Paper detail

A fresh look at linear cosmological constraints on a decaying dark matter component

We consider a cosmological model in which a fraction $f$ of the Dark Matter (DM) is allowed to decay in an invisible relativistic component, and compute the resulting constraints on both the decay width (or inverse lifetime) $Γ$ and $f$ from purely gravitational arguments. We report a full derivation of the Boltzmann hierarchy, correcting a mistake in previous literature, and compute the impact of the decay --as a function of the lifetime-- on the CMB and matter power spectra. From CMB only, we obtain that no more than 3.8 % of the DM could have decayed in the time between recombination and today (all bounds quoted at 95 % CL). We also comment on the important application of this bound to the case where primordial black holes constitute DM, a scenario notoriously difficult to constrain. For lifetimes longer than the age of the Universe, the bounds can be cast as $fΓ< 6.3\times10^{-3}$ Gyr$^{-1}$. For the first time, we also checked that degeneracies with massive neutrinos are broken when information from the large scale structure is used. Even secondary effects like CMB lensing suffice to this purpose. Decaying DM models have been invoked to solve a possible tension between low redshift astronomical measurements of $σ_8$ and $Ω_{\rm m}$ and the ones inferred by Planck. We reassess this claim finding that with the most recent BAO, HST and $σ_8$ data extracted from the CFHT survey, the tension is only slightly reduced despite the two additional free parameters, loosening the bound to $fΓ< 15.9\times10^{-3}$ Gyr$^{-1}$. The bound however improves to $fΓ< 5.9\times10^{-3}$ Gyr$^{-1}$ if only data consistent with the CMB are included. This highlights the importance of establishing whether the tension is due to real physical effects or unaccounted systematics, for settling the reach of achievable constraints on decaying DM.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.