Hindawi Publishing Corporation Advances in High Energy Physics Volume 2014, Article ID 869425, 5 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/869425 Research Article Dark Atoms and the Positron-Annihilation-Line Excess in the Galactic Bulge J.-R. Cudell,1 M. Yu. Khlopov,2,3,4 and Q. Wallemacq1 1 IFPA, “D´epartement d’AGO”, Universit´e de Li`ege, Sart Tilman, 4000 Li`ege, Belgium National Research Nuclear University “Moscow Engineering Physics Institute,” Moscow 115409, Russia 3 Centre for Cosmoparticle Physics “Cosmion,” 115409 Moscow, Russia 4 APC Laboratory 10, rue Alice Domon et L´eonie Duquet, 75205 Paris Cedex 13, France 2 Correspondence should be addressed to Q. Wallemacq; [email protected] Received 25 November 2013; Accepted 13 January 2014; Published 25 February 2014 Academic Editor: Chris Kouvaris Copyright © 2014 J.-R. Cudell et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The publication of this article was funded by SCOAP3 . It was recently proposed that stable particles of charge −2, O−− , can exist and constitute dark matter after they bind with primordial helium in O-helium (OHe) atoms. We study here in detail the possibility that this model provides an explanation for the excess of gamma radiation in the positron-annihilation line from the galactic bulge observed by INTEGRAL. This explanation assumes that OHe, excited to a 2s state through collisions in the central part of the Galaxy, deexcites to its ground state via an 0 transition, emitting an electron-positron pair. The cross-section for OHe collisions with excitation to 2s level is calculated and it is shown that the rate of such excitations in the galactic bulge strongly depends not only on the mass of O-helium, which is determined by the mass of O−− , but also on the density and velocity distribution of dark matter. Given the astrophysical uncertainties on these distributions, this mechanism constrains the O−− mass to lie in two possible regions. One of these is reachable in the experimental searches for stable multicharged particles at the LHC. 1. Introduction According to modern cosmology, dark matter corresponds to 25% of the total cosmological density, is nonbaryonic, and consists of new stable particles. Such particles (see [1– 6] for reviews and references) should be stable, provide the measured dark-matter density, and be decoupled from plasma and radiation at least before the beginning of the matter-dominated era. It was recently shown that heavy stable particles of charge −2, O−− , bound to primordial helium in OHe atoms, can provide an interesting explanation for cosmological dark matter [6, 7]. It should also be noted that the nuclear cross-section of the O-helium interaction with matter escapes the severe constraints [8–10] on strongly interacting dark-matter particles (SIMPs) [8–16] imposed by the XQC experiment [17, 18]. The hypothesis of composite O-helium dark matter, first considered to provide a solution to the puzzles of direct darkmatter searches, can offer an explanation for another puzzle of modern astrophysics [6, 7, 19]: this composite dark-matter model can explain the excess of gamma radiation in the electron-positron-annihilation line, observed by INTEGRAL in the galactic bulge (see [20] for a review and references). The explanation assumes that OHe provides all the galactic dark matter and that its collisions in the central part of the Galaxy result in 2s-level excitations of OHe which are deexcited to the ground state by an 0 transition, in which an electron-positron pair is emitted. If the 2s level is excited, pair production dominates over the two-photon channel in the deexcitation, because electrons are much lighter than helium nuclei, and positron production is not accompanied by a strong gamma-ray signal. According to [21] the rate of positron production 3 ⋅ 1042 s−1 is sufficient to explain the excess in the positronannihilation line from the bulge measured by INTEGRAL. In the present paper we study the process of 2s-level excitation of OHe from collisions in the galactic bulge and determine the conditions under which such collisions can provide 2 Advances in High Energy Physics the observed excess. Inelastic interactions of O-helium with matter in interstellar space and subsequent deexcitation can give rise to radiation in the range from a few keV to a few MeV. In the galactic bulge with radius ∼ 1 kpc the number density of O-helium can be of the order of ≈ 3 ⋅ 10−3 /3 cm−3 or larger, and the collision rate of Ohelium in this central region was estimated in [19]: / = 2 Vℎ 43 /3 ≈ 3 ⋅ 1042 3−2 s−1 , with 3 = OHe /1 TeV. At the velocity of Vℎ ∼ 3 ⋅ 107 cm/s energy transfer in such collisions is Δ ∼ 1 MeV3 . These collisions can lead to excitation of O-helium. If OHe levels with nonzero angular momentum are excited, gamma lines should be observed from transitions ( > ) = 1.598 MeV(1/2 − 1/2 ) (or from similar transitions corresponding to the case = 1.287 MeV) at the level 3 ⋅ 10−4 3−2 (cm2 s MeV ster)−1 . 2. Collisional Excitation Cross-Section The studied reaction is the collision between two OHe atoms, both being initially in their ground state |1s⟩, giving rise to the excitation of one of them to a |s⟩ state while the other remains in its ground state: OHe (1s) + OHe (1s) → OHe (1s) + OHe (s) . (1) If we work in the rest frame of the OHe that gets excited and if we neglect its recoil after the collision, the differential cross-section of the process is given by 2 ⃗ (1s → s) = 2⟨s, ⃗ ||1s, ⟩ × ( 2 2 3 , + s − − 1s ) 2 2 (2)3 (2) where is the mass of OHe, ⃗ and ⃗ are the momenta of the incident OHe before and after the collision, 1s and s are the ground-state and excited-state energies of the target OHe, and is the interaction potential between the incident and the target OHe’s. We will neglect the internal structure of the incident OHe, so that its wave functions are plane waves. ⃗ is normalized to obtain a unit incident current density and the normalisation of ⃗ is chosen for it to be pointlike, that is, the Fourier transform of (3) ()⃗ [22]: ⃗ = √ ⋅⃗ ⃗ , ⃗ ⋅ ⃗ ⃗ = (3) , where ⃗ is the position vector of the incident OHe and = ||.⃗ In the following, we will be led to consider O−− masses which are much larger than the mass of helium or the boundstate energies. Therefore, the origin of the rest frame of the target OHe coincides with the position of its O−− component and its reduced mass can be taken as the mass of helium He . The OHe that gets excited is described as a hydrogen-like atom, with energy levels s = −0.5He (He O )2 /2 and initial and final bound-state wave functions 1s and s of a hydrogenoid atom with a Bohr radius 0 = (He He O )−1 . The incident OHe interacts with the O−− and helium components in the target OHe, so that the interaction potential is the sum of the two contributions O and He : ⃗ ), ()⃗ = O ()⃗ + He ( ⃗ − He (4) ⃗ is the position vector of the helium component. where He The first term O gives a zero contribution to the integral of expression (2) since the states 1s and s are orthogonal. For the second term, we treat the incident OHe as a heavy neutron colliding on a helium nucleus through short-range nuclear forces. The interaction potential can then be written in the form of a contact term: 2 ⃗ ), ⃗ )=− ( ⃗ − He He ( ⃗ − He (5) He 0 where we have normalised the delta function to obtain an OHe-helium elastic cross-section equal to 402 . Going to spherical coordinates for ⃗ and integrating over = |⃗ | in the differential cross-section (2), together with the previous expressions (3), (4), and (5), we get (1s → s) = ( 2 2 ) 0 ( ) He 2 ⃗ ∗ s 1s 3 He Ω, × ∫ −.⃗ He (6) where ⃗ = ⃗ − ⃗ is the transferred momentum and Ω is the solid angle. From the integration over the delta function in (2), we have obtained the conservation of energy during the process: 2 = 2 + 2 (1s − s ) . (7) It leads to the threshold energy corresponding to 2 = 0 and to a minimum incident velocity Vmin = √2(s − 1s )/. The previous expression for allows us to express the squared modulus of ⃗ as 2 = 2 (2 + (1s − s ) (8) −√2 + 2 (1s − s ) cos ) , where is the deviation angle of the incident OHe with respect to the collision axis in the rest frame of the target OHe. + − pairs will be dominantly produced if OHe is excited to a 2s state, since the only deexcitation channel is in this case from 2s to 1s. As + − pair production is the only possible channel, the differential pair-production cross-section is equal to the differential collisional excitation cross-section. By particularizing expression (6) to the case = 2, one finally gets 4 22 . = 5122 ( 2 ) 06 ( ) cos 2(42 2 + 9)6 He 0 (9) Advances in High Energy Physics 3 3. The + − Pair-Production Rate in the Galactic Bulge The total + − pair-production rate in the galactic bulge is given by 2 ⃗ DM () ⃗ ,⃗ ⟨ V⟩ () = ∫ 2 (10) where is the volume of the galactic bulge, which is a sphere of radius = 1.5 kpc, DM is the energy density distribution of dark matter in the galactic halo, and ⟨ V⟩ is the pairproduction cross-section times relative velocity V averaged over the velocity distribution of dark-matter particles. The total pair-production cross-section is obtained by integrating (9) over the diffusion angle. Its dependence on the relative velocity V is contained in , , and through = V and the expressions (7) and (8) of and in terms of . We use a Burkert [23, 24] flat, cored, dark-matter density profile known to reproduce well the kinematics of disk systems in massive spiral galaxies and supported by recent simulations including supernova feedback and radiation pressure of massive stars [25] in response to the cuspy halo problem: DM () = 0 03 , ( + 0 ) (2 + 02 ) (11) where is the distance from the galactic center. The central dark-matter density 0 is left as a free parameter and 0 is determined by requiring that the local dark-matter density at = ⊙ = 8 kpc is ⊙ = 0.3 GeV/cm3 . The dark-matter mass enclosed in a sphere of radius is therefore given by DM () = 0 03 {log ( 2 + 02 ) 02 +2 log ( + 0 ) − 2 arctan ( ) } . 0 0 (12) For the baryons in the bulge, we use an exponential profile [26] of the form () = bulge 83 −/ , (13) where bulge = 1010 ⊙ [27] is the mass of the bulge. This gives the baryonic mass distribution in the galactic bulge () = bulge {1 − −/ (1 + 2 + )} . 2 (14) We assume a Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution for the dark-matter particles of the galactic halo, with a velocity dispersion () and a cutoff at the galactic escape velocity Vesc (): (, V⃗ℎ ) = 1 −Vℎ2 /2 () , () (15) where V⃗ℎ is the velocity of the dark-matter particles in the frame of the halo and () = 2 (√ erf(Vesc /) − 2 2 2Vesc −Vesc / ) is a normalization constant such that V () ∫0 esc (, V⃗ℎ )V⃗ℎ = 1. The radial dependence of the velocity dispersion is obtained via the virial theorem: () = √ tot () , (16) where tot = DM + , while Vesc = √2. Using the velocity distribution (15), going to center-ofmass and relative velocities V⃗CM and V,⃗ and performing the integrals over V⃗CM , we obtain for the mean pair-production cross-section times relative velocity −2V2 /2 1 √2 erf (√2Vesc /) − 4Vesc esc ⟨ V⟩ = 2 2 /2 2 (√ erf (V /) − 2V −Vesc ) esc ×∫ 2Vesc 0 (V) V3 −V esc 2 /22 (17) V, which is also a function of through and Vesc . Putting (9), (11), (12), (14), (16), and (17) together allows us to compute the pair-production rate in the galactic bulge defined in (10) as a function of 0 and . 4. Results The rate of excessive + − pairs to be generated in the galactic bulge was estimated in [21] to be /|obs = 3 × 1042 s−1 . We computed /| for a large range of central darkmatter densities, going from 0.3 GeV/cm3 to an ultimate upper limit of 104 GeV/cm3 [28]. For each value of 0 , we searched for the mass of OHe that reproduces the observed rate. The results are shown in Figure 1. The observed rate can be reproduced from a value of 0 ≃ 115 GeV/cm3 , corresponding to an OHe mass of ≃ 1.25 TeV. As 0 gets larger, two values of are possible, with the lower one going from 1.25 TeV to 130 GeV and the upper one going from 1.25 to 130 TeV as 0 goes from 115 to 104 GeV/cm3 . 5. Conclusion The existence of heavy stable particles is one of the most popular solutions for the dark- matter problem. Usually they are considered to be electrically neutral. But dark matter can potentially be made of stable heavy charged particles bound in neutral atom-like states by Coulomb attraction. An analysis of the cosmological data and of the atomic composition of the Universe forces the particle to have charge −2. O−− is then trapped by primordial helium in neutral Ohelium states and this avoids the problem of overproduction of anomalous isotopes, which are severely constrained by observations. Here we have shown that the cosmological model of O-helium dark matter can explain the puzzle of positron line emission from the center of our Galaxy. 4 Advances in High Energy Physics 10000 0 (GeV/cm3 ) [3] [4] 1000 [5] [6] 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 [7] M (TeV) Figure 1: Values of the central dark-matter density 0 (GeV/cm3 ) and of the OHe mass (TeV) reproducing the excess of + − pairs production in the galactic bulge. Below the red curve, the predicted rate is too low. The proposed explanation is based on the assumption that OHe dominates the dark-matter sector. Its collisions can lead to 0 deexcitations of the 2s states excited by the collisions. The estimated luminosity in the electron-positronannihilation line strongly depends not only on the mass of O−− but also on the density profile and velocity distribution of dark matter in the galactic bulge. Note that the density profile we considered is used only to obtain a reasonable estimate for the uncertainties on the density in the bulge. It indeed underestimates the mass of the Galaxy, but it shows that the uncertainties on the astrophysical parameters are large enough to reproduce the observed excess for a rather wide range of masses of O−− . For a fixed density profile and a fixed velocity distribution, only two values of the O−− mass lead to the necessary rate of positron production. The lower value of this mass, which does not exceed 1.25 TeV, is within the reach of experimental searches for multicharged stable heavy particles at the LHC. [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] Conflict of Interests The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper. Acknowledgment The authors express their gratitude to A. S. Romaniouk for discussions. References [17] [18] [19] [20] [1] M. Yu. Khlopov, Cosmoparticle Physics, World Scientific, Singapore, 1999. [2] M. Yu. Khlopov, “Cosmoarcheology. Direct and indirect astrophysical effects of hypothetical particles and fields,” in Cosmion94, M. Yu. Khlopov, M. E. Prokhorov, A. A. Starobinsky, and J. [21] Tran Thanh Van, Eds., pp. 67–76, Editions Fronti`eres, Quebec, Canada, 1996. M. Y. Khlopov, “Proceedings to the 9th workshop ‘what comes beyond the standard models’,” Bled Workshops in Physics, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 51, 2006. M. Y. Khlopov, “Proceedings to the 10th workshop ‘what comes beyond the standard models’,” Bled Workshops in Physics, vol. 8, no. 2, p. 114, 2007. M. Yu. Khlopov, Fundamentals of Cosmoparticle Physics, CISPSpringer, Cambridge, UK, 2012. M. Yu. Khlopov, “Fundamental particle structure in the cosmological dark matter,” International Journal of Modern Physics A, vol. 28, no. 29, Article ID 1330042, 60 pages, 2013. M. Yu. Khlopov, “Physics of dark matter in the light of dark atoms,” Modern Physics Letters A, vol. 26, no. 38, Article ID 2823, 2011. B. D. Wandelt, R. Dave, G. R. Farrar, P. C. McGuire, D. N. Spergel, and P. J. Steinhardt, “Self-interacting dark matter,” http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0006344. P. C. McGuire and P. J. Steinhardt, “Cracking open the window for strongly interacting massive particles as the halo dark matter,” http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0105567. G. Zaharijas and G. R. Farrar, “Window in the dark matter exclusion limits,” Physical Review D, vol. 72, no. 8, Article ID 083502, 11 pages, 2005. C. B. Dover et al., “Cosmological constraints on new stable hadrons,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 42, no. 17, pp. 1117–1120, 1979. S. Wolfram, “Abundances of new stable particles produced in the early universe,” Physics Letters B, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 65–68, 1979. G. D. Starkman, A. Gould, R. Esmailzadeh, and S. Dimopoulos, “Opening the window on strongly interacting dark matter,” Physical Review D, vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 3594–3603, 1990. D. Javorsek, D. Elmore, E. Fischbach et al., “New experimental limits on strongly interacting massive particles at the TeV scale,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 87, no. 23, Article ID 231804, 2001. S. Mitra, “Uranus’s anomalously low excess heat constrains strongly interacting dark matter,” Physical Review D, vol. 70, no. 10, Article ID 103517, 2004. G. D. Mack, J. F. Beacom, and G. Bertone, “Towards closing the window on strongly interacting dark matter: far-reaching constraints from Earth’s heat flow,” Physical Review D, vol. 76, no. 4, Article ID 043523, 2007. D. McCammon, R. Almy, S. Deiker et al., “A sounding rocket payload for X-ray astronomy employing high-resolution microcalorimeters,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A, vol. 370, no. 1, pp. 266–268, 1996. D. McCammon, R. Almy, E. Apodaca et al., “A high spectral resolution observation of the soft X-ray diffuse background with thermal detectors ,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 576, no. 1, p. 188, 2002. M. Yu. Khlopov, “Composite dark matter from stable charged constituents,” http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.3581. B. J. Teegarden, K. Watanabe, P. Jean et al., “INTEGRAL SPI limits on electron-positron annihilation radiation from the galactic plane,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 621, no. 1, p. 296, 2005. D. P. Finkbeiner and N. Weiner, “Exciting dark matter and the INTEGRAL/SPI 511 keV signal,” Physical Review D, vol. 76, no. 8, Article ID 083519, 2007. Advances in High Energy Physics [22] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics, Pergamon Press, Elmsford, NY, USA, 1965. [23] A. Burkert, “The structure of dark matter haloes in dwarf galaxies,” IAU Symposia, vol. 171, p. 175, 1996. [24] A. Burkert, “The structure of dark matter haloes in dwarf galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 447, no. 1, p. L25, 1995. [25] A. V. Maccio, G. Stinson, C. B. Brook et al., “HALO Expansion in cosmological hydro simulations: toward a baryonic solution of the cusp/core problem in massive spirals,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters, vol. 744, no. 1, p. L9, 2012. [26] O. Y. Gnedin, A. V. Kravtsov, A. A. Klypin, and D. Nagai, “Response of dark matter halos to condensation of Baryons: cosmological simulations and improved adiabatic contraction model,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 616, no. 1, p. 16, 2004. [27] H. Mo, F. van den Bosch, and S. White, Galaxy Formation and Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2010. [28] X. Hernandez and W. H. Lee, “An upper limit to the central density of dark matter haloes from consistency with the presence of massive central black holes,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 404, no. 1, p. L10, 2010. 5

© Copyright 2018 ExploreDoc