Difference between revisions of "UMICH-2015: Neutrino and Light Relativisic Species break-out session 1"
From CMB-S4 wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
;For thermal decoupling above 100 GeV : | ;For thermal decoupling above 100 GeV : | ||
| − | : | + | : Real scalar - ΔN<sub>eff</sub> = 0.027 |
| − | : | + | : Weyl fermion - ΔN<sub>eff</sub> = 0.047 (Dirac - 0.094) |
| − | : | + | : Vector field - ΔN<sub>eff</sub> = 0.054 |
| − | ;With 10<sup>6</sup> detectors and f<sub>sky</sub> = 0.75, forecasts of σ<sub>Neff</sub> =0.013 (see e.g. arXiv:1402.4108). | + | [[File:Neffmin.png|500px]] |
| + | |||
| + | (figure from arXiv:1303.5379) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ;With 10<sup>6</sup> detectors and f<sub>sky</sub> = 0.75, forecasts of σ<sub>Neff</sub> =0.013 | ||
| + | :(see e.g. arXiv:1402.4108). | ||
: Model independent theory motivation - Is this realistic experimentally? | : Model independent theory motivation - Is this realistic experimentally? | ||
| Line 19: | Line 24: | ||
: What is missing from the forecast that could significantly reduce the sensitivity? | : What is missing from the forecast that could significantly reduce the sensitivity? | ||
| − | ;More general science targets -- axion-like particles, late decays of massive fields (before or after BBN), decaying Dark matter | + | ;More general science targets -- axion-like particles, late decays of massive fields (before, during or after BBN), decaying Dark matter |
: How well can be break degeneracies? | : How well can be break degeneracies? | ||
| Line 35: | Line 40: | ||
:: Can it help break degeneracies in other models (e.g. decaying dark matter) ? | :: Can it help break degeneracies in other models (e.g. decaying dark matter) ? | ||
| − | ; Forecasts | + | :: Is it a good direct probe of BSM physics (as in the case of neutrino masses) |
| + | |||
| + | [[File:PhaseShift.png]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ; Forecasts for CMB Stage IV | ||
: Planck 2015 versus forecasts with 2 different marginalizations (see arXiv:1508.06342) | : Planck 2015 versus forecasts with 2 different marginalizations (see arXiv:1508.06342) | ||
[[File:Neff.png|500px]] | [[File:Neff.png|500px]] | ||
Latest revision as of 06:44, 21 September 2015
Return to Neutrino and Light Relativisic Species sessions page
- Clear science target - A massless field in thermal equilibrium with the Standard model leads to ΔNeff > 0.027
- For thermal decoupling above 100 GeV
- Real scalar - ΔNeff = 0.027
- Weyl fermion - ΔNeff = 0.047 (Dirac - 0.094)
- Vector field - ΔNeff = 0.054
(figure from arXiv:1303.5379)
- With 106 detectors and fsky = 0.75, forecasts of σNeff =0.013
- (see e.g. arXiv:1402.4108).
- Model independent theory motivation - Is this realistic experimentally?
- What are the trade-offs for other science goals to achieve this sensitivity
- What is missing from the forecast that could significantly reduce the sensitivity?
- More general science targets -- axion-like particles, late decays of massive fields (before, during or after BBN), decaying Dark matter
- How well can be break degeneracies?
- E.g. Want to separate NeffCMB from Yp
- Forecasts with both varying give σNeff = 0.048 and σYp = 0.0027 (see arXiv:1508.06342)
- In principle allows us to distinguish effects at recombination from changes to BBN
- What role does CMB lensing play?
- For Neff, delensing E-modes improves constraints significantly (sharpens peaks - improves phase shift measurement)
- Can it help break degeneracies in other models (e.g. decaying dark matter) ?
- Is it a good direct probe of BSM physics (as in the case of neutrino masses)
- Forecasts for CMB Stage IV
- Planck 2015 versus forecasts with 2 different marginalizations (see arXiv:1508.06342)
