Arxiv:2009.06555V3 [Astro-Ph.CO] 1 Feb 2021
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
KCL-PH-TH/2020-53, CERN-TH-2020-150 Cosmic String Interpretation of NANOGrav Pulsar Timing Data John Ellis,1, 2, 3, ∗ and Marek Lewicki1, 4, y 1Kings College London, Strand, London, WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom 2Theoretical Physics Department, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland 3National Institute of Chemical Physics & Biophysics, R¨avala10, 10143 Tallinn, Estonia 4Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw ul. Pasteura 5, 02-093 Warsaw, Poland Pulsar timing data used to provide upper limits on a possible stochastic gravitational wave back- ground (SGWB). However, the NANOGrav Collaboration has recently reported strong evidence for a stochastic common-spectrum process, which we interpret as a SGWB in the framework of cosmic strings. The possible NANOGrav signal would correspond to a string tension Gµ 2 (4×10−11; 10−10) at the 68% confidence level, with a different frequency dependence from supermassive black hole mergers. The SGWB produced by cosmic strings with such values of Gµ would be beyond the reach of LIGO, but could be measured by other planned and proposed detectors such as SKA, LISA, TianQin, AION-1km, AEDGE, Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer. Introduction: Stimulated by the direct discovery of for cosmic string models, discussing how experiments gravitational waves (GWs) by the LIGO and Virgo Col- could confirm or disprove such an interpretation. Upper laborations [1{8] of black holes and neutron stars at fre- limits on the SGWB are often quoted assuming a spec- 2=3 quencies f & 10 Hz, there is widespread interest in ex- trum described by a GW abundance proportional to f , periments exploring other parts of the GW spectrum. as expected for SMBH mergers [13]. However, the cos- Foremost among these are pulsar timing array (PTA) ex- mic string GW spectrum is not a simple power law, but periments, which are sensitive to GWs with frequencies is convex with an amplitude and a frequency-dependent f . 1/yr. PTA experiments probe the possible exis- slope that depend on the parameter, Gµ, where G is the tence of a stochastic GW background (SGWB), as might Newton constant of gravitation and µ is the string ten- be generated by very different physical phenomena such sion. Any limit (or estimate) of Gµ from any specific as astrophysical sources of GWs, e.g., the mergers of su- experiment must take into account take into account the permassive black hole (SMBHs), or cosmological sources, appropriate slope parameter, which is in general 6= 2=3 e.g., cosmic strings. in the characteristic frequency measurement range. Once Aggregating pulsar measurements for over a decade, an allowed (interesting) value of Gµ has been identified, the EPTA [9], PPTA [10] and NANOGrav [11] PTA ex- however, the cosmic string prediction for the magnitude periments have pushed their sensitivities down to an en- and spectral shape of the SGWB is then fixed as a func- 2 −9 tion of frequency, and can then be compared with the ergy density ΩGWh . 10 over frequencies in the range f 2 (2:5 × 10−9; 1:2 × 10−8) Hz. Until recently, there has sensitivities of other experiments. been no indication of a positive signal above background. In this paper we calculate the effective slope parame- However, a recent NANOGrav analysis of 12.5 yrs of pul- ter for the timing-residual cross-power spectral density γ sar timing data [12] reports strong evidence for a stochas- (which translates to γ = 5−β for Ω / f β) for frequencies tic common-spectrum process that may be interpreted as −9 −8 −15 in the range (2:5 × 10 ; 1:2 × 10 ) Hz used in [12] to a GW signal with amplitude A ∼ O(10 ) at f ∼ 1/yr. make a single-power fit to the NANOGrav 12.5 yr data. The NANOGrav Collaboration notes that this signal is The best fit to the NANOGrav data is shown as an or- in apparent tension with previous upper limits on the ange dashed line in the left panel of Fig. 1 of [12], and the arXiv:2009.06555v3 [astro-ph.CO] 1 Feb 2021 SGWB in this frequency range, but argues that this is 68% and 95% CL ranges in the (γ; A) plane are shown not real, but reflects its improved treatment of the in- as orange dashed and dotted ellipses in the right panel of trinsic pulsar red noise. The NANOGrav signal does Fig. 1 of [12]. We find that the cosmic string model gives not exhibit significant monopole or dipole correlations, a better fit than does a single power law with γ = 13=3 as might arise, e.g., from reference clock or solar-system as suggested by models of SMBH mergers: the one- ephemeris systematics, respectively. On the other hand, parameter cosmic string prediction crosses the 68% CL neither does the signal exhibit significant quadrupole cor- ellipse, whereas the γ = 13=3 line passes outside it though relations, which would have been a \smoking gun" for within the 95% ellipse. The GW spectra predicted by the a GW background, and the NANOGrav Collaboration cosmic string model for Gµ 2 (2 × 10−11; 2 × 10−10), the does not claim a detection of GWs. range where it lies within the NANOGrav 12.5 yr 95% CL Nevertheless, we are emboldened to explore the impli- region in the (γ; A) plane, are all completely compatible cations of this possible SGWB detection by NANOGrav with the EPTA upper limit, although some tension with 2 with the PPTA results remains in the upper part of our for details) range. The cosmic string predictions are well within the 2 estimated reaches of the SKA [14], LISA [15, 16], Tian- (k) 16π (0:1) (Gµ) 1 ΩGW (f) = 2 (4) Qin [17, 18], AEDGE [19], AION-1km [20], ET [21, 22] 3H0 α`(α` + ΓGµ) f 5 and CE [23] experiments, but beyond the present and Z t0 3 Ceff (ti) a(t~) a(ti) estimated future sensitivities of the LIGO [24{27] exper- × dt~ Θ(ti − tF ) : t4 a(t ) a(t~) iment. tF i 0 GW spectrum from cosmic strings: Cosmic In evaluating the scale factor a(t), we use the number of strings are one-dimensional stable objects described by degrees of freedom predicted by the Standard Model as their characteristic tension µ. They are a common pre- given by microMEGAS [47]. The lower integration limit diction of many extensions of the Standard Model [28, 29] tF corresponds to the network formation time, which can featuring a U(1) symmetry-breaking phase transition in be assumed to be an arbitrarily small number for our the early universe [30]. They can also arise in super- purposes, as it only controls the high frequency cut-off string theory as cosmologically-stretched fundamental of the spectrum, whereas we are mostly interested in the strings [31, 32]. We focus mostly on the former case, for low-frequency peak. [48] We calculate the Ceff factor which the inter-commutation probability p (the probabil- controlling the loop number density in Eq. (4) using the ity that strings reconnect in a different way after cross- velocity-dependent one-scale (VOS) [36{38, 49, 50] model ing) takes the value p = 1, and comment on this choice as in [33, 34] which gives Ceff = 5:4 and 0:39 during ra- towards the end of the following Section. diation and matter domination, respectively. These val- We use a simple method of computation of the GW ues agree quite well with the values predicted by recent spectrum from a cosmic string network following [33, 34] numerical simulations [39, 40, 51{53]. Finally the addi- (for an overview, see [35]). We utilise the Velocity- tional factor 0:1 comes from the same simulations, which dependent One-Scale (VOS) model [36{38], assuming find that only this fraction of energy goes into large loops that the length of a loop produced by the network ` at that produce GWs efficiently, whereas the rest goes into the kinetic energy of small loops that is then lost to red- time ti evolves as shifting. Connection with experimental results: The most ` = α`ti − ΓGµ(t − ti) ; (1) recent experimental results from 12.5 yr of NANOGrav data [12] are expressed in terms of a generic power-law where Gµ is the string tension and α` the initial loop signal with characteristic strain given by size. Following the guidance from recent numerical sim- α ulations [39, 40], we focus on the largest loops produced f hc(f) = A ; (5) by the network, fixing α` = 0:1, as these dominate the fyr GW emission. String loops emit at normal oscillation where f = 1yr−1. The abundance of gravitational mode frequencies, allowing us to express the frequency yr waves has the standard form, which can also be recast measured today from mode k with emission time t~ as as a power-law: a(t~) 2k 2π2 f β f 5−γ f = ; (2) Ω(f) = f 2h (f)2 = Ω = Ω ; ~ 2 c yr yr a(t0) α`ti − ΓGµ(t − ti) 3H0 fyr fyr (6) where where t0 is the current time. The GW abundance can be computed as a sum over individual emission modes 2π2 Ω = A2f 2 : (7) yr 3H2 yr 1 0 CS X (k) (k) ΩGW (f) = kΓ ΩGW (f) ; (3) The experimental analysis was cast in terms of the power k=1 law found in the timing-residual cross-power spectral density γ = 3 − 2α = 5 − β, and we adopt this nota- where the total emission rate Γ is found in simulations tion. to have the value Γ ' 50 [39{43], and we assume that In order to make connection with the experimental this is dominated by emission from cusps with Γ(k) = results, we approximate the cosmic string spectra with 4 1 4 − 3 P − 3 Γk =( m=1 m )[34].