Cosmology at the LHC?Manuel Drees
Bonn University
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 1/27
Contents
1 Does the LHC recreate conditions ofthe Early Universe?
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 2/27
Contents
1 Does the LHC recreate conditions ofthe Early Universe?
2 Dark Energy and the LHC
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 2/27
Contents
1 Does the LHC recreate conditions ofthe Early Universe?
2 Dark Energy and the LHC
3 Dark Matter and the LHC
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 2/27
Contents
1 Does the LHC recreate conditions ofthe Early Universe?
2 Dark Energy and the LHC
3 Dark Matter and the LHC
4 Summary
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 2/27
1 The LHC vs the Early Universe
The early Universe:
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 3/27
1 The LHC vs the Early Universe
The early Universe:
Expanded, described by H = RR =
√ρ/3
MP
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 3/27
1 The LHC vs the Early Universe
The early Universe:
Expanded, described by H = RR =
√ρ/3
MP
Between reheating (after inflation) and decoupling ofCMB: dominated by radiation, ρ = π2
30g∗T4
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 3/27
1 The LHC vs the Early Universe
The early Universe:
Expanded, described by H = RR =
√ρ/3
MP
Between reheating (after inflation) and decoupling ofCMB: dominated by radiation, ρ = π2
30g∗T4
Was mostly in thermal equilibrium: sR3 =const.
=⇒ TT = −H ∼ 5 · 10−19T (T ∼ 500 MeV)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 3/27
1 The LHC vs the Early Universe
The early Universe:
Expanded, described by H = RR =
√ρ/3
MP
Between reheating (after inflation) and decoupling ofCMB: dominated by radiation, ρ = π2
30g∗T4
Was mostly in thermal equilibrium: sR3 =const.
=⇒ TT = −H ∼ 5 · 10−19T (T ∼ 500 MeV)
Heavy ion collisions at the LHC:
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 3/27
1 The LHC vs the Early Universe
The early Universe:
Expanded, described by H = RR =
√ρ/3
MP
Between reheating (after inflation) and decoupling ofCMB: dominated by radiation, ρ = π2
30g∗T4
Was mostly in thermal equilibrium: sR3 =const.
=⇒ TT = −H ∼ 5 · 10−19T (T ∼ 500 MeV)
Heavy ion collisions at the LHC:Fireball expands with roughly speed of light
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 3/27
1 The LHC vs the Early Universe
The early Universe:
Expanded, described by H = RR =
√ρ/3
MP
Between reheating (after inflation) and decoupling ofCMB: dominated by radiation, ρ = π2
30g∗T4
Was mostly in thermal equilibrium: sR3 =const.
=⇒ TT = −H ∼ 5 · 10−19T (T ∼ 500 MeV)
Heavy ion collisions at the LHC:Fireball expands with roughly speed of light
Total energy ∼ ρR3 =const. =⇒ TT ∼ −3
4cR ∼ 0.015T
∼ 3 · 1016 TT
∣
∣
∣
early Universe(Tinitial = 500 MeV)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 3/27
The LHC vs the Early Universe (cont.d)
The early Universe:
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 4/27
The LHC vs the Early Universe (cont.d)
The early Universe:Weak interactions were in equilibrium for T >∼ 1 MeV
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 4/27
The LHC vs the Early Universe (cont.d)
The early Universe:Weak interactions were in equilibrium for T >∼ 1 MeV
Electromagnetic interactions (between photons andelectrons) were in equilibrium for T >∼ 0.3 eV (untilCMB decoupling)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 4/27
The LHC vs the Early Universe (cont.d)
The early Universe:Weak interactions were in equilibrium for T >∼ 1 MeV
Electromagnetic interactions (between photons andelectrons) were in equilibrium for T >∼ 0.3 eV (untilCMB decoupling)
Heavy ion collisions at the LHC:
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 4/27
The LHC vs the Early Universe (cont.d)
The early Universe:Weak interactions were in equilibrium for T >∼ 1 MeV
Electromagnetic interactions (between photons andelectrons) were in equilibrium for T >∼ 0.3 eV (untilCMB decoupling)
Heavy ion collisions at the LHC:Weak interactions never reach equilibrium
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 4/27
The LHC vs the Early Universe (cont.d)
The early Universe:Weak interactions were in equilibrium for T >∼ 1 MeV
Electromagnetic interactions (between photons andelectrons) were in equilibrium for T >∼ 0.3 eV (untilCMB decoupling)
Heavy ion collisions at the LHC:Weak interactions never reach equilibriumElectromagnetic interactions never reach equilibrium
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 4/27
The LHC vs the Early Universe (cont.d)
The early Universe:Weak interactions were in equilibrium for T >∼ 1 MeV
Electromagnetic interactions (between photons andelectrons) were in equilibrium for T >∼ 0.3 eV (untilCMB decoupling)
Heavy ion collisions at the LHC:Weak interactions never reach equilibriumElectromagnetic interactions never reach equilibriumNot clear which strong interactions are in equilibriumfor what period of time
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 4/27
The LHC vs the Early Universe (cont.d)
The early Universe:Weak interactions were in equilibrium for T >∼ 1 MeV
Electromagnetic interactions (between photons andelectrons) were in equilibrium for T >∼ 0.3 eV (untilCMB decoupling)
Heavy ion collisions at the LHC:Weak interactions never reach equilibriumElectromagnetic interactions never reach equilibriumNot clear which strong interactions are in equilibriumfor what period of time
LHC will not recreate conditions of the early Universe!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 4/27
Creating massive particles
Often said: “LHC will create massive, short–lived particlesfor the first time since the Big Bang”.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 5/27
Creating massive particles
Often said: “LHC will create massive, short–lived particlesfor the first time since the Big Bang”.
This is not true, either.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 5/27
Creating massive particles
Often said: “LHC will create massive, short–lived particlesfor the first time since the Big Bang”.
This is not true, either.
Example: Higgs production, σ ≃ 10 pb (at LHC)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 5/27
Creating massive particles
Often said: “LHC will create massive, short–lived particlesfor the first time since the Big Bang”.
This is not true, either.
Example: Higgs production, σ ≃ 10 pb (at LHC)
Cosmic Ray flux on earth: dΦdE ∼ 10−18
m2sr s GeV
(
E108 GeV
)−3
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 5/27
Creating massive particles
Often said: “LHC will create massive, short–lived particlesfor the first time since the Big Bang”.
This is not true, either.
Example: Higgs production, σ ≃ 10 pb (at LHC)
Cosmic Ray flux on earth: dΦdE ∼ 10−18
m2sr s GeV
(
E108 GeV
)−3
Implies ∼ 2.5 · 1013 pp collisions with√
s >√
sLHC fromCR events per year on Earth
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 5/27
Creating massive particles
Often said: “LHC will create massive, short–lived particlesfor the first time since the Big Bang”.
This is not true, either.
Example: Higgs production, σ ≃ 10 pb (at LHC)
Cosmic Ray flux on earth: dΦdE ∼ 10−18
m2sr s GeV
(
E108 GeV
)−3
Implies ∼ 2.5 · 1013 pp collisions with√
s >√
sLHC fromCR events per year on Earth
Implies ∼ 104 Higgs bosons are produced per year inCR events on Earth
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 5/27
True Statements
LHC will (hopefully) be humanity’s first chance to analyze(many) new particles
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 6/27
True Statements
LHC will (hopefully) be humanity’s first chance to analyze(many) new particles
Some of these particles may well be of relevance forcosmology
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 6/27
True Statements
LHC will (hopefully) be humanity’s first chance to analyze(many) new particles
Some of these particles may well be of relevance forcosmology
LHC discoveries may well be of interest tocosmologists!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 6/27
Biggest puzzles in particle cosmology
70% Dark Energy
25% non-baryonic DM
0.8% knownbaryons
4.2% unknownbaryons
Composition of the Universe
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 7/27
Biggest puzzles in particle cosmology
70% Dark Energy
25% non-baryonic DM
0.8% knownbaryons
4.2% unknownbaryons
Composition of the Universe
What is all the dark stuff?Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 7/27
2 Dark Energy and the LHC
Origin and nature of DE are completely unclear:Biggest mystery in current cosmology!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 8/27
2 Dark Energy and the LHC
Origin and nature of DE are completely unclear:Biggest mystery in current cosmology!
In 4 dimensions: No connection to collider physics
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 8/27
2 Dark Energy and the LHC
Origin and nature of DE are completely unclear:Biggest mystery in current cosmology!
In 4 dimensions: No connection to collider physics
In models with small extra dimensions: Connections tocollider physics may exist (radion–Higgs mixing;spectrum of KK states), but no example is known (tome)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 8/27
2 Dark Energy and the LHC
Origin and nature of DE are completely unclear:Biggest mystery in current cosmology!
In 4 dimensions: No connection to collider physics
In models with small extra dimensions: Connections tocollider physics may exist (radion–Higgs mixing;spectrum of KK states), but no example is known (tome)
In models with large extra dimension: LHC may beblack hole factory; “cosmon” should be produced in bhdecay
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 8/27
Challenges
Only have semi–classical treatment: supposed to workfor M ≫ MD
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 9/27
Challenges
Only have semi–classical treatment: supposed to workfor M ≫ MD
Partonic cross section ∝ M1/(1+n), but pp cross sectionfalls with increasing M :
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
M [TeV]0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
1e+05
1e+06
1e+07
σ [p
b]
MD
= 0.65 TeV, no gravitational radiation
σ^ (n=2)
n = 2
σ^ (n=6)
n = 6
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 9/27
Challenges
Only have semi–classical treatment: supposed to workfor M ≫ MD
Partonic cross section ∝ M1/(1+n), but pp cross sectionfalls with increasing M :
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
M [TeV]0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
1e+05
1e+06
1e+07
σ [p
b]
MD
= 0.65 TeV, no gravitational radiation
σ^ (n=2)
n = 2
σ^ (n=6)
n = 6
Hence: Neither understand final stage of bh decay, nortotal bh production cross section!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 9/27
On the other hand . . .
Finding superparticles makes understanding smallcosmological constant 1060 times easier!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 10/27
3 Dark Matter
Several observations indicate existence of non-luminousDark Matter (DM) (more exactly: missing force)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 11/27
3 Dark Matter
Several observations indicate existence of non-luminousDark Matter (DM) (more exactly: missing force)
Galactic rotation curves imply ΩDMh2 ≥ 0.05.
Ω: Mass density in units of critical density; Ω = 1 means flatUniverse.h: Scaled Hubble constant. Observation: h = 0.72 ± 0.07
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 11/27
3 Dark Matter
Several observations indicate existence of non-luminousDark Matter (DM) (more exactly: missing force)
Galactic rotation curves imply ΩDMh2 ≥ 0.05.
Ω: Mass density in units of critical density; Ω = 1 means flatUniverse.h: Scaled Hubble constant. Observation: h = 0.72 ± 0.07
Models of structure formation, X ray temperature ofclusters of galaxies, . . .
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 11/27
3 Dark Matter
Several observations indicate existence of non-luminousDark Matter (DM) (more exactly: missing force)
Galactic rotation curves imply ΩDMh2 ≥ 0.05.
Ω: Mass density in units of critical density; Ω = 1 means flatUniverse.h: Scaled Hubble constant. Observation: h = 0.72 ± 0.07
Models of structure formation, X ray temperature ofclusters of galaxies, . . .
Cosmic Microwave Background anisotropies (WMAP)imply ΩDMh2 = 0.105+0.007
−0.013 Spergel et al., astro–ph/0603449
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 11/27
Density of thermal DM
Decoupling of DM particle χ defined by:
nχ(Tf )〈vσ(χχ → any)〉 = H(Tf )
nχ: χ number density ∝ e−mχ/T
v: Relative velocity〈. . . 〉: Thermal averageH: Hubble parameter; in standard cosmology ∼ T 2/MPlanck
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 12/27
Density of thermal DM
Decoupling of DM particle χ defined by:
nχ(Tf )〈vσ(χχ → any)〉 = H(Tf )
nχ: χ number density ∝ e−mχ/T
v: Relative velocity〈. . . 〉: Thermal averageH: Hubble parameter; in standard cosmology ∼ T 2/MPlanck
Gives average relic mass density
Ωχ ∝ 1〈vσ(χχ→any)〉
Yields roughly right result for weak cross section!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 12/27
Assumptions
χ is effectively stable, τχ ≫ τU: partly testable atcolliders
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 13/27
Assumptions
χ is effectively stable, τχ ≫ τU: partly testable atcolliders
Temperature (after inflation) was high enough for χ tohave reached thermal equilibrium: Not testable atcolliders
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 13/27
Assumptions
χ is effectively stable, τχ ≫ τU: partly testable atcolliders
Temperature (after inflation) was high enough for χ tohave reached thermal equilibrium: Not testable atcolliders
No entropy production after χ decoupled: Not testableat colliders
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 13/27
Assumptions
χ is effectively stable, τχ ≫ τU: partly testable atcolliders
Temperature (after inflation) was high enough for χ tohave reached thermal equilibrium: Not testable atcolliders
No entropy production after χ decoupled: Not testableat colliders
H at time of χ decoupling is known: partly testable atcolliders
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 13/27
Thermal WIMPs at colliders: Generalities
Only 〈vσ(χχ → anything)〉 is known
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 14/27
Thermal WIMPs at colliders: Generalities
Only 〈vσ(χχ → anything)〉 is known
No guarantee that χ couples to light quarks or electrons(which we can collide)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 14/27
Thermal WIMPs at colliders: Generalities
Only 〈vσ(χχ → anything)〉 is known
No guarantee that χ couples to light quarks or electrons(which we can collide)
At LHC: direct χ pair production is undetectable
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 14/27
Thermal WIMPs at colliders: Generalities
Only 〈vσ(χχ → anything)〉 is known
No guarantee that χ couples to light quarks or electrons(which we can collide)
At LHC: direct χ pair production is undetectable
Hence can generally only test models with “Überbau” ofheavier, strongly interacting new particles decaying intoχ
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 14/27
Thermal WIMPs at colliders: Generalities
Only 〈vσ(χχ → anything)〉 is known
No guarantee that χ couples to light quarks or electrons(which we can collide)
At LHC: direct χ pair production is undetectable
Hence can generally only test models with “Überbau” ofheavier, strongly interacting new particles decaying intoχ
Such particles exist for best–motivated χ candidates:SUSY, Little Higgs, (universal extra dimension)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 14/27
SUSY Dark Matter
Conditions for successful DM candidate:
Must be stable ⇒ χ = LSP and R−parity is conserved(if LSP in visible sector)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 15/27
SUSY Dark Matter
Conditions for successful DM candidate:
Must be stable ⇒ χ = LSP and R−parity is conserved(if LSP in visible sector)
Exotic isotope searches ⇒ χ must be neutral
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 15/27
SUSY Dark Matter
Conditions for successful DM candidate:
Must be stable ⇒ χ = LSP and R−parity is conserved(if LSP in visible sector)
Exotic isotope searches ⇒ χ must be neutral
Must satisfy DM search limits ⇒ χ 6= ν
And the winner is . . .
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 15/27
SUSY Dark Matter
Conditions for successful DM candidate:
Must be stable ⇒ χ = LSP and R−parity is conserved(if LSP in visible sector)
Exotic isotope searches ⇒ χ must be neutral
Must satisfy DM search limits ⇒ χ 6= ν
And the winner is . . .χ = χ0
1(or in hidden sector)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 15/27
χ0
1relic density
To predict thermal χ01 relic density: have to know
σ(χ01χ
01 −→ SM particles)
In general, this requires knowledge of almost all sparticle andHiggs masses and of all couplings of the LSP!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 16/27
χ0
1relic density
To predict thermal χ01 relic density: have to know
σ(χ01χ
01 −→ SM particles)
In general, this requires knowledge of almost all sparticle andHiggs masses and of all couplings of the LSP!
Neutralino mass matrix in the MSSM:
M0 =
0
B
B
B
B
B
@
M1 0 −MZ cosβ sinθW MZ sinβ sinθW
0 M2 MZ cosβ cosθW −MZ sinβ cosθW
−MZ cosβ sinθW MZ cosβ cosθW 0 −µ
MZ sinβ sinθW −MZ sinβ cosθW −µ 0
1
C
C
C
C
C
A
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 16/27
χ0
1relic density
To predict thermal χ01 relic density: have to know
σ(χ01χ
01 −→ SM particles)
In general, this requires knowledge of almost all sparticle andHiggs masses and of all couplings of the LSP!
Neutralino mass matrix in the MSSM:
M0 =
0
B
B
B
B
B
@
M1 0 −MZ cosβ sinθW MZ sinβ sinθW
0 M2 MZ cosβ cosθW −MZ sinβ cosθW
−MZ cosβ sinθW MZ cosβ cosθW 0 −µ
MZ sinβ sinθW −MZ sinβ cosθW −µ 0
1
C
C
C
C
C
A
=⇒ Can determine decomposition of χ01 by studying χ
±
1 , χ02, χ
03:
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 16/27
χ0
1relic density
To predict thermal χ01 relic density: have to know
σ(χ01χ
01 −→ SM particles)
In general, this requires knowledge of almost all sparticle andHiggs masses and of all couplings of the LSP!
Neutralino mass matrix in the MSSM:
M0 =
0
B
B
B
B
B
@
M1 0 −MZ cosβ sinθW MZ sinβ sinθW
0 M2 MZ cosβ cosθW −MZ sinβ cosθW
−MZ cosβ sinθW MZ cosβ cosθW 0 −µ
MZ sinβ sinθW −MZ sinβ cosθW −µ 0
1
C
C
C
C
C
A
=⇒ Can determine decomposition of χ01 by studying χ
±
1 , χ02, χ
03:
Are produced both directly and in q, g decays at the LHC!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 16/27
χ0
1annihilation in the MSSM
mfL, mfR
, θf : Needed for χ01χ
01 → ff
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 17/27
χ0
1annihilation in the MSSM
mfL, mfR
, θf : Needed for χ01χ
01 → ff
mh, mH , mA, α, tanβ: Needed forχ0
1χ01 → ff , V V, V φ, φφ (V : Massive gauge boson; φ:
Higgs boson).
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 17/27
χ0
1annihilation in the MSSM
mfL, mfR
, θf : Needed for χ01χ
01 → ff
mh, mH , mA, α, tanβ: Needed forχ0
1χ01 → ff , V V, V φ, φφ (V : Massive gauge boson; φ:
Higgs boson).
For many masses: lower bounds may be sufficient
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 17/27
χ0
1annihilation in the MSSM
mfL, mfR
, θf : Needed for χ01χ
01 → ff
mh, mH , mA, α, tanβ: Needed forχ0
1χ01 → ff , V V, V φ, φφ (V : Massive gauge boson; φ:
Higgs boson).
For many masses: lower bounds may be sufficient
If coannihilation is important: final answer dependsexponentially on mass difference
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 17/27
χ0
1annihilation in the MSSM
mfL, mfR
, θf : Needed for χ01χ
01 → ff
mh, mH , mA, α, tanβ: Needed forχ0
1χ01 → ff , V V, V φ, φφ (V : Massive gauge boson; φ:
Higgs boson).
For many masses: lower bounds may be sufficient
If coannihilation is important: final answer dependsexponentially on mass difference
Parameters in Higgs and squark sector are also neededto predict χ0
1 detection rate, i.e. σ(χ01N → χ0
1N)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 17/27
Impact on particle physics (mSUGRA)
w./ A. Djouadi, J.-L. Kneur, hep-ph/0602001
Parameter space is constrained by:
Sparticle searches, in particular χ±1 , τ1 searches at
LEP: σ < 20 fb
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 18/27
Impact on particle physics (mSUGRA)
w./ A. Djouadi, J.-L. Kneur, hep-ph/0602001
Parameter space is constrained by:
Sparticle searches, in particular χ±1 , τ1 searches at
LEP: σ < 20 fb
Higgs searches, in particular light CP–even Higgssearch at LEP (parameterized)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 18/27
Impact on particle physics (mSUGRA)
w./ A. Djouadi, J.-L. Kneur, hep-ph/0602001
Parameter space is constrained by:
Sparticle searches, in particular χ±1 , τ1 searches at
LEP: σ < 20 fb
Higgs searches, in particular light CP–even Higgssearch at LEP (parameterized)
Brookhaven gµ − 2 measurement: Take envelope ofconstraints using τ and e+e− data for SM prediction
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 18/27
Impact on particle physics (mSUGRA)
w./ A. Djouadi, J.-L. Kneur, hep-ph/0602001
Parameter space is constrained by:
Sparticle searches, in particular χ±1 , τ1 searches at
LEP: σ < 20 fb
Higgs searches, in particular light CP–even Higgssearch at LEP (parameterized)
Brookhaven gµ − 2 measurement: Take envelope ofconstraints using τ and e+e− data for SM prediction
Radiative b decays (BELLE, . . . ): Take2.65 · 10−4 ≤ B(b → sγ) ≤ 4.45 · 10−4
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 18/27
Impact on particle physics (mSUGRA)
w./ A. Djouadi, J.-L. Kneur, hep-ph/0602001
Parameter space is constrained by:
Sparticle searches, in particular χ±1 , τ1 searches at
LEP: σ < 20 fb
Higgs searches, in particular light CP–even Higgssearch at LEP (parameterized)
Brookhaven gµ − 2 measurement: Take envelope ofconstraints using τ and e+e− data for SM prediction
Radiative b decays (BELLE, . . . ): Take2.65 · 10−4 ≤ B(b → sγ) ≤ 4.45 · 10−4
Simple CCB constraints (at weak scale only)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 18/27
100 1000m
0 [GeV]
100
1000
m1/
2 [G
eV]
mSUGRA, mt = 178 GeV, tanβ = 10, µ>0, A
0 = 0
All constraints except DM included
τ∼ 1 is LSP
h is too light
χ~+
1 is too light
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 19/27
100 1000m
0 [GeV]
100
1000
m1/
2 [G
eV]
mSUGRA, mt = 178 GeV, tanβ = 10, µ>0, A
0 = 0
All constraints included
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 20/27
mt = 173 GeV, tan β = 50, A0 = 0, µ > 0
m0 [GeV]
m1/2
[GeV
]
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 21/27
Can LHC probe the DM allowed region?
τ co–annihilation region can be probed entirely
.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 22/27
Can LHC probe the DM allowed region?
τ co–annihilation region can be probed entirely
“Focus point” region with higgsino–like LSP cannot beprobed
.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 22/27
Can LHC probe the DM allowed region?
τ co–annihilation region can be probed entirely
“Focus point” region with higgsino–like LSP cannot beprobed
End of “A−funnel” cannot be probed
.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 22/27
Can LHC probe the DM allowed region?
τ co–annihilation region can be probed entirely
“Focus point” region with higgsino–like LSP cannot beprobed
End of “A−funnel” cannot be probed
Even in this simplest, most predictive, possibly realistic DMmodel, existence of thermal WIMP DM does not guaranteenew LHC signals!
.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 22/27
Can LHC probe the DM allowed region?
τ co–annihilation region can be probed entirely
“Focus point” region with higgsino–like LSP cannot beprobed
End of “A−funnel” cannot be probed
Even in this simplest, most predictive, possibly realistic DMmodel, existence of thermal WIMP DM does not guaranteenew LHC signals!
Finetuning arguments do guarantee LHC signal, if SUSY isto stabilize the hierarchy.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 22/27
Predicting Ωχ0
1h2 from LHC data
The precision with which Ωχ0
1h2 can be predicted strongly
depends on SUSY parameters: Battaglia et al., hep–ph/0602187
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 23/27
Predicting Ωχ0
1h2 from LHC data
The precision with which Ωχ0
1h2 can be predicted strongly
depends on SUSY parameters: Battaglia et al., hep–ph/0602187
“Bulk region”: χ01χ
01 → ℓ+ℓ− via ℓ exchange, needs rather
light χ01, ℓ: Ωχ0
1h2 to 7%!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 23/27
Predicting Ωχ0
1h2 from LHC data
The precision with which Ωχ0
1h2 can be predicted strongly
depends on SUSY parameters: Battaglia et al., hep–ph/0602187
“Bulk region”: χ01χ
01 → ℓ+ℓ− via ℓ exchange, needs rather
light χ01, ℓ: Ωχ0
1h2 to 7%!
“Focus point” region: χ01χ
01 → V V,Zh (V = Z,W±) via h
component of χ01: Ωχ0
1h2 to 82%
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 23/27
Predicting Ωχ0
1h2 from LHC data
The precision with which Ωχ0
1h2 can be predicted strongly
depends on SUSY parameters: Battaglia et al., hep–ph/0602187
“Bulk region”: χ01χ
01 → ℓ+ℓ− via ℓ exchange, needs rather
light χ01, ℓ: Ωχ0
1h2 to 7%!
“Focus point” region: χ01χ
01 → V V,Zh (V = Z,W±) via h
component of χ01: Ωχ0
1h2 to 82%
“Co–annihilation region”: mχ0
1≃ mτ1: Ωχ0
1h2 to 170%.
Arnowitt et al. (2007) can do better!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 23/27
Predicting Ωχ0
1h2 from LHC data
The precision with which Ωχ0
1h2 can be predicted strongly
depends on SUSY parameters: Battaglia et al., hep–ph/0602187
“Bulk region”: χ01χ
01 → ℓ+ℓ− via ℓ exchange, needs rather
light χ01, ℓ: Ωχ0
1h2 to 7%!
“Focus point” region: χ01χ
01 → V V,Zh (V = Z,W±) via h
component of χ01: Ωχ0
1h2 to 82%
“Co–annihilation region”: mχ0
1≃ mτ1: Ωχ0
1h2 to 170%.
Arnowitt et al. (2007) can do better!
“Funnel region”: mχ0
1≃ mA/2: Ωχ0
1h2 to 400%
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 23/27
Predicting Ωχ0
1h2 from LHC data
The precision with which Ωχ0
1h2 can be predicted strongly
depends on SUSY parameters: Battaglia et al., hep–ph/0602187
“Bulk region”: χ01χ
01 → ℓ+ℓ− via ℓ exchange, needs rather
light χ01, ℓ: Ωχ0
1h2 to 7%!
“Focus point” region: χ01χ
01 → V V,Zh (V = Z,W±) via h
component of χ01: Ωχ0
1h2 to 82%
“Co–annihilation region”: mχ0
1≃ mτ1: Ωχ0
1h2 to 170%.
Arnowitt et al. (2007) can do better!
“Funnel region”: mχ0
1≃ mA/2: Ωχ0
1h2 to 400%
Based on spectrum information only!Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 23/27
Hidden Sector Dark Matter
Any mSUGRA parameter set can have the right DM densityif LSP is in hidden or invisible sector. It could be:
The axino Covi et al., hep-ph/9905212 . . .
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 24/27
Hidden Sector Dark Matter
Any mSUGRA parameter set can have the right DM densityif LSP is in hidden or invisible sector. It could be:
The axino Covi et al., hep-ph/9905212 . . .
The gravitino Buchmüller et al.; J.L. Feng et al.; J. Ellis et al.; Di Austri and
Roszkowski; . . .
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 24/27
Hidden Sector Dark Matter
Any mSUGRA parameter set can have the right DM densityif LSP is in hidden or invisible sector. It could be:
The axino Covi et al., hep-ph/9905212 . . .
The gravitino Buchmüller et al.; J.L. Feng et al.; J. Ellis et al.; Di Austri and
Roszkowski; . . .
A modulino
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 24/27
Hidden Sector DM (contd.)
Unfortunately,
ΩDM can no longer be predicted from particle physicsalone; e.g. ΩGh2 ∝ Treheat
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 25/27
Hidden Sector DM (contd.)
Unfortunately,
ΩDM can no longer be predicted from particle physicsalone; e.g. ΩGh2 ∝ Treheat
hidden sector LSP may leave no imprint at colliders,unless lightest visible sparticle (LVSP) is charged; LVSPis quite long-lived
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 25/27
Hidden Sector DM (contd.)
Unfortunately,
ΩDM can no longer be predicted from particle physicsalone; e.g. ΩGh2 ∝ Treheat
hidden sector LSP may leave no imprint at colliders,unless lightest visible sparticle (LVSP) is charged; LVSPis quite long-lived
Detection of hidden sector DM seems impossible:Cross sections are way too small!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 25/27
Nonstandard cosmology
Can either reduce or increase density of stable χ01
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 26/27
Nonstandard cosmology
Can either reduce or increase density of stable χ01
Increase: through incease of H(Tf ); or throughnon-thermal χ0
1 production mechanisms.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 26/27
Nonstandard cosmology
Can either reduce or increase density of stable χ01
Increase: through incease of H(Tf ); or throughnon-thermal χ0
1 production mechanisms.
Reduce: through decrease of H(Tf ); through lateentropy production; or through low Treheat.
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 26/27
Nonstandard cosmology
Can either reduce or increase density of stable χ01
Increase: through incease of H(Tf ); or throughnon-thermal χ0
1 production mechanisms.
Reduce: through decrease of H(Tf ); through lateentropy production; or through low Treheat.
None of these mechanisms in general has observableconsequences (except DM density).
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 26/27
Nonstandard cosmology
Can either reduce or increase density of stable χ01
Increase: through incease of H(Tf ); or throughnon-thermal χ0
1 production mechanisms.
Reduce: through decrease of H(Tf ); through lateentropy production; or through low Treheat.
None of these mechanisms in general has observableconsequences (except DM density).
If χ01 makes DM: Can use measurements at colliders to
constrain cosmology!
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 26/27
Nonstandard cosmology
Can either reduce or increase density of stable χ01
Increase: through incease of H(Tf ); or throughnon-thermal χ0
1 production mechanisms.
Reduce: through decrease of H(Tf ); through lateentropy production; or through low Treheat.
None of these mechanisms in general has observableconsequences (except DM density).
If χ01 makes DM: Can use measurements at colliders to
constrain cosmology! E.g.: assuming thermal WIMP, candetermine H(TF ) with relative precision about two timesworse than σ(χ0
1χ01 → any).(Drees, Imminiyaz, Kakizaki, arXiv:0704.1590)
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 26/27
4 Summary
LHC does not recreate conditions of the early Universe
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 27/27
4 Summary
LHC does not recreate conditions of the early Universe
Dark Energy
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 27/27
4 Summary
LHC does not recreate conditions of the early Universe
Dark Energy
Direct detection of cosmon in bh decay in principlepossible, but very challenging
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 27/27
4 Summary
LHC does not recreate conditions of the early Universe
Dark Energy
Direct detection of cosmon in bh decay in principlepossible, but very challengingDiscovering supersymmetry will have big impact on“landscape” arguments
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 27/27
4 Summary
LHC does not recreate conditions of the early Universe
Dark Energy
Direct detection of cosmon in bh decay in principlepossible, but very challengingDiscovering supersymmetry will have big impact on“landscape” arguments
Dark Matter:
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 27/27
4 Summary
LHC does not recreate conditions of the early Universe
Dark Energy
Direct detection of cosmon in bh decay in principlepossible, but very challengingDiscovering supersymmetry will have big impact on“landscape” arguments
Dark Matter:Does not guarantee new signals at LHC
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 27/27
4 Summary
LHC does not recreate conditions of the early Universe
Dark Energy
Direct detection of cosmon in bh decay in principlepossible, but very challengingDiscovering supersymmetry will have big impact on“landscape” arguments
Dark Matter:Does not guarantee new signals at LHCDo not over–emphasize “DM allowed regions”
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 27/27
4 Summary
LHC does not recreate conditions of the early Universe
Dark Energy
Direct detection of cosmon in bh decay in principlepossible, but very challengingDiscovering supersymmetry will have big impact on“landscape” arguments
Dark Matter:Does not guarantee new signals at LHCDo not over–emphasize “DM allowed regions”Accurate determinations of WIMP couplings wouldallow to constrain very early Universe
Cosmology at the LHC? – p. 27/27