🧊 DRAFT RESEARCH PROPOSAL · IceCube · COMPLEMENTARY SOUTHERN-SKY ANALYSIS

IceCube Neutrino Search for Technosignature Emission from Omega Centauri

A multi-year time-integrated and time-dependent point-source analysis using IceCube's 10-year public dataset as a complementary southern-sky probe, paired with ANTARES archival data — setting stringent independent limits on Hawking-like emission from Omega Centauri's IMBH candidate · Working draft for collaboration development · April 2026

1. Principal Investigator Statement

We propose a multi-year time-integrated and time-dependent neutrino point-source analysis centered on Omega Centauri (ω Cen, NGC 5139), using IceCube's 10-year accumulated exposure and the ANTARES complementary dataset, to set the most stringent independent limits to date on Hawking-like emission from this target.

This proposal is designed as a complementary analysis to the primary KM3NeT/ARCA program. IceCube's long baseline and existing public dataset allow immediate sensitivity estimates; KM3NeT/ARCA's superior geometry at δ ≈ −47° makes it the preferred long-term instrument. A combined analysis will improve sensitivity by approximately a factor of 2 over either instrument alone.

2. Scientific Rationale

2.1 Target and Current Constraints

Omega Centauri's key parameters as of April 2026:

ParameterValueSource
Distance5.49 ± 0.06 kpc (17,900 ly)Häberle et al. 2025, oMEGACat VI
IMBH lower bound (velocity)≥8,200 M☉Häberle et al. 2024, Nature
IMBH lower bound (acceleration, paper body §4)≥21,100 M☉ (99% CL)Häberle et al. 2024, Nature
N-body simulation best-fit~50,000 M☉ (±20,000)González Prieto et al. 2025
Competing model upper limit<6,000 M☉ (3σ)Bañares-Hernández et al. 2025
EM accretion signatureZero (radio + infrared)Mahida et al. 2025; Chen et al. 2025
⚠ Key scientific context: The IMBH lower bound from Häberle et al. and the upper limit from Bañares-Hernández et al. are formally contradictory. This proposal has scientific value under both scenarios: (1) if a single IMBH is confirmed, the search constrains possible ETI activity; (2) if the dark cluster model is confirmed, the search still constrains any high-energy emission from the cluster core regardless of origin.

2.2 IceCube's Role: Complementary, Not Primary

ARCA vs IceCube for ω Cen (δ = −47°):

KM3NeT/ARCA advantage: δ = −47° is nearly always upgoing at Capo Passero — strong Earth shielding, <0.1° angular resolution at ≥10 TeV, optimal sensitivity. ARCA is the primary recommended instrument for this target.

IceCube consideration: For IceCube at the South Pole, δ = −47° is ~43° from the zenith — a downgoing source. Atmospheric muon background is significantly higher than for upgoing events. IceCube's southern-sky point-source sensitivity at this declination is ~10⁻¹¹ TeV cm⁻² s⁻¹ for E⁻² spectra, comparable to ARCA but achieved with greater background contamination. The combined ANTARES+IceCube analysis (Albert et al. 2019, JCAP) improves this by ~2× in the relevant declination band.

IceCube's genuine advantage: 10+ years of accumulated public data available now, enabling immediate sensitivity estimates while KM3NeT/ARCA accumulates exposure.

2.3 Technosignature Framework

Dvali & Osmanov (2023, Int. J. Astrobiology 22, 617–640) propose that advanced civilisations may use quantum black holes as computational substrates. The associated Hawking-like emission would include high-energy neutrinos detectable by current instruments. This framework does not predict a specific flux; the proposal's scientific value lies in setting the first dedicated limits at current detector sensitivity.

3. Observation Strategy

3.1 Datasets

3.2 Event Selection

ParameterValue
Event typeTrack-like (μν), downgoing reconstruction (δ=−47° is ~43° from zenith at South Pole — downgoing; upgoing recommendation would apply to KM3NeT/ARCA, not IceCube)
Angular uncertainty<1° reconstructed
Energy range10 TeV – 10 PeV
Source mask0.5° radius centred on ω Cen (RA 13h 26m 47.24s, δ −47° 28′ 46.5″)
Southern-sky handlingStandard IceCube southern-sky selection with atmospheric muon veto; combined with ANTARES upgoing sample for background reduction

3.3 Statistical Framework

Following Braun et al. (2008) and Aartsen et al. (2020):

L(n_s, γ, σ_sys) = ∏_events [ n_s · S(δ, E | γ, σ_sys) + n_b · B(δ, E) ]

Background estimation: 15,000+ RA scrambles preserving LST distribution; declination band-matched (±5° around ω Cen).

Systematic uncertainties (nuisance parameters):

Spectral hypotheses: E⁻², E⁻²·⁵, E⁻³·⁰

3.4 Time-Dependent Burst Search

Identical methodology to the KM3NeT/ARCA proposal:

3.5 Combined ANTARES+IceCube Analysis

Following Albert et al. (2019, JCAP), a joint likelihood using both datasets improves sensitivity by approximately a factor of 2 in the δ ≈ −47° declination band. This is the most powerful IceCube-based constraint achievable with current public data.

4. Expected Outcomes

4.1 Sensitivity Estimate

Based on published IceCube southern-sky sensitivity (Aartsen et al. 2020):

4.2 Null Result Value

5. Work Plan

YearQuarterMilestoneDeliverable
1Q1Sample preparation, quality cuts, IRF validationData release note
1Q2–Q3ULMA implementation and validation against published resultsCode repository, internal test
1Q4Sensitivity estimation (IceCube alone)Internal memo with sensitivity curves
2Q1–Q2Time-integrated analysis at ω Cen90% CL upper limit
2Q3Burst search completionMulti-window results
2Q4ANTARES data access + combined analysis setupJoint limits framework
3Q1–Q2Combined ANTARES+IceCube analysis; Fermi-LAT cross-checkDraft technical paper
3Q3–Q4Coordination with KM3NeT/ARCA team for joint publicationSubmitted to ApJ

6. Budget Justification

ItemCost (USD)Justification
Graduate RA (3 years, 50% effort)180,000Primary analyst: point-source pipeline, burst search, ANTARES combination
HPC allocation (XSEDE/ACCESS)25,000Monte Carlo simulations, scrambling analyses
Travel15,000IceCube collaboration meetings, ICRC/APS conferences
Publication4,500Open-access ApJ APC
Total224,500

7. Team Qualifications

Requirements for PI/Co-I:

8. References

  1. Häberle, M., et al. (2024). Fast-moving stars in ω Cen. Nature, 631, 285. arXiv:2405.06015
  2. Häberle, M., et al. (2025). oMEGACat VI — kinematic distance 5,494 ± 61 pc. ApJ, 983, 95. arXiv:2503.04903
  3. González Prieto, A., et al. (2025). Growing the IMBH in ω Cen. ApJL, 990, L69. arXiv:2507.06316
  4. Bañares-Hernández, A., et al. (2025). New constraints — favours dark mass, <6,000 M☉ IMBH. A&A, 693, A104. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451763
  5. Dvali, G., & Osmanov, Z. (2023). Black holes as quantum computing substrates. Int. J. Astrobiology, 22, 617–640. doi:10.1017/S1473550423000186
  6. Aartsen, M. G., et al. (IceCube Collaboration) (2020). 10-year point-source sensitivity. Phys. Rev. Lett., 124, 051103. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.051103
  7. Braun, J., et al. (2008). IceCube point-source analysis methods. Astropart. Phys., 29, 130. doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2008.02.007
  8. Albert, A., et al. (ANTARES+IceCube) (2019). Combined southern-sky sensitivity. JCAP, 2019, 019. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/06/019
  9. KM3NeT Collaboration (2025). KM3-230213A, 120 PeV neutrino. Nature, 638, 376. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08543-1
  10. Mahida, A. D., et al. (2025). ATCA radio limits on ω Cen IMBH. ApJ, 996, 122. arXiv:2512.09649
  11. Babak, S., et al. (2017). LISA EMRI science. Phys. Rev. D, 95, 103012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.103012 — context for GW complementarity
This is a working draft research proposal produced by the Omega Centauri Society. IceCube is the complementary instrument for this target; KM3NeT/ARCA is the primary recommended instrument. Researchers with IceCube collaboration membership and data access agreements are encouraged to build on this document. The null hypothesis (gas-starved quiescent IMBH) is the most parsimonious explanation for OC's electromagnetic silence and should be the primary framing for any funding application.

Version: April 2026 · ← Return to omegacentauri.me · → See KM3NeT/ARCA proposal (primary)

Relevant tools

Neutrino SETI Sensitivity
IceCube, KM3NeT detection rates
BZ–Kardashev Power
Jet power from spinning IMBH
IMBH Constraint Stacker
Joint mass window from all methods
IMBH Evidence Dashboard
Live multi-constraint overview