|
|
Reid, B. A., Verde, L., Jimenez, R., & Mena, O. (2010). Robust neutrino constraints by combining low redshift observations with the CMB. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys., 01(1), 003–21pp.
Abstract: We illustrate how recently improved low-redshift cosmological measurements can tighten constraints on neutrino properties. In particular we examine the impact of the assumed cosmological model on the constraints. We first consider the new HST H-0 = 74.2 +/- 3.6 measurement by Riess et al. (2009) and the sigma(8)(Omega(m)/0.25)(0.41) = 0.832 +/- 0.033 constraint from Rozo et al. (2009) derived from the SDSS maxBCG Cluster Catalog. In a ACDM model and when combined with WMAP5 constraints, these low-redshift measurements constrain Sigma m(v) < 0.4 eV at the 95% confidence level. This bound does not relax when allowing for the running of the spectral index or for primordial tensor perturbations. When adding also Supernovae and BAO constraints, we obtain a 95% upper limit of Sigma m(v) < 0.3eV. We test the sensitivity of the neutrino mass constraint to the assumed expansion history by both allowing a dark energy equation of state parameter w not equal -1 and by studying a model with coupling between dark energy and dark matter, which allows for variation in w, Omega(k), and dark coupling strength xi. When combining CMB, H-0 and the SDSS LRG halo power spectrum from Reid et al. 2009, we find that in this very general model, Sigma m(v) < 0.51 eV with 95% confidence. If we allow the number of relativistic species N-rel to vary in a ACDM model with Sigma m(v) = 0, we find N-rel = 3.76(-0.68)(+0.63)(+1.38 -1.21) for the 68% and 95% confidence intervals. We also report prior-independent constraints, which are in excellent agreement with the Bayesian constraints.
|
|
|
|
Agullo, I., Navarro-Salas, J., Olmo, G. J., & Parker, L. (2010). Revising the observable consequences of slow-roll inflation. Phys. Rev. D, 81(4), 043514–14pp.
Abstract: We study the generation of primordial perturbations in a (single-field) slow-roll inflationary Universe. In momentum space, these (Gaussian) perturbations are characterized by a zero mean and a nonzero variance Delta(2) (k, t). However, in position space the variance diverges in the ultraviolet. The requirement of a finite variance in position space forces one to regularize Delta(2) (k, t). This can (and should) be achieved by proper renormalization in an expanding Universe in a unique way. This affects the predicted scalar and tensorial power spectra (evaluated when the modes acquire classical properties) for wavelengths that today are at observable scales. As a consequence, the imprint of slow-roll inflation on the cosmic microwave background anisotropies is significantly altered. We find a nontrivial change in the consistency condition that relates the tensor-to-scalar ratio r to the spectral indices. For instance, an exact scale-invariant tensorial power spectrum, n(t) = 0, is now compatible with a nonzero ratio r approximate to 0.12 +/- 0.06, which is forbidden by the standard prediction (r = -8n(t)). The influence of relic gravitational waves on the cosmic microwave background may soon come within the range of planned measurements, offering a nontrivial test of the new predictions.
|
|
|
|
Particle Data Group(Nakamura, K. et al), & Hernandez-Rey, J. J. (2010). Review of Particle Physics. J. Phys. G, 37(7a), 1–1422.
Abstract: This biennial Review summarizes much of particle physics. Using data from previous editions, plus 2158 new measurements from 551 papers, we list, evaluate, and average measured properties of gauge bosons, leptons, quarks, mesons, and baryons. We also summarize searches for hypothetical particles such as Higgs bosons, heavy neutrinos, and supersymmetric particles. All the particle properties and search limits are listed in Summary Tables. We also give numerous tables, figures, formulae, and reviews of topics such as the Standard Model, particle detectors, probability, and statistics. Among the 108 reviews are many that are new or heavily revised including those on neutrino mass, mixing, and oscillations, QCD, top quark, CKM quark-mixing matrix, V-ud & V-us, V-cb & V-ub, fragmentation functions, particle detectors for accelerator and non-accelerator physics, magnetic monopoles, cosmological parameters, and big bang cosmology. A booklet is available containing the Summary Tables and abbreviated versions of some of the other sections of this full Review. All tables, listings, and reviews (and errata) are also available on the Particle Data Group website: http://pdg.1b1.gov.
|
|
|
|
SuperNEMO Collaboration(Argyriades, J. et al), Carcel, S., Diaz, J., Monrabal, F., Serra, L., & Yahlali, N. (2010). Results of the BiPo-1 prototype for radiopurity measurements for the SuperNEMO double beta decay source foils. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, 622(1), 120–128.
Abstract: The development of BiPo detectors is dedicated to the measurement of extremely high radiopurity in (TI)-T-208 and Bi-214 for the SuperNEMO double beta decay source foils. A modular prototype, called BiPo-1, with 0.8 m(2) of sensitive surface area, has been running in the Modane Underground Laboratory since February, 2008. The goal of BiPo-1 is to measure the different components of the background and in particular the surface radiopurity of the plastic scintillators that make up the detector. The first phase of data collection has been dedicated to the measurement of the radiopurity in (TI)-T-208. After more than one year of background measurement, a surface activity of the scintillators of A((TI)-T-208) = 1.5 μBq/m(2) is reported here. Given this level of background, a larger BiPo detector having 12 m(2) of active surface area, is able to qualify the radiopurity of the SuperNEMO selenium double beta decay foils with the required sensitivity of A((TI)-T-208) <2 μBq/kg (90% CL.) with a six month measurement.
|
|
|
|
Agullo, I., Navarro-Salas, J., Olmo, G. J., & Parker, L. (2010). Reply to "Comment on 'Insensitivity of Hawking radiation to an invariant Planck-scale cutoff' ''. Phys. Rev. D, 81(10), 108502–3pp.
Abstract: We clarify the relationship between the conclusions of the previous Comment of A. Helfer [A. Helfer, preceding Comment, Phys. Rev. D 81, 108501 (2010)] and that of our Brief Report [I. Agullo, J. Navarro-Salas, G. J. Olmo, and L. Parker, Phys. Rev. D 80, 047503 (2009).].
|
|
