Transcript Slide 1

NEUTRINOS IN NUCLEOSYNTHESIS
AND STRUCTURE FORMATION
ne
nm
nt
STEEN HANNESTAD
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK
NOW2004, 17 SEPTEMBER 2004
NEUTRINOS, THE MICROWAVE BACKGROUND,
AND LARGE SCALE STRUCTURE
WMAP
1-YEAR DATA
2dF Galaxy redshift survey
15 May 2002
SDSS SURVEY
2dF POWER SPECTRUM
SDSS POWER SPECTRUM
DATA FROM THE LYMAN-ALPHA FOREST PROVIDES AN INDEPENDENT
MEASUREMENT OF POWER ON SMALL SCALES, BUT IN THE
SEMI-LINEAR REGIME (CROFT ET AL. 2002, MCDONALD ET AL. 2003).
THE RELIABILITY OF THE INFERRED MATTER SPECTRUM IS
CONTROVERSIAL!
CROFT ET AL. DATA
SDSS
EXPERIMENTAL QUESTIONS FROM
NEUTRINO PHYSICS
NEUTRINO MASS HIERARCHY AND MIXING MATRIX
- solar & atmospheric neutrinos
- supernovae
ABSOLUTE NEUTRINO MASSES
- cosmology: CMB and large scale structure
- supernovae
STERILE NEUTRINOS (LEPTOGENESIS)
- cosmology, supernovae
NUMBER OF RELIC NEUTRINOS /
RELATIVISTIC ENERGY
- cosmology
STATUS OF 1-2 MIXING (SOLAR + KAMLAND)
Araki et al. hep-ex/0406035
STATUS OF 2-3 MIXING (ATMOSPHERIC + K2K)
Maltoni et al. hep-ph/0405172
If neutrino masses are hierarchical then oscillation experiments
do not give information on the absolute value of neutrino masses
ATMO. n
K2K
SOLAR n
KAMLAND
Normal hierarchy
Inverted hierarchy
TALKS BY FERUGLIO, GIUNTI
However, if neutrino masses are degenerate
m0  matmospheric
no information can be gained from such experiments.
Experiments which rely on the kinematics of neutrino mass
are the most efficient for measuring m0 (or 0n2b decays)
Tritium decay endpoint measurements have reached limits
on the electron neutrino mass
mn e 
 U
2
ei
2
i
m

1/ 2
 2.3 eV (95%)
Mainz experiment, final analysis (Kraus et al. 2003)
This translates into a limit on the sum of the three mass
eigenstates
m  7 eV
i
TALKS BY GIUNTI, DREXLIN
IF NEUTRINOS ARE MAJORANA PARTICLES, THEN 0n2b CAN OCCUR
(TALKS BY FAESSLER, KLAPDOR-KLEINGROTHAUS)
THE ABSOLUTE VALUES OF NEUTRINO MASSES
FROM COSMOLOGY
NEUTRINOS AFFECT STRUCTURE FORMATION
BECAUSE THEY ARE A SOURCE OF DARK MATTER
n h 
2
 mn
92.5 eV
HOWEVER, eV NEUTRINOS ARE DIFFERENT FROM CDM
BECAUSE THEY FREE STREAM
1
eV
d FS ~ 1 Gpc m
SCALES SMALLER THAN dFS DAMPED AWAY, LEADS TO
SUPPRESSION OF POWER ON SMALL SCALES
BY MEASURING THE
MATTER POWER SPECTRUM
P(k )  P0 (k )T (k )
0 eV
0.3 eV
T(k) = Transfer function
IT IS POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN
CONSTRAINTS ON mn
ROUGHLY ONE FINDS THAT
n
P
 8
P
m
EISENSTEIN, HU & TEGMARK ’99
1 eV
mn  0 eV
mn  1 eV
mn  7 eV
mn  4 eV
Ma ’96
COMBINED ANALYSIS OF CMB, 2dF AND LY-ALPHA DATA BY THE
WMAP TEAM (Spergel et al. 2003)
HOWEVER, THIS MASS LIMIT IS EXTREMELY DEPENDENT ON DATA
OTHER THAN CMB, AND ON PRIORS.
Elgaroy & Lahav (astro-ph/0303089, JCAP)
A SELECTION OF RECENT RESULTS ON Smn
WMAP ONLY
13 eV @ 95%
WMAP
SPERGEL ET AL.
(WMAP) 2003
0.69 eV @ 95%
WMAP, CMB, 2dF,
s8, H0
STH 2003
1.01 eV @ 95%
WMAP, CMB, 2dF,
H0
ALLEN, SMITH,
BRIDLE 2003
0.56 00..326eV @ 68%
WMAP, CMB, 2dF,
s8, H0
TEGMARK ET AL
2003
1.8 eV @ 95%
WMAP, SDSS
BARGER ET AL
2003
0.65 eV @ 95%
WMAP, CMB, 2dF,
SDSS , H0
CROTTY ET AL.
2004
1.0 eV @ 95%
WMAP, CMB, 2dF,
SDSS , H0
ANALYSIS WITH RECENT DATA:
WMAP CMB DATA
SDSS LARGE SCALE STRUCTURE DATA
RIESS ET AL. SNI-a ”gold” SAMPLE
Lya DATA FROM KECK SAMPLE,
NO PRIOR ON s8 (SMALL SCALE AMPLITUDE)
 mn  0.65 eV @ 95% C.L.
S
STH, HEP-PH/0409108
BOUND FROM SDSS + WMAP + BIAS + SDSS LYMAN ALPHA
(SELJAK ET AL. ASTRO-PH/0407372)
 mn  0.42 eV @ 95% C.L.
FOGLI ET AL. HEP-PH/0408045 FIND ~ 0.5 eV IN A SIMILAR STUDY
BOTH RESULTS RELY ON THE ABILITY TO MEASURE THE
EXACT MATTER FLUCTUATION AMPLITUDE ON SMALL
SCALES
Fogli et al., hep-ph/0408045
Normal hierarchy
Inverted hierarchy
mb 
 U
mbb 
2
ei
2
i
m

1/ 2
2
U
 ei mi
Including the most recent Klapdor
et al. constraint
Klapdor-Kleingrothaus et al.
Nucl. Inst. & Meth. A 522, 371 (2004)
Phys. Lett. B 586, 198 (2004)
leads to
FINAL HEALTH WARNING!!
A GENERIC PROBLEM WITH USING COSMOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS
TO PROBE PARTICLE PHYSICS:
IN GENERAL, LIKELIHOOD ANALYSES ARE CARRIED OUT ON TOP
OF THE MINIMAL COSMOLOGICAL STANDARD MODEL
HOWEVER, THERE COULD BE MORE THAN ONE NON-STANDARD
EFFECT, SEVERELY BIASING THE PARAMETER ESTIMATE
A MODEL WITH BROKEN SCALE-INVARIANCE
CAN ALLOW FOR A HIGH NEUTRINO MASS
WHAT ABOUT TOPOLOGICAL DEFECTS?
COULD WE EVEN BE LIVING IN A NEUTRINOLESS
UNIVERSE? (BEACOM, BELL, DODELSON ASTRO-PH/0404585)
ANY DERIVED LIMIT SHOULD BE TREATED WITH SOME CARE
EXPERIMENTAL QUESTIONS FROM
NEUTRINO PHYSICS
NEUTRINO MASS HIERARCHY AND MIXING MATRIX
- solar & atmospheric neutrinos
- supernovae
ABSOLUTE NEUTRINO MASSES
- cosmology: CMB and large scale structure
- supernovae
STERILE NEUTRINOS (LEPTOGENESIS)
- cosmology, supernovae
NUMBER OF RELIC NEUTRINOS /
RELATIVISTIC ENERGY
- cosmology
ANALYSIS OF PRESENT DATA
GIVES A LIMIT ON Nn OF
2  Nn  7 (95% C.L.)
NOTE THAT THIS MEANS A
POSITIVE DETECTION OF THE
COSMIC NEUTRINO BACKGROUND AT 3.5s!
Crotty, Lesgourgues & Pastor ’03
Pierpaoli ’03, Barger et al. ’03
STH 2003 (JCAP 5, 004 (2003))
Because of the stringent bound from LEP on neutrinos lighter than
about 45 GeV
Nn  2.992  0.008
this bound is mainly of academic interest if all such light neutrinos
couple to Z. However, sterile neutrinos can also contribute to Nn
STERILE NEUTRINOS: WHAT ABOUT LSND?
WMAP
TAKEN AT FACE VALUE THE WMAP RESULT ON NEUTRINO MASS
SEEMS TO RULE OUT LSND BECAUSE NO ALLOWED REGIONS EXIST
FOR LOW m2. (Pierce & Murayama, hep-ph/0302131; Giunti hep-ph/0302173)
HOWEVER, A DETAILED ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT INCREASING Nn,
THE NEUTRINO MASS, AND THE MATTER DENSITY SIMULTANEOUSLY
PRODUCES EXCELLENT FITS
0 = 1.0
M= 0.35
0.3
b= 0.05
H0 = 70
ns = 1.0
mn = 3eV
0
Nn = 8
3
STH, JCAP 0305, 004 (2003), STH & G RAFFELT JCAP 0404, 008 (2004)
THE UPPER MASS LIMIT ON EACH INDIVIDUAL MASS EIGENSTATE
IS ROUGHLY CONSTANT FOR ALL Nn IF ALL SPECIES CARRY EQUAL
MASS
STH & G RAFFELT (JCAP 0404, 008 (2004))
SEE ALSO CROTTY, LESGOURGUES & PASTOR HEP-PH/0402049
A GLOBAL ANALYSIS STILL LEAVES THE TWO LOWEST LYING ISLANDS
IN PARAMETER SPACE FOR LSND!
Maltoni, Schweitz, Tortola & Valle ’03 (hep-ph/0305312)
ONLY IF LYMAN-ALPHA AND BIAS CONSTRAINTS ARE INCLUDED IS
THE LSND SOLUTION EXCLUDED AT 95% C.L. (SELJAK ET AL. 2004)
BIG BANG NUCLEOSYNTHESIS
THE WMAP+LSS LIMIT ON
THE BARYON DENSITY
b h2  0.0226 0.0008
CAN BE COMBARED TO THE
CONFIDENCE REGION FROM
OBSERVATIONS OF PRIMORDIAL
DEUTERIUM
b h2  0.022 0.006
THERE IS COMPLETE CONSISTENCY WITH THE DEUTERIUM
VALUE! HOWEVER....
CYBURT, FIELDS & OLIVE,
astro-ph/0302431
THERE IS AN INCONSISTENCY AT ROUGHLY 2s WITH HELIUM
AND LITHIUM OBSERVATIONS
CYBURT, FIELDS & OLIVE,
astro-ph/0302431
BOUND ON THE RELATIVISTIC ENERGY DENSITY
(NUMBER OF NEUTRINO SPECIES) FROM BBN
Helium-4 production is very sensitive to Nn
Nn = 4
Nn = 3
Nn = 2
MOST RECENT RESULTS ON Nn FROM BBN
1.7  Nn  3.0 @ 95% C.L.
BARGER ET AL. HEP-PH/0305075
Nn  2.510..19
CUOCO ET AL. ASTRO-PH/0307213
DIFFERENCES DUE TO ESTIMATED HELIUM UNCERTAINTY
WHAT ABOUT NEUTRINO CHEMICAL POTENTIALS?
12-MIXING LEADS TO ALMOST COMPLETE FLAVOUR
EQUILIBRATION BEFORE BBN AND SETS VERY
STRINGENT BOUNDS ON THE MAGNITUDE OF THE
CHEMICAL POTENTIAL
 e , m ,t  0.15
Dolgov et al. ’02
Lunardini & Smirnov, hep-ph/0012056 (PRD), Dolgov et al., hep-ph/0201287
Abazajian, Beacom & Bell, astro-ph/0203442, Wong hep-ph/0203180
COMBINING BBN, CMB AND LSS
A GLOBAL FIT INCLUDING
ALL DATA (BBN, WMAP, 2dF)
YIELDS
Nn  2.600..43 (95% C.L.)
INDICATING THAT
a) There seems to be a slight inconsistency between BBN and CMB,
meaning that either YP is higher
than usually believed, or Nn is
lower than 3.
b) There seem to be tight bounds on
the presence of sterile neutrinos
STH, JCAP 5, 004 (2003)
ALMOST IDENTICAL RESULT FOUND
BY BARGER ET AL. hep-ph/0305075
NEUTRINO THERMALIZATION ALSO
PROVIDES A VERY ROBUST
LOWER BOUND ON THE REHEATING
TEMPERATURE AT THE END OF
INFLATION
TRH  4 MeV @ 95 C.L.
STH, PRD 70, 043506 (2004)
SEE ALSO:
KAWASAKI ET AL. PRL 82, 4168 (1999)
KAWASAKI ET AL. PRD 62, 023506 (2000)
GIUDICE ET AL. PRD 64, 023508 (2001)
GIUDICE ET AL. PRD 64, 043512 (2001)
WHAT ABOUT OTHER LIGHT, THERMALLY
PRODUCED PARTICLES?
...........
RADIONS
AXINOS
MAJORONS
GRAVITONS
AXIONS
NEUTRINOS
FOR ANY THERMALLY PRODUCED PARTICLE IT IS
STRAIGHTFORWARD TO CALCULATE THE DECOUPLING
EPOCH ETC.
THE ONLY IMPORTANT PARAMETERS ARE
mX
AND
g*,X
WHERE g* IS THE EFECTIVE NUMBER OF DEGREES OF
FREEDOM WHEN X DECOUPLES.
Density bound for a Majorana fermion
Based on WMAP, SDSS, SNI-a and Lyman-a data,
No assumptions about bias!
EW transition (~ 100 GeV)
g* = 106.75
MASS BOUND FOR
SPECIES DECOUPLING
AROUND EW TRANSITION
m  5 eV
Below QCD transition
(~ 100 MeV) g* < 20
DECOUPLING AFTER
QCD PHASE TRANSITION
LEADS TO
m  1 eV
STH, hep-ph/0409108 (See also STH & G Raffelt, JCAP 0404, 008)
WHAT IS IN STORE FOR THE FUTURE?
BETTER CMBR TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS
Satellites
Balloons
Interferometers
WMAP (ongoing)
Boomerang (ongoing)
CBI (ongoing)
Planck (2007)
TopHat (ongoing)DASI (ongoing)
CMBR POLARIZATION MEASUREMENTS
Satellites
Balloons
WMAP (ongoing)
Boomerang (2002-3)
Planck (2007)
LARGE SCALE STRUCTURE SURVEYS
2dF (completed) 250.000 galaxies
SDSS (ongoing) 1.000.000 galaxies
COSMOLOGICAL SUPERNOVA SURVEYS
SNAP satellite (2012???)
WEAK LENSING SURVEYS
Ground
Polatron (ongoing)
DASI
MEASURING mn USING CMB+LSS DATA
SDSS-BRG
SDSS-BRG
PROSPECTS FOR FUTURE DETERMINATION OF Nn
Lopez et al. 1998
Data from Planck may allow for very accurate
determination of Nn
Standard model prediction Nn =3.03-3.04 due to heating and
finite temperature effect could perhaps be detected
CONCLUSIONS ON NEUTRINOS
THE PRESENT UPPER BOUND ON THE NEUTRINO MASS IS
SOMEWHERE IN THE REGION OF 0.5-1 eV
USING PLANCK, SDSS AND WEAK LENSING SURVEYS IT WILL
BE POSSIBLE TO PROBE MASSES AS SMALL AS 0.1-0.2 eV
(FOR THE SUM OF ALL MASS EIGENSTATES).
IT WILL BE POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER NEUTRINO
MASSES ARE HIERARCHICAL
SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN DIRECT MEASUREMENTS
LIKE KATRIN, BUT ALSO LESS ROBUST
THE EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF NEUTRINO SPECIES CAN BE
PROBED WITH A PRECISION APPROACHING Nn ~ 0.05,
CLOSE TO THE STANDARD MODEL PREDICTION OF 0.04