Research Article  Open Access
Observational Constraints of 30–40 GeV Dark Matter Annihilation in Galaxy Clusters
Abstract
Recently, it has been shown that the annihilation of 30–40 GeV dark matter particles through channel can satisfactorily explain the excess GeV gammaray spectrum near the Galactic Center. In this paper, we apply the above model to galaxy clusters and use the latest upper limits of gammaray flux derived from FermiLAT data to obtain an upper bound of the annihilation cross section of dark matter. By considering the extended density profiles and the cosmic ray profile models of 49 galaxy clusters, the upper bound of the annihilation cross section can be further tightened to cm^{3} s^{−1}. This result is consistent with the one obtained from the data near the Galactic Center.
1. Introduction
In the past few decades, high energy gammaray near the Galactic Center was detected. The origin of this gammaray is commonly believed to be the cosmic ray due to high energy protonproton collisions and emission from pulsars [1, 2]. However, recently, Hooper et al. [3] point out that a large diffuse signal of gammaray is obtained near the Galactic Center, which is hard to be explained by the cosmic ray and pulsar emission. In particular, even including both known sources and unidentified sources, the millisecond pulsars can only account for no more than 10 percent of the GeV excess [3]. Although recent studies report some evidence for unresolved point sources in the inner galaxy which can explain part of the excess gammaray signal [4, 5], the possibility of the emission of gammaray due to the dark matter annihilation is still a very popular model to explain the observed diffuse signal [1, 2, 6–8]. Moreover, Daylan et al. [6] discover that the gammaray spectrum obtained from FermiLAT data can be well fitted with annihilation channel of dark matter particles. The required rest mass of the dark matter particle is about GeV and the annihilation cross sections obtained by two different groups are cm^{3} s^{−1} [6] and cm^{3} s^{−1} [1], respectively. The obtained cross sections are consistent with the expected canonical thermal relic abundance cross section ( cm^{3} s^{−1}) in cosmology. Furthermore, Moore et al. (1999) point out that the inner slope of the radialdependence of the gammaray emission is (the best fit is ), which is consistent with the numerical simulation of dark matter halo structure [9, 10].
Besides the emission of gammaray near the Galactic Centre, FermiLAT also reports the emission of gammaray from different galaxy clusters. Although most galaxy clusters are located far away from us, the dark matter annihilation signals from some of them are still significant because they have a larger amount of dark matter. Therefore, it is worthwhile to detect gammaray flux emitted by some nearby galaxy clusters. The first systematic study of 33 galaxy clusters by FermiLAT obtained some upper limits on the gammaray flux in the range GeV. The typical values of the flux are about ph cm^{−2} s^{−1} [11]. However, these upper limits are too high to constrain the flux due to the annihilation of dark matter, which is of the order ph cm^{−2} s^{−1}. Later, Ando and Nagai [12] start to realize that the gammaray flux data from Fornax cluster is able to constrain the annihilation dark matter model because the cosmic ray emission from Fornax cluster does not dominate the gammaray emission. By using their data, the cross section constrained from the Fornax cluster is cm^{3} s^{−1} [12]. This upper limit, however, is a factor of 5 greater than that obtained from the data near the Galactic Center.
Fortunately, the recent observations of 50 galaxy clusters in 4 years of FermiLAT data narrow down the upper flux limit to the order of ph cm^{−2} s^{−1}, which may provide a better constraint on the dark matter annihilation [13]. In this paper, we calculate the latest constraint on the dark matter annihilation cross section through channel based on these recent observations. We also realize that there are 2 galaxy clusters (Fornax and A2877) which are good candidates to constrain the properties of dark matter annihilation.
2. Dark Matter Annihilation in Galaxy Clusters
The total number of photons with energy greater than produced by the annihilation of dark matter within a galaxy cluster can be calculated bywhere is the dark matter density profile, is the effective radius of a galaxy cluster, and is the energy spectrum of gammaray produced per one annihilation. The finalstate spectrum can be generated by PYTHIA simulations. It can be well fitted by the following analytic formula (see Figure 1) [16]:where and , , , , , , , , , , and are all fitted parameters. Some of the parameters depend on and they can be estimated by using simple power law in [16]. For GeV, the values are equal to GeV^{−2} and GeV^{−2} for MeV and GeV, respectively (see Figure 2). The reason of using these two energy bins (MeV and 1 GeV) is to match the observed fluxes in [13]. Since the values of vary less than 4% of the mean value, for simplicity, we just assume that this value is a constant in the following discussion.
We apply the NFW density profile to model the mass density profile of dark matter in galaxy clusters [10]:where and are the scale density and scale radius of a galaxy cluster, respectively. By using the virial mass , we can get the concentration parameter for each galaxy cluster by a universal scaling relation [17]. Therefore, we can get the scale density and for each galaxy cluster. The observed gammaray flux from the above extended profile within a solid angle along the line of sight can be calculated byIn general, the factor depends on , , and the size and the distance of a galaxy cluster.
3. Comparing the GammaRay Flux with the Observed Data
Since most of the galaxy clusters are extended sources, we compare the calculated flux from (4) with the upper limit of the “extended flux” obtained from FermiLAT [13]. The factor (in GeV^{2} cm^{−5}) calculated by using the angle of view measured is about (see Table 1), which is consistent with the result obtained previously [18]. In order to match the observational data, we examine MeV and GeV [13]. By assuming cm^{3} s^{−1}, the ranges of the flux calculated by (4) based on the sample in Ackermann et al. [13] (49 galaxy clusters) are ph cm^{−2} s^{−1} for MeV and ph cm^{−2} s^{−1} for GeV, respectively. The obtained ranges of flux are much smaller than the upper limits obtained by FermiLAT data for many galaxy clusters except 2 nearby galaxy clusters (A2877 and Fornax) whose gammaray flux upper limits (95% CL) are close to their corresponding annihilation gammaray flux. If we assume that all gammaray flux is due to the dark matter annihilation, we can obtain an upper limit of annihilation cross section for each galaxy cluster (see Table 1). In particular, the Fornax cluster gives the tightest upper bound (95% CL) for the annihilation cross section cm^{3} s^{−1}, which is just a little bit tightened compared with the result obtained by Ando and Nagai [12].

Nevertheless, in most galaxy clusters, the major contribution of the gammaray flux is the cosmic ray emission due to protonproton collisions [11]. Recently, Pinzke and Pfrommer [14] discover a universal scaling relation to model the cosmic ray emission in galaxy clusters. Later, Pinzke et al. [15] give a better model to estimate the gammaray contribution from cosmic ray. If we assume that some of the gammaray flux is contributed by the cosmic ray emission, and the remaining flux is due to the dark matter annihilation, we can obtain a tighter constraint on the upper bound of the annihilation cross section for each galaxy cluster (see Table 1).
The two smallest 95% CL upper bounds of the annihilation cross section are close to cm^{3} s^{−1} (A2877 and Fornax). Although this upper bound is somewhat greater than that obtained by using the data from the Galactic Center ( cm^{3} s^{−1}), this is already the tightest upper bound ever obtained based on the data from galaxy clusters. This upper bound can be tightened to a greater extent if we could get a tighter upper bound on gammaray flux.
4. Discussion
Recently, it has been reported that the excess gammaray emission near the Galactic Center can be explained by the GeV dark matter annihilation through channel. In this paper, we follow this model and use the FermiLAT data obtained from galaxy clusters to constrain the annihilation cross section. By considering the most recent cosmic ray model, the tightest 95% CL upper limit on the cross section is cm^{3} s^{−1}. If we can precisely model the cosmic ray contribution, the possible range of the annihilation cross section could be tightened to a smaller range.
On the other hand, it can be shown that the annihilation of dark matter particles can also provide the required energy source of soft and hard components of hot plasma in the Galactic Centre. The predicted cross section is cm^{3} s^{−1} [19]. All these results are generally consistent with each other and satisfy the constraints from cosmic microwave background and lowredshift data [20]. They are also close to the canonical thermal relic abundance cross section in cosmology cm^{3} s^{−1} [21].
Besides, recent analysis from a stack of the 79 richest nearby galaxy clusters obtained an upper luminosity limit of ph s^{−1} per galaxy cluster in the GeV band [22]. In the sample we used, the galaxy cluster with the highest luminosity in the same energy band is A2244 with ph s^{−1} for cm^{3} s^{−1}. Therefore, our calculations still agree with the most recent analysis. Although the jointlikelihood analysis using a stack of galaxy cluster may be a better approach to study the dark matter annihilation, using nearby individual cluster can avoid systematic errors for distant galaxy clusters in the stack analysis. We can check the results from different approaches to ensure the constraints obtained are consistent with each other.
Moreover, we find that there are 2 important galaxy cluster candidates for the evaluation of dark matter annihilation. The gammaray annihilation flux is close to their corresponding upper limits obtained from the FermiLAT data. In particular, the data from Fornax can provide the best indicator on the dark matter annihilation besides the Milky Way. The advantage of using data from galaxy clusters is that we can neglect the contribution from pulsars, which is quite significant in Milky Way. Therefore, further observations on these galaxy clusters can give an alternative way to study the properties of dark matter annihilation.
To conclude, our result provides a selfconsistent picture and a tighter constraint on the annihilation dark matter model. The rest mass and the annihilation cross section could probably be verified by the Large Hadron Collider Experiment in the future.
Conflict of Interests
The author declares that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.
Acknowledgment
This work is partially supported by a grant from the Hong Kong Institute of Education (Project no. RG57/20152016R).
References
 K. N. Abazajian, N. Canac, S. Horiuchi, and M. Kaplinghat, “Astrophysical and dark matter interpretations of extended gammaray emission from the Galactic Center,” Physical Review D, vol. 90, no. 2, Article ID 023526, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 C. Gordon and O. Macias, “Dark matter and pulsar model constraints from Galactic Center FermiLAT gammaray observations,” Physical Review D, vol. 88, Article ID 083521, 2013. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 D. Hooper, I. Cholis, T. Linden, J. M. SiegalGaskins, and T. R. Slatyer, “Millisecond pulsars cannot account for the inner Galaxy's GeV excess,” Physical Review D, vol. 88, no. 8, Article ID 083009, 2013. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 R. Bartels, S. Krishnamurthy, and C. Weniger, “Strong support for the millisecond pulsar origin of the Galactic center GeV excess,” http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.05104. View at: Google Scholar
 S. K. Lee, M. Lisanti, B. R. Safdi, T. R. Slatyer, and W. Xue, “Evidence for unresolved gammaray point sources in the inner galaxy,” http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.05124. View at: Google Scholar
 T. Daylan, D. P. Finkbeiner, D. Hooper et al., “The characterization of the gammaray signal from the central milky way: a compelling case for annihilating dark matter,” http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.6703. View at: Google Scholar
 E. Izaguirre, G. Krnjaic, and B. Shuve, “Bottomup approach to the Galactic Center excess,” Physical Review D, vol. 90, no. 5, Article ID 055002, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 F. Calore, I. Cholis, and C. Weniger, “Background model systematics for the Fermi GeV excess,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2015, no. 03, article 038, 2015. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 B. Moore, T. Quinn, F. Governato, J. Stadel, and G. Lake, “Cold collapse and the core catastrophe,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 310, no. 4, pp. 1147–1152, 1999. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk, and S. D. M. White, “A universal density profile from hierarchical clustering,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 490, no. 2, pp. 493–508, 1997. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. Ackermann, “GeV γray flux upper limits from clusters of galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 717, no. 1, article L71, 2010. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. Ando and D. Nagai, “FermiLAT constraints on dark matter annihilation cross section from observations of the Fornax cluster,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2012, no. 7, article 017, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
 M. Ackermann, M. Ajello, A. Albert et al., “Search for cosmicrayinduced gammaray emission in galaxy clusters,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 787, no. 1, 18 pages, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. Pinzke and C. Pfrommer, “Simulating the γray emission from galaxy clusters: a universal cosmic ray spectrum and spatial distribution,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 409, no. 2, pp. 449–480, 2010. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. Pinzke, C. Pfrommer, and L. Bergström, “Prospects of detecting gammaray emission from galaxy clusters: cosmic rays and dark matter annihilations,” Physical Review D, vol. 84, no. 12, Article ID 123509, 2011. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. A. R. Cembranos, A. de la CruzDombriz, A. Dobado, R. A. Lineros, and A. L. Maroto, “Photon spectra from WIMP annihilation,” Physical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 83, no. 8, Article ID 083507, 2011. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. Schaller, C. S. Frenk, R. G. Bower et al., “Baryon effects on the internal structure of ΛCDM haloes in the EAGLE simulations,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 451, no. 2, pp. 1247–1267, 2015. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. Ackermann, “Dark matter constraints from observations of 25 Milky Way satellite galaxies with the Fermi Large Area Telescope,” Physical Review D, vol. 89, no. 4, Article ID 042001, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. H. Chan, “Indirect evidence of GeV dark matter,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters, vol. 448, no. 1, pp. L87–L89, 2015. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. S. Madhavacheril, N. Sehgal, and T. R. Slatyer, “Current dark matter annihilation constraints from CMB and lowredshift data,” Physical Review D, vol. 89, no. 10, Article ID 103508, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 L. LopezHonorez, O. Mena, S. PalomaresRuiz, and A. C. Vincent, “Constraints on dark matter annihilation from CMB observations before Planck,” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2013, no. 7, article 046, 2013. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 R. D. Griffin, X. Dai, and C. S. Kochanek, “New limits on gammaray emission from galaxy clusters,” The Astrophysical Journal, vol. 795, article L21, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 Man Ho Chan. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.