1. 3 astrophysical measurements of neutrino mass Neutrino mass will tend to wash out intermediate scale structure during galaxy formation. Thus the presence of such structure in the present day distributions of galaxies disfavours neutrino mass. The Z-burst model for the origin of supra-GZK cosmic rays requires a non-zero neutrino mass. See hep-ph/0308168 for a method based on supernova neutrinos observed around a gravitational lens. It only requires you to see supernova neutrinos around a gravitational lens. That shouldn’t be too hard…. …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

2. 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

3. …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

4. P(k)=A k n T 2 (k) Neutrino Free Streaming  P(k)/P(k) = -8    m (Hu et al. 1998)  P(k)/P(k) = -8    m (Hu et al. 1998) …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

5.  =0  =0.01  =0.05 They derive m,tot < 1.8 eV 2dF team: astro-ph/0204152 …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

6. …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

7. astro-ph/0302209 …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

8. astro-ph/0304237 …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

9. astro-ph/0306386 …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark

10. Neutrino mass from Cosmology DataAuthors M  m i 2dFGRSElgaroy et al. 02 < 1.8 eV WMAP+2dF+…Spergel et al. 03 < 0.7 eV WMAP+2dFHannestad 03 < 1.0 eV SDSS+WMAPTegmark et al. 04 < 1.7 eV WMAP+2dF+ SDSS Crotty et al. 04 < 1.0 eV Clusters +WMAPAllen et al. 040.56 +0.30 -0.26 eV All upper limits 95% CL, but different assumed priors ! Slide from Ofer Lahav

11. What does this mean for neutrino physics? Sensitivity is better than tritium, and currently comparable to 0  decay – but clearly at this time suffers from substantial model dependencies. Data improve with more MAP data, Planck, and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, perhaps gaining another factor of 3-5 in potential sensitivity. (See astro-ph/0303344, which claims  (m ) = 0.15 eV from Planck alone, and eventually perhaps 0.04 eV from better CMBR measurements) What are the real model dependencies? Hubble parameter? Bias? What is a model-independent limit? Time will tell. Watch, or better yet, join in the fun. Real connection between particle physics and cosmology! …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark