REVIEW 2 cited by
Constraining Dark Matter Substructure With Gaia Wide Binaries
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
We use a catalogue of stellar binaries with wide separations (up to 1 pc) identified by the Gaia satellite to constrain the presence of extended substructure within the Milky Way galaxy. Heating of the binaries through repeated encounters with substructure results in a characteristic distribution of binary separations, allowing constraints to be placed independent of the formation mechanism of wide binaries. Across a wide range of subhalo density profiles, we show that subhalos with masses $\gtrsim 65 \ M_\odot$ and characteristic length scales similar to the separation of these wide binaries cannot make up 100% of the Galaxy's dark matter. Constraints weaken for subhalos with larger length scales and are dependent on their density profiles. For such large subhalos, higher central densities lead to stronger constraints. Subhalos with density profiles similar to those expected from cold dark matter must be at least $\sim 5,000$ times denser than predicted by simulation to be constrained by the wide binary catalogue.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Probing the fate of large primordial perturbations with exoplanets
Observed ultra-wide exoplanets already constrain the amplitude and scale of primordial power-spectrum peaks that produce ultra-compact minihalos, with misalignment signatures as a future probe.
-
Wide binaries in ultra-faint dwarf galaxies as a probe of extended dark objects
Wide binaries in Boötes I exclude dark-matter fractions down to ~10^-3 to 10^-2 for extended dark objects between 0.1 and 3000 solar masses with radii up to 10^7 solar radii, implying P_R ≲ 5×10^-6 at k ≈ 4×10^2-3×10^...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.