qcd critical point and observables
play

QCD critical point and observables M. Stephanov U. of Illinois at - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

QCD critical point and observables M. Stephanov U. of Illinois at Chicago QCD critical point and observables p. 1/15 QCD phase diagram (a sketch) T , GeV QGP crossover critical point 0.1 hadron gas quark(yonic) matter phases: c.s.c.,


  1. QCD critical point and observables M. Stephanov U. of Illinois at Chicago QCD critical point and observables – p. 1/15

  2. QCD phase diagram (a sketch) T , GeV QGP crossover critical point 0.1 hadron gas quark(yonic) matter phases: c.s.c., nuclear crystals, ..? CFL matter vacuum 0 µ B , GeV 1 Models (and lattice) suggest the transition becomes 1st order at some µ B . Can we observe the critical point in heavy ion collisions, and how? QCD critical point and observables – p. 2/15

  3. Critical point(s) in known liquids Most liquids have a critical point (seen, e.g., by critical opalescence). Water: Does QCD “perfect liquid” have one? QCD critical point and observables – p. 3/15

  4. What do we need to discover the critical point? 200 LTE04 LTE03 LTE08 T , LR01 130 LR04 MeV 19 150 11 R H I C 7.7 s c a n 5 100 50 2 0 0 200 400 600 800 µ B , MeV Experiments: RHIC, NA61/SPS, FAIR/GSI, NICA. Better lattice predictions, with controllable systematics. Sensitive experimental signatures. QCD critical point and observables – p. 4/15

  5. Critical fluctuations: theory Consider an observable such as, Ω( σ V ) 1 V σ , where σ ∼ ¯ � e.g., σ V = ψψ . µ < µ CP Einstein, 1910: V � ∼ (Ω ′′ ) − 1 � σ 2 P ( σ V ) ∼ number σ V of states with that σ V i.e., e S , or e − Ω /T 2 (Ω ′′ ) − 1 → ∞ µ = µ CP large equilibrium fluctuations T 1 3 2 3 µ > µ CP µ Why does CP defy the central limit theorem? Because, correlation length ξ → ∞ . This is a collective phenomenon. The magnitude of fluctuations � σ 2 V � ∼ ξ 2 . QCD critical point and observables – p. 5/15

  6. Fluctuation signatures Experiments measure multiplicities N π , N p , . . . , 6 10 Au+Au 200 GeV 0-5% mean p T , etc. Number of Events 0.4<p <0.8 (GeV/c) 5 30-40% 10 T |y|<0.5 70-80% 4 10 These quantities fluctuate event-by-event. 3 10 Fluctuation magnitude is quantified by e.g., 2 10 � ( δN ) 2 � , � ( δp T ) 2 � . 10 1 -20 -10 0 10 20 What is the magnitude of these fluctuations ∆ Net Proton ( N ) p near the QCD C.P .? (Rajagopal-Shuryak-MS, 1998) Universality tells us how it grows at the critical point: � ( δN ) 2 � ∼ ξ 2 . Magnitude of ξ is limited < O ( 2–3 fm ) (Berdnikov-Rajagopal) . “Shape” of the fluctuations can be measured: non-Gaussian moments. As ξ → ∞ fluctuations become less Gaussian. Higher cumulants show even stronger dependence on ξ (PRL 102:032301,2009) : � ( δN ) 4 � − 3 � ( δN ) 2 � 2 ∼ ξ 7 � ( δN ) 3 � ∼ ξ 4 . 5 , which makes them more sensitive signatures of the critical point. QCD critical point and observables – p. 6/15

  7. Higher moments (cumulants) and ξ Consider probability distribution for the order-parameter field: P [ σ ] ∼ exp {− Ω[ σ ] /T } , 2( ∇ σ ) 2 + m 2 Z » 1 – 2 σ 2 + λ 3 3 σ 3 + λ 4 4 σ 4 + . . . d 3 x ξ = m − 1 σ Ω = . ⇒ σ d 3 x σ ( x ) : R Moments (connected) of q = 0 mode σ V ≡ V � = V T ξ 2 ; V � = 2 V T 2 λ 3 ξ 6 ; κ 2 = � σ 2 κ 3 = � σ 3 V � 2 = 6 V T 3 [ 2( λ 3 ξ ) 2 − λ 4 ] ξ 8 . κ 4 = � σ 4 V � c ≡ � σ 4 V � − 3 � σ 2 Tree graphs. Each propagator gives ξ 2 . + λ 3 T ( Tξ ) − 3 / 2 and λ 4 = ˜ Scaling requires “running”: λ 3 = ˜ λ 4 ( Tξ ) − 1 , i.e., V � = 2 V T 3 / 2 ˜ λ 3 ξ 4 . 5 ; κ 4 = 6 V T 2 [ 2(˜ λ 3 ) 2 − ˜ λ 4 ] ξ 7 . κ 3 = � σ 3 QCD critical point and observables – p. 7/15

  8. Moments of observables Example: Fluctuation of multiplicity is the fluctuation of occup. numbers, X δN = p δn p . Any moment of the multiplicity distribution is related to a correlator of δn p : d 3 p κ 3 π = � ( δN ) 3 � = X X X p 3 � δn p 1 δn p 2 δn p 3 � , (2 π ) 3 . R where P p = V p 1 p 2 n p fluctuates around ¯ n p ( m ) , which also fluctuates: δm = gδσ , i.e., p + ∂ ¯ n p δn p = δn 0 ∂m g δσ . „ g « 3 v 2 v 2 v 2 � δn p 1 δn p 2 δn p 3 � σ = 2 λ 3 p 1 p 2 p 3 V 2 T m 2 γ p 1 γ p 2 γ p 3 σ v 2 γ p = ( dE p /dm ) − 1 p = ¯ n p (1 ± ¯ n p ) , Similarly for � ( δN ) 4 � c . Since � ( δN ) 3 � scales as V 1 we suggest ω 3 ( N ) ≡ � ( δN ) 3 � which is V 0 . ¯ N QCD critical point and observables – p. 8/15

  9. Energy scan and fluctuation signatures: notes crossover ( ˜ λ 3 = 0 ) T 1st order critical point freeze-out point with max ξ contours of equal ξ freeze-out points vs √ s µ B Higher moments provide more sensitive signatures. As usual, value comes at a price: Harder to predict – more theoretical uncertainties. Signal/noise is worse for higher moments. But one can, e.g., combine various higher moments to optimize or eliminate uncertainties. QCD critical point and observables – p. 9/15

  10. Using ratios and mixed moments Athanasiou, Rajagopal, MS (2010) The dominant dependence on µ B (i.e., on √ s ) is from two sources ξ and n p , e.g., κ 3 p ∼ ˜ λ 3 g 3 p ξ 4 . 5 n 3 p . ξ ( µ B ) has a peak at µ B = µ critical ; B /T determines the height of the peak; n B ∼ e µ critical B p and ˜ other factors: g 3 λ 3 depend on µ B weaker. Leading dependence on µ critical can be cancelled in ratios. E.g., B « 2 „ N π κ 3 p ∼ ˜ λ 3 g 3 p ξ 4 . 5 N p N p Unknown/poorly known coupling parameters g p or g π can be also cancelled in ratios. E.g., no uncertainties in these ratios κ 3 κ 2 κ 4 κ 4 p 4 p 2 π 3 π κ 4 π , or . κ 2 κ 4 κ 3 2 p 3 p 4 π when critical fluctuations dominate. They are 1. Mixed moments allow more possibilities. E.g., κ 2 2 p 2 π κ 4 p κ 4 π . Mixed moments have no trivial Poisson contribution. QCD critical point and observables – p. 10/15

  11. Using ratios and mixed moments Athanasiou, Rajagopal, MS (2010) The dominant dependence on µ B (i.e., on √ s ) is from two sources ξ and n p , e.g., κ 3 p ∼ ˜ λ 3 g 3 p ξ 4 . 5 n 3 p . ξ ( µ B ) has a peak at µ B = µ critical ; B /T determines the height of the peak; n B ∼ e µ critical B p and ˜ other factors: g 3 λ 3 depend on µ B weaker. Leading dependence on µ critical can be cancelled in ratios. E.g., B « 2 „ N π κ 3 p ∼ ˜ λ 3 g 3 p ξ 4 . 5 N p N p Unknown/poorly known coupling parameters g p or g π can be also cancelled in ratios. E.g., no uncertainties in these ratios κ 3 κ 2 κ 4 κ 4 p 4 p 2 π 3 π κ 4 π , or . κ 2 κ 4 κ 3 2 p 3 p 4 π when critical fluctuations dominate. They are 1. Mixed moments allow more possibilities. E.g., κ 2 2 p 2 π κ 4 p κ 4 π . Mixed moments have no trivial Poisson contribution. QCD critical point and observables – p. 10/15

  12. Experiment (pre-QM) 200 LTE04 LTE03 LTE08 T , LR01 MeV µ LR04 (MeV) B 150 210 54 720 420 20 10 R H 3 I C STAR Data Au+Au Collisions Lattice QCD s c a n AMPT 0.4<p <0.8 (GeV/c) AMPT (SM) T |y|<0.5 Hijing 100 UrQMD 2 Therminator 2 σ κ 50 1 STAR Preliminary Critical Point Search 0 0 4 5 20 100 200 10 0 200 400 600 800 s (GeV) µ B , MeV NN ( κσ 2 = κ 4 /κ 2 ≈ ω 4 if κ 2 ≈ N ). No critical signatures seen at those values of µ B . Consistent with expectations that µ critical > 200 MeV. B What is happening at √ s = 19 . 6 GeV? Low statistics. Large positive contribution to Poisson is excluded, but large negative — is not. QCD critical point and observables – p. 11/15

  13. Negative kurtosis? Could the critical contribution to kurtosis be negative? (MS, arxiv:1104.1627) „ g « 4 v 2 Z � ( δN ) 4 � c = � N � + � σ 4 p V � c + . . . , T γ p p V � c = 6 V T 2 [ 2˜ λ 4 ] ξ 7 . 3 − ˜ � σ 4 λ 2 On the crossover line ˜ λ 3 = 0 by symmetry, while ˜ λ 4 ≈ 4 . > 0 . P ( σ V ) : → Thus � σ 4 V � c < 0 and ω 4 ( N ) < 1 on the crossover line. And around it. Universal Ising eq. of state: M = R β θ , t = R (1 − θ 2 ) , H = R βδ h ( θ ) here κ 4 is κ 4 ( M ) ≡ � M 4 � c 120 100 80 60 Κ 4 40 20 0 � 20 � 0.4 � 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 t QCD critical point and observables – p. 12/15

  14. Implications for the energy scan , GeV T QGP critical point freezeout 0.1 curve CFL+ hadron gas nuclear matter 0 µ B , GeV 1 QCD critical point and observables – p. 13/15

  15. Implications for the energy scan , GeV T QGP critical point t H 0.1 CFL+ hadron gas nuclear matter 0 µ B , GeV 1 QCD critical point and observables – p. 13/15

  16. Implications for the energy scan , GeV T QGP critical point t 19 H freezeout 0.1 curve CFL+ hadron gas nuclear matter 0 µ B , GeV 1 QCD critical point and observables – p. 13/15

  17. Implications for the energy scan , GeV T QGP critical point t 19 ? 11 H freezeout 0.1 curve CFL+ hadron gas nuclear matter 0 µ B , GeV 1 If the kurtosis stays significantly below Poisson value in 19 GeV data, the logical place to take a closer look is between 19 and 11 GeV. QCD critical point and observables – p. 13/15

  18. Implications for the energy scan ω 4 baseline √ s 11 19 If the kurtosis stays significantly below Poisson value in 19 GeV data, the logical place to take a closer look is between 19 and 11 GeV. QCD critical point and observables – p. 13/15

  19. QM notes Potential sources of baseline shift (from Poisson) at high baryon density: Fermi statistics: ω 4 ≈ 1 − 7 � n p � p (small effect, but grows with µ B ). O(4) critical line (Friman-Karsch-Redlich-Skokov). Baryon number conservation? QCD critical point and observables – p. 14/15

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend