Top arXiv papers from Week 23, 2020

This week’s entry discusses the effects of the Hubble constant on the growth of high-redshift supermassive black holes, a new test of General Relativity from galaxy-galaxy lensing and clustering amplitudes, and a new WIMP dark matter production mechanism from conformal or disformal couplings to ultra-light scalars.

#1 2006.01839: Effects of the Hubble Parameter on the Cosmic Growth of the First Quasars by Rafael C. Nunes and Fabio Pacucci

Regular readers of this blog will probably have understood that I particularly enjoy reading ingenious, out-of-the-box-thinking papers, which cleverly span the boundary of multiple disciplines in ways previously not considered. This is the case with this week’s paper by Nunes and Pacucci, where the two disciplines are cosmology and astrophysics, or more precisely, supermassive black hole (SMBH) formation. I feel I can safely say this was the most interesting paper I read this year so far. Going back to the science, the presence at high redshift (z>6) of various SMBHs/quasars with masses up to 10^10 solar masses is a challenge for models of black hole growth. The most widely accepted models, supported by observational evidence, postulate that these SMBHs grew from seeds which were already present at extremely early times (we are talking about redshifts of 20-30). The question is then what are the characteristics of these seeds, and here the possibilities essentially branch in two: “light seed models” where the seeds are remnant from so-called Pop III stars (the first population of stars) with masses between 10 and 1000 solar masses, and “heavy seed models” where the seeds are as heavy as 10^5 solar masses, and could be so-called direct collapse black holes. Regardless of what the correct seed model is, these seeds would have to be able to reach masses of about 10^10 solar masses at redshift 7 in order to match observations (which in the case of the light seed models might require super-Eddington accretion, where the Eddington accretion rate is set by equilibrium between radiation pressure and gravitational forces).

Besides details as to whether the accretion rate is Eddington-limited or super-Eddington, there is another crucial ingredient in determining how these seeds grow (and whether they reach masses as high as 10^10 solar masses): this ingredient is cosmology. In fact, in the usual formalism for describing the cosmic growth of SMBHs, once SMBH-specific parameters are specified (such as the efficiency factor, the Eddington ratio, and the duty cycle, see Eqs.(1,2,3) for more details on the meanings of these parameters), the mass a SMBH seed reaches at a certain time depends on the lookback time at that point, which in turn is given by an integral involving the expansion rate of the Universe, see Eqs.(4,5). Crucially, as you probably have guessed, this means that the growth of SMBH seeds will depend on the Hubble constant H0. Therefore, the questions Nunes and Pacucci ask themselves in this week’s paper are: how strongly does H0 influence the growth of the first SMBHs? Can one jointly constrain H0 and SMBH-specific parameters and what does this tell us about which of the two seed models best describes our observations? How much can direct measurements of H0 improve constraints on the SMBH-specific parameters? To address the above questions, Nunes and Pacucci perform a MCMC analysis scanning the parameter space described by the SMBH initial mass, H0, and the Eddington ratio (this is the ratio between the BH accretion rate and the Eddington accretion rate), based on measurements of the masses of 8 very massive quasars at redshifts of about 7. In doing so, they make two simplifying assumptions: that BH growth occurs only by baryonic gas accretion, and that they can do away with fixing three parameters which otherwise should be varied in the MCMC (the matter density fraction, the initial seed redshift, and the duty cycle, for why this is reasonable see the discussion on the top left column of Page 3).

The answers to the previous questions then are given by the following. The value of H0 can strongly influence the growth of the first SMBHs, with the masses at redshift of 6 varying by up to 300% if one considers values of H0 (in km/s/Mpc, which I’ll henceforward suppress) between 65 and 74 (see Fig. 2). One can indeed jointly constrain H0 and SMBH-specific parameters, and this seems to suggest that the initial seed mass should be at least 10^4.5 solar masses at 95% CL, which rejects the light seed model at more than 3 sigma. How good the constraints on H0 are depend on whether one varies the Eddington ratio as well, since it is strongly degenerate with H0: fixing the former to 1, one infers a central value of H0=73.6, intriguingly in line with local distance ladder measurements (but with large uncertainties). However, varying the Eddington ratio as well leads to broader constraints on H0, with only a lower limit of H0>55. Even in this case, however, the light seed model is rejected, whereas one infers an Eddington ratio very close to 1. Finally, including priors on H0 from local distance ladder measurements (e.g. from Cepheid-calibrated or TRGB-calibrated Type Ia Supernovae) leads to important improvements on the constraints on the initial seed mass and the Eddington ratio. Overall, I personally think this was as rather ingenious out-of-the-box paper (and in spirit it shares some features with the cosmic chronometers idea pioneered by Jimenez and Loeb in astro-ph/0106145, i.e. use astrophysics to learn about cosmology). At the same time, I think one should also be cautious and take the results with a grain of salt - there are many simplifying assumptions going in, since SMBH growth is a very complex business, the analysis relies only on 8 quasars (which, besides the small sample, may or may not be outliers of the true underlying population), and I think for example one shouldn’t absolutely over-interpret the value H0=73.6 quoted in Section 4. There are potentially very interesting follow-ups (e.g. testing dark energy models with low-redshift SMBH growth?), and I look forward to reading more on the subject.

#2 2005.14351: Testing gravity using galaxy-galaxy lensing and clustering amplitudes in KiDS-1000, BOSS and 2dFLenS by Chris Blake et al.

As far as I can tell, this is a Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS for friends) collaboration paper, and as such a rather technical one. I generally find it hard to write about collaboration papers, and the only other time I wrote about one was in my Week 14 post in the context of the Atacama Cosmology Telescope. Nonetheless, since I enjoyed reading this paper, I’ll try my best to write a synopsis as non-technical as possible. The key concept in this paper is a statistic called EG. First proposed in 0704.1932, EG is a statistic which probes gravity by measuring the ratio between curvature and velocity perturbations by means of gravitational lensing, galaxy clustering, and growth of structure measurements. Because EG measures the relative amplitudes of weak gravitational lensing and the rate of assembly of large-scale structure (for this reason it is often referred to as an amplitude-ratio test), which in turn depends on the difference between the two space-time metric potentials (often called “gravitational slip”), it can be used to test deviations from General Relativity (GR) and discriminate between different models of gravity (for instance in 1511.04457 an EG-based 2.6 sigma tension with GR was claimed), since in GR EG should be scale-independent and have a predictable redshift dependence. The cool thing about EG when it was initially proposed was that it is independent of galaxy bias and the amplitude of matter clustering sigma8. This is true with a few caveats and most importantly in the linear regime, whereas in the non-linear regime (where the bias becomes scale-dependent and a host of other complications arise) things are much less simple.

In this week’s paper, Blake and collaborators perform the latest measurement of EG using weak gravitational lensing data from KiDS-1000, together with galaxy clustering data from the overlapping BOSS and 2dFLenS spectroscopic surveys. The results are the black points in Fig. 12, which show measurements of a scale-independent version of EG (denoted <EG>) as a function of redshift in 5 bins, whereas in the rest of the figure you can see other important EG measurements. The cool thing is that everything looks consistent with GR, both in the redshift-dependence of <EG> (the data point at z~0.45 is little more than 1 sigma off, but that’s nothing to scratch our heads over), and the scale-dependence of EG (more precisely, the scale-independence thereof). So it looks like GR passes yet another test, through what is one of the most precise set of measurements of EG (if not the most precise altogether) to date. As a side story, I’ve always been quite a fan of EG, and one project I’ve always had in the back of my mind would be to try and combine all available EG measurements to provide even tighter constraints GR (and no, you can’t simply multiply all the measurements, since they are inevitably correlated, so this would require a very careful modelling of the cross-covariance between all measurements, which is why it’s only in the back of my mind). In any case, this was a very interesting paper, which sets the stage for future EG-based percent-level tests of GR using future data from DESI, 4MOST, VRO (formerly LSST), and Euclid.

#3 2006.01149: Dark matter relic density from conformally or disformally coupled light scalars by Sebastian Trojanowski, Philippe Brax, and Carsten van de Bruck

Weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) are among the most economical dark matter (DM) candidates. The definition of WIMP is rather broad, but in the most common scenarios, WIMPs are heavy particles, with masses and annihilation cross-sections around typical weak scale values: that is, around 100 GeV-a few TeV in mass, and cross-section of around 10^-26 cm^2. The most common WIMP DM scenario production is thermal freeze-out, wherein the DM is initially in thermal equilibrium with Standard Model (SM) degrees of freedom, but ceases to be in equilibrium once the Universe’s expansion rate is sufficiently high. The simplest WIMP models are under some pressure due to null results from direct detection experiments and collider searches, and are subject to tight constraints from indirect searches (which exclude thermal cross-section values for masses below 100 GeV, as shown in e.g. 1503.02641). This at the very least motivates considering WIMP scenarios beyond the canonical ones. You can read more about the status of WIMP DM in 1703.07364.

On the other end of the particle mass spectrum, a wide plethora of SM extensions predict the existence of light or ultra-light scalars (think for instance of the string axiverse), some of which could play the role of DM or drive cosmic acceleration (thus being a dark energy candidate). If such light scalars exist, one would expect them to couple to matter fields, unless such a coupling were forbidden by a symmetry. These couplings should be universal (i.e. should not distinguish between different species, in order to respect the weak equivalence principle). In most cases, the tiny mass of these scalars, or equivalently the flatness of their potential (think e.g. of how natural inflation works) is protected by a shift symmetry (i.e. phi -> phi+constant). If this is the case, they should couple derivatively to matter, since a derivative does not care about a constant shift. The most general derivative coupling preserving Lorentz invariance and causality is a combination of a conformal and a disformal coupling, see Eq.(1) in the paper.

Now let’s put two and two together. If WIMPs and ultra-light shift-symmetric scalars exist, the latter might impact the production process of the former. To what extent? This question is addressed by Trojanowski and collaborators in this week’s paper. In particular, they consider a scenario where the WIMP couples to SM degrees of freedom only through the ultra-light scalar. Even though ultra-light scalars live at the opposite end of the mass scale compared to WIMPs, a derivative coupling between the two leads to a strong energy-dependence of the interaction cross-sections, which means that the resulting processes can play an important role in collider searches or in the early Universe. This is indeed the case, and the result is that this WIMP-scalar portal can lead to the correct WIMP relic abundance on its own for a range of WIMP masses between 100 GeV and a few TeV. A number of interesting predictions for a such a portal are discussed in Section IV, and include propagation of gravitational waves at a speed which could be different from the speed of light, or a contribution to the total energy density of the Universe in the form of extra relativistic species. Every day on the arXiv there are many works examining alternative WIMP or more generally DM production mechanisms, with varying degrees of motivation. However, I found this one to be particularly interesting and important, and to some degree profound, because in some way (although the authors do not stress this much throughout the paper), if these ultra-light scalars drive cosmic acceleration, then the scenario which has been considered here could be described in a few words as “dark matter production via dark energy”. Sounds cool!