Paper detail

Limits on the neutrino magnetic dipole moment from the luminosity function of hot white dwarfs

Recent determinations of the white dwarf luminosity function (WDLF) from very large surveys have extended our knowledge of the WDLF to very high luminosities. This, together with the availability of new full evolutionary white dwarf models that are reliable at high luminosities, have opened the possibility of testing particle emission in the core of very hot white dwarfs, where neutrino processes are dominant. We use the available WDLFs from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and the SuperCOSMOS Sky Survey to constrain the value of the neutrino magnetic dipole moment ($μ_ν$). We constructed theoretical WDLFs for different values of $μ_ν$ and performed a $χ^2$-test to derive constraints on the value of $μ_ν$. We also constructed a unified WDLF by averaging the SDSS and SSS and estimated the uncertainties by taking into account the differences between the WDLF at each magnitude bin. Then we compared all WDLFs with theoretical WDLFs.Comparison between theoretical WDLFs and both the SDSS and the averaged WDLF indicates that $μ_ν$ should be $μ_ν<5\times 10^{-12}\, e\hbar/(2m_e c)$. In particular, a $χ^2$-test on the averaged WDLF suggests that observations of the disk WDLF exclude values of $μ_ν>5\times 10^{-12}e\hbar/(2m_e c)$ at more than a 95\% confidence level, even when conservative estimates of the uncertainties are adopted. Our study shows that modern WDLFs, which extend to the high-luminosity regime, are an excellent tool for constraining the emission of particles in the core of hot white dwarfs. However, discrepancies between different WDLFs suggest there might be some relevant unaccounted systematic errors. A larger set of completely independent WDLFs, as well as more detailed studies of the theoretical WDLFs and their own uncertainties, is desirable to explore the systematic uncertainties behind this constraint.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

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 map preview

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.