Arxiv:2108.10886V1 [Astro-Ph.CO] 24 Aug 2021 find Evidence for Subhalos at Small Masses, We Can Rule 40,000 Exposures of Each Star in the Region [26–28]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Detecting dark matter subhalos with the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope Kris Pardo1, ∗ and Olivier Dor´e1, 2, y 1Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91101, USA 2California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA (Dated: August 26, 2021) The dark matter subhalo mass function is a promising way of distinguishing between dark mat- ter models. While cold dark matter predicts halos down to Earth-sized masses, other dark matter models typically predict a cut-off in the subhalo mass function. Thus a definitive detection or limits on the existence of subhalos at small masses can give us insight into the nature of dark matter. If these subhalos exist in the Milky Way, they would produce weak lensing signatures, such as modified apparent positions, on background stars. These signatures would generate correlations in the appar- ent velocities and accelerations of these stars, which could be observable given sufficient astrometric resolution and cadence. The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope's Exoplanet Microlensing Survey will be perfectly suited to measuring the acceleration signatures of these halos. Here we forward model these acceleration signatures and explore the Roman Space Telescope's future constraints on lens profiles and populations. We find that the Roman Space Telescope could place competitive bounds on point source, Gaussian, and Navarro-Frenk-White (NFW) profile lenses that are com- plementary to other proposed methods. In particular, it could place 95% upper limits on the NFW 2:5 concentration, c200 < 10 . We discuss possible systematic effects that could hinder these efforts, but argue they should not prevent the Roman Space Telescope from placing strong limits. We also discuss further analysis methods for improving these constraints. I. INTRODUCTION placed stringent constraints on very compact lenses, such as Massive Compact Halo Objects (MACHOs) [16{18]. Although we have known about dark matter (DM) for Recently, stellar streams have also emerged as a way of many decades [1{3], we have yet to find a particle re- constraining dense halos [e.g., 19]. For more diffuse ha- sponsible for its effects. The promise of a weakly inter- los, strong gravitational lensing has produced interesting acting particle has so far eluded direct detection efforts constraints [e.g., 20, 21]. 1 [4{6]. Many other candidate particles have attracted Recently, Ref. [22] explored the weak lensing signa- considerable attention (e.g., axions and self-interacting tures that DM subhalos would induce on stars within the DM); however we have not seen concrete evidence of their Milky Way. These vary depending on the types of halos unique signatures. (e.g., point source or diffuse). However, all are observed While we have observed many DM signatures, one through changes in apparent stellar velocities or acceler- feature is both universal to all galaxies and discerning ations. Follow-up work calculated the power spectrum of of different particle models: the subhalo mass function, these lensing signatures and forecasted interesting con- which describes the distribution of sub-galactic DM halos straints from current and future missions [23]. within galaxies. From hierarchical structure formation, The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is NASA's we expect smaller halos to exist within larger ones [7,8]. next flagship mission after JWST, and it will have the The exact properties of the DM (e.g., whether it is warm necessary astrometric resolution to look for these weak or cold, or whether it has any interactions with other lensing signatures [23{25]. In particular, the Exoplanet particles) define the shape of the subhalo mass function Microlensing (EML) survey would have the precision nec- and the profiles of these halos. The cold dark matter essary to properly probe this signal. The EML survey 2 (CDM) model predicts halos down to Earth-sized masses should continuously monitor an approximately 2 deg [9, 10]. However, many other models have subhalo mass patch near the galactic center for six 72-day periods. The function cutoffs at higher scales. Thus, if we are able to 15 minute cadence over these fields should produce over arXiv:2108.10886v1 [astro-ph.CO] 24 Aug 2021 find evidence for subhalos at small masses, we can rule 40,000 exposures of each star in the region [26{28]. Com- out certain properties of DM [see Ref. 11, for a review of bined with Roman's relative astrometric accuracy of 1.1 these issues]. mas per exposure, this would create incredibly precise 10 acceleration maps of the 108 stars that the EML survey For subhalos with masses . 10 M , star formation is heavily suppressed by photoheating and tidal interac- will monitor. tions with host galaxies [12{15]. Thus, for the small- In this paper, we forward model the constraints that est structures, the most reliable observation mechanism the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope's EML Sur- is through gravitational interactions. Microlensing has vey would place on DM subhalos in the Milky Way. In ∗ [email protected] 1 By weak lensing, we mean that multiple images of the sources y [email protected] are not produced. 2 FIG. 1: Example lensing-induced apparent accelerations assuming different mass profiles. The lens is located at the black `X' at the center of each plot and it is assumed to be moving in the positive y-direction. Each blue arrow shows the direction of the induced acceleration and its color shows the magnitude. The black circles demarcate the NFW scale radius. Left: NFW lens. Right: Point-source lens. The differences in the signals are due to the dependence on derivatives of the mass profile with respect to the impact parameter (see text below). SectionII we summarize the lensing signature we expect. where: In Section III we discuss our forward modeling approach. A(b) = −8(^b · ~v)2^b + 2b(^b · ~v_)^b + 2v2^b In SectionIV we present our results, discuss possible sys- tematics, and identify avenues for improved constraints. +4(^b · ~v)~v − b~v_ (4) The code used in this paper is publicly available at: B(b) = 5(^b · ~v)2^b − 2(^b · ~v)~v − b(^b · ~v_)^b − v2^b (5) https://github.com/kpardo/dmsl. C(b) = −(^b · ~v)2^b : (6) For the rest of this work, we set ~v_ = 0. We also ignore II. THEORY any changes to the direction of ~b. Note the very strong dependence on the impact pa- In this section, we provide a summary of the lensing rameter here, ~α / 1=b3. This will be important to our signatures expected by DM substructure. For a more statistical formalism. detailed discussion of these signatures, see Ref. [22]. Examples of the lensing signature for two different The apparent change in a star's position caused by one mass profiles (NFW and point-source) are given in Fig.1. lens is: The differences in the signatures are due to the depen- dence on the mass profile derivatives in Equation3. For ~ Dl 4GMl ^ an NFW profile, all of the mass-impact parameter ra- ∆θ = − 1 − 2 b ; (1) 3 0 2 00 Ds c b tios (Ml=b , Ml =b , and Ml =b) are approximately the 00 same order of magnitude, with Ml =b having the oppo- where c is the speed of light, b is the impact parameter on site sign as the other terms (for b=rs > 1). The resulting the sky, Dl is the distance to the lens, Ds is the distance simplifications give a dipole. For the point source case, to the star, and Ml is the lensing mass within a cylinder 0 00 Ml = Ml = 0. This allows the quadrupole moment to of radius b and height Ds. From now on, we take the dominate. These behaviors are easiest to see when using distant-source limit: Ds Dl. a vector spherical harmonic decomposition [see Ref. 23, Then, the apparent velocity change is [22, 23]: for some discussion of this topic]. 0 _ G Ml M ~µ ≡ ∆θ~ = 4 2(^b · ~v)^b − ~v − l (^b · ~v)^b ; (2) c2 b2 b III. METHODS d ~_ 0 d In general, we expect there to be some population of where _ ≡ dt , ~v ≡ b, and ≡ db . The apparent accelera- tion due to a DM lens is then: lenses that change the apparent accelerations of stars. Each star can be lensed by multiple lenses and the proba- 0 00 ¨ G Ml M M bility of being lensed increases with the number of lenses. ~α ≡ ∆θ~ = 4 A(b) + l B(b) + l C(b) ; (3) c2 b3 b2 b Thus, the lens signal for any one star will rely on Ml, vl, 3 and b, as well as the total number of lenses, Nl. Here we dark matter is contained in halos of one mass, Ml. Then, forward model the expected distribution of acceleration to conserve the local dark matter density, the number of signals induced by DM weak lensing. We then perform a lenses for a given lens mass is: Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) over different lens ρDMAFOVdmax parameters to find the constraints the Roman Space Tele- Nl = ; (8) 3M scope would achieve. In the following, we first give the l details of our statistical model and then describe our sam- where ρDM is the local density of dark matter, AF OV is pling efforts. the area covered by the FOV, and dmax is the maximum distance of the lenses. This assumes that the volume probed by the telescope is a square pyramid, which is A. Statistical Formalism a fine assumption for small FOVs (in other words, we take the flat sky approximation). We always assume at Upon a first attempt at this problem, we could try least 1 lens within the volume.