malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Expectations for Femtoscopy at the LHC Mike Lisa Ohio State University

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Outline Femtoscopic LHC NNUS: systematic extrapolation of multiplicity systematic naïve CGC HRM: microscopic hadronic rescattering model hydro scales shapes p+p Pythia (+HRM, jets) Black holes Summary Some foci of the experimental program

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Baseline: 20-year-old systematic program Pion Bevalac: “largely confirming nuclear dimensions” Since 90’s: increasingly detailed understanding and study w/ high stats y |b| pTpT

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept R(√S NN, b, N part, A, B, y, m T, , PID)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept R(√S NN, b, N part, A, B, y, m T, , PID) Z. Chajecki, QM05

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept R(√S NN, b, N part, A, B, y, m T, , PID) Z. Chajecki, QM05 MAL, Pratt, Soltz, Wiedemann nucl-ex/ STAR, PRL 2004

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept R(√S NN, b, N part, A, B, y, m T, , PID) Z. Chajecki, QM05 MAL, Pratt, Soltz, Wiedemann nucl-ex/ STAR, PRL 2004 MAL,Pratt Soltz,Wiedemann nucl-ex/

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept R(√S NN, b, N part, A, B, y, m T, , PID) Z. Chajecki, QM05 MAL, Pratt, Soltz, Wiedemann nucl-ex/ STAR, PRL 2004 MAL,Pratt Soltz,Wiedemann nucl-ex/ ++ -- K+K+ K-K- K0SK0S p pp     pp  p  K0SK0S  K-K-  K+K+  --  ++  Full program just started Evolution with energy? Little data Shape Evolution with energy? Naïve (?) : multiplicity dominance LHC (though two unexplored areas...)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept LHC = RHIC++ MAL,Pratt Soltz,Wiedemann nucl-ex/ PHOBOS White Paper: NPA 757, TeV = RHICx1.6 Naïve (?) : multiplicity dominance LHC (though two unexplored areas...)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Multiplicity sets scale: all else fixed MAL,Pratt Soltz,Wiedemann nucl-ex/ PHOBOS White Paper: NPA 757, TeV = RHICx1.6

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Multiplicity sets scale: all else fixed PHOBOS-based extrapolation: R LHC / R RHIC = (1.6) 1/3 = 1.17 PHOBOS White Paper: NPA 757, TeV = RHICx1.6

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Multiplicity sets scale: all else fixed PHOBOS-based extrapolation: R LHC / R RHIC = (1.6) 1/3 = 1.17 CGC prediction of multiplicity R LHC / R RHIC = (11/3.6) 1/3 = 3 1/3 = 1.45 Kharzeev, Levin & Nardi NPA (2005)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Beyond multiplicity PHOBOS-based extrapolation: R LHC / R RHIC = (1.6) 1/3 = 1.17 CGC prediction of multiplicity R LHC / R RHIC = (11/3.6) 1/3 = 3 1/3 = 1.45 Humanic Rescattering Model “real” model predicting dN/d  and HBT (dN/d  [LHC] / dN/d  [RHIC] ) 1/3 ~ 1.9 dN/d  T. Humanic, Int.J.Mod.Phys.E15197(2006)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Beyond multiplicity R long (fm) dN/dt PHOBOS-based extrapolation: R LHC / R RHIC = (1.6) 1/3 = 1.17 CGC prediction of multiplicity R LHC / R RHIC = (11/3.6) 1/3 = 3 1/3 = 1.45 Humanic Rescattering Model “real” model predicting dN/d  and HBT (dN/d  [LHC] / dN/d  [RHIC] ) 1/3 ~ 1.9  LHC /  RHIC = 2 :: (recall R long~ ~  ) dynamic effect R long [LHC] / R long [RHIC] ~ 2 all are connected?? T. Humanic, Int.J.Mod.Phys.E15197(2006)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Beyond multiplicity PHOBOS-based extrapolation: R LHC / R RHIC = (1.6) 1/3 = 1.17 CGC prediction of multiplicity R LHC / R RHIC = (11/3.6) 1/3 = 3 1/3 = 1.45 Humanic Rescattering Model “real” model predicting dN/d  and HBT (dN/d  [LHC] / dN/d  [RHIC] ) 1/3 ~ 1.9  LHC /  RHIC = 2 :: (recall R long~ ~  ) dynamic effect R long [LHC] / R long [RHIC] ~ 2 all are connected? R S, R O larger, but not a simple factor T. Humanic, Int.J.Mod.Phys.E15197(2006)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Beyond multiplicity PHOBOS-based extrapolation: R LHC / R RHIC = (1.6) 1/3 = 1.17 CGC prediction of multiplicity R LHC / R RHIC = (11/3.6) 1/3 = 3 1/3 = 1.45 Humanic Rescattering Model “real” model predicting dN/d  and HBT (dN/d  [LHC] / dN/d  [RHIC] ) 1/3 ~ 1.9  LHC /  RHIC = 2 :: (recall R long~ ~  ) dynamic effect R long [LHC] / R long [RHIC] ~ 2 all are connected? R S, R O larger, but not a simple factor steeper p T -dep due to more flow? dynamic effect T. Humanic, Int.J.Mod.Phys.E15197(2006)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Hydro predictions I: Scales Neglecting flow, to cool to  C [QGP] :  C =  0 (  C /  0 ) 3/4  C no flow [RHIC] = 6 fm/c  C no flow [LHC] = 20 fm/c Eskola et al PRC (2005) initial conditions from pQCD+saturation

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Neglecting flow, to cool to  C [QGP] :  C =  0 (  C /  0 ) 3/4  C no flow [RHIC] = 6 fm/c  C no flow [LHC] = 20 fm/c Much larger signif. reduction of LHC [similar to RHIC] larger transverse FO Eskola et al PRC (2005) Hydro predictions I: Scales

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Neglecting flow, to cool to  C [QGP] :  C =  0 (  C /  0 ) 3/4  C no flow [RHIC] = 6 fm/c  C no flow [LHC] = 20 fm/c Much larger signif. reduction of LHC [similar to RHIC] larger transverse FO No HBT prediction per se, but... R L [LHC] / R L [RHIC] ~ 1.1 ÷ 1.2 R S [LHC] / R S [RHIC] ~ 1.5 ÷ 2 (different than HRM) steeper p T -dependence Eskola et al PRC (2005) Hydro predictions I: Scales

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept Neglecting flow, to cool to  C [QGP] :  C =  0 (  C /  0 ) 3/4  C no flow [RHIC] = 6 fm/c  C no flow [LHC] = 20 fm/c Much larger signif. reduction of LHC [similar to RHIC] larger transverse FO No HBT prediction per se, but... R L [LHC] / R L [RHIC] ~ 1.1 ÷ 1.2 R S [LHC] / R S [RHIC] ~ 1.5 ÷ 2 (different than HRM) steeper p T -dependence Consistent w/ independent hydro for non-central collisions Eskola et al PRC (2005) Hydro predictions I: Scales Heinz&Kolb, PLB (2002) (LHC)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept easy prediction: importance of  -dep measurements will LHC asHBT probes timescale & dynamics non-trivial (& incomplete!) excitation fctn Hydro predictions II: Shapes E895 2 GeV PLB496 1 (2000) STAR 200 GeV PRL (‘04) O’Hara, et al, Science (2002)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept easy prediction: importance of  -dep measurements will LHC asHBT probes timescale & dynamics non-trivial (& incomplete!) excitation fctn RHIC misses scale (well-known) impressive agreement on  -dep Hydro predictions II: Shapes STAR PRL (2004) Heinz&Kolb, PLB (2002) “RHIC”

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept easy prediction: importance of  -dep measurements will LHC asHBT probes timescale & dynamics non-trivial (& incomplete!) excitation fctn RHIC misses scale (well-known) impressive agreement on  -dep LHC sign change in shape & oscillations Hydro predictions II: Shapes Heinz&Kolb, PLB (2002) “RHIC” Heinz&Kolb, PLB (2002) “IPES” (LHC)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept easy prediction: importance of  -dep measurements will LHC asHBT probes timescale & dynamics non-trivial (& incomplete!) excitation fctn RHIC misses scale (well-known) impressive agreement on  -dep LHC sign change in shape & oscillations qualitatively different k T dependence (*) Hydro predictions II: Shapes Heinz&Kolb, PLB (2002) “RHIC” Heinz&Kolb, PLB (2002) “IPES” (LHC) * simple formula will not LHC F. Retière & MAL PRC (2004)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept p+p: a short diversion and “practice,” or a crucial question? “minimalist” physics Momenta & parentage from PYTHIA space by hand: x  = “1 fm” +  p  /E p T -dep from x-p correlations resonances formation time  some from rescatt mult dep from rescatt only i-th particle Initial “disk” of radius r T. Humanic, presentation to ALICE PW2 (March 2006)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept p+p: a short diversion and “practice,” or a crucial question? “minimalist” physics Momenta & parentage from PYTHIA space by hand: x  = “1 fm” +  p  /E p T -dep from x-p correlations resonances formation time  some from rescatt mult dep from rescatt only R(dN/d  )  space-time properties of jet fragmentation/hadronization? [fundamental] prediction of p T -dependence needed to test whether hard processes are really dominant here p p jet Paic and Skowronski J. Phys. G (2005) see also Csorgo & Zajc hep-ph/ (ISMD04)

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept p+p: a short diversion and “practice,” or a crucial question? “minimalist” physics Momenta & parentage from PYTHIA space by hand: x  = “1 fm” +  p  /E p T -dep from x-p correlations resonances formation time  some from rescatt mult dep from rescatt only R(dN/d  )  space-time properties of jet fragmentation/hadronization? [fundamental] prediction of p T -dependence needed to test whether hard processes are really dominant here Black Holes / extra dimensions at LHC p+p ? may be copiously produced (depending on mass) look for long lifetimes (if d large) in high mult events ??? even more fundamental, but expectations unclear [prelim from T. Humanic: small effect on HBT...] Hossenfelder, Hofmann, Bleicher, Stocker Phys.Rev. D66 (2002) Humanic, Koch, Stocker hep-ph/

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept as before (same p T dep etc) but scale by ~17% as before (same p T dep etc) but scale by ~45% NNUS: naive extrapolation HRM R L scales with mult (x2 increase) [dynamics / chemistry / both ??] R O,S smaller increase (~30%) higher flow  steeper p T dep hydro R L small increase (~30%) [huge flow  rapid cooling  short  ] R O,S : huge flow  larger increase (~60%) steeper p T dep shape inversion; oscillation sign flip p+p p p jet signif p T dep R increase w/ mult other details?? very large R O in high mult?? plats principaux boissons entrées le menu des espérances au LHC

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept THE END

malisa - WPCF - Sao Paulo, Brazil - Sept references RHIC-tested predictions for low-pT and high-pT hadron spectra in nearly central Pb+Pb collisions at the LHC Eskola et al hep-ph/ ; PRC (2005) hydro predictions for spectra no HBT per se, but timescales and sizes of freezeout at LHC versus RHIC are shown Emission angle dependent pion interferometry at RHIC and beyond Heinz and Kolb PLB (2002) RHIC and LHC predictions for asHBT from hydro Signatures for Black Hole production from hadronic observables at the Large Hadron Collider Humanic, Koch, Stocker hep-ph/ surprisingly, no HBT, but discussion of possible BH formation, rates, and how to trigger on them (high-mult: will it follow multiplicity systematics if physics changes so much??) Femtoscopy in heavy ion collisions: Wherefore, whence, and whither? Lisa nucl-ex/ (WPCF05) systematics and PHOBOS-extrapolation-based “prediction” for LHC Color Glass Condensate at the LHC: hadron multiplicities in pp, pA and AA collisions Kharzeev, Levin & Nardi; NPA (2005) not HBT, but multiplicity predictions, which of course can be coupled to HBT multiplicity systematics Hanbury-Brown-Twiss interferometry with identical bosons in relativistic heavy ion collisions: Comparisons with hadronic scattering models Humanic, Int.J.Mod.Phys.E15: ,2006; nucl- th/ Tom’s review article; contains LHC predictions For proton-proton collisions: Signatures for Black Hole production from hadronic observables at the Large Hadron Collider Humanic, Koch, Stocker hep-ph/ surprisingly, no HBT, but discussion of possible BH formation, rates, and how to trigger on them (high-mult: will it follow multiplicity systematics if physics changes so much??) Quasi-stable black holes at LHC Hossenfieder, Hoffman, Bleicher, Stocker hep- ph/ ; Phys.Rev. D66 (2002) VERY nice plot of lifetime versus number of dimensions Pion HBT for LHC p+p collisions using a simple causality model Humanic, ppt presentation at PW2 meeting March 06 Pythia and HRM - nice, simple calculations showing pT dep from simple formation time effect Effect of hard processes on momentum correlations in pp and ppbar collisions Paic and Skowronski; J. Phys. G (2005) from size and mult dep, make a connection to space- time properties of jet fragmentation unfortunately, no pT prediction