- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

What IceCube data tell us about neutrino emission from star-forming galaxies (so far)

Luis A. Anchordoqui1,2, Thomas C. Paul2,3, Luiz H. M. da Silva2, Diego F. Torres4,5, and Brian J. Vlcek2

  • 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Lehman College at CUNY, Bronx, New York 10468, USA
  • 2Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201, USA
  • 3Department of Physics, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA
  • 4Institute of Space Sciences (IEEC-CSIC), Campus UAB, Torre C5, 2a planta, 08193 Barcelona, Spain
  • 5Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA), 08010 Barcelona, Spain

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 89, 127304 – Published 30 June, 2014

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.127304

Abstract

Very recently, the IceCube Collaboration reported a flux of neutrinos in the energy range 50  TeV≲Eν≲2  PeV, which departs from expectations from atmospheric background at the 5.7σ level. This flux is in remarkable agreement with the expected diffuse flux of neutrinos from starburst galaxies, and the three highest energy events have uncertainty contours encompassing some of such systems. These events, all of which have well-measured energies above 1 PeV, exhibit shower topologies, for which the angular resolution is about 15°. Due to this angular uncertainty and the a posteriori nature of cuts used in our study, it is not possible to assign a robust statistical significance to this association. Using muon tracks, which have angular resolution <1°, we compute the number of observations required to make a statistically significant statement and show that in a few years of operation the upgraded IceCube detector should be able to confirm or refute this hypothesis. We also note that double bang topology rates constitute a possible discriminator among various astrophysical sources.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (28)

  1. M. G. Aartsen et al. (IceCube Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 021103 (2013). Note, however, that a cosmogenic origin of these events is highly unlikely, (IceCube Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 88, 112008 (2013).
  2. S. Schonert, T. Gaisser, E. Resconi, and O. Schulz, Phys. Rev. D 79, 043009 (2009); T. K. Gaisser et al., arXiv:1405.0525.
  3. M. G. Aartsen et al. (IceCube Collaboration), Science 342, 1242856 (2013).
  4. M. G. Aartsen et al. (IceCube Collaboration), arXiv:1405.5303.
  5. For a review of other possible origins of the IceCube events, see L. A. Anchordoqui et al., J. High Energy Astrophys. 1–2, 1 (2014).
  6. R. Abbasi et al. (IceCube Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 84, 072001 (2011).
  7. J. G. Learned and S. Pakvasa, Astropart. Phys. 3, 267 (1995).

  8. Neutral current interactions of all ν flavors also produce showers, but with a smaller rate than CC interactions.

  9. S. L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. 118, 316 (1960).
  10. L. A. Anchordoqui, H. Goldberg, M. H. Lynch, A. V. Olinto, T. C. Paul, and T. J. Weiler, Phys. Rev. D 89, 083003 (2014).
  11. E. Waxman and J. N. Bahcall, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2292 (1997).
  12. T. A. D. Paglione, A. P. Marscher, J. M. Jackson, and D. L. Bertsch, Astrophys. J. 460, 295 (1996); V. Pavlidou and B. D. Fields, 558, 63 (2001); D. F. Torres, 617, 966 (2004); E. Domingo-Santamaria and D. F. Torres, Astron. Astrophys. 444, 403 (2005).
  13. A. Loeb and E. Waxman, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2006) 003.
  14. K. Murase, M. Ahlers, and B. C. Lacki, Phys. Rev. D 88, 121301 (2013); I. Tamborra, S. ’i. Ando, and K. Murase, arXiv:1404.1189.
  15. R. Abbasi et al. (IceCube Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 83, 012001 (2011).
  16. A. A. Abdo et al. (Fermi-LAT Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 101101 (2010); M. Ackermann, in 4th Fermi Symposium, 2012.
  17. J. P. Rachen and P. Meszaros, Phys. Rev. D 58, 123005 (1998); T. Kashti and E. Waxman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 181101 (2005).
  18. L. A. Anchordoqui, H. Goldberg, F. Halzen, and T. J. Weiler, Phys. Lett. B 621, 18 (2005).
  19. A. Karle, in Phenomenology 2014 Symposium.
  20. H.-N. He, T. Wang, Y.-Z. Fan, S.-M. Liu, and D.-M. Wei, Phys. Rev. D 87, 063011 (2013); R.-Y. Liu, X.-Y. Wang, S. Inoue, R. Crocker, and F. Aharonian, 89, 083004 (2014).
  21. M. Ackermann et al. (Fermi LAT Collaboration), Astrophys. J. 755, 164 (2012).
  22. Y. Gao and P. M. Solomon, Astrophys. J. 606, 271 (2004). The only galaxy from the HCN survey not included in the sample is NGC 6921.
  23. F. Acero et al. (H.E.S.S. Collaboration), Science 326, 1080 (2009); V. A. Acciari et al. (VERITAS Collaboration), Nature (London) 462, 770 (2009); A. A. Abdo (Fermi LAT Collaboration), Astrophys. J. 709, L152 (2010).
  24. For detailed models of the gamma ray emission, see e.g., Y. Rephaeli, Y. Arieli, and M. Persic, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 401, 473 (2010); E. d. C. del Pozo, D. F. Torres, and A. Y. R. Marrero, Astrophys. J. 698, 1054 (2009); M. Persic, Y. Rephaeli, and Y. Arieli, Astron. Astrophys. 486, 143 (2008); B. C. Lacki, S. Horiuchi, and J. F. Beacom, Astrophys. J. 786, 40 (2014).
  25. L. A. Anchordoqui, G. E. Romero, and J. A. Combi, Phys. Rev. D 60, 103001 (1999).
  26. R. U. Abbasi et al. (TA Collaboration), arXiv:1404.5890.
  27. G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, Phys. Rev. D 57, 3873 (1998).
  28. K. Fang et al., arXiv:1404.6237.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 89, 127304– Published 30 June, 2014
  • Received 29 May 2014

© 2014 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation