- Email: [email protected]
Erratum to: “Primordial black holes and the observed Galactic 511 keV line” [Phys. Lett. B 670 (2008) 174–178]
Physics Letters B 681 (2009) 504
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Physics Letters B www.elsevier.com/locate/physletb
Erratum
Erratum to: “Primordial black holes and the observed Galactic 511 keV line” [Phys. Lett. B 670 (2008) 174–178] Cosimo Bambi ∗ , Alexander D. Dolgov, Alexey A. Petrov a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 15 October 2009 Available online 22 October 2009
We overestimated the total annihilation rate in the Galaxy almost by factor 2. Instead of the value 3 × 1043 s−1 , used in the Letter, the correct one is 1.6 × 1043 s−1 . Our error was based on the statement of Ref. [6] of our Letter where it is written that “the true annihilation rate is 3.6 times larger than would be deduced from the 0.511 MeV flux alone”. The corrected number of the annihilation rate results in shift down of the theoretical curves in Figs. 1 and 5 by factor 1.8–1.9. We thank Pierre Jean for indicating to this error.
*
DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.physletb.2008.10.057. Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Bambi).
0370-2693/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2009.10.053
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Physics Letters B www.elsevier.com/locate/physletb
Erratum
Erratum to: “Primordial black holes and the observed Galactic 511 keV line” [Phys. Lett. B 670 (2008) 174–178] Cosimo Bambi ∗ , Alexander D. Dolgov, Alexey A. Petrov a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 15 October 2009 Available online 22 October 2009
We overestimated the total annihilation rate in the Galaxy almost by factor 2. Instead of the value 3 × 1043 s−1 , used in the Letter, the correct one is 1.6 × 1043 s−1 . Our error was based on the statement of Ref. [6] of our Letter where it is written that “the true annihilation rate is 3.6 times larger than would be deduced from the 0.511 MeV flux alone”. The corrected number of the annihilation rate results in shift down of the theoretical curves in Figs. 1 and 5 by factor 1.8–1.9. We thank Pierre Jean for indicating to this error.
*
DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.physletb.2008.10.057. Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Bambi).
0370-2693/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2009.10.053