Deep physics from Small Bodies : Dark Matter in the Solar System

T. Marshall Eubanks Asteroid Initiatives LLC, Clifton, Virginia (tme@asteroidinitiatives.com)

February 25, 2014 Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, California

Beautiful, if true. Igor Mitrofanov (IKI) January 10, 2014

Outline of Talk
Introduction : What is Dark Matter? Quark Matter Nuggets Basics of Quark Nugget theory Current Limits on Quark Nuggets Quark Matter and the Solar System Capture of Dark Matter in the Proto-Solar Nebula How to nd Quark Nuggets in the Solar System Evidence for Strange Asteroids The Anomalous Rotation of Small Asteroids Solar Prospectors - Finding Ultra-Dense Asteroids by Spacecraft Conclusions : A Game-Changing Possibility for Space Exploration.

Introduction : What is Dark Matter?

What is Dark Matter?

Observations reveal a serious failure of physics at large astronomical scales (galactic disks and halos, clusters of galaxies and larger). Apparent gravitational accelerations on these scales are consistently larger than can be explained by the matter we can see (stars, gas, etc.). This appears to be totally separate from the dark energy required to explain a relatively recent acceleration in the expansion of the universe. If these accelerations are attributed to some non-interacting (or dark) form of matter, then roughly 84.5 % of the matter in the universe is dark. There have been many proposals to explain these discrepancies in terms of new particles from new physics. E.g., WIMPS (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles) After decades of searching, there is no conclusive evidence that any such particles exist. The eld is wide open for alternative explanations. This talk will explore one of them.

Generic Constraints on Dark Matter

It is important to recognize that there are basically no generic constraints on either the mass or cross section (with ordinary matter) of dark matter (assumed to be some sort of particles). Individual theories may, and typically do, have such constraints, but these are theory dependent and do not apply generally. Astrophysical data do, however, limit the ratio of the cross-section, c , and typical mass, mc , of any CDM particles; the best current limit coming from observations of the Bullet Cluster (1E 065756), where two colliding galaxy clusters show the CDM (observable with gravitational lensing) decoupled from the cluster gas [Clowe et al., 2006] The best cross section mass ratio limit is [Markevitch et al., 2004] c 0.1 m2 kg1 . (1) mc (Observational cross section limits for specic particles in specic mass ranges may of course be signicantly lower.) Quark nuggets are consistent with the observational constraints on DM not through new physics and weak interactions with ordinary matter, but through their macroscopic size, yielding very small cross section to mass ratios and high binding energies. They satisfy the above constraint by over 10 orders of magnitude; such data are unlikely to rule out macroscopic condensed matter DM theory.
6

The Bullet Cluster (Chandra X-ray image with gravitational lensing mass estimates overlaid)

The Bullet Cluster is the best current test of the non-gravitational physics of dark matter. Two clusters have slammed into each other; the stars and dark matter continue on while the gas is stopped by uid drag. This sets a strong constraint on the mass-cross section ratio of dark matter 7 [Clowe et al., 2006].

Quark Matter Nuggets

Condensed Quark Matter : An Alternate Explanation for Dark Matter

Quark Nuggets are an alternative explanation for Dark Matter with profound implications for the exploration of the Solar System. There are numerous theories predicting that nuggets of condensed quark matter (QBalls, nucleates, etc.) would be left over from the early universe. The Quark Nugget theory used here is that of Zhitnitsky [2003a,b], which makes specic and testable predictions. What is the relevance of this for Space Exploration? If there is a signicant density of primordial condensed quark matter, there will be some in the solar system (including in asteroids). Nuggets buried in small asteroids would be especially detectable, as nuggets should have a mass oor, and ordinary matter asteroids do not. The most conclusive way to search for quark matter in the near term is to send spacecraft to selected small asteroids. Searching for them is a huge bet on the future, as quark matter, if found, could be mined for antimatter (currently valued at $ 65 trillion USD / gram).
9

A (brief) review of Quantum ChromoDynamics (QCD)

Recent work indicates that at low temperatures and high densities the lowest QCD energy state is Color-Flavor-Locked (CFL) superconducting quark matter [Alford, 1999, Madsen, 2001, Zhitnitsky, 2003a, Kogut and Stephanov, 2004, Alford et al., 2008]. In ordinary matter, quarks are conned. There are different avors of quark (u,d and s are the only ones of concern here) and each quark also has a color (r, g or b for normal matter). Both avor and color can be viewed as a charge, analogous to an electric charge, except that Color and avor charges are not just + / - , but are multi-valued. Color charges can be exchanged by gluons Any free particle has to be color-neutral. A proton, for example, is a <u, u, d> triplet, and must have colors of <r, g, b>, but it is not possible to assign a particular color to any one of these quarks.

10

CFL Quark Matter

CFL quark matter is (roughly) similar to BCS superconductors for electrons. A dense sea of cold quarks ll all available quantum states, allowing for quasiparticles, which can propagate freely, and a superconducting gap, . Some differences : CFL is a color superconductor, but an electrical insulator. CFL forms a superuid, with rotation and magnetic eld conned to vortex lines Quasi particles are in color-avor locked pairs, such as < dred , ugreen > These differences will be important for the potential generation of antimatter, to be dealt with later. CFL superuids may be absolutely stable, in which case this, instead of the proton or 56 Fe, is the fundamental state of matter. Qiark matter was the primary state of matter in the very early universe, and yet we exist. How can some, but not all, of the primordial quark matter have survived as CFL to the present?

11

QCD Phase Diagram

The schematic phase diagram for quark matter, in terms of the temperature and chemical potential. The Color-Flavor-Locked (CFL) superconducting phase has the highest density at near-zero temperatures.
12

The QCD Era in the Early Universe

Quark Nuggets are a new version of an old idea. The idea that condensed quark matter could form in the early universe and persist until the present has a considerable history, dating back to the quark nugget proposal of Witten [1984]. Other names for similar proposals are stranglets, nuclearites, Q-Balls.. Quark Nuggets would be relics of the QCD epoch, the period during the rst few seconds after the Big Bang when there were no baryons (protons, neutrons), but instead a quark-gluon plasma (QGP). At that time the Hubble distance, RH , was 10 km and the Hubble time 3 seconds. The density was > 4 1017 kg m3 (the nuclear density). The temperature was 160 MeV (1.9 1012 K). The redshift, z, was 1012 . This represents the point, as the universe expanded and cooled, when quarks became conned and the QGP froze out into hadrons, forming protons and neutrons. If quark matter is stable (or sufciently metastable) material from that epoch, if adequately conned, could still exist today.
13

Basics of Zhitnitsky Quark Nugget theory

In the Zhitnitsky theory stable Quark Nuggets would be formed in a fairly narrow range of masses, compressed by axion domain walls shortly after the QCD phase transition The lower mass limit is set by the stability of the Quark Nugget against decay and the upper mass limit by the requirement that the quark matter be compressed to greater than nuclear density. This mass range is less than two orders of magnitude in extent, but the exact values are considerably more uncertain. The stable Quark Nugget mass range is determined by fa , the axion decay constant. The current uncertainty in fa [Laki c et al., 2012] constrains the stable Quark Nugget mass, MQ , to 105 kg MQ 4 1010 kg. I will show evidence that MQ is 1010 kg, implying a value for fa at the upper end of the allowed range. Note that a 10 megaton Quark Nugget would have a radius of only 1.5 mm. Zhitnitsky and his colleagues favor a small value for MQ , 1 gm, so that Quark Nuggets could explain various anomalous radiation features in in the Galactic Bulge [Forbes and Zhitnitsky, 2008a,b, Lawson and Zhitnitsky, 2013]. Such small Quark Nuggets would be inherently metastable, but normal matter nuggets could merge, absorb ordinary matter, and grow to the maximum mass.
14

Current Limits on Quark Nugget Dark Matter

There are a variety of prior limits on Quark Nuggets as dark matter, which can be divided into three mass ranges. Low mass limits (MQ 1 gm) come from laboratory searches for dark matter. The current best such limits are from the MACRO Collaboration [2002], which disallow Quark Nuggets smaller than 10 milligrams. Mid-range (kg to ton) limits come from seismology, with Lunar seismology being especially important. [Herrin et al., 2006]. Finally, at the upper end of the mass range (planetary masses) there are limits from gravitational lensing [Alcock et al., 1998], and (for primordial Quark Nuggets) from the requirement that Quark Nuggets could not be larger than the horizon at the QCD era [Madsen, 2006] All of these constraints are consistent with the stable Quark Nugget mass range allowed by the Zhitnitsky axion domain wall theory.

15

Observational Limits on Quark Nugget Dark Matter

Mass (kg) 100000 1e+10

1e-05 1e-21

1e+15

1e+20

VFR Asteroids

Kepler

Q (kg m-3)

MACRO 1e-22 Apollo ALSEP CDM (Halo) USGS Lensing 1e+20 1e+25 1e+30

Axion Domain Wall Model Mass Range 1e+35 1e+40 Baryon Number(B) 1e+45 1e+50 Femtolensing Lensing

This gure assumes a monochromatic Quark Nugget mass spectrum. The Halo CDM Density is 16 from local stellar kinematics [Bovy and Tremaine, 2012]. Note that the experimental asteroid constraints and the theoretical axion domain wall mass range are consistent with each other and with all the other experimental constraints.

Quark Matter and the Solar System

17

Why should there be Dark Matter in the Solar System?

Dark matter (whether microscopic or macroscopic) would be included in the Solar System primordially (from its formation). Planetary systems such as the Solar System appear to form in the collapse of molecular clouds as they cool. A small portion of the dark matter inside the collapsing cloud would have (by chance) relative velocities 5 km sec1 , and would be subject to capture. Primordial capture probabilities are 2 104 and 3 106 for dark disk and Halo dark matter, respectively. The total amount of primordially captured dark matter would be 106 M or 3 1024 kg), with 98% of the captured material coming from the dark disk. That corresponds to 3 1014 (1010 kg/ MQ ) Quark Nuggets. With their large superconducting gap energies, there is nothing to stop these Quark Nuggets from beginning to accrete normal matter mantles, forming strange planetesimals. Bodies with radii 100 meters would have most of their mass coming from their strange matter cores and would be truly strange asteroids.

18

Quark Matter and the Meter Barrier to Planetesimal Growth

Quark matter nuggets in the early Solar System could have profound (and observable) effects on planetary formation. Proto-planetary discs, the rst step of planet formation is thought to be the conglomeration of dust particles into small (sub-meter) bodies, which then must grow through conglomeration into larger ones. An obstacle in the current models for this process is the the so called meter-barrier [Brauer et al., 2008, Mordasini et al., 2010]. In a proto-planetary disk the gas is subject to both pressure and gravity, and so does not follow a Keplerian orbit, creating a headwind for orbiting bodies, and causing meter sized objects to rapidly spiral into the central star [Weidenschilling, 1977, Birnstiel et al., 2010]. In addition, collisions of meter size bodies appears unlikely to result in aggregation of mass. With their large mass oor, quark nuggets could solve the meter barrier. They would provide proto-planetesimal population with minimum mass comparable to a 100 meter asteroid, nd thus evade the barrier.
19

Quark Matter : A source of Heating and High Energy Events in the Early Solar System
Primordially-captured quark nuggets might be able to account for many of the heating and high-energy radiation episodes in the early Solar System. Quark nugget energy releases (due, say, to nugget mergers) would be primarily high energy (MeV or higher) rays, together with pion or even proton pair production, which would cause heating and spallation nucleosynthesis in adjacent ordinary matter. Radiochemistry reveals that material in the early solar system was indeed subjected to multiple episodes of high-energy radiation, which produced at least some of the fossil short-lived radionuclides (those with half-lives < 107 yr) [McKeegan et al., 2000, Albar` ede et al., 2006, Thrane et al., 2010, Wielandt et al., 2012] The non-ferrous fossil radionuclides present in the early Solar System are all spallation products, and could be formed by high-energy nugget radiation; their inhomogeneous initial distributions [Makide et al., 2013] suggests a localized source within the early Solar System. The evidence for supernova injection of 60 Fe in the early Solar System is not conclusive [Moynier et al., 2011, Tang and Dauphas, 2012]. I regard the possibility of nugget heating and radioisotope formation as an very open issue that badly needs specialist attention.
20

How to nd Quark Nuggets in the Solar System

Most Quark Nuggets in the Solar System should be currently located in the center of the Sun and planets, where they would be hard to detect, and even harder to reach. Small ( 200 meter radius) strange asteroids, if they exist at all, are both more likely to both reveal their Quark Nugget cores and (if detected) could be suitable for direct exploration by spacecraft. Asteroids can be strongly perturbed by radiation pressure, both the Yarkovsky effect [Vokrouhlick y et al., 2000], thrusting which changes orbits, and the Yarkovsky-OKeefe-RadzievskiiPaddack (YORP) effect [Bottke et al., 2006], torquing of asteroidal rotation. A small strange asteroid would respond very differently to Yarkovsky and YORP perturbations. The mass would be increased over an ordinary matter body of the same size, which would decrease Yarkovsky accelerations; such objects would have a longer residence time in NEO orbits. The moment of inertia change would be negligible, so there would be nothing to stop YORP spin-up of rotation period. AND, a small strange asteroid would have a higher than expected surface gravity, and thus would be more resistant to rotational disruption, and thus could be spun up very fast.
21

Evidence for Strange Asteroids in the Solar System

22

Anomalous Rotation of Small Strange Asteroids

Small asteroids ( 200 meter radius) with quark matter cores can be considered strange asteroids, as their mass will be dominated by their quark matter cores. A small strange asteroid would respond differently to the Yarkovsky and the YORP effects. The mass would be greatly increased over an ordinary matter body of the same size, which would greatly decrease Yarkovsky accelerations; such objects would have a longer residence time in NEO orbits. The moment of inertia change would be negligible, so there would be nothing to stop YORP spin-up of rotation period. However, a small strange asteroid would have a higher than expected surface gravity, would thus be more resistant to rotational disruption, and thus could be spun up very fast. I originally thought that this would be a good way to disprove the massive CCO theory. However Fast rotating small asteroids are very common, with the shortest known period being 25 seconds. This tendency for fast rotation could be explained by CCO masses in the stable range predicted by the Zhitnitsky theory, which of course is completely independent of any asteroidal data.
23

Asteroid Rubble Pile rotation limits

Suppose that you have a spherical asteroid, with a bulk density A , mass MA and radius RA , being spun up by YORP. At what point will it be rotationally disrupted? Disruption could come from internal fractures, but it is simple to consider the point at which surface mass is lost, when the gravitational and rotational accelerations are equal on the surface at the equator. This is the so called Rubble Pile limit (RPL), which occurs at a rotational frequency, RP L , with GMA 4GA 2 = (2) RP L = 3 RA 3 Note that the RPL depends only on the bulk density. For A = 2300 kg m3 the RPL rotation limit (PRP ) is 2.2 hours. For an asteroid of solid Osmium, PRP 0.7 hours. I call asteroids with P < 0.5 hours Very Fast Rotators (VFR); they cannot be bound gravitationally by ordinary matter.

24

The asteroid rotation period-radius relation

0.01 0.1 Rotation Period (Hours) 1 10 100 1000 10000 0.001 NEO Main Belt Trans-Neptune Objects Comet-Like Orbits RPL (2.2 hr) Very Fast Rotator Limit (0.5 hr) 0.01 0.1 1 10 Asteroid Radius (km) 100 1000

The change in the character of asteroid rotation rates at R 200 m is obvious to the eye, with most asteroids with R < 200 m having rotation periods < 1 hour while almost all asteroids with R > 200 m have periods 2 hours. The horizontal solid line is the Rubble Pile limit for a uniform density of 2300 kg m3 , and the horizontal dashed line is the 0.5 hour VFR limit.

25

Estimating Core Masses from Asteroid Rubble Pile rotation limits

It is hard to directly determine asteroid masses (unless there is a satellite or spacecraft present), but rotation rates are available for (at present) 5077 bodies. Assuming a lack of internal cohesion it is straightforward to take the observed radius and rotation frequency and estimate the mass of the Quark Nugget core, MQ , (assuming a default density, O , for the ordinary matter mantle, and, e.g., a spherical body). This indirect mass estimate is certainly not as rm as a direct mass estimate (say, from an orbiting spacecraft), but it can be done for numerous bodies. When this is done the centroid of the MQ distribution is 2 1010 kg within the range predicted by the Zhitnitsky theory for stable Quark Nuggets. This agreement between theory and observation is not proof, but it is powerfully suggestive.

26

Quark Nugget Core Mass Histograms from Asteroid Rotation

1e+06 30 Axion Model Prediction 1e+08 Mass (kg) 1e+10 1e+12 1e+14 R < 50 m R > 50 m

25

# Asteroids / Bin

20

15 Range for Maximum fa

10

0 32 34 36 38 Log 10 Baryon Number 40 42

Histogram of the Quark Nugget core mass required to prevent rotational disruption assuming gravitational binding and no internal tensile strength, for two independent sets of asteroids. These core mass estimates are based on a rubble pile model with a default = 2300 kg m3 for all asteroid mantles. Also shown (as vertical lines) is the Quark Nugget mass range allowed by the axion domain wall theory given current experimental constraints on the axion delay constant fa and, as marked, the narrower range consistent with the maximum allowed value [Wantz and Shellard, 2010] for fa (2.8 1011 GeV).
27

What About Asteroid Cohesion

The existence of rapidly rotation asteroids is of course not new; these are generally assumed to be stable due to internal cohesion, most realistically due to van der Waals forces [Scheeres, 2011]. Van der Waals forces appear to be the strongest source of cohesion [Scheeres et al., 2010]. Scheeres [Scheeres, 2011] provides a model for the maximum grain size to avoid rotational disruption in a sand pile model, assuming cohesion from van der Waals forces with a modied Hamaker constant of 0.05 N m1 . (Van der Waals forces are contact forces and are thus increased by decreasing the mean particle size.) The VFR asteroids require very small grain sizes in the asteroid center (assuming an absence of quark matter). These same asteroids can have 10 cm sec2 surface accelerations directed outwards from the surface. It is very hard for me to see how these dust piles in the sky could survive even gentle shaking from meteorite impacts.

28

Maximum Grain Size Allowed for van der Waals force cohesion against disruption)
1 Maximum Stable Body Grain Radius (m) 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 1e-05 1e-06 1e-07 0.001 FR NEO VFR HA-VFR

0.01 0.1 Asteroid Radius (km)

Maximum grain size consistent with stability of the asteroid center against rotational disruption, assuming cohesion from van der Waals forces [Scheeres et al., 2010, Scheeres, 2011] and a modied Hamaker constant of 0.05 N m1 .

29

Positive outward equatorial accelerations (rotational minus gravitational)

1 Outward Acceleration at the Equator (m sec-2)

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001

1e-05

1e-06 0.001 0.01

Near Earth Asteroids Main Belt P = 0.5 hr (VFR Limit) P = 1.3 hr P = 2.0 hr 0.1 1 Asteroid Radius (km) 10 100

Positive outward equatorial accelerations (rotational minus gravitational), assuming spherical bodies with a density of 2300 kg m3 . (Positive outward accelerations of course imply that any loose material at the equator would be lost to space.) A set of asteroids with a common density rotating at their rubble pile limit would form a diagonally sloping cluster of points. Two such clusters are visible and are marked by a diagonal dashed lines.
30

Solar Prospectors Finding Ultra-Dense Asteroids by Spacecraft

31

Strange Asteroid Prospectors

What is the best way to conrm (or refute) the existence of Quark Nuggets in the NEO? The best way to conrm the existence of strange asteroids would be simply to visit them. With a low speed rendezvous, or after going into orbit, it would be straightforward to determine the mass and density of a strange asteroid candidate. From the current set of asteroids in the Light Curve Database, we have identied 12 strange asteroid candidates with V 6 km / sec relative to the Earth. Preliminary design work indicates an adequate prospector spacecraft could have Mass < 50 kg, with a payload mass < 3 kg Payload would be cameras. 1 kg would be potentially available to partners Such small prospectors would be similar to the proposed BEE / APIES spacecraft swarm of DArrigo and Santandrea [2004] ESA considered solar sails, but went with more proven technology. With the upcoming ight of the Sunjammer, solar sail propulsion seems very competitive propulsion for prospectors.
32

Conclusions
There are both theoretical and observational reasons to believe that there is condensed quark matter in the Solar System. If such matter is locally available, it can be found and used for scientic research and resource (energy) extraction. Phenomenal amounts of energy are potentially available. A 1010 kg Quark Nugget could potentially yield megatons of antimatter. An initial production of micrograms would be difcult enough (as it would have to be done in deep space) but it would be sufcient to enable antimatter catalyzed fusion. Although the proposition is risky, the potential payoff would be immense. This is truly a game-changing possibility for space exploration. Asteroid Initiatives is seeking partners and funding to prospect the Near Earth Objects for ultra-dense strange asteroids. The information gained from these prospectors would also be valuable for more conventional mining.

33

References F. Albar` ede, E. E. Scherer, J. Blichert-Toft, M. Rosing, A. Simionovici, and M. Bizzarro. -ray irradiation in the early Solar System and the conundrum of the 176 Lu decay constant. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 70:12611270, Mar. 2006. doi: 10.1016/j.gca.2005.09.027. C. Alcock, R. A. Allsman, D. Alves, R. Ansari, E. Aubourg, T. S. Axelrod, P. Bareyre, J.-P. Beaulieu, A. C. Becker, D. P. Bennett, S. Brehin, F. Cavalier, S. Char, K. H. Cook, R. Ferlet, J. Fernandez, K. C. Freeman, K. Griest, P. Grison, M. Gros, C. Gry, J. Guibert, M. Lachieze-Rey, B. Laurent, M. J. Lehner, E. Lesquoy, C. Magneville, S. L. Marshall, E. Maurice, A. Milsztajn, D. Minniti, M. Moniez, O. Moreau, L. Moscoso, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, B. A. Peterson, M. R. Pratt, L. Prevot, F. Queinnec, P. J. Quinn, C. Renault, J. Rich, M. Spiro, C. W. Stubbs, W. Sutherland, A. Tomaney, T. Vandehei, A. Vidal-Madjar, L. Vigroux, and S. Zylberajch. EROS and MACHO Combined Limits on Planetary-Mass Dark Matter in the Galactic Halo. Ap. J. Lett., 499:L9, 1998. M. Alford. New possibilities for QCD at nite density. Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl., 73:161166, 1999. doi: 10.1016/S0920-5632(99)85015-4. M. G. Alford, A. Schmitt, K. Rajagopal, and T. Sch afer. Color superconductivity in dense quark matter. Rev. Mod. Phys., 80:14551515, Nov 2008. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.80.1455. T. Birnstiel, C. P. Dullemond, and F. Brauer. Gas- and dust evolution in protoplanetary disks. Astron. Astrophys., 513:A79, 2010. W. F. Bottke, Jr., D. Vokrouhlick y, D. P. Rubincam, and D. Nesvorn y. The Yarkovsky and Yorp

34

Effects: Implications for Asteroid Dynamics. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 34:157191, May 2006. doi: 10.1146/annurev.earth.34.031405.125154. J. Bovy and S. Tremaine. On the Local Dark Matter Density. Ap. J., 756:89, 2012. doi: 10.1088/ 0004-637X/756/1/89. F. Brauer, C. P. Dullemond, and T. Henning. Coagulation, fragmentation and radial motion of solid particles in protoplanetary disks. Astron. Astropys., 480:859877, 2008. D. Clowe, M. Brada c, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones, and D. Zaritsky. A Direct Empirical Proof of the Existence of Dark Matter. Ap. J., 648:L109L113, Sept. 2006. doi: 10.1086/508162. P. DArrigo and S. Santandrea. The APIES microsatellite mission to explore the asteroid belt. In B. Warmbein, editor, Small Satellites, Systems and Services, volume 571 of ESA Special Publication, Nov. 2004. M. M. Forbes and A. R. Zhitnitsky. WMAP haze: Directly observing dark matter? Phys. Rev. D, 78:083505, 2008a. M. M. Forbes and A. R. Zhitnitsky. Diffuse x-rays: Directly observing dark matter? J. Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, page 023, 2008b. doi: doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2008/01/023. E. T. Herrin, D. C. Rosenbaum, and V. L. Teplitz. Seismic search for strange quark nuggets. Phys. Rev. D, 73(4):043511, Feb. 2006. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.73.043511. J. B. Kogut and M. A. Stephanov. The Phases of Quantum Chromodynamics. Cambridge Monographs on Particle Physics, Nuclear Physics and Cosmology. Cambridge University Press, Mar. 2004.
35

B. Laki c, M. Arik, S. Aune, K. Barth, A. Belov, S. Borghi, H. Br auninger, G. Cantatore, J. M. Carmona, S. A. Cetin, J. I. Collar, T. Dafni, M. Davenport, C. Eleftheriadis, N. Elias, C. Ezer, G. Fanourakis, E. Ferrer-Ribas, P. Friedrich, J. Gal an, J. A. Garc a, A. Gardikiotis, E. N. Gazis, T. Geralis, I. Giomataris, S. Gninenko, H. G omez, E. Gruber, T. Guth orl, R. Hartmann, F. Haug, M. D. Hasinoff, D. H. H. Hoffmann, F. J. Iguaz, I. G. Irastorza, J. Jacoby, K. Jakov ci c, M. Karuza, K. K onigsmann, R. Kotthaus, M. Kr cmar, M. Kuster, J. M. Laurent, A. Liolios, A. Ljubi ci c, V. Lozza, G. Lutz, G. Luz on, J. Morales, T. Niinikoski, A. Nordt, T. Papaevangelou, M. J. Pivovaroff, G. Raffelt, T. Rashba, H. Riege, A. Rodr guez, M. Rosu, J. Ruz, I. Savvidis, P. S. Silva, S. K. Solanki, L. Stewart, A. Tom as, M. Tsagri, K. van Bibber, T. Vafeiadis, J. Villar, J. K. Vogel, S. C. Yildiz, K. Zioutas, and Cast Collaboration. Status and perspectives of the CAST experiment. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 375(2):022001, July 2012. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/375/1/022001. K. Lawson and A. R. Zhitnitsky. Quark (Anti) Nugget Dark Matter. In Cosmic Frontier Workshop (CF3 and CF6 groups), SLAC 2013. Snowmass 2013 e-Proceedings, May 2013. MACRO Collaboration. Search for massive rare particles with MACRO. Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl., 110:186188, 2002. J. Madsen. Color-Flavor Locked Strangelets. Phys. Rev. Lett., 87:172003, Oct 2001. doi: 10. 1103/PhysRevLett.87.172003. J. Madsen. Strangelets, Nuclearites, Q-ballsA Brief Overview. Invited talk at Workshop on Exotic Physics with Neutrino Telescopes, 2006. K. Makide, K. Nagashima, A. N. Krot, G. R. Huss, I. D. Hutcheon, E. Hellebrand, and M. I. Petaev. Heterogeneous distribution of 26 Al at the birth of the Solar System: Evidence from
36

corundum-bearing refractory inclusions in carbonaceous chondrites. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 110:190215, June 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.gca.2013.01.028. M. Markevitch, A. H. Gonzalez, D. Clowe, A. Vikhlinin, W. Forman, C. Jones, S. Murray, and W. Tucker. Direct Constraints on the Dark Matter Self-Interaction Cross Section from the Merging Galaxy Cluster 1E 0657-56. Ap. J., 606:819824, 2004. K. D. McKeegan, M. Chaussidon, and F. Robert. Incorporation of Short-Lived 10 Be in a CalciumAluminum-Rich Inclusion from the Allende Meteorite. Science, 289:13341337, Aug. 2000. doi: 10.1126/science.289.5483.1334. C. Mordasini, H. Klahr, Y. Alibert, W. Benz, and K.-M. Dittkrist. Theory of planet formation. Proceedings Workshop Circumstellar disks and planets: Science cases for the second generation VLTI instrumentation, to appear in Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, ed. Sebastian Wolf, 2010. F. Moynier, J. Blichert-Toft, K. Wang, G. F. Herzog, and F. Albarede. The Elusive Solar Nebula. Ap. J., 741:71, Nov. 2011. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/71.
60

Fe in the

D. J. Scheeres, C. M. Hartzell, P. S anchez, and M. Swift. Scaling forces to asteroid surfaces: The role of cohesion. Icarus, 210:968984, Dec. 2010. doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2010.07.009. P. Scheeres, D. J.and S anchez. Evolution of Small, Rapidly Rotating Asteroids. In Lunar and Planetary Institute Science Conference Abstracts, volume 42 of Lunar and Planetary Inst. Technical Report, page 2307, Mar. 2011. H. Tang and N. Dauphas. Abundance, distribution, and origin of 60 Fe in the solar protoplanetary disk. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 359:248263, Dec. 2012. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2012. 10.011.
37

K. Thrane, J. N. Connelly, M. Bizzarro, B. S. Meyer, and L.-S. The. Origin of Excess 176 Hf in Meteorites. Ap. J., 717:861867, July 2010. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/717/2/861. D. Vokrouhlick y, A. Milani, and S. R. Chesley. Yarkovsky Effect on Small Near-Earth Asteroids: Mathematical Formulation and Examples. Icarus, 148:118138, Nov. 2000. doi: 10.1006/icar. 2000.6469. O. Wantz and E. P. S. Shellard. Axion cosmology revisited. Phys. Rev. D, 82:123508, Dec 2010. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.123508. S. J. Weidenschilling. Aerodynamics of solid bodies in the solar nebula. Mon. Not. R.A.S., 180: 5770, 1977. D. Wielandt, K. Nagashima, A. N. Krot, G. R. Huss, M. A. Ivanova, and M. Bizzarro. Evidence for Multiple Sources of 10 Be in the Early Solar System. Ap. J. Lett., 748:L25, Apr. 2012. doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/748/2/L25. E. Witten. Cosmic separation of phases. Phys. Rev. D, 30:272285, Jul 1984. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.30.272. A. Zhitnitsky. Dark matter as dense color superconductor. In Nuclear Physics B Proceedings Supplements, volume 124, pages 99102, July 2003a. doi: 10.1016/S0920-5632(03)02087-5. A. Zhitnitsky. Nonbaryonic dark matter as baryonic colour superconductor. J. Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 10:010, Oct. 2003b. doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2003/10/010.

38