structure formation with scalar field dark...
TRANSCRIPT
Tonatiuh Matoshttp://www.fis.cinvestav.mx/~tmatos/
http://www.iac.edu.mx
Some Problems of the LCDM SFDM
Structure Formation with Scalar Field Dark Matter
The Standard Model of Cosmology: LCDM
• Extreme fine tuning • Coincidence • Cuspy central density profiles • Missing Satellites Problem • Satellites stability • Too big to fail • No-detection of DM • etc.
The Standard Model of Cosmology: Problems
!!
• Cuspy central density profiles • Missing Satellites Problem • Satellites stability !!
The Standard Model of Cosmology: Problems
Galaxy’s Center: Observations
!5
NFW
!6
Gentile G., Tonini C. and Salucci P., A&A, 467, 925-931 (2007).
Galaxy’s Center: Observations
F. Gobernato, et. al., NATURE, Vol 463, 14 January 2010
Galaxy’s Center: Simulations
⇢ = ⇢0e�A r↵
F. Gobernato, et. al., NATURE, Vol 463, 14 January 2010
No evidence for internal features or star formation that could be the result of tidal processes or star formation induced by the cluster environment.ej: Samantha J. Penny, Christopher J. Conselice, !Sven De Rijcke and Enrico V. Held: !Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 393, 1054–1062 (2009), etc.
Galaxy’s Center: Simulations
Einasto profile
Stellar Mass Predictions
!9
Till Sawala, Qi Guo, Cecilia Scannapieco, Adrian Jenkins and Simon White. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 413, (2011), 659
The dwarf galaxies formed in hydrodynamical simulations are almost two orders of magnitude more luminous than expected for haloes of this mass.
Stellar Mass Predictions
!10
V. Avila-Reese, P. Colín, A. González-Samaniego, O. Valenzuela, C. Firmani, H. Velázquez, & D. Ceverino. The ApJ, 736:134, (2011)
Velocity predictions
!11
Jesús Zavala, et. al. ApJ, 700:1779–1793, 2009 August 1
The simulation with CDM predicts a steep rise in the VF toward lower velocities; for Vmax = 35 km/s, it forecasts ∼10 times more sources than the ones observed. If confirmed by the complete ALFALFA survey, these results indicate a potential problem for the CDM paradigm
!12
Galactic DynamicsJ. Peñarrubia, A. J. Benson, M. G. Walker,G. Gilmore, A. W. McConnachie & L. Mayer. MNRAS 406(2010)1290
!13
Galactic DynamicsJ. Penarrubia, A. J. Benson, M. G. Walker,G. Gilmore, A. W. McConnachie4 & L. Mayer. MNRAS 406(2010)1290
The Cosmology
• Dark Matter: → • Dark Energy: → Λ !
• Baryons, Radiation, • Neutrinos, etc. !
• ΩΦ ∼ 0.23 • ΩΛ ∼ 0.73 • Ωb ∼ 0.04
T. Matos and L. Ureña, Class. Q. Grav. 17(2000)L75
12m2�2 +
14��4
⇤� +dV
d�= 0
� + 3H� +dV
d�= 0
kBTc =2⇡~2
m53
⇢
g 32(1)
! 23
Bose-Einstein CondensatesA Review on the Scalar Field/ Bose-Einstein Dark Matter model. Abril Suarez, Victor Robles and Tonatiuh Matos. arXiv:1302.0903
Φ2 as Dark Matter. T. Matos, A. Vázquez & J.A. Magaña. MNRAS, 389, (2009) 13957.
The Cosmology
�min
!17
In
Natural Cut off
T << Tc
Tonatiuh Matos and Luis A. Ureña. Phys Rev. D63, (2001), 063506. Available at: astro-ph/ 0006024
¨��k + 3H ˙��k +✓
k2
a2+ V,��
◆��k + 2V,� �k � 4�0�k = 0
�min
!18
In
Natural Cut off
T << Tc
Tonatiuh Matos and Luis A. Ureña. Phys Rev. D63, (2001), 063506. Available at: astro-ph/ 0006024
¨��k + 3H ˙��k +✓
k2
a2�m2 +
�
4T 2
◆��k = 4�0�k
�� + 3H��� 1a2r2�� + V,�� �� + 2V,� � = 0
�� =p
⇥ cos✓
mc2 t
~ + S
◆~v ⌘ ~
mrS
Abril Suarez and TM MNRAS 311, (2011), 87
Structure Formation
~v ⌘ ~mrS
@⇢
@t+
1a2r · (⇢~v) + 3H ⇢
� ~m
⇢⇣S + 3HS
⌘� ~
mˆ⇢S = 0
@~v
@t+
1a2
~vr · ~v +r� +~2
2m2r
✓⇤p⇢p⇢
◆
� ~m
S@~v
@t= 0,
!20
Abril Suarez and TM MNRAS 311, (2011), 87
Structure Formation
~v ⌘ ~mrS
!21
@⇢
@t+
1a2r · (⇢~v) + 3H ⇢ = 0
@~v
@t+
1a2
~vr · ~v +r� +~2
2m2r
✓⇤p⇢p⇢
◆= 0,
Abril Suarez and TM MNRAS 311, (2011), 87
Structure Formation
~v ⌘ ~mrS⇢ = ⇢(t) S = S(t)
!22
@⇢
@t+
1a2r · (⇢~v) + 3H ⇢ = 0
@~v
@t+
1a2
~vr · ~v +r� +~2
2m2r
✓⇤p⇢p⇢
◆= 0,
Abril Suarez and TM MNRAS 311, (2011), 87
Structure Formation
~v ⌘ ~mrS⇢ = ⇢(t)
@⇢
@t+ 3H ⇢ = 0
⇢ ⇠ 1a3
S = S(t)
!23
Abril Suarez and TM MNRAS 311, (2011), 87
Structure Formation
~v ⌘ ~mrS
⇤�
⇤t+
1a2⇥ · (�⌅v) = 0
⇤⌅v
⇤t+
1a2
⌅v⇥ · ⌅v +⇥⇥ +~2
2m2⇥
✓⇤����
◆= 0,
!24
Abril Suarez and TM MNRAS 311, (2011), 87
Structure Formation
~v1 = �~k + ~v2
@⇢1
@t+ 3H⇢1 + i
⇢0
a2k2� = 0
@�
@t+ i(
v2q
⇢0� 4⇡G
a2
k2)⇢1 = 0,
d2�
dt2+ 2 H
d�
dt+
✓v2
qk2
a2� 4⇡G⇢0
◆� = 0,
d2�
dt2+ 2 H
d�
dt+
✓v2
sk2
a2� 4⇡G⇢0
◆� = 0,
� =⇢1
⇢
!25
SFDM
CDM
� = �0 + �1(t) exp(i⇤k · ⇤x/a)
⇤v = ⇤v0 + ⇤v1(t) exp(i⇤k · ⇤x/a)
⇥ = ⇥0 + ⇥1(t) exp(i⇤k · ⇤x/a)
v2q =
~2k2
4a2m2
Abril Suarez and TM MNRAS 311, (2011), 87
Structure Formation
!26
Abril Suarez and TM MNRAS 311, (2011), 87
Structure Formation
!27
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
l(l+1
)Cl (µ
K)2
Multipole l
CMB anisotropies
TT
1000
10000
0.1
P(k)
(h-3
Mpc
3 )
k/h
Power Spectrum
SDSS2dfs
I. Rodriguez, A. Pérez-Lorenzana, E. de la Cruz, Y. Giraud-Héraud and TM. Bosonic Cosmic Dark Matter. Phys. Rev. D87(2013)025009. arXiv:1110.2751
The Cosmology
M ⇠ 0.06p
�m3
pl
m2
� = 1⇥ 10�6
M ⇠ 1014 M�
Tc =2mp
�
Tc ⇠ 2000 eV
Scalar Field Fluctuation = HaloM.Alcubierre, F. S. Guzmán, T. Matos, D. Núñez, L. A. Ureña and P. Wiederhold. !
Galactic Collapse of Scalar Field Dark Matter. CQG 19(2002)5017. arXiv:gr-qc /0110102.
J. Balakrishna, E. Seidel and W. Suen. PRD 58(1998)104004
Pau Amaro-Seoane, Juan Barranco, Argelia Bernal and Luciano Rezzolla. Constraining scalar fields with stellar kinematics and collisional dark matter. JCAP11 (2010)002
m ~ 1eV
Axions vs SFDM
!29
Barranco and Bernal, PRD 83,(2011)043525
0
20
40
60
80
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
V (k
m s
-1)
r (kpc)
NGC1560j = 1+3, _= 0.3
0
40
80
120
160
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
V (k
m s
-1)
r (kpc)
NGC6946j = 1+2, _= 0.5
0
30
60
90
120
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
V (k
m s
-1)
r (kpc)
NGC1003j = 1+3, _= 0.14
!30
V. H. Robles and TM. MNRAS 392, (2012) in press. arXiv:1201.3032
Galaxy Formation
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Log(l
[Ms/
pc3 ])
Log(Radio [Kpc])
U11557
_= 0.20
BECISO
NFW
0
20
40
60
80
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Velo
cida
d [K
m/s
]
Radio [Kpc]
U11557
observacionalBECISO
NFW
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Log(µ
B 0 [M
s /pc
2 ])
N
!31
V. H. Robles and TM. MNRAS 422, (2012) 282. arXiv:1201.3032
Galaxy Formation
!32
M.Alcubierre, F. S. Guzmán, T. Matos, D. Núñez, L. A. Ureña and P. Wiederhold. !Galactic Collapse of Scalar Field Dark Matter. CQG 19(2002)5017. arXiv:gr-qc /0110102.
Scalar Field Fluctuation=Halo
!33
M.Alcubierre, F. S. Guzmán, T. Matos, D. Núñez, L. A. Ureña and P. Wiederhold. !Galactic Collapse of Scalar Field Dark Matter. CQG 19(2002)5017. arXiv:gr-qc /0110102.
Scalar Field Fluctuation=Halo
!34
Scalar Field Fluctuation=Halo
Galactic Dynamics
!35
V. Lora, V. Robles, F.J. Sanchez-Salcedo and TM. In preparation
MW Potential + Dwarf DM Potential + Dwarf stellar component + Miyamoto-Nagai Disc! rho_Dwarf = 0.16 Msun/pc^3, peri = 14 kpc, apo = 70 kpc (Peri/Apo = 1/5)
Galactic Dynamics
!36
V. Lora, V. Robles, F.J. Sanchez-Salcedo and TM. In preparation
SFDM
!37
Same predictions for CMB and MPS
Galaxies form by condensation of the SF
Galaxies haloes form earlier and are similar
Behaves like dust at cosmological level
Clusters form by hierarchy Same predictions for structure formation
Haloes are BEC drops Galaxies are core
MPS has a natural cut off Substructure is restricted
A brief Review of the Scalar Field Dark Matter model. Juan Magana, Tonatiuh Matos, Victor Robles, Abril Suarez. arXiv:1201.6107
Conclusion
• Scalar Field Dark Matter is so far an excellent candidate to be the Dark Matter in the Universe