Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T22:17:03.194Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

WIMP direct detection and halo structure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2016

Anne M. Green
Anne M. Green*
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Stockholm University, Stockholm, 106 91, Sweden

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Weakly Interacting Massive Particle (WIMP) direct detection experiments are just reaching the sensitivity required to detect Galactic dark matter in the form of neutralinos (or indeed any stable weakly interacting particle). Detection strategies and data analyses are often based on the simplifying assumption of a standard spherical, isothermal halo model, but observations and numerical simulations indicate that galaxy halos are in fact triaxial and anisotropic, and contain substructure. the annual modulation and direction dependence of the event rate (due to the motion of the Earth) provide the best prospects of distinguishing WIMP scattering from background events, however these signals depend sensitively on the local WIMP velocity distribution. I briefly review the status of WIMP direct detection experiments before discussing the dependence of the annual modulation signal on astrophysical input, in particular the structure of the Milky Way halo, and the possibility that the local WIMP distribution is not smooth.

Type
Part 15: Direct Detection of Elementary Particles
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 220: Dark Matter in Galaxies , 2004 , pp. 483 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of the Pacific 2004 

References

Akerib, D. S. et al. 2003, hep-ex/0306001.Google Scholar
Barton, J. C. et al. 2002, proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on the Identification of Dark Matter, eds. Spooner, N. J. C. & Kudryavtsev, V. (World Scientific), p.302.Google Scholar
Belli, P., et al. 2002, Phys. Rev. D, 66, 043503.Google Scholar
Benoit, A. et al. 2002, Phys. Lett. B545, 43.Google Scholar
Bergström, L. 2000, Prog. Phys. 63, 793.Google Scholar
Bernabei, R. et al. 2003, Riv. N. Cim., 23, 1.Google Scholar
Copi, C. J. & Krauss, L. M. 2003, Phys. Rev. D, 67, 103507.Google Scholar
Drukier, A. K., Freese, K. & Spergel, D. N. 1986, Phys. Rev. D, 33, 3495.Google Scholar
Fornengo, N. & Scopel, S. 2003, astro-ph/0301132.Google Scholar
Green, A. M. 2002, Phys. Rev. D, 66, 083003.Google Scholar
Green, A. M. 2003, Phys. Rev. D, 68, 023004.Google Scholar
Green, A. M., Hofmann, S. & Schwarz, D. 2003, astro-ph/0309621.Google Scholar
Helmi, A., White, S. D. M. & Springel, V. 2002, Phys. Rev. D, 66, 063502.Google Scholar
Hofmann, S., Schwarz, D. J. & Stöcker, H. 2001, Phys. Rev. D, 64, 083507.Google Scholar
Moore, B. et al. 2001, Phys. Rev. D, 64, 063508.Google Scholar
Spergel, D. N. 1988, Phys. Rev. D, 37, 1353.Google Scholar
Stiff, D. & Widrow, L. M. 2003, Phys. Rev. Lett, 90, 211301.Google Scholar