4.6 Article

Neutrino constraints from future nearly all-sky spectroscopic galaxy surveys

Journal

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2011/03/030

Keywords

redshift surveys; cosmological parameters from LSS; baryon acoustic oscillations; neutrino masses from cosmology

Funding

  1. Agenzia Spaziale Italiana (ASI-Uni Bologna-Astronomy Dept. Euclid-NIS) [I/039/10/0]
  2. MIUR
  3. MICINN [AYA2008-03531]
  4. [FP7-PEOPLE-2007-4-3-IRG]
  5. [202182]
  6. [FP7-IDEAS-Phys.LSS 240117]
  7. ICREA Funding Source: Custom

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examine whether future, nearly all-sky galaxy redshift surveys, in combination with CMB priors, will be able to detect the signature of the cosmic neutrino background and determine the absolute neutrino mass scale. We also consider what constraints can be imposed on the effective number of neutrino species. In particular we consider two spectroscopic strategies in the near-IR, the so-called slitless and multi-slit approaches, whose examples are given by future space-based galaxy surveys, as EUCLID for the slitless case, or SPACE, JEDI, and possibly WFIRST in the future, for the multi-slit case. We find that, in combination with Planck, these galaxy probes will be able to detect at better than 3-sigma level and measure the mass of cosmic neutrinos: a) in a cosmology-independent way, if the sum of neutrino masses is above 0.1 eV; b) assuming spatial flatness and that dark energy is a cosmological constant, otherwise. We find that the sensitivity of such surveys is well suited to span the entire range of neutrino masses allowed by neutrino oscillation experiments, and to yield a clear detection of non-zero neutrino mass. The detection of the cosmic relic neutrino background with cosmological experiments will be a spectacular confirmation of our model for the early Universe and a window into one of the oldest relic components of our Universe.

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