Neutrino physics from precision cosmology

Hannestad, Steen

doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2010.07.001

Cited by 101 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 170 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A striking illustration of the interplay between cosmology and particle physics is the potential of CMB observations to constrain the properties of relic neutrinos, and possibly of additional light relic particles in the Universe (see e.g., Dodelson et al 1996;Hu et al 1995;Bashinsky & Seljak 2004;Ichikawa et al 2005;Hannestad 2010). In the following subsections, we present Planck constraints on the mass of ordinary (active) neutrinos assuming no extra relics, on the density of light relics assuming they all have negligible masses, and finally on models with both light massive and massless relics.…”

Section: Neutrino Physics and Constraints On Relativistic Componentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planck2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters

Ade¹,

Aghanim²,

Armitage-Caplan³

et al. 2014

A&A

5,084

163

2,253

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the first cosmological results based on Planck measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) temperature and lensing-potential power spectra. We find that the Planck spectra at high multipoles ( > ∼ 40) are extremely well described by the standard spatiallyflat six-parameter ΛCDM cosmology with a power-law spectrum of adiabatic scalar perturbations. Within the context of this cosmology, the Planck data determine the cosmological parameters to high precision: the angular size of the sound horizon at recombination, the physical densities of baryons and cold dark matter, and the scalar spectral index are estimated to be θ * = (1.04147 ± 0.00062) × 10 −2 , Ω b h 2 = 0.02205 ± 0.00028, Ω c h 2 = 0.1199 ± 0.0027, and n s = 0.9603 ± 0.0073, respectively (note that in this abstract we quote 68% errors on measured parameters and 95% upper limits on other parameters). For this cosmology, we find a low value of the Hubble constant, H 0 = (67.3 ± 1.2) km s −1 Mpc −1 , and a high value of the matter density parameter, Ω m = 0.315 ± 0.017. These values are in tension with recent direct measurements of H 0 and the magnituderedshift relation for Type Ia supernovae, but are in excellent agreement with geometrical constraints from baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) surveys. Including curvature, we find that the Universe is consistent with spatial flatness to percent level precision using Planck CMB data alone. We use high-resolution CMB data together with Planck to provide greater control on extragalactic foreground components in an investigation of extensions to the six-parameter ΛCDM model. We present selected results from a large grid of cosmological models, using a range of additional astrophysical data sets in addition to Planck and high-resolution CMB data. None of these models are favoured over the standard six-parameter ΛCDM cosmology. The deviation of the scalar spectral index from unity is insensitive to the addition of tensor modes and to changes in the matter content of the Universe. We find an upper limit of r 0.002 < 0.11 on the tensor-to-scalar ratio. There is no evidence for additional neutrino-like relativistic particles beyond the three families of neutrinos in the standard model. Using BAO and CMB data, we find N eff = 3.30 ± 0.27 for the effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom, and an upper limit of 0.23 eV for the sum of neutrino masses. Our results are in excellent agreement with big bang nucleosynthesis and the standard value of N eff = 3.046. We find no evidence for dynamical dark energy; using BAO and CMB data, the dark energy equation of state parameter is constrained to be w = −1.13 +0.13 −0.10 . We also use the Planck data to set limits on a possible variation of the fine-structure constant, dark matter annihilation and primordial magnetic fields. Despite the success of the six-parameter ΛCDM model in describing the Planck data at high multipoles, we note that this cosmology does not provide a good fit to the temperature power spectrum at low multipoles. T...

show abstract

Section: Neutrino Physics and Constraints On Relativistic Componentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planck2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters

Ade¹,

Aghanim²,

Armitage-Caplan³

et al. 2014

A&A

5,084

163

2,253

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This change leaves a characteristic imprint on several cosmological observables (see, e.g. [16,[63][64][65][66][67]), letting cosmology to strongly bound the neutrino mass scale, indeed providing the current strongest (albeit model dependent) bounds on Σ. Bounds on Σ from recent cosmological data have been presented in several papers (see, for example, [68][69][70][71][72][73] and references therein) while forecasts for near (and far) future cosmological datasets have been obtained in [74][75][76][77][78][79].…”

Section: Cosmologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, three main observables can probe the absolute mass spectrum: (i) the effective neutrino mass m β in β decay; (ii) the effective mass m ββ in neutrinoless double beta (0νββ) decay, if neutrinos are Majorana fermions; and (iii) the total neutrino mass Σ in cosmology; see, e.g., the reviews in [13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global constraints on absolute neutrino masses and their ordering

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the standard three-neutrino framework, the absolute neutrino masses and their ordering (either normal, NO, or inverted, IO) are currently unknown. However, the combination of current data coming from oscillation experiments, neutrinoless double beta (0νββ) decay searches, and cosmological surveys, can provide interesting constraints for such unknowns in the sub-eV mass range, down to O(10 −1 ) eV in some cases. We discuss current limits on absolute neutrino mass observables by performing a global data analysis, that includes the latest results from oscillation experiments, 0νββ decay bounds from the KamLAND-Zen experiment, and constraints from representative combinations of Planck measurements and other cosmological data sets. In general, NO appears to be somewhat favored with respect to IO at the level of ∼ 2σ, mainly by neutrino oscillation data (especially atmospheric), corroborated by cosmological data in some cases. Detailed constraints are obtained via the χ 2 method, by expanding the parameter space either around separate minima in NO and IO, or around the absolute minimum in any ordering. Implications for upcoming oscillation and non-oscillation neutrino experiments, including β-decay searches, are also discussed.

show abstract

“…-Perhaps, if double beta decay were to be observed in the next round of experiments and either KATRIN [20] or cosmological data [21][22][23] also find hints for a neutrino mass scale of the order of, say, somewhat larger than O(0.1) eV, one could claim on the basis of minimality that the mass mechanism m ν gives (at least) the most important contribution to the total decay rate. However, once upper limits on the total neutrino mass ( m ν ) placed from cosmology drop below the level of O(0.1) eV, the question becomes exceedingly difficult to answer.…”

Section: Jhep05(2015)092mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Here,m ν is the matrix of eigenvalues of m ν , which is diagonalized with the neutrino mixing matrix U ν via 22) JHEP05 (2015)092 for which we use the following standard parametrization c ij = cos θ ij , s ij = sin θ ij with the mixing angles θ ij , δ is the Dirac phase and α 1 , α 2 are Majorana phases. Finally, R is a complex orthogonal matrix which satisfies the condition R T R = 1.…”

Section: Jhep05(2015)092mentioning

confidence: 99%

Double beta decay and neutrino mass models

Helo

Hirsch

Ota

et al. 2015

J. High Energ. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neutrinoless double beta decay allows to constrain lepton number violating extensions of the standard model. If neutrinos are Majorana particles, the mass mechanism will always contribute to the decay rate, however, it is not a priori guaranteed to be the dominant contribution in all models. Here, we discuss whether the mass mechanism dominates or not from the theory point of view. We classify all possible (scalar-mediated) short-range contributions to the decay rate according to the loop level, at which the corresponding models will generate Majorana neutrino masses, and discuss the expected relative size of the different contributions to the decay rate in each class. Our discussion is general for models based on the SM group but does not cover models with an extended gauge. We also work out the phenomenology of one concrete 2-loop model in which both, mass mechanism and short-range diagram, might lead to competitive contributions, in some detail.

show abstract

Neutrino physics from precision cosmology

Cited by 101 publications

References 170 publications

Planck2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters

Planck2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters

Global constraints on absolute neutrino masses and their ordering

Double beta decay and neutrino mass models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About