4.6 Article

Towards a realistic astrophysical interpretation of the gamma-ray Galactic center excess

Journal

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2015/12/056

Keywords

gamma ray theory; cosmic ray theory; cosmic ray experiments; gamma ray experiments

Funding

  1. University of Hamburg [SFB 676]
  2. European Research Council (ERc) under the EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7)/ERc Starting Grant [278234]
  3. ERC Advanced Grant [267985]
  4. European Union FP7 ITN INVISIBLES [PITN-GA-2011-289442]
  5. research grant Theoretical Astroparticle Physics under the program PRIN [2012CPPYP7]
  6. Ministero dell'Istruzione, Universita e della Ricerca (MIUR)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A spherical-symmetric gamma-ray emission from the inner region of the Galaxy (at least up to roughly 100 in latitude and longitude) has been recently identified in FermiLAT data, and initially associated to dark matter particle annihilations. Guided by the evidence for a high gas density in the inner kpc of the Galaxy correlated with a very large Supernova rate, and hence with ongoing cosmic-ray acceleration, we investigate instead the possibility of addressing this excess in terms of ordinary cosmic-ray sources and standard steady-state diffusion. We alter the source term, and consistently the correlated gamma-ray emissions, in the context of a template-fitting analysis. We focus on a region of interest (ROT) defined as: vertical bar l vertical bar < 20 degrees; 2 degrees < vertical bar b vertical bar < 20 degrees, with l and b the Galactic longitude and latitude coordinates. We analyze in detail the overall goodness of the fit of our framework, and perform a detailed direct comparison against data examining profiles in different directions. Remarkably, the test statistic of the fit related to our scenario turns out to be as good as the Dark Matter one in the ROT here considered.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available