD axion
Chain Inflate:
Tunnel from higher to lower minimum in stages, with a fraction of an efold at each stage
Freese, Liu, and Spolyar (2005)
V (a) = V0[1− cos (Na /v)] − η cos(a/v +γ)

34. WIMPs Prospects for detection: Lightest Neutralino, LSP in MSSM
Relic Density: h2≈( 3x10-26 cm3/sec / sm)
Annihilation cross section sm of Weak Interaction strength gives right answer
Prospects for detection:
direct
Neutrinos
from sun/earth
Detectio n
indirect
anomalous
cosmic rays
WIMP candidate motivated by SUSY:
Lightest Neutralino, LSP in MSSM

35. Supersymmetry
Particle theory designed to keep particle masses at the right values
Every particle we know has a partner:
photon photino
quark squark
electron selectron
The lightest supersymmetric partner is a dark matter candidate.

36. Lightest Super Symmetric Particle: neutralino
Most popular dark matter candidate.
Mass 1Gev-10TeV
(canonical value 100GeV)
Majorana particles: they are their own antiparticles and thus annihilate with themselves
Annihilation rate in the early universe determines the density today.
The annihilation rate comes purely from particle physics and automatically gives the right answer for the relic density!

37. Dark Matter Annihilation
Annihilation mediated by weak interaction.
Thus for the standard neutralino (WIMPS):
On going searches: LHC, CDMS XENON, GLAST, ICECUBE

38. SUSY dark matter
Coannihilation included (Binetruy, Girardi, and Salati 1984);
Griest and Seckel 1991)

39. Mass contours and composition of nearly pure LSP states in the MSSM
Olive
2003

40. mSUGRA

41. Searching for dark WIMPs
Direct Detection (Goodman and Witten 1986; Drukier, Freese, and Spergel 1986)
Neutrinos from Sun (Silk, Olive, and Srednicki 1985) or Earth (Freese 1986; Krauss and Wilczek 1986)
Anomalous Cosmic rays from Galactic Halo (Ellis, KF et al 1987)
Neutrinos, Gamma-rays, radio waves from galactic center (Gondolo and Silk 1999)
N.B. SUSY WIMPs are their own antiparticles; they annihilate among themselves to 1/3 neutrinos, 1/3 photons, 1/3 electrons and positrons

42. Detecting Dark Matter Particles
Accelerators
Direct Detection
Indirect Detection (Neutrinos)
Sun (Silk,Olive,Srednicki ‘85)
Earth (Freese ‘86; Krauss, Srednicki, Wilczek ‘86)
Indirect Detection (Gamma Rays, positrons)
Milky Way Halo (Ellis, KF et al ‘87)
Galactic Center (Gondolo and Silk 2000)
Anomalous signals seen in HEAT (e+), HESS, CANGAROO, WMAP, EGRET, etc.

43. Detection of WIMP dark matter
A WIMP in the Galaxy
travels through our detectors. It hits a nucleus, and deposits
a tiny amount of energy. The nucleus recoils, and we detect
this energy deposit.
Expected Rate: less than one count/kg/day!

44. Three claims of WIMP dark matter detection: how can we be sure?
1) The DAMA annual modulation
2) The HEAT positron excess
3) Gamma-rays from Galactic Center
HAS DARK MATTER BEEN DISCOVERED?

45. The DAMA Annual Modulation

46. DAMA annual modulation Drukier, Freese, and Spergel (PRD 1986); Freese, Frieman, and Gould (PRD 1988)
Bernabei et al 2003
Data do show a 6s modulation
WIMP interpretation is controversial

47. DAMA/LIBRA
(April 17, 2008)
8 sigma

48. Event rate (number of events)/(kg of detector)/(keV of recoil energy)
Spin-independent
Spin-dependent

49. DAMA: spin-independent?
Spin-independent cross section with canonical Maxwellian halo
is excluded by CDMS-II (2004)
EDELWEISS
DAMA
CDMS-II
Baltz&Gondolo
Bottino et al

50. 2008
DAMA
CDMS
XENON

51. DAMA: spin-independent?
Gondolo, Gelmini 2004
Possible at small masses with
canonical halo and Maxwellian distribution
Galactic or extragalactic dark matter streams

52. DAMA: spin-dependent?
Savage, Gondolo, Freese 2004
(1) Neutron only

53. DAMA: spin-dependent?
Savage, Gondolo, Freese 2004
(2) Proton only

54. DAMA: spin-dependent?
Savage, Gondolo, Freese 2004
(3) Proton+neutron

55. WIMP direct searches

56. The HEAT Positron Excess

57. Positron excess HEAT balloon found anomaly in cosmic ray positron flux
Explanation 1: dark matter annihilation
Explanation 2: we do not understand cosmic ray propagation
Upcoming: PAMELA data release, June 2008
Baltz, Edsjo, Freese, Gondolo 2001

58. Gamma-rays from the Galactic Center

59. Dark Matter at Galactic Center?
CANGAROO observations of gamma-rays from Galactic Center
Tsuchiya et al 2004
Possible interpretation in terms of WIMP annihilation
Hooper et al 2004

61. HESS Gamma-ray Data
Aharonian et al 2004

62. WIMPs at Galactic Center?
One can fit either CANGAROO and HESS spectra (but not both)
Horns 2004

63. Neutralinos at Galactic Center?
mSUGRA study
Hall, Baltz, Gondolo 2004
Compact source: pc
J~10 or 103
Compatible with mass from stellar motions
Ghez et al 2003
Genzel et al 2003

64. Gamma Ray Status: from WIMP annihilation in Galactic Center?
CANGAROO: possible detection up to 10TeV
HESS: different power law
Can explain with astrophysics?
Not easy to get intensity in SUSY
New decay channel for Kaluza-Klein particles
CACTUS observed Draco (nearby dwarf galaxy).

65. WMAP microwave emission interpreted as dark matter annihilation in inner galaxy?
Consistent with 100 GeV WIMPs.
Finkbeiner 2005

66. Gamma-ray line GLAST may do it below ~80 GeV
Characteristic of WIMP annihilation
Need good energy resolution
GLAST may do
it below ~80 GeV
GLAST Simulation
Bergstrom, Ullio and
Buckley 1998

67. Three Claims of WIMP detection
The DAMA annual modulation
The HEAT positron excess
Gamma-rays from Galactic Center

68. Upcoming Data LHC (find SUSY) Indirect Detection due to annihilation:
GLAST first light May 27, 2008 (gamma rays)
PAMELA (positrons)
ICECUBE (neutrinos)
Direct Detection: CDMS, XENON, WARP, CRESST, ZEPLIN, COUPP, KIMS …

69. On GLAST
First light, May 27, 2008
DM annihilation to gamma rays

76. Dark Matter Distribution in Halo affects Signal in Detectors

78. Streams of WIMPs
For example, leading tidal stream of Sagittarius dwarf galaxy may pass through Solar System
Majewski et al 2003, Newberg et al 2003
Dark matter density in stream ~
Freese, Gondolo, Newberg 2003
New annual modulation of rate and endpoint energy; difficult to mimic with lab effects
Freese, Gondolo, Newberg, Lewis 2003

79. Sagittarius stream Rate modulation Endpoint energy modulation
Plot for 20% Sgr stream density (to make effect visible); scp=2.7x10-42cm2

80. Sagittarius stream Directional detection with DRIFT-II
Freese, Gondolo, Newberg 2003
Directional detection with DRIFT-II

81. Stream shifts peak date of annual modulation

82. Sagittarius stream
Increases countrate in detectors up to cutoff in energy spectrum
Cutoff location moves in time
Sticks out like a sore thumb in directional detectors
Changes date of peak in annual modulation
Smoking gun for WIMP detection

83. Dark Stars: Dark Matter Annihilation in the First Stars leads to a new phase of stellar evolution.
Katherine Freese
Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, (2008)
D. Spolyar , K .Freese, and P. Gondolo
arXiv:
K. Freese, D. Spolyar, and A. Aguirre
Also with P. Bodenheimer and N. Yoshida

84. Our Results
Dark Matter (DM) in proto-stellar haloes can dramatically alter the formation of the first stars
The LSP (lightest supersymmetric particle) provides a heat source that prevents the protostar from further collapse, leading to a new stellar phase:
The first stars in the universe are giant (> 1 A.U.) H/He stars powered by dark matter annihilation rather than by fusion

85. Basic Picture The first stars form in a DM rich environment
As the gas cools and collapses to form the first stars, the cloud pulls DM in as it collapses.
DM annihilates and annihilates more rapidly as its densities increase
At a high enough DM density, the DM heating overwhelms any cooling mechanisms which stops the cloud from continuing to cool and collapse.

86. Basic Picture Continued
Thus a gas cloud forms which is supported by DM annihilation
More DM and gas accretes onto the initial core which potentially leads to a very massive gas cloud supported by DM annihilation.
If it were fusion, we would call it a star.
Hence the name Dark Star

87. The First Stars- standard picture Dark Matter
The LSP (lightest SUSY particle)
Density Profile
DM annihilation: a heat source that overwhelms cooling in Pop III star formation
Outcome: A new stellar phase
Observable consequences
1 a dark star
2 a dark star phase
3 modified collapse accretion

88. Dark Matter 

89.  Talk about Gas first

90. The First Stars Important for: End of Dark Ages.
Reionize the universe.
Provide enriched gas for later stellar generations.
May be precursors to black holes which power quasars.

91. First Stars: Standard Picture
Formation Basics:
At z = 10-50
Form inside DM haloes of ( ) M
Baryons initially only 15%
The dominant cooling Mechanism is H2
Not a very good coolant
(Hollenbach and McKee ‘79)

92. 0.3 Mpc
Naoki Yoshida

93. Self-gravitating cloud
5pc
Yoshida

94.  Time increasing
 Density increasing
ABN 2002

95. A new born proto-star
with T* ~ 20,000K
r ~ 10 Rsun!

96. Thermal evolution of a primordial gas
adiabatic phase
Must be cool to collapse!
104
collision
induced
emission
H2 formation
line cooling
　(NLTE)
T [K]
3-body
reaction
Heat
release
opaque
to cont.
and
dissociation
103
loitering
(~LTE)
opaque to
molecular
line
adiabatic
contraction
102
number density

97. H2 Cooling and Collapse Gas Density: n.b fraction of Atomic H
Molecular H
Atomic H

98. Cooling 3-Body Reaction H+H+H  H2+H Becomes 100% molecular
Opacity  less efficient cooling

99. Cooling to Collapse Other cooling processes CIE Disassociation Atomic
Mini Core Forms at
(Omukai and Nishi ‘98)

100. Scales Final stellar Mass?? in standard picture Jeans Mass ~ 1000 Mat
Central Core Mass (requires cooling)
 accretion
Final stellar Mass??
in standard picture

101. Dark Matter + Pop III Stars
Dark Matter annihilation heats the collapsing gas cloud preventing further collapse, which halts the march toward the main sequence.
A “Dark Star” may result forming
(a new Stellar phase)

102. Dark Matter Heating Heating rate: Fraction of annihilation energy
deposited in the gas:
Annihilation products
Gas density

103. Dark Matter 

104. Lightest Super Symmetric Particle: neutralino
Most popular dark matter candidate.
Mass 1Gev-10TeV
(canonical value 100GeV)
Majorana particles: they are their own antiparticles and thus annihilate with themselves
Annihilation rate in the early universe determines the density today.
The annihilation rate comes purely from particle physics and automatically gives the right answer for the relic density!

105. Dark Matter Annihilation
Annihilation mediated by weak interaction.
Thus for the standard neutralino (WIMPS):
On going searches: LHC, CDMS XENON, GLAST, ICECUBE

106. Dark Matter Our Canonical Case: Minimal supergravity (SUGRA)
Mass 50GeV-2TeV
can be an order of magnitude bigger
Nonthermal relics
can be much larger!

107. Dark Matter We consider a range: Results apply to other candidates
Mass: 1GeV-10TeV
a range of Cross sections
Results apply to other candidates
Sterile 
K-K particles

108. Dark Matter Density Profile
Annihilation rate proportional to square of dark matter density
We need to know how much dark matter is inside the star: what is the DM profile?

109. Substructure 
NFW profile
Via Lactea 2006

110. Hierarchical Structure Formation
Smallest objects form first
Pop III stars (105 M)
Merge  galaxies
Merge  clusters etc.

111. Numerical Simulations
NFW Profile (Navarro,Frank,white ‘96)
“Central Density”
“Scale Radius”

112. The DM density of the universe at the time of formation.
Other Variables
We can exchange
radius at which
The DM density of the universe at the time of formation.

113. Dark Matter Density Profile
Adiabatic contraction (a prescription):
As baryons fall into core, DM particles respond to potential well.
Profile
that we find:
(using prescription from Blumenthal, Faber, Flores, and Primack ‘86)

114. Does not Conserve energy
Gas collapses to
Higher and Higher
Densities.
Does not Conserve energy
or angular Momentum!

115.  Time increasing
 Density increasing
ABN 2002

116. DM profile and Gas Gas densities: Gas Profile Envelope
Black: 1016 cm-3 
Red: 1013 cm-3
Green: 1010 cm-3
ABN 2002 
Blue: Original NFW Profile
Z=20 Cvir=2 M=7x105 M

117. How accurate is Blumenthal method for DM density profile?
Work with Jerry Sellwood (in prep):
There exist three adiabatic invariants.
In spherical case, one is zero. Blumenthal method conserves only angular momentum; takes into account only circular orbits. With Sellwood, also include radial orbits and invariant. Find that our naivest results were only high by 25%! Adiabatic conraction works where it really shouldn’t.

118. Dark Matter Heating 1/3 electrons 1/3 photons 1/3 neutrinos
Heating rate:
Fraction of annihilation energy
deposited in the gas:
Previous work noted that at
annihilation products simply escape
(Ripamonti,Mapelli,Ferrara 07)
1/3 electrons
1/3 photons
1/3 neutrinos

119. Crucial Transition   
At sufficiently high densities, most of the annihilation energy is trapped inside the core and heats it up
When:
The DM heating dominates over all cooling mechanisms, impeding the further collapse of the core   

120. DM Heating dominates over cooling when the red lines cross the blue/green lines (standard evolutionary tracks from simulations). Then heating impedes further collapse.

121. New Stellar Phase: fueled by dark matter
Yoshida
et al ‘07
Yoshida etal. 2007

122. New Stellar Phase
“Dark Star” supported by DM annihilation rather than fusion
They are giant diffuse stars that fill Earth’s orbit
THE POWER OF DARKNESS: DM is only 2% of the mass of the star but provides the heat source
Dark stars are made of DM but are not dark:
they do shine, although they’re cooler than standard early stars.
Mass 11 M
Mass 0.6 M
Luminosity 140 solar

123. Key Question: Lifetime of Dark Stars
How long does it take the DM in the core to annihilate away?
For example for our canonical case:
v.s. dynamical time of <103yr:
the core may fill in with DM again s.t. annihilation heating continues for a longer time
Are there still some dark stars around today?

124. Possible effects
Reionization: Delayed due to later formation of Pop III stars? Can study with upcoming measurements of 21 cm line.
Solve big early black hole problem.
Massive quasars at high z

125. Observables Dark stars are giant objects with core radii > 1 a.u.
Find them with JWST:
NASA’s 4 billion dollar sequel to HST plans to see the first stars and should be able to differentiate standard fusion driven ones from dark stars, which will be cooler
 annihilation products in AMANDA or ICECUBE? Fluxes too low, angular resolution inadequate in current detectors. Someday.
Can neutralinos be discovered via dark stars or can we learn more about their properties?

126. DARK STARs (in conclusion)
The first Stars live in a DM rich environment.
DM annihilation heating in Pop III protostars can delay/block their production.
A new stellar phase DARK STARS
Driven by DM annihilating and not by fusion!

127. What happens next? Outer material accretes onto core Once T~106 K:
Accretion shock
Once T~106 K:
Deuterium burning, pp chain, Helmholz contraction, CNO cycle.
Star reaches main sequence
Pop III star formation is delayed.

128. Next stage
Even once/if first star reaches main sequence and has fusion in core, DM annihilation can be very important.
Can be dominant heat source
Can determine the mass of the stars
(Freese, Spolyar, Aguirre Feb. 08;
Iocco Feb. 08)

129. 1 M Basic Idea All first stars Dark star phase has ended
Next, fusion powered star forms: on main sequence
New star captures DM
Capture rate extremely high, which leads to a very large luminosity from the DM.
How big?
All first stars
1 M
Fixes mass of the first stars or limits DM scattering cross section.

130. Capture Rate (Particle Physics)
Scattering
Consider only SD scattering for first stars, which are made only of H and He. SI scattering is generally subdominant. 
and
DM luminosity LDM generally independent of DM mass and annihilation rate!
 Limits from
Super-K
m= 100 GeV
<v>ann=3x10-26 cm3/s

131. Capture Rate (Astrophysics)
M ~ (10 to 250) M
Typical Mass of first stars
Up to 103 M (Jeans Mass)
First stars DM host halo
DM Velocity
Much slower than Milky Way
since typical host halo is much smaller
DM density
MDM~106 M
Simulations: 108 GeV/cm3
(Abel, Bryan, Norman 2002)
(Blumenthal, Faber, Flores,
Primack 1987)
Adiabatic Contraction: 1018 Gev/cm3

132. Capture Rate per Unit Volume
Press, Spergel 85 & Gould 88
n (number density of DM) cm-3
n (number density of H) cm-3
We can neglect the term in the brackets because the DM velocity
is much less than the escape velocity for the first stars, which makes B big.
V(r) escape velocity at a point r
velocity of the DM
c scattering cross section
If the star moves relative to the DM halo, the term in the brackets changes.
Luckily, we can still neglect the term.

133. Capture Rate in the First Stars
Capture Rate s-1
1 Assume constant DM density
2 Conservatively fix v(r) to the escape from surface of star (vesc).
3 Integrate nH giving the number of H in the star, which
produces the second term in parentheses on the RHS below.
H fraction (fH)
DM density ()
Proton mass (Mp )
DM mass (m)

134. DM Luminosity (LDM)
Equilibrium between the annihilation and Capture is very short
Fraction of Energy deposited (f)- we assume a third goes into neutrinos so we take f = (2/3).
Independent of the
mass of particle!

135. Comparison of Luminosity
If LDM exceeds Ledd, stellar mass is fixed! 
70M 
250M  
100M
50M 
10M
Black line- LEdd
For eddington luminosity DM density is 5*10^11 Gev/cm^3 and SD cs of 10^-38 and
A seventy solar mass star
Green line-LDM
Blue line-L(fitted)
Red () zero metallicity stars on MS (Heger &Woosley)

136. LDM versus L
We compare the DM luminosity against fusion luminosity of zero metallicity stars half way through H burning (on the main sequence) for various masses. (Heger,Woosley, in prep)
H burning represents the largest fraction of a star’s life.
DM luminosity wins for a sufficiently high DM density.

137. Similar and Simultaneous Work
Within a few days of each other, we and Fabio Iocco posted the same basic idea:
Both groups found that the DM luminosity can be larger than fusion for the first stars.
We went one step further:
We found that when the DM luminosity exceeds the Eddington luminosity, we can uniquely fix the mass of the first stars.

138. Eddington Luminosity
Luminosity of a star at which the radiation pressure
overwhelms the gravitational force.
C speed of light
p opacity
G Newton's Constant
Assume opacity (mean free path)
is dominated by Thompson scattering
since the surface of first stars is hot.
M Stellar Mass

139. Max Stellar Mass
Once LDM exceeds LEdd, star cannot accrete any more matter and mass is determined.
We can solve for the max stellar mass by setting LEdd=LDM.
We derived the above by fixing v=10 km/s
And also noting that (Vesc)2  (M)0.55,
which follows since R  (M)0.45
We find that the M and c are inversely
related for a fixed DM density. _

140. Conclusions too Even if the Dark Star phase is short.
DM Capture can still alter the first stars.
DM luminosity larger than fusion Luminosity
May uniquely determine Mass of first stars
Conversely- the first stars may offer the best bounds or opportunity to measure the the scattering cross section of DM.

141. Max Mass
cm2
cm2
cm2
Lines correspond to fixed scattering cross section. We show the relationship between the DM density and mass of the first stars.

142. Max Mass Example 10-38 cm2 10-40 cm2 10-43 cm2 M=10M
=1014 Gev/cm3
Lines correspond to fixed cross section. We show the relationship
between the DM density and mass of the first stars.

143. First Stars: Limits on SD Scattering
Limits with Stellar Mass Larger than 1M
5x1012
(GeV/cm3) 
Super K
5x1015
(GeV/cm3)
Zeplin SI 
1018
(GeV/cm3) 
Xenon SI
(SD limits examined in Savage, Freese, Gondolo 2005)

144. First Stars also limit SI Scattering
Limits with Stellar Mass Larger than 1M
5x1012
(GeV/cm3)
Super K
5x1015
(GeV/cm3)
Zeplin SI  
CDMSII SI
1018
(GeV/cm3) 
Xenon SI
Present bounds from DMTools

145. CONCLUSION Dark matter experiments are underway
Already hints of detection?
Dark Stars: new phase of stellar evolution for the very first stars driven by SUSY dark matter annihilation