View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Graeme Addison
Joined: 17 Jul 2014 Posts: 18 Affiliation: Johns Hopkins University
|
Posted: February 15 2017 |
|
|
Hi,
I'm interested in including measurements of deuterium / helium3 abundances in a fit. In batch2/abundances.ini it says
Code: | abundance_dataset[Izotov]= %DATASETDIR%Yp_Izotov2014.dataset
#Do not include Cooke, current AlterBBN grid is not accurate enough (rate issues etc)
#abundance_dataset[Cooke]= %DATASETDIR%D_Cooke2013.dataset |
What exactly is the issue for the Cooke2013 deuterium constraint? Is the comment saying that the conversion from input obh2 / nnu etc params to a predicted D/H is not accurate enough given the Cooke2013 error?
For helium is there any similar issue? Or can I replace Izotov with other Yp constraints without worrying about this?
Thanks a lot |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Antony Lewis
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 1332 Affiliation: University of Sussex
|
Posted: February 15 2017 |
|
|
The comment may be old, the default grid is not based on AlterBBN. The Helium results are also more stable. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Graeme Addison
Joined: 17 Jul 2014 Posts: 18 Affiliation: Johns Hopkins University
|
Posted: February 15 2017 |
|
|
OK I see. I had missed the data/bbn.py file initially. Looking at that file, it seems that the assumed neutron lifetime can be adjusted (just by editing tau_n in line 25) but that the reaction rate that dominates the deuterium uncertainty d(p,γ)3He is hardcoded. Do you know if there have been any PArthENoPE updates using different / more recent numbers for the d(p,γ)3He rate? E.g. from this paper http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvL.116j2501M , which was used in one of the recent Cooke et al. deuterium analyses https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.03900
Thanks again for your help. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Antony Lewis
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 1332 Affiliation: University of Sussex
|
Posted: February 15 2017 |
|
|
I don't know of any updates - you could ask them. (would be great if they could produce a numerical interpolation table, rather than a fitting formula which is presumably less accurate). |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|