Dark Matter Self-interactions and Small Scale Structure Sean Tulin1, ∗ and Hai-Bo Yu2, y 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada 2Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Riverside, California 92521, USA (Dated: November 28, 2017) Abstract We review theories of dark matter (DM) beyond the collisionless paradigm, known as self-interacting dark matter (SIDM), and their observable implications for astrophysical structure in the Universe. Self- interactions are motivated, in part, due to the potential to explain long-standing (and more recent) small scale structure observations that are in tension with collisionless cold DM (CDM) predictions. Simple particle physics models for SIDM can provide a universal explanation for these observations across a wide range of mass scales spanning dwarf galaxies, low and high surface brightness spiral galaxies, and clusters of galaxies. At the same time, SIDM leaves intact the success of ΛCDM cosmology on large scales. This report covers the following topics: (1) small scale structure issues, including the core-cusp problem, the diversity problem for rotation curves, the missing satellites problem, and the too-big-to-fail problem, as well as recent progress in hydrodynamical simulations of galaxy formation; (2) N-body simulations for SIDM, including implications for density profiles, halo shapes, substructure, and the interplay between baryons and self- interactions; (3) semi-analytic Jeans-based methods that provide a complementary approach for connecting particle models with observations; (4) merging systems, such as cluster mergers (e.g., the Bullet Cluster) and minor infalls, along with recent simulation results for mergers; (5) particle physics models, including light mediator models and composite DM models; and (6) complementary probes for SIDM, including indirect and direct detection experiments, particle collider searches, and cosmological observations. We provide a summary and critical look for all current constraints on DM self-interactions and an outline for future directions. arXiv:1705.02358v2 [hep-ph] 24 Nov 2017 ∗Electronic address: [email protected] yElectronic address: [email protected] 1 Contents I. Introduction 4 A. The dark matter puzzle 4 B. Crisis on small scales 6 C. Self-Interacting dark matter 7 D. From astrophysics to particle theory 10 II. Astrophysical observations 12 A. Core-Cusp Problem 12 B. Diversity Problem 16 C. Missing Satellites Problem 17 D. Too-Big-to-Fail Problem 19 E. Baryon feedback 21 III. N-body simulations and SIDM halo properties 24 A. Implementing self-interactions in simulations 26 B. Halo density profiles 27 C. Halo shapes: ellipticity 30 D. Substructure 31 E. SIDM simulations with baryons 34 IV. Jeans approach to relaxed SIDM halos 35 A. Isothermal solutions to the Jeans equations 35 B. Diverse rotation curves for SIDM 38 C. Scaling relations 41 V. Halo mergers 42 A. Observations 43 B. Self-interactions in merging clusters 46 C. Self-interactions in minor mergers 48 VI. Particle physics models 49 A. What cross section is relevant? 49 B. Self-coupled scalar 51 C. Light mediator models 51 D. Strongly interacting dark matter 54 E. Dark atoms 56 F. SIDM with an excited state 57 VII. Complementary searches 58 A. Portals for light mediators 59 B. Direct detection 60 C. Indirect detection 63 D. Collider searches 65 E. Cosmological probes 67 VIII. Conclusions 69 2 A. Summary 69 B. Outlook 71 References 74 3 I. INTRODUCTION A. The dark matter puzzle It was long ago pointed out by Oort that the distributions of mass and light in galaxies have little resemblance to one another [1]. At the time, observations of galaxy NGC 3115 found a rota- tion curve rising linearly with radius—indicating a constant mass density—despite its luminosity falling by over an order of magnitude. Oort derived a mass-to-light ratio that increased with dis- tance up to 250 in solar units1 at the outermost radius. He concluded that the luminous disk of NGC 3115 is∼ “imbedded in a more or less homogeneous mass of great density” [1]. The same phe- nomenon was observed in M31 by Babcock a year earlier [2]. These observations stood in contrast to the Milky Way (MW), where, by studying vertical dynamics of nearby stars, the mass-to-light ratio within the disk was known to be only 2 at the solar radius [3, 4, 5, 6]. Earlier pioneering observations of the Coma cluster by Zwicky∼ [7] and Virgo cluster by Smith [8] inferred similarly striking discrepencies between mass and light on much larger scales. These issues were not fully appreciated for several decades, when astronomers were able to study galactic rotational velocities at much larger distances. While many rotation curves exhibited a linearly increasing velocity at small distances, they were expected to turn over eventually and fall as r−1=2 according to Kepler’s laws [9]. Instead, optical observations by Rubin and Ford of M31 [10]—soon after extended to larger radii using 21-cm radio observations [11, 12]—revealed a circular velocity that did not fall off, but remained approximately constant. Many other spiral galaxies were found to exhibit the same behavior [12, 13, 14, 15, 16], indicating that most of the mass in galaxies is found in massive, nonluminous halos extending far beyond the spatial extent of luminous stars and gas [17, 18]. Massive spherical dark halos could also explain the apparent stability of bulgeless spiral galaxies [19], which by themselves are unstable to the formation of bars [20, 21]. The large amount of dark matter (DM) required by observations pointed toward its nonbary- onic nature.2 The total mass density found in halos was estimated to be around 20% of the critical density [17, 18], in remarkable agreement with present cosmological values [22]. If composed of baryons, the cosmological baryon density would be in tension with upper limits inferred from nucleosynthesis arguments [23], as well as being difficult to hide from astrophysical observa- tions [24]. Therefore, the “missing mass” puzzle in galaxies, as well as clusters, suggested the existence of a new dominant form of matter, such as an elementary particle leftover from the Big Bang. At first, the neutrino appeared to be a promising DM candidate within the Standard Model (SM) of elementary particles [25, 26, 27]. A relic thermal bath of neutrinos, produced alongside the cosmic microwave background (CMB), could yield the required mass density if the neutrino mass was (10 eV). However, because neutrinos are “hot” DM—they decouple from photons and electrons aroundO the nucleosynthesis epoch while still relativistic—free-streaming erases density fluctuations below supercluster scales (see, e.g., Ref. [28]). Numerical simulations have shown that top-down structure formation, where superclusters form first in the neutrino-dominated Uni- verse and subsequently fragment to produce galaxies, is incompatible with galaxy clustering con- straints [29, 30, 31]. Cosmological data has converged upon the ΛCDM paradigm as the standard model of cos- 1 Modern distance estimates revise Oort’s value down to 40. ∼ 2 In this context, the term “baryons” represents protons, neutrons, and electrons that constitute normal atomic matter. 4 FIG. 1: Matter power spectrum inferred through cosmological measurements. Red line shows the best fit for ΛCDM cosmology for a simplified five-parameter model, assuming a flat spatial geometry and a scale- invariant primordial spectrum. Reprinted from Ref. [32]. See therein and Ref. [33] for further information. mology (e.g., Ref. [34]). Of the total mass-energy content of the Universe, approximately 26% is cold dark matter (CDM) and 5% is baryonic matter (while the remainder is consistent with a cosmological constant Λ), with a nearly scale-invariant spectrum of primordial fluctuations [22]. In this picture, structure in the Universe forms as primordial overdensities collapse under gravity. Since CDM, acting as a pressureless fluid, is more dominant and collapses more readily than bary- onic matter, it provides the gravitational potential underlying the distribution of visible matter in the Universe. The observed matter power spectrum, as obtained from a variety of cosmological probes, is in remarkable agreement with ΛCDM cosmology, shown in Fig. 1. In addition, the ΛCDM model also explains many important aspects of galaxy formation [35, 36]. Despite this success, all evidence to date for DM comes from its gravitational influence in the Universe. With no viable DM candidate within SM, the underlying theory for DM remains unknown. Many new particle physics theories proposed to address shortcomings of the SM simul- taneously predict new particles that can be a DM candidate. Examples include weakly-interacting massive particles (WIMPs) motivated by the hierarchy problem, such as neutralinos in the su- persymmetric models [37, 38] and Kaluza-Klein states in extra dimensional models [39, 40], as well as extremely light axion particles [41] associated with the solution to the strong CP prob- lem in QCD [42]. The comic abundance of these new particles can be naturally close to the DM abundance inferred from the cosmological observations (e.g., Ref. [43]). This coincidence has mo- tivated decades of efforts to discover the particle physics realization of DM through experimental searches for new physics beyond the SM (e.g., see [44, 45, 46] and references therein). On large scales, the structure of the Universe is consistent with DM particles that are cold, colli- sionless, and interact with each other and SM particles purely via gravity. WIMPs and axions have interactions with the SM that are potentially large enough to be detectable in the laboratory, while 5 on astrophysical scales these interactions are negligible and these candidates behave as CDM. On the other hand, other particle physics candidates for DM may have interactions with the SM are too feeble to observe directly. Here, observational tests of structure and departures from the CDM paradigm play a complementary role in probing the particle physics of DM independently of its interactions with SM particles (as had been done for hot DM candidates).