Hard probes of hot, dense matter at RHIC
description
Transcript of Hard probes of hot, dense matter at RHIC
Hard probes of hot, dense matter at RHIC
Report from PHENIX
2
outline
Introduction to PHENIX & our physics approachTalk covers only a subset of PHENIX results!
Elliptic flow: magnitude and flavor dependence of v2
Jets in pp, dAu and AuAuSuppression and non-suppressionpT distribution of partonsa closer look at Au+Au
Baryons and jet fragmentation Heavy quark production
3
did something new happen at RHIC?
Study collision dynamics (via final state)
Probe the early (hot) phase
Equilibrium?hadron spectra, yields
Collective behaviori.e. pressure and expansion?elliptic, radial flow
vacuum
QGP
Particles created early, predictable quantity, interact differently in QGP vs. hadron matterfast quarks/gluons, J/fast quarks/gluons, J/, D mesons, D mesonsthermal radiation
4
s = 200 GeV, hard probesstart with pQCD & pp collisions
p-p hep-ex/0304038
Good agreementwith NLO pQCD
Works!
A handle on initial NN interactions by scattering of q, g inside N
We also need:2
/( , )
a Nf x Q
2
/( , )ch a
D z Q
Parton distribution functions
Fragmentation functions
0
5
In A+A: QCD in non-perturbative regime
T/Tc
Karsch, Laermann, Peikert ‘99
/T4
we look for physics beyond simple superposition of NN:
EquilibrationCollective effectsEnergy, color transport in dense mediumDeconfinement?
Physics is soft!
EOS
Lattice…
Tc ~ 170 ± 10 MeV (1012 °K)
~ 3 GeV/fm3Lattice QCD says:Create these conditions to look for new physics
6
PHENIX at RHIC
2 Central spectrometers
2 Forward spectrometers
3 Global detectors
7
USA Abilene Christian University, Abilene, TX Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY University of California - Riverside, Riverside, CA University of Colorado, Boulder, CO Columbia University, Nevis Laboratories, Irvington, NY Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, IL Iowa State University and Ames Laboratory, Ames, IA Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM Dept. of Chemistry, Stony Brook Univ., Stony Brook, NY Dept. Phys. and Astronomy, Stony Brook Univ., Stony Brook, NY Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN
Brazil University of São Paulo, São PauloChina Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing Peking University, BeijingFrance LPC, University de Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand Dapnia, CEA Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette IPN-Orsay, Universite Paris Sud, CNRS-IN2P3, Orsay LLR, Ecòle Polytechnique, CNRS-IN2P3, Palaiseau SUBATECH, Ecòle des Mines at Nantes, NantesGermany University of Münster, MünsterHungary Central Research Institute for Physics (KFKI), Budapest Debrecen University, Debrecen Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE), Budapest India Banaras Hindu University, Banaras Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, BombayIsrael Weizmann Institute, RehovotJapan Center for Nuclear Study, University of Tokyo, Tokyo Hiroshima University, Higashi-Hiroshima KEK, Institute for High Energy Physics, Tsukuba Kyoto University, Kyoto Nagasaki Institute of Applied Science, Nagasaki RIKEN, Institute for Physical and Chemical Research, Wako RIKEN-BNL Research Center, Upton, NY University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba Waseda University, Tokyo S. Korea Cyclotron Application Laboratory, KAERI, Seoul Kangnung National University, Kangnung Korea University, Seoul Myong Ji University, Yongin City System Electronics Laboratory, Seoul Nat. University, Seoul Yonsei University, SeoulRussia Institute of High Energy Physics, Protovino Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna Kurchatov Institute, Moscow PNPI, St. Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, St. Petersburg St. Petersburg State Technical University, St. PetersburgSweden Lund University, Lund
12 Countries; 57 Institutions; 460 Participants
8
Is the energy density high enough?PRL87, 052301 (2001)
R2
2c
Colliding system expands:
dy
dE
cRT
Bj 22
11
02
Energy tobeam direction
per unitvelocity || to beam
5.5 GeV/fm3 (200 GeV Au+Au)
well above predicted transition!
9
pQCD in Au+Au? direct photons
[w/ the real suppression]
( pQCD x Ncoll) / background Vogelsang/CTEQ6
[if there were no suppression]
( pQCD x Ncoll) / ( background x Ncoll)
Au+Au 200 GeV/A: 10% most central collisions
[]measured / []background = measured/background
Preliminary
At high pT, it also works!
TOT
pT (GeV/c)
10
Pressure? “elliptic flow” barometer
Origin: spatial anisotropy of the system when created, followed by multiple scattering of particles in the evolving system spatial anisotropy momentum anisotropy
v2: 2nd harmonic Fourier coefficient in azimuthal distribution of particles with respect to the reaction plane
Almond shape overlap region in coordinate space
y2 x2 y2 x2
2cos2 vx
y
p
patan
11
PHENIX measures v2 two ways:
2 particle correlationsGets tricky at high pT,
jets can contribute
Determine reaction plane at y = 3-4From BBC, with full
azimuthal symmetryMeasure hadrons in
central arms, sort vs. reaction plane
No jet effects upon found reaction plane
min bias 200 GeV Au+ Au
12
Implication #1 of fast equilibration & large v2Huge cross sections!!
13
Implication #2 (from flavor dependence)nucl-ex/0305013
above p forpT < 2 GeV/c.Then crosses over
Values ~ saturateat high pT
geometry?
v2/quark seemsalmost constant create hadronsby coalescence of quarks from boosted distribution?
14
a unique probe for physics of hot medium
hadrons
q
q
hadronsleadingparticle
leading particle
schematic view of jet productionProbe: Jets from hard scattered quarks
Observed via fast leading particles orazimuthal correlations between the leadingparticles
But, before they create jets, the scattered quarks radiate energy (~ GeV/fm) in the colored medium
decreases their momentum (fewer high pT particles)“kills” jet partner on other side “jet quenching”
15
Nuclear Modification of Leading Part. Spectra?
ddpdT
ddpNdpR
TNN
AA
TAA
TAA /
/)(
2
2
<Nbinary>/inelp+p
nucleon-nucleon cross section
1. Compare Au+Au to nucleon-nucleon cross sections2. Compare Au+Au central/peripheral
Nuclear Modification Factor:
If no “effects”: RAA < 1 in regime of soft physics RAA = 1 at high-pT where hard scattering dominates Suppression: RAA < 1 at high-pT
AA
AA
AA
16
pp
AuAubinaryAuAuAA Yield
NYieldR
/
2/pp
AuAupartAuAupartAA Yield
NYieldR
/
Au-Au s = 200 GeV: high pT suppression!
PRL91, 072301(2003)
17
Suppression: a final state effect?
Hadronic absorption of fragments: Gallmeister, et al. PRC67,044905(2003)Fragments formed inside hadronic medium
Energy loss of partons in dense matterGyulassy, Wang, Vitev, Baier, Wiedemann…
PCM & clust. hadronization
NFD
NFD & hadronic TM
PCM & hadronic TM
CYM & LGT
string & hadronic TM
Hadron gas
1AuAuR Absent in d+Au collisions!d+Au is the “control” experiment
18
Suppression: an initial state effect?
Gluon Saturation (color glass condensate)
Wavefunction of low x gluons overlap; the self-coupling gluons fuse, saturating the density of
gluons in the initial state. (gets Nch right!)
• Initial state elastic scattering (Cronin effect) Wang, Kopeliovich, Levai, Accardi
• Nuclear shadowing
Levin, Ryshkin, Mueller, Qiu, Kharzeev, McLerran, Venugopalan,
Balitsky, Kovchegov, Kovner, Iancu …
probe rest frame
r/ggg
dAu AuAuR R RdAu~ 0.5D.Kharzeev et al., hep-ph/0210033
1dAuR
decreases dAuR
Broaden pT :
19
Compare centrality dependence to control
Dramatically different and opposite centrality evolution of AuAu experiment from dAu control.
Jet suppression is clearly a final state effect.
Au + Au Experiment d + Au Control
20
Centrality dependence of Cronin effect
Probe response of cold nuclear matter with increased number of collisions.
See larger Cronin effect for baryons than for mesons (as at Fermilab)
Qualitative agreement with model by Accardi and Gyulassy. Partonic Glauber-Eikonal approach: sequential multiple partonic collisions. nucl-th/0308029
21
Pions in 3 detectors.
Charged pions from TOF
Neutral pions from EMCAL
Charged pions from RICH+EMCAL
Cronin effect gone at pT ~ 8 GeV/c
22
Does Cronin enhancement saturate?
A different approach:
Intrinsic momentum broadening in the excited projectile proton:
hpA: average number of collisions:
X.N.Wang, Phys.Rev.C 61 (2000): no upper limit.
Zhang, Fai, Papp, Barnafoldi & Levai, Phys.Rev.C 65 (2002): n=4 due to proton d dissociation.
23
Jet physics in PHENIXTrigger: hadron with pT > 2.5 GeV/c
Count associated particles for each trigger at lower pT (> 1 GeV/c) “conditional yield”
Near side yield: number of jet associated particles from same jet in specified pT bin
Away side yield: jet fragments from opposing jet
Intra-jet pairs angular width :
N |jTy|
Inter-jet pairs angular width :
F |jTy| |kTy|
trigger“near side” < 90° jet partner
“away side” > 90° opposing jet
CARTOON
flow
flow+jet
NF
24
Questions we can ask
What is the intrinsic (primordial) parton transverse momentum kT?
In a nucleon? Nucleus?Defines baseline for modifications
What is the fragmentation function?Shape & width, defined by jT, in p+p collisionsFlavor composition of fragments, to compare observed
baryon/meson yields in Au+Au
vital for understanding of mechanism of parton interaction with QCD medium formed at RHIC
25
jet fragmentation and momentum
2 2 21 1 2cos tan tan
2N N
y Fk pk
|jy| = mean transverse momentum of the hadron with respect to the jet axis (in the plane to beam axis)
21sin N
yj j p
|ky| = mean effective transverse momentum of the two colliding partons in the plane to beam axis
vac IS nuc2
l2 2 2
FS nuclk k kk
26
pp and dAu correlation functions
2.2<pT<6.01<pT<1.5
Fit = const + Gauss(0)+Gauss()
p+p
h+- correl.
d+Au
: 5<pT <16 GeV/c
assoc. with h+-
Near angle peak
Far angle peak
27
from jet correlations in pp at s = 200GeV
PHENIX preliminary
|jTy| = 36715 MeV/c
z |kTy| = 66050 MeV/c
|kTy| = 920100 MeV/c
PHENIX preliminary
|jTy| = 36715 MeV/c
z |kTy| = 66050 MeV/c
|kTy| = 920100 MeV/c
28
Jet cone “width” independent of s *
CCOR CollaborationPhys. Lett. 97B(1980)163
*Subject to same trigger bias by selecting pT of particles
29
Au+Au: lost energy is absorbed by medium
Near-side width is constant.Away-side width increases with centrality.
(2.5<pTtrigg<4.0)@ (1.0<pTtrigg<2.5)
flow
flow+jet
NF
30
90° yield
Au+Au conditional yields(Number of particle pairs per trigger particle in AuAu)
The near-side width is independent of centrality.
The away-side width is a strong function of centrality.
But if we integrate the entire Gaussian for the away-side, the away-side associated yields change in step with the near side associated yields as they increase with centrality.
31
central Au+Au is very baryon rich!
p/ ~1 at high pT
in central collisionsHigher than in p+por jets in e+e-collisions
nucl-ex/0305036 (PRL)
Hydro. expansion at low pT
+ jet quenching at high pT:Recombination of boosted q’s?Modified fragmentationfunction INSIDE the medium?
Teff = 350 MeV
pQCD spectrum shifted by 2.2 GeV
R. Fries, et al
32
Do the baryons scale with Ncoll?
Baryons appear not suppresed Ncoll at pT = 2 – 4 GeV/c
Au+Au
Yield depends on quark content!Quark recombination…
central
peripheral
33
So, are the baryons soft, or from jets?
• Look for jet-like correlations with baryons of pT = 2.5 - 4 GeV/cIdentify trigger particleCount associated particles per trigger
• If baryon excess from quark recombination (coalescence)Expect fewer jet-like associated particles
thermal partons coalescence no partnerSo yield of associated particles should decrease
when coalescence contribution increases with centrality.
34
The data say:
QM04 consensus: coalescence of jet + thermal partons this is medium modification of the jet fragmentation!
• jet partner equally likely for trigger baryons & mesons
• slight decrease of baryon associated particles with centrality!
• expected from recombination
35
Identify Triggers: Away Side Yields
In agreement with other measurements of suppression/broadening
Baryon trigger:more associated particles on far side?
36
ProtonA. Andronic et. Al. Nucl-th/0303036
Deconfinement? Does colored medium screen c+cbar?
EXTRA (thermal) J/no Deconfinement:? J/ above Tc:??
R.L. Thews, M. Schroedter, J. Rafelski Phys. Rev. C63 054905 (2001): Plasma coalesence modelfor T=400MeV and ycharm=1.0,2.0, 3.0 and 4.0.
L. Grandchamp, R. Rapp Nucl.
Phys. A&09, 415 (2002) and Phys. Lett. B 523, 50 (2001):Nuclear Absorption+ absoption in a high temperature quark gluon plasma
40-90%least central Ncoll=45
0-20%most central Ncoll=779
20-40%semi central Ncoll=296
Look at J/nucl-ex/0305030
37
PHENIX PRELIMINARY
Open charm: baseline is p+p collisions
fit p+p data to get the baseline for d+Au and Au+Au.
Measure charm via semi-leptonic decay to e+ & e-
, photon conversions are measured and subtracted
38
Curves are the p+p fit, scaled by the number of binary collisions
No large suppression as for light quarks!
PHENIX PRELIMINARY
39
How about Color Glass Condensate?
Pt (GeV/c) Pt (GeV/c)
Rda
Rda
Peripheral d+Au (like p+p)
Central: Enhancednot suppressed PHENIX preliminary
y=0
Xc(A)
pQCD
BFKL, DGLAP
G-sat.
>2
RHIC
Log Q2
No CGC signalat mid-rapiditySo, perhaps
40
But at forward rapidity reach smaller x
y = 3.2 in deuteron direction x 10-3 in Au nucleus
Strong shadowing, maybe even saturation?
d Au
Phenix Preliminary
41
Analysis
Photon cuts: - low energy threshold - |TOF| - 2 (photon-like cluster) - fiducial cut
Asymmetry cut < 0.5
42
Yields in 3 centrality selections 0-20%, 20-60%, 60-92%
Corrected for acceptance, efficiency, and branching ratio
Absolute normalization still being finalized (to present /0)
Errors dominated by uncertainty in peak extraction (point-to-point systematic error)
Yields (shown in arbitrary units) as a function of pT
PHENIX Preliminary
43
Nuclear Modification Factor for (compared to 0)
peripheralbinaryperipheral
centralbinarycentral
NYield
NYield
//
0
RC
P =
PHENIX Preliminary
44
Efficiency beingevaluated
Anti-Penta Quarks with PHENIX?
Statistically it’s a 4 effect1.54 GeV
Systematic Error under study
Nobody scrambles quarks like we do!
- n + K-
45
conclusions
Rapid equilibration! Strong pressure gradients, hydrodynamics worksConstituent scattering cross section is very large
EOS is not hadronic The hot matter is “sticky” – it absorbs energy & seems to
transport it efficientlySee energy loss/jet quenchingd+Au data says: final state, not initial state effect
So, the stuff is dense, hot, ~ equilibrated AND NEW! QGP discovery?
J/ suppression or not? This runTinitial? direct photons & low-mass continuum dileptons
46
Identified Associated Particles--AuAu
Trigger (not identified)
“near side” < 90° jet partner identified
“away side” > 90° opposing jet fragment identified
Perhaps due to PHENIX’s limited acceptance
47
Medium properties
Extract by constraining QCD-inspired models with measured jet suppression and v2
Find (values from Vitev, et al; others consistent)
Energy loss <dE/dz> (GeV/fm) 7-10 0.5 in cold matter
Energy density (GeV/fm3) 14-20 >5.5 from ET data
dN(gluon)/dy ~1000 200-300 at SPS
T (MeV) 380-400 must measure!
Equilibration time0 (fm/c) 0.6 Parton cascade agrees
Medium lifetimeTOT (fm/c) 6-7
48
Implications of the results for QGP
Ample evidence for equilibration v2 & jet quenching measurements constrain initial gluon
density, energy density, and energy loss parton interaction cross sections 50x perturbative
parton correlations at T>Tccomplicates cc bound states as deconfinement probes!
Hadronization by coalescence of thermal,flowing quarksv2 & baryon abundances point to quark recombination
as hadronization mechanismJet data imply must also include recombination between
quarks fromjets and the thermalized medium medium modifies jet fragmentation!
49
J/ in pp and d+Au
● Total cross section :
BR pp = 159 nb ± 8.5 % (fit) ± 12.3% (abs)
50
dAu/pp versus rapidity
51
Vogt, nucl-th/0305046Kopeliovich, hep-ph/0104256
● x2 is the momentum fraction of
the parton from the Au nucleus.
● Data favours (weak) shadowing + (weak) absorption ( > 0.92)
● With limited statistics, difficult to disentangle small nuclear effects.
Low x2(shadowing region)
dAu/pp versus rapidity
See R. G. de Cassagnac's talk Friday parallel 2
52
formulae
However, if we neglect the fragmentation momentum |jTy| one can see that the F is a measure of ztrigg |kTy|. In order to extract the |kTy| one has to know also the fractional momentum of the trigger particle ztrigg.
53
Fragmentation function
If the kTy pT,trigg than xE measures directly
the slope of the fragmentation function D(z) = prop exp…
54
xE in pp collisions
CCOR see ref….PHENIX preliminary
Correct +-
55
z extracted from pp dataz
trig
g
1
z
PHENIX preliminary PHENIX preliminary
56
PHENIX PRELIMINARY
PHENIX PRELIMINARYPHENIX PRELIMINARY
PHENIX PRELIMINARY
d+Au data vs centrality
The curves are the p+p fit, binary scaled.
57
The yellow band represents the set of alpha values consistent with the data at the 90% Confidence Level.
Au+Au dN/dy, binary scaled
See Sean Kelly's talk Thursday parallel 2
58
Peripheral Au-Au like p-p and d-Au
h/0 ratio shows that p is enhanced only < 5 GeV/c
59
How to get 50 times pQCD ?
• Lattice indicates that hadrons don’t all melt at Tc!c bound at 1.5 Tc Asakawa &
Hatsuda, PRL92, 012001 (2004)
charmonium bound states up to ~ 1.7 Tc Karsch; Asakawa&Hatsuda
, survive as resonances Schaefer & Shuryak, PLB 356 , 147(1995)
q,g have thermal masses at high T. s runs up at T>Tc? (Shuryak and Zahed)would cause strong rescattering
qq meson
spectral function
60
E. Shuryak
61
Implication #3:
Hydro can reproduce magnitudeof elliptic flow for , p at low pT
BUTmust add QGP to hadronic EOS!!
Similar conclusion reached byKo, Kapusta, Bleicher, Molnar others… rescattering must be very large!
Kolb, et al.
62
Why no energy loss for charm quarks?
“dead cone” predicted by Kharzeev and Dokshitzer, Phys. Lett. B519, 199 (1991)
Gluon bremsstrahlung:kT
2 = 2 tform/transverse momentum of radiated gluon
pT in single scatt. mean free path
~ kT / gluon energy But radiation is suppressed below angles 0= Mq/Eq
soft gluon distribution is
dP = sCF/ d/ kT2 dkT
2/(kT2+ 2 0
2) 2not small forheavy quarks!causes a dead cone
63
Why a liquid?
Mean free path is very shortSmaller than size of systemMust be so to get large energy loss
Interaction among gluons is quite strong
Have a (residual) correlation among partons until T>>Tc
64
Hydro describes single + multi-particles
• How to increase R without increasing Rout/Rside???
EOS?initial T & r profiles? emissivity?
Maybe an experimental artifact (i.e. Coulomb corrections) ?
But FAILS to reproducetwo-particle correlations!
65
Need partial Coulomb correction?
Full CoulombNo Coulomb
RlongRside λRout
R [
fm],
λ (
x10)
Long-lived resonance contribution• Full Coulomb correction on all pion pairs assuming well localized (core) source ~5fm.•pions from resonance decays come from a larger “halo” source, and have weaker (negligible) Coulomb effect.
fPC dependence of Bertsch-Pratt radii• Vary the fraction (fPC) of Coulomb corrected pairs from 0 (no Coulomb) to 1 (full Coulomb).• Rside and Rlong decrease as fPC is reduced.• In contrast, Rout increase as fPC is reduced. • The ratio Rout/Rside is very sensitive to fPC .
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0fPC
Halo
Core
66
This recent analysis shows the change in Rout
/Rside
when the partial Coulomb correction is used instead of the full Coulomb correction.
The ratio moves in the direction of the models, but only increases to about one. Note the large k
T reach of the data. See Mike Heffner's talk for
detailed discussion of this and other HBT topics.
Rout
/Rside
from HBT
See Mike Heffner's talk Tuesday parallel 3
67
PHENIX looks for J/ e+e- and
There is the electron.
need electron / pion separation at the level of one in 10,000 (needle in a haystack!)
Ring Imaging Cherenkovcounter to tag electrons“RICH”
See signal whenvpart. > cmedium
68
Forward n tagged d+Au
p
n ZDC
Neutron tagged eventsenhance peripheral collisions
<Ncoll> = 5.0 / 3.6Could be Ncoll dependenced+Au looks very similar to p+Au
69
Centrality selection
In PHENIX “min bias” = 92% of geometric cross sectionUse Glauber model to calculate Npart
70
More on RdAu & Glauber calculation
What we actually doRdA= 1/Nevt d2Nparticle/ddpT
--------------------------------- <Ncoll>/pp,inel d2pp/ddpT
TheoreticallyRdA= 1/Nevt d2Nparticle,dAu/ddpT
--------------------------------- <TAB> d2pp /ddpT
As pointed out in nucl-th/0306044<Ncoll> = <TAB>* pp,inel ---------------------
1 – exp (- <TAB>* pp,inel )
We measure pp= 21.3mb
Evaluate trigger eff. for
full pp,inel and correct
particle yield by that
= 0.99982 for m.b.= 0.973 for leading n(absorbed in syst)
71
0 RAA vs. predictions
PHENIX Preliminary
shadowing
anti-shadowing
Theoretical predictions:
d+Au: I. Vitev, nucl-th/0302002 and private communication.
Au+Au: I. Vitev and M. Gyulassy, hep-ph/0208108, to appear in Nucl. Phys. A; M. Gyulassy, P. Levai and I. Vitev, Nucl. Phys. B 594, p. 371 (2001).
Initial state: mult. scatt.,shadowing + final state dE/dx (Au+Au)
Also: Kopeliovich, et al (PRL88, 232303,2002)
predict RpA~1.1 max at pT=2.5 GeV projectile as color dipole
72
Why no big energy loss for heavy quarks?
no x4 suppressionfrom peripheral to central,as predicted fordE/dx=-0.5GeV/fm!
But (we squirm) - Is 40-70% peripheral enough? error bars still big!
73
Jet Evidence in Azimuthal Correlations at RHIC
near-side correlation of charged tracks (STAR)trigger particle pT = 4-6 GeV/c distribution for pT > 2 GeV/c
signature of jets
also seen in (0) triggered events (PHENIX)trigger particle pT > 2.5 GeV/c distribution for pT = 2-4 GeV/c
M. Chiu, PHENIX Parallel Saturday
QM2002 summary slide (Peitzmann)
74
Identifying Jets - Angular Correlations
Remove soft background by subtraction of mixed event distribution
Fit remainder:Jet correlation in ; shape taken from PYTHIAAdditional v2 component to correct flow effects
PHENIX Preliminaryraw differential yields
2-4 GeV
75
Verify PYTHIA using p+p collisions
(neutral E>2.5 GeV + 1-2 GeV/c charged partner)
||<.35 ||>.35
ake cuts in to enhance near or far-side correlationsBlue = PYTHIA
76
In Au+Au collisions
1-2 GeV partner
(neutral E>2.5 GeV + charged partner)
||<.35 ||>.35
1/N
trig d
N/d
1/N
trig d
N/d
Correlation after mixed event background subtraction
Clear jet signal in Au + AuDifferent away side effect than in p+p
77
Jet strengthSee non-zero jet strength as partner pT increases!
jets or flow correlations? fit pythia + 2v2vjcos(2)
partner = .3-.6 GeV .6-1.0 GeV/c 2-4 GeV/c
1/N
trig d
N/d
v2vj
1-2 GeV/c
78
How do high pT yields scale?
vs. binary collisions:continuous decrease as
function of centralityfactor ~ 3.5 from
peripheral to central vs. participants:
first increase, then decrease as function of centrality
for Npart > 100 have 3 change (scaling or no?)
surface emission? re-interactions?accident?
18% scaling uncertainty from corrections
79
Opaque, expanding source would mean:
2222222 2)()( xtso YXRR
)(outX
)(sideY
29.13
5)(
)(
spheres
shellhalfs
R
R
65.012
5)(
)(
sphereo
shellhalfo
R
R
Opaque Expanding
Rischke RIKEN workshop (2002): Such strong xt correlations probably require a lack of boost-invariance...
80
Energy Dependence
Assumptions:in Lab in C.M.
Energy density (Bjorken):
2% most central at sNN=200 GeV:
5.5 GeV/fm3
From AGS, SPS to RHIC:
Transverse energy and charged particle multiplicity densities per participant consistent with logarithmic behaviour
d
dX
dy
dX
d
dX
dy
dX2.1
dy
dE
Rt
2
1
cfm
AfmR
/1
18.1 3/1
PHENIX preliminary
PHENIX preliminary
81
So, is there jet quenching?
Suppression observed to 8 GeV/c! (in 3 independent measurements)
Theory agrees with data when quark, gluon energy loss is included
NB: 2 examples here, others also must add some kind of medium modification of the fast quarks/gluons
In initial or final state?
82
Look at “transverse mass” mT2 = pT
2 + m02
— is distribution e-E/T?i.e. Boltzmann distribution from thermalized gas?
hadron spectra: , K, p and antiprotons
130GeV/A
yes !
Protons are flatter velocity boost to beamResult of pressure built up
83
Note pbar/p behavior
Centrality dependence only for pT > 3 GeV/c
Peripheral collisions have quite a few protons at mid-y
84
Phenix-Star comparison
STAR
Compare for charged hadrons at = 0 in min bias collisionsBoth compare to their own measured pp at s = 200 GeV
85
Are the RdA numbers wrong due to inel?
STAR
Compare for charged hadrons at = 0 in min bias collisionsBoth compare to their own measured pp at s = 200 GeV
PHENIX sees ~10% of single diffractive and 30% of double diffractive in ppAnalysis approach: correct pp to 42 mb via trigger efficiency correction; use =42mb to calculate Ncoll in d+Au~ same as <T(dAu)>* ppmeas in denominator
STAR triggers on forward n, sees all double diffractive and some single diffractive.
No room for PHENIX by 20-30% and STAR by 10%
86
Collide heavy ions at RHIC to
Create very high temperature and density matteras existed ~1 sec after the Big Banginter-hadron distances comparable to that in neutron starscollide heavy ions to achieve maximum volume
Study the hot, dense mediumis thermal equilibrium reached?transport properties? equation of state?do the nuclei dissolve into a quark gluon plasma?
Au + Au at s = 200 GeV/nucleon pairp+p and d+A to compareAlso polarized p+p collisions to study carriers of p’s spin
87
We follow history of heavy ion collisions
PCM & clust. hadronization
NFD
NFD & hadronic TM
PCM & hadronic TM
CYM & LGT
string & hadronic TM
, e+e-,
+c,cbar
KpndReal and virtual photons from q scattering sensitive to the early stages. Probe also with q and g produced early, & passing through the medium on their way out.
Hadrons reflect medium properties when inelastic collisions stop (chemical then thermal freeze-out).
high , pressure builds up
88
Grows with s as expected
89
charm by single e production
Cross section fits into expected energy dependence
130 GeV/A Au+Au
Phys.Rev.Lett. 88 (2002) 192303
90
25 Juin 2003
Central/peripheral versus Ncoll
• First measurement of J/ vs
Ncoll in pA(dA)!
• Low and med x2 have small
variation with Ncoll
– Weak nuclear effects
• High x2 has a steep rising
shape - no clear explanation
at present, see
High x2
Low x2