 Okay, let's start. So hello everybody. I'm Nicolás Bernal from the University of Universidad Antonio Nariño in Bogotá, Colombia. And it's a pleasure to have you, all of you guys here today with Oscar Macias from Virginia Tech University. Oscar will tell us about all that we always want to know about the GV Galactic excess. So I think Oscar, you can get started. Okay, excellent. Okay, thanks, Nicolás, for the introduction and it's wonderful to be with you guys in this opportunity. So let me share my screen. So can you guys see my slides? Yes, it's working. Okay, perfect. Okay, so let's start. Okay, so at the beginning of the 1900s, Lord Kelvin tried to see maybe the amount of dark matter in the Milky Way by describing the stars of our galaxy as gas particles. And in repuncture was very impressed with Lord Kelvin's idea and commenting for a friend's journal, he apparently coined for the first time the term dark matter. So back in those days, dark matter refer merely to some sort of astrophysical material that happened to be too faint to be observed with our instruments. However, nowadays, there is a wealth of gravitational information that indicates that that matter cannot be composed of the kind of matter we are made of. So there are many dark matter candidates that have been proposed over the last few decades, and perhaps the best motivated ones are these are called wind particles. So wind stands for weekly interacting massive particles. And these particles arise naturally in modes that seek to extend the standard model of particle physics. And they possess the correct relative density to explain the amount of dark matter we see today. So if these particles, if the wind particles have masses of about a few Jeeves, then they could potentially self annihilate and produce gamma ray signals that could be detected with the Fermilat telescope. So the Fermilat telescope is a space based gamma ray telescope that scans the whole sky every three hours. It does so in the energy range between 20 mega electron volts and 500 Jeeves. And it has a spatial resolution that increases with energy. So the highest intensity of dark matter is expected to be at the galactic center. But this is also a place where the uncertainties are highest. There are other places where one can look for dark matter, like Dorsferoidals, galaxy clusters, and even the extragalactic gamma ray background. And in general, one needs to make a compromise between large statistics and background uncertainties. So during this talk, as Nicolas Chau commented, we'll be mainly referring to the galactic center. Okay. So this is an optical image of the plane of our galaxy. And the galactic center is here, close to the Sagittarius constellation. So this region was first identified in 1951 by astronomers Pineton and Minnet. And essentially, this region was identified through a score of the Sagittarius A source. So throughout the study of the unique radio signals of the source and because of its precise concerns with the rotating hydrogen disk because of its precise concerns of the source with the nickel center of the rotating hydrogen disk, this region was identified. So later in 1974, astronomers Balik and Brown discovered the unresolved source Sagittarius A star, which we now know coincides with the supermassive black hole in our galaxy. Okay. So observations with the Fermilat of the galactic center have uncovered a gamma ray excess that peaks at about one to three degrees and that whose maximum intensity coincides with the dynamical center of our galaxy from where it falls off as a real power law with a slope of 2.4. So given these spectral and morphological characteristics, the galactic center excess can be explained with a dark matter model governed by another reference white profile. So the wind particles that feed the excess have typical masses of about 10 to 100 GBs, but there are some other astrophysical explanations that people have put forward. The galactic center excess was first claimed by Gwyneth and Cooper in 2009. And since then many research teams have essentially confirmed their original claim. And in fact, the Fermilat collaboration recently, almost one year ago, confirmed the existence of the excess. And there is essentially an overall consensus that the properties of the galactic center excess depend on the modeling of the galactic diffuse emission. So this is a gamma ray image of the whole sky. And to our purposes, the main components making up the gamma ray sky are the gamma ray pon sources and the galactic diffuse emission. So these gamma ray pon sources are compact objects that cannot be resolved by the Fermi instrument. These are objects like AGMs, pool stars and supernova remnants and anours. And the galactic diffuse emission is essentially the gamma rays produced by our own galaxy. And we have here the tentative dark matter emission that we want to find out from the sea of photons. So importantly, the galactic diffuse emission is expected to have an intensity which is at least two orders of magnitude higher than the best, the most optimistic estimates for dark matter emission. So we anticipate that disentangling a dark matter signal from the galactic center involves having a very deep knowledge of the galactic diffuse emission in our galaxy. So the galactic diffuse emission is produced by the interaction of cosmic ray particles with interstellar gas and interstellar radiation fields. And so when high energy protons interact with gas, they produce neutral pions, which almost immediately decay into gamma rays. Similarly, high energy electrons and positrons upscatter ambient photons into high energies in a process that we call inverse camton. And designing electrons and positrons accelerating into the Coulomb field of interstellar gas produce brainstorming emission. So these are the three main components making up the galactic diffuse emission. So there are two methods that people have used to model the galactic diffuse emission in our galaxy. And the first one, which I shall call the empirical approach corresponds to the realization that the cosmic ray particles uniformly penetrate all the gas phases in our galaxy. And what that means is that the gamma rays coming from every direction can be modeled as a superposition of empirical templates. So namely, gas column density templates at template describing the inverse camton emission and so on isotropic and isotropic template and so on, which I will describe a bit later. The second approach is the parametric approach. And these corresponds to the solution of the diffusion equation for cosmic ray particles, the advantage. So people use numerical codes like Galprop, it's probably the Gordon rule to solve this problem. And the advantage of this method is that it produces physically motivated solutions, but unfortunately is much harder to account for the systematic uncertainties with this parametric approach. So because the empirical method provides a much robust way to account for the systematic uncertainties, we choose this method in our analysis. I should also mention that this is the method that the Fermilat collaboration uses in the construction of the official galactic diffuse emission model published by the Fermilat team. So more specifically in our analysis, we use gamma rate data taken from the inner 15 degrees by 15 degrees region of the galactic center. We use almost 10 years of Fermilat data. And in our empirical approach, we assume that the data is made of a linear combination of Gaussian density templates, of an inverse quantum template as predicted by Galprop, a loop one template. So this is a large scale structure seen in gamma rays and a template accounting for the Fermi bars. So these are some giant lobes that extend up to 7 kiloparsecs away from the galactic plane into both northern and southern hemispheres. And of course, we also account for the gamma-ray consortium. There are some more templates that we include in our analysis and but I'm showing probably the main ones. Okay, so the gas correlated photons are more with a combination of gas column density templates. So in order for us to account for the galactocentric cosmic-ray gradient, so the galactocentric gradient of cosmic-ray flux, we divide the gas maps in different annually. So at every annulus, we assume that the cosmic-ray properties are constant. We then include these gas templates into our maximum likelihood analysis and the normalization that we get from these likelihood analysis represents the gamma-ray intensity. So there is freedom in how many annually we want to use and we have found that dividing the gas maps in four different annually is optimal. Okay, so about 90% of the baryonic mass of our galaxy is in the form of atomic hydrogen and molecular hydrogen. Here in this cartoon representation, the pink represents the atomic hydrogen and these are the molecular clouds of molecular hydrogen. So we can trace the atomic hydrogen with its 21 centimeters line of mission but since the molecular hydrogen doesn't have permanent dipole, we cannot reliably trace it directly. So instead, we use observation that molecular hydrogen is well mixed with carbon monoxide and we can use the 2.6 millimeter emission of carbon monoxide to infer the distribution of gas particles in our galaxy. So in order for us to construct these gas rings or these gas annually, we need to know one, the distance at which a certain gas cloud is and two, the mass of that gas cloud. So from astronomical surveys, we can know the gas cloud velocity and we can also know the gas cloud temperature. So the gas cloud velocity can be learned by the Doppler shift of the relevant long emission and then we can, we assume, so people usually assume that the gas clouds follow a circular orbit around the galactic center and then we can establish a simple relation between the line of side velocity of the gas clouds and the distance to the galactic center. So remember that this velocity can be obtained with this Doppler shift. So we can obtain the distance to the gas cloud and by solving the relative transfer equation, we can obtain a relationship between the gas column density or the mass of the gas cloud and the temperature. So we assume a certain spin temperature for the gas cloud and we can obtain the mass or the gas column density for the gas clouds. Okay, so it is now well established that our galaxy is a bar galaxy. So there is a bar of stars in the galactic center and the gravitational potential of these bar of stars induces highly non-circular motions towards the galactic center. So definitely the assumption of circular velocity for the gas clouds in our galaxy is incorrect in the inner region of our galaxy. So to solve this problem, the Fermilat collaboration have used an interpolation method and so in this interpolation approach what they do is they calculate the average gas close to the galactic center and so in the boundaries of the galactic center and then they interpolate the gas across the boundaries. Then what they do is they renormalize the amount of gas towards this direction so that the total amount of gas is preserved in the galaxy. So to absorb my knowledge, all previous works doing analysis of the galactic center have used these interpolation methods to obtain the amount of gas in the galactic center and but there is a totally different method. This was pioneered by one of my collaborators, Martin Paul and this method uses hydrodynamical simulations to gain kinematical resolutions in the galactic center. So this method introduces a probabilistic convolution method to assign gas cloud distances by gas flow simulations and these simulations assume a certain gravitational potential for the spiral arms and they also account for the galactic bar in our galaxy. So as we can see here there is kinematical resolution towards the galactic center. So what we are showing here is so we use the two methods we use the interpolated approach and we use also the hydrodynamical approach to consider the gas maps in the different annually and what's interesting to see is that there are differences between the two approaches for almost every annulus and so then what we do in our analysis is that we include the two different methods so the two different gas maps. So we use the hydrodynamical gas maps we also use interpolated gas maps and we find that so we find so we run our maximum likelihood analysis and we find that the hydrodynamic gas maps are preferred almost every energy being. In fact we find that the hydrodynamic gas maps are preferred with that so improve the feed in activity five sigma. So then so we now have the so we now know that the hydrodynamic gas maps describe the galactic diffuse emission much better and then we start looking for additional emission. So first we start looking for residual point-like emission and so what we do is we divide our region of interest these are 15 by 15 degrees region of interest around the galactic center and we divide this region in a grid of 0.1 degrees squares and at every pixel we place a putative point source with some general properties then we run the maximum likelihood analysis with and without the source and for every pixel we assign a TS value so a test statistics value. So this TS value is simply the difference between the local likelihood of the source and without the source and essentially the square root of this value gives the significant detection of a point source in a certain pixel. In this sense if we find a pixel with a TS of 25 so a square root of 25 is 5 so that will be five sigma significance detection for a point source in that game pixel. So with this technique we find 43 new point sources in the galactic center so these 43 new point sources are the green crosses and the white crosses are the known gamma ray sources discord by the Fermilat collaboration in the region. So we also did some multi-web length analysis to look for counter parts of the new point sources we found in the galactic center and we found that for seven of them there are multi-web length counterparts so we find that most of them correspond to a global clusters there is a couple of pool source and there is only one super north element. So this doesn't mean that for the remaining 36 gamma ray point sources that the remaining 36 point sources are not real since most of the gamma ray sources discord by the Fermilat collaboration in this region are actually unassociated sources as well. Okay so there is another interesting feature of this residual TS map and is that there is some indication for some extended residual emission in the galactic center and what one will expect if we were seeing that matter is that this residual emission was asferically distributed around the galactic center but in fact we find this innocent shape which resembles something like an X so I'll come back to this point a week later in the talk. So our galaxy is a spiral galaxy and about a third of all the galaxies in the universe when seen etch on present a bulge morphology that resembles a box and so these the bulge of these spiral galaxies are called the so this is called the boxy or peanut morphology and so more people also call this the X shape morphology of the spiral of the galactic bulge in spiral galaxies. So in fact astronomer Nathan Lank did analysis with the wise data and so the wise telescope looks the sky looks at the sky in the infrared wavelength and they uncover a next shape in our galaxy. So these X shapes are well understood and people portalital have run n-body simulations of stars and they have shown that dynamical instabilities in the galactic bar send stars of the galactic bar into orbits that contribute to this over density in the infrared. So these are stable orbits of stars and in fact they have estimated that the amount of mass in stars contributing to this X in our galaxy corresponds to our 45 percent of the total mass of our galactic bulge. There is another interesting population of stars in the galactic center. This is in the this is the so-called nuclear bulge stars. These are measured by this water telescope and they leap in the inner two hundred and thirty percent of our galaxy. Here interestingly the the reason going is transformation while in the X corresponds to some of the oldest stars in our galaxy. Okay so then in our analysis what we did was we included the gas maps, the aeronomic gas maps. We also included the new point sources that we found in our analysis and then we run our maximum likelihood analysis. Then what we are showing here is the full data minus the best fit or best fit model accounting for the new point sources and for the dynamical gas maps. And what we are left with is with the residual gamma ray emission in the galactic center. So the residual and so on top of this residual emission shown in red we plot the contour plots. So we chose some contours from the infrared image discovered by Nez and Lang. And we also plot the contours of these star populations in the nuclear bulge. And so we find a striking correlation between the gamma ray residuals and the X shape. So then we normalize this X, this infrared X shape and include that into our maximum likelihood analysis and compute the gamma ray flux spectrum. So this is simply the distribution of photons as a function of energy in our galaxy, in the center of our galaxy. The red boxes show the spectrum for the X shape and the black boxes show the spectrum, the total spectrum for the 43 new point sources we find in our galaxy. So the assume of these two components makes up these green boxes. And we find that up to systematic uncertainties, the superposition of these two new components agree almost perfectly well with the galactic center excess as shown in previous works. Okay so then what we do is we show here the spectrum of all the components we include in our in our analysis. And what's interesting to take from here is that once we account for the this X shape there are no residuals left in the galactic center. So this X shape really corrects the so accounts for the galactic center excess. Okay so what we are showing here is now we are looking for the for the aliens for the matter in the galactic center. In this top panel we show that when we use the interpolated gas maps and we do not account for the new X component in the galaxy we essentially reproduce the previously known galactic center excess spectrum. And here we show the TS distribution and we show that we agree with previous works in that the galactic center excess peaks at about one to three gs. Okay so now we repeat sorry now we repeat the same analysis by taking into account the hydromic gas maps and we also include the X balls and the nuclear balls stars and we find that the as the remaining spectrum for the for the dark matter is basically destroyed and this shows that the same thing happens for the TS distribution. So the TS distribution is basically destroyed and if we convert this TS distribution to a significant detection we find that there is essentially a one sigma only one sigma significant detection for dark matter in the galactic center. Okay so what so what happens now is that the stars that are contributing to the X are some of the oldest stars and neutron stars or meaning second pulsars are rapidly are rapidly rotating neutron stars that are more likely to live in places where there are high densities of stars and where there are all populations of stars. So this X shape so we expect that this X shape so we expect that there should be an unresolved population of many second pulsars in this X and also in this nuclear balls as the as in the nuclear balls that are there is a mixture between all the stars and there is also a star formation activity so there should be also many second pulsars in the region and so we believe that this is this is showing evidence for the existence of unresolved population of many second pulsars there. So we also find that the overall spectrum for the X shape in our galaxy is consistent with the average spectrum of many second pulsars known in our galaxy so the average spectrum of the resolved new second pulsars is scored by the Fermilat team and here we make we make some back of the envelope calculations for the luminosity to mass ratio of the of the military computer population so using the luminosity function from winter at all we find that this is the luminosity for the total means a computer population of our galaxy and this is the luminosity from a global cluster called 47 took which is many second pulsars dominated and we find that the luminosity we infer from the X is consistent it's consistently between these two luminosities so that's some sort of indication for for what we are seeing okay so for those of you who are interested in looking into more detail of our analysis I will refer you guys to this archive this is the list of my collaborators and I want to pass now to the conclusions so we have shown that the galactic center excess is not as very closely distributed and so that matter is no longer favored at the galactic center we have also shown that the hydrodynamic hydrodynamic gas maps are a much better description for the galactic center and we also indicate so we also show that there is a new evidence for our non-resolved population opening second pulsars at the galactic center okay so that's all guys and thank you very much for your attention thank you very much Oscar for this super interesting talk so first I want to remember that you guys can ask questions via the q&a system of youtube and also via twitter using the hashtag latin american webinars on physics la w physics so do you have questions now for Oscar from the audience if you have a question can I yes please go okay well Oscar very nice talk I'm very amazing okay thanks very impressive I have a question regarding the well this is a composer interpretation well almost I think all the pulsars they have a kind of and I don't think there is any music composer with the production of a mission about 10 gps at the introspection well you can take some mission about uh I don't know five gps or something like that that's hard to reproduce with no one it's a composer it's it's impossible that there is some kind of different issue right so yeah so so let me okay so let me let me try to okay okay so this is a pretty known spectrum and so definitely definitely this spectrum can be fit we are that matter more but uh it it has been shown that uh the average spectrum of the millisecond pulsars can also easily account for this spectrum so so what happens is that this spectrum peaks at three gps and it definitely and it rapidly falls off and there is actually a cutoff at close to 10 gps so that that's something and so and so now as we have more data we have been able to resolve points also to do higher energies but so in principle millisecond pulsars are the millisecond hypothesis is completely built for the electric center however I agree that means the components are are not is not the only hypothesis to resolve this issue so we can see so this is the point that I wanted to make so so definitely so what happens here is that the systematic uncertainties of these axis emission uh so so these error bars are very large and so a typical uh millisecond pulsars spectrum can still fit the success so in fact we find this is the best fit uh spectrum for the uh millisecond pulsars and these are between two sigma uh of the best feed values of the average of the non-millisecond pulsars in the galactic sorry of the non-millisecond pulsars in global clusters and in the field so okay so so milliseconds are still a valid explanation and perhaps the best motivated one and but there are but this is not the only hypothesis so one cool thing that perhaps uh so as in this x shape there are some alt stars one cool thing that's something like a star bores so uh bores of so magnetic pulses in the in these uh in this x shape can accelerate electrons or so cosmic rays and produce some extended gamma ray emission in this in this region so so definitely uh millisecond pulsars is the best motivated solution but uh there are some other alternatives and possible alternatives definitely okay okay her man seems to be left uh okay i can see a couple of questions from san tanu from the qna so this person is asking uh so did he hear did i hear you correctly that the number of neutrons star is correlated with a dark matter density so so no so so no so the so no so so what he wanted to say was that uh the these uh so so essentially these galactic center excels what he wanted to say was that the galactic center excels is correlated with these infrared contour uh counter plots so and so what that means is that the uh galactic center is not as vertically distributed and that basically disfabors the dark matter explanation so hopefully that answers the question so definitely so yeah so definitely so so yeah so perhaps the question goes into the uh so previously people sorry so and so previously the so with the interpolated gas maps people found that the uh excess emission was a spherical symmetric and so uh and so an unresolved population of millisecond pulsars which is a spherically distributed cool account for the excess or also uh of course a dark matter because that matter is expected to be as a spherically symmetric but uh now with our new uh gas maps with your hierodynamic gas maps we are able to to show that the uh galactic center excels is not as spherically distributed as one will expect for uh dark matter that is actually actually follows that x shape so in the sense that that x shape consigns with that x shape seen on the infrared and the infrared is produced by all the stars but some all some of the oldest stars in our galaxy then uh those all the stars are good tracers for millisecond pulsars so while the dark matter hypothesis is disfabored the millisecond pulsar alternative is actually is actually now much more robust it's actually it's actually much better motivated i meant to say okay there are a couple of comments on the same on the same line uh first one again from uh shantan so this person is saying that uh the reason i ask is that a few years back joseph brahmante had a paper arguing that the density of dark matter is anti-correlated with the density of neutron stars since dark matter accretion on neutron stars changes them to black holes okay i think okay so okay yes unfortunately i'm not aware of that of that work so yes so okay so okay so probably yes so probably uh i'm not able to answer properly that question yes okay and there's a second comment this time coming from pedro so he said that i think that dark matter is not correlated with the excess but the neutron stars are the nfw profile should have at least a modest correlation with the centred bulge hopefully the speaker can answer okay so okay so yeah so uh let me go to the i hope i understand the question but so so so the whole point so the whole point of all paper is that definitely the gamma access is correlated with the infrared emission so it's not as frankly distributed as pre-works uh so i see no reason why dark matter should have this x shape so i so i do not i do not understand why dark matter will have this x shape however as in this x there are all the stars and means the computers that live with all all the stars then the means a computer hypothesis is much more likely uh but definitely definitely i see no reason why dark matter should be correlated with this x i'm not sure if i answered the correct the question but uh that's the whole point i wanted to make i yeah i hope i i was able to successfully answer pedros question i think so i see another question this time come from professor palo marido ruiz so he's asking oh he said that you're considering for sigma significance to select the sources but it seems that this is without taking into account the look elsewhere effect i will expect this to reduce the significance in a non-obligatory way is that right okay so okay let me uh go back to my uh analysis let me go back to that okay so in fact uh we have using so yeah so so i probably i probably the impression that we were using only this for sigma significant detection for point sources but in fact we are also using a much more strict uh uh requirement for these point sources so we use our t s value uh that is uh background dependent and so and so what uh and so essentially the point sources that are more likely to reveal in the galactic center according to a Fermilat collaboration are point sources that uh according to the number of photons in our field of view uh so so the ps should be larger than 90 uh so that so that means that um uh the significant detection for a real point source in our analysis is is more is is definitely much larger so we anyway uh show here use only a for sigma significant detection to look for the so to show uh the uh point sources candidates so these these are likely so these are interesting point sources to look for multi-web length counterparts but definitely the ones where we are pointing our finger that they are more likely to be real are the ones that have a t s larger than 90 so we are definitely not using only this t s authentified but we are actually uh placing a much larger constraint for the more likely sources so the sources that are found with the for sigma significance are interesting point sources but they could be real or not so they could be some features of the of the galactic background for instance okay so thanks yes so are there more questions for the audience uh well i have one so at the very beginning you show uh the the background used by Fermi and one of these was called like loop one or loop a i'm not true can you please go back to that slide okay let me go back to the exact one so what's this loop one template yeah so yeah so so unfortunately there is no consensus of what loop one is and uh so wallowine et al so wallowine has a mall in which he thinks so he proposes that loop one is just some local is a couple of supernova remnants that are close to our solar system and just because they are so close to our position then they look like extended sources that go even up to the position of the birgo cluster that's uh to have some unknowledge probably the best mall for that but that's a still not so that's an open question that's probably the best material but that's a still an open question so people don't know exactly what loop one is but definitely people have seen this excess in the gamma rays and yeah i see so this template comes just from measurements so this template yes so this template so the plane the template we are using here is the geometric template proposed by wallowine and so um so this guy used radio measurements to create his mall and then he data fit to his radio measurements and we are using that geometrical mall to account for this structure in in the galactic center so this is not a data driven so yeah this is not a data driven gamma ray template in the galactic center this is more a model that has been shown to explain well this structure at our wavelength nice thanks right so are there more questions yeah i have a couple if i can ask them so what one question that i have is about when when you are saying that there is no i mean there is no necessity of that matter because of the data indicate that i mean you don't need to include it because you have a already a good fit with your uh backgrounds and so on so how is this compared to this necessity of or not this necessity of matter with the analysis of dwarf galaxies in which at what time the the dwarf galaxy analysis gonna completely rule out the this this slightly indication of that matter right yeah so that's something that i is still i see working on so i'm trying to account what are the dark matter constraints from uh this analysis so definitely we're finding only one sigma significant detection for that matter and we expect to have strong constraints from dark matter but compared to the dwarfs feroidal galaxies i would so i so i suspect we are going to get competitive constraints but definitely dwarfs feroidal galaxies are going to provide much more um some so stronger constraints for dark matter models so yes so definitely dwarfs feroidals with the 45 something like 45 dwarfs feroidals that are known up to now and uh uh doing the forecasting to almost 15 years of Fermilab data one can definitely yeah so those upper limits found from dwarfs feroidals are going to be much stronger than than these galaxies and uh uh upper limits but definitely definitely a one sigma significant detection in astrophysics is basically a null detection is essentially a null detection is not even an interesting uh is not even an interesting significance to look for that matter and then what we need to do is uh just put constraints on dark matter models thank you and another question is there is a different analysis for the case of decaying that matter in the galactic center or in the surrounding because the profile right yeah so perhaps yeah so perhaps uh Hermann Gomes Vargas is uh so he's very knowledgeable all that he's an expert on that so uh so what happens at the galactic center is that the NFW so the density uh so the expected flux in the galactic center uh so it's proportional to a square of the arc matter density instead for the kinder matter you have only linear density and so and so the galactic center is not the best place to look for the kinder matter so instead people look at higher latitudes where the expected decay that matter signals are a lot larger compared to the to the background so certainly the galactic center is not a good place or the galactic center is not a good place to look to place constraints in the uh for the kinder matter perhaps the inner galaxy or higher latitude of or analysis at higher latitudes definitely the galactic center is best for self annihilating that matter okay thank you okay and the last one just to to to to to make a circle in this stuff the uh what in in this analysis you are considering just the kind of this benchmark dark matter annihilation channels no i mean the sense there is no exotic annihilation processes right yeah so right yeah so so this analysis is completely more independent so what we are doing is we are only assuming uh in analysis we only assumed uh certain uh the matter distribution so we use an fw profile with a slope of 1.2 and this mood uh nfw with a slope of one so we use those two uh dark matter profiles and then for the spectrum we use a general spectrum so so essentially the spectrum at every uh beam so because we are doing a beam by beam analysis uh so we are running the maximum likelihood analysis at every different beam and so in that sense the constraints or the spectrum that we get for dark matter is more independent so uh the idea is that uh if you have a positive detection of dark matter with this technique you can then fit your dark matter more to the uh to the to the access emission but in case of a new detection as is our case then we can essentially place upper limits flux upper limits at every energy beam and then place constraints on a certain dark matter candidate so this is for so this is valid for every for a for a general dark matter model and we can use this data to place constraints on yeah um uh every other control also we can make assumptions of uh the uh emission mechanisms and so forth so in in in in some way this if there are television watching the this webinar and they want to test their model they have just two focus and sometimes in the in the plot in the lower left no that's correct yes so that's correct so so so in our paper we are not yet showing the upper limits so because these are actual so what we are planning to show here so but the intention to to show here is that the galactic center excelsis basically destroyed but so the flux upper limits are not included in our paper but someone interested can contact me and i can send these upper limits i'm planning to have a follow-up publication where i'm going to show the upper limits for that but yeah that's all the point i i didn't include the flux upper limits so this plot is merely to illustrative purposes so it shows that the galactic center excelsis destroyed once we account for these new components the x balls nuclear balls and the hydronomical gas maps right so still from this data we cannot place constraints because these are measurements are not upper limits we cannot place constraints on dark matter models so i will need to provide that data to be interested in this in this task okay thank you sure excellent okay okay i have another question so you say that this hypothesis of circular motion is not so in class i i not hearing you now can you hear me now guys thanks yes yes okay so at some point you say that we'll recommend that the circular motion is not a good hypothesis in the innermost part of the of the galaxy so when you say like the center is it's what what i mean how many kilometers okay so so okay so what happens so what happens is that the this galactic bar so it's well established that our galaxy possess this galactic bar of stars and so the gravitational potential of these stars induce highly non-circular motion of gas in this region so so essentially essentially the gas in this region is moving in yeah so it's not moving in circular motion in this in this in this region and and then to have kinematical resolution towards the region we need to perform hydronomical simulations definitely okay see but what's the size of this galactic bar oh yeah so so so this is so this is 20 degrees across if i'm correct so this is something like 20 degrees in in longitude uh okay so from our location because you can see out in our location from our location this galactic bar is inclined so we are more or less here and so approximately speaking this is minus so this is 10 degrees in longitude and this is minus 10 degrees in longitude as well so so from our location that's 20 degrees across the sky across the sky from our position because you can see that yeah the galactic bar is inclined from our position okay you see sure thanks so are there more questions maybe last one so i don't think that's the case so let's thank oscar oscar again for the super talk and i want to remind you guys that in two weeks from now so it's uh the 15th i think i will have another webinar now this time by um i forgot okay about actions and the magma experiment by Javier redondo sorry and okay so thanks a lot guys in particular to you uh oscar okay thanks for the class that's right see you around yes thanks a lot thank you guys