STAR Surprises from RHIC John G. Cramer Department of Physics University of Washington John G. Cramer Department of Physics University of Washington Colloquium.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Mass, Quark-number, Energy Dependence of v 2 and v 4 in Relativistic Nucleus- Nucleus Collisions Yan Lu University of Science and Technology of China Many.

Advertisements

Elliptic flow of thermal photons in Au+Au collisions at 200GeV QNP2009 Beijing, Sep , 2009 F.M. Liu Central China Normal University, China T. Hirano.

Quantum Opacity, RHIC HBT Puzzle, and the Chiral Phase Transition RHIC Physics, HBT and RHIC HBT Puzzle Quantum mech. treatment of optical potential, U.

Results from PHENIX on deuteron and anti- deuteron production in Au+Au collisions at RHIC Joakim Nystrand University of Bergen for the PHENIX Collaboration.

CERN May Heavy Ion Collisions at the LHC Last Call for Predictions Initial conditions and space-time scales in relativistic heavy ion collisions.

Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions: Recent Results from RHIC David Hardtke LBNL.

DNP03, Tucson, Oct 29, Kai Schweda Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for the STAR collaboration Hadron Yields, Hadrochemistry, and Hadronization.

STAR Patricia Fachini 1 Brookhaven National Laboratory Motivation Data Analysis Results Conclusions Resonance Production in Au+Au and p+p Collisions at.

P.Seyboth: Indications for the onset of deconfinement in Pb+Pb collisions at the CERN SPS from NA49 (ISMD2004) 1 Indications for the Onset of Deconfinement.

STAR STRANGENESS! K0sK0s    K+K+ (Preliminary)         

STAR Looking Through the “Veil of Hadronization”: Pion Entropy & PSD at RHIC John G. Cramer Department of Physics University of Washington, Seattle, WA,

1/6/02Gyulassy-1 The Space-Time Puzzle at RHIC  Instead of slowly burning QGP Log Dt~ R/v def >>R  Evidence for Sudden freezeout Dt

Recent Results from STAR Rene Bellwied, Wayne State, for the STAR Collaboration  Thermalization & Timescales  High pt physics  Fluctuations  130 to.

5-12 April 2008 Winter Workshop on Nuclear Dynamics STAR Particle production at RHIC Aneta Iordanova for the STAR collaboration.

STAR Pion Interferometry and RHIC Physics John G. Cramer Department of Physics University of Washington Seattle, Washington, USA John G. Cramer Department.

Statistical Models A.) Chemical equilibration (Braun-Munzinger, Stachel, Redlich, Tounsi) B.) Thermal equilibration (Schnedermann, Heinz) C.) Hydrodynamics.

XXXIII International Symposium on Multiparticle Dynamics, September 7, 2003 Kraków, Poland Manuel Calderón de la Barca Sánchez STAR Collaboration Review.

March 1, 2003University of Rochester - Graduate Student Days1 Nuclear Physics at the University of Rochester Steven Manly Grad. Student Days March 1, 2003.

Supriya Das SQM 2006, 26th March 2006, UCLA 1 Event By Event Fluctuation in K/  ratio atRHIC Supriya Das § VECC, Kolkata (for STAR Collaboration) § Present.

WWND, San Diego1 Scaling Characteristics of Azimuthal Anisotropy at RHIC Michael Issah SUNY Stony Brook for the PHENIX Collaboration.

STAR Pion Entropy and Phase Space Density at RHIC John G. Cramer Department of Physics University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Second Warsaw Meeting.

Behind QGP Investigating the matter of the early Universe Investigating the matter of the early Universe Is the form of this matter Quark Gluon Plasma?

ISMD31 / Sept. 4, 2001 Toru Sugitate / Hiroshima Univ. The 31 st International Symposium on Multiparticle Dynamics on 1-7, Sept in Datong, China.

Strange and Charm Probes of Hadronization of Bulk Matter at RHIC International Symposium on Multi-Particle Dynamics Aug 9-15, 2005 Huan Zhong Huang University.

Particle Spectra at AGS, SPS and RHIC Dieter Röhrich Fysisk institutt, Universitetet i Bergen Similarities and differences Rapidity distributions –net.

Masashi Kaneta, LBNL Masashi Kaneta for the STAR collaboration Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. First results from STAR experiment at RHIC - Soft hadron.

Collective Flow in Heavy-Ion Collisions Kirill Filimonov (LBNL)

Spectra Physics at RHIC : Highlights from 200 GeV data Manuel Calderón de la Barca Sánchez ISMD ‘02, Alushta, Ukraine Sep 9, 2002.

Hard vs. Soft Physics at RHIC - Insights from PHENIX l Why hard vs. soft? l Soft physics: thermal, flow effects l Hard processes at RHIC l Conclusion Barbara.

STAR S.A. Voloshin Elliptic Flow at RHIC STAR Collaboration U.S. Labs: Argonne, Berkeley, Brookhaven National Labs U.S. Universities: Arkansas, UC Berkeley,

Higher moments of net-charge multiplicity distributions at RHIC energies in STAR Nihar R. Sahoo, VECC, India (for the STAR collaboration) 1 Nihar R. Sahoo,

EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FOR HADRONIC DECONFINEMENT In p-p Collisions at 1.8 TeV * L. Gutay - 1 * Phys. Lett. B528(2002)43-48 (FNAL, E-735 Collaboration Purdue,

1 Jeffery T. Mitchell – Quark Matter /17/12 The RHIC Beam Energy Scan Program: Results from the PHENIX Experiment Jeffery T. Mitchell Brookhaven.

Hadron Collider Physics 2012, 12/Nov/2012, KyotoShinIchi Esumi, Univ. of Tsukuba1 Heavy Ion results from RHIC-BNL ShinIchi Esumi Univ. of Tsukuba Contents.

Does HBT interferometry probe thermalization? Clément Gombeaud, Tuomas Lappi and J-Y Ollitrault IPhT Saclay WPCF 2009, CERN, October 16, 2009.

Sergey Panitkin Current Status of the RHIC HBT Puzzle Sergey Panitkin Brookhaven National Lab La Thuile, March 18, 2005.

Masashi Kaneta, First joint Meeting of the Nuclear Physics Divisions of APS and JPS 1 / Masashi Kaneta LBNL

Heavy-Ion Physics - Hydrodynamic Approach Introduction Hydrodynamic aspect Observables explained Recombination model Summary 전남대 이강석 HIM

Inha Nuclear Physics Group Quantum Opacity and Refractivity in HBT Puzzle Jin-Hee Yoon Dept. of Physics, Inha University, Korea John G. Cramer,

R. Lednicky: Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia I.P. Lokhtin, A.M. Snigirev, L.V. Malinina: Moscow State University, Institute of Nuclear.

Scott PrattMichigan State University Femtoscopy: Theory ____________________________________________________ Scott Pratt, Michigan State University.

Budapest, 4-9 August 2005Quark Matter 2005 HBT search for new states of matter in A+A collisions Yu. Sinyukov, BITP, Kiev Based on the paper S.V. Akkelin,

Itzhak Tserruya Initial Conditions at RHIC: an Experimental Perspective RHIC-INT Workshop LBNL, May31 – June 2, 2001 Itzhak Tserruya Weizmann.

Characterization of the pion source at the AGS Mike Lisa The Ohio State University Motivation and Measurement Systematics of HBT in E895 Existing problems.

Chester - Sept Russell Betts 1 The Experimental Challenge Adapting the Techniques of Particle Physics to Measuring 100  more Particles per.

1 Probing dense matter at extremely high temperature Rudolph C. Hwa University of Oregon Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China April 20, 2009.

Systematic Study of Elliptic Flow at RHIC Maya SHIMOMURA University of Tsukuba ATHIC 2008 University of Tsukuba, Japan October 13-15, 2008.

BNL/ Tatsuya CHUJO JPS RHIC symposium, Chuo Univ., Tokyo Hadron Production at RHIC-PHENIX Tatsuya Chujo (BNL) for the PHENIX Collaboration.

Andras. Ster, RMKI, Hungary ZIMANYI-SCHOOL’09, Budapest, 01/12/ Azimuthally Sensitive Buda-Lund Hydrodynamic Model and Fits to Spectra, Elliptic.

Kirill Filimonov, ISMD 2002, Alushta 1 Kirill Filimonov Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Anisotropy and high p T hadrons in Au+Au collisions at RHIC.

QM08, Jaipur, 9 th February, 2008 Raghunath Sahoo Saturation of E T /N ch and Freeze-out Criteria in Heavy Ion Collisions Raghunath Sahoo Institute of.

QGP-Meet’06, VECC, Kolkata. 6 th Feb-2006 RAGHUNATH SAHOO, INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS, BHUBANESWAR TRANSVERSE ENERGY PRODUCTION AT RHIC OUTLINE: Introduction.

Japanese Physics Society meeting, Hokkaido Univ. 23/Sep/2007, JPS meeting, Sapporo, JapanShinIchi Esumi, Inst. of Physics, Univ. of Tsukuba1 Collective.

T. Csörgő 1,2 for the PHENIX Collaboration Femtoscopic results in Au+Au & p+p from PHENIX at RHIC 1 MTA KFKI RMKI, Budapest,

Helen Caines Yale University Strasbourg - May 2006 Strangeness and entropy.

Global and Collective Dynamics at PHENIX Takafumi Niida for the PHENIX Collaboration University of Tsukuba “Heavy Ion collisions in the LHC era” in Quy.

PHENIX Results from the RHIC Beam Energy Scan Brett Fadem for the PHENIX Collaboration Winter Workshop on Nuclear Dynamics 2016.

Hadron Spectra and Yields Experimental Overview Julia Velkovska INT/RHIC Winter Workshop, Dec 13-15, 2002.

A generalized Buda-Lund model M. Csanád, T. Csörgő and B. Lörstad (Budapest & Lund) Buda-Lund model for ellipsoidally symmetric systems and it’s comparison.

Soft physics in PbPb at the LHC Hadron Collider Physics 2011 P. Kuijer ALICECMSATLAS Necessarily incomplete.

What do the scaling characteristics of elliptic flow reveal about the properties of the matter at RHIC ? Michael Issah Stony Brook University for the PHENIX.

Direct Photon v 2 Study in 200 GeV AuAu Collisions at RHIC Guoji Lin (Yale) For STAR Collaboration RHIC & AGS Users’ Meeting, BNL, June 5-9.

Hydro + Cascade Model at RHIC

Collective Dynamics at RHIC

Outline First of all, there’s too much data!! BRAHMS PHOBOS PHENIX

Heavy Ion Physics at NICA Simulations G. Musulmanbekov, V

Two Particle Interferometry at RHIC

One PeV Collisions Very successful Heavy Ion run in 2015, with all new detectors in operation 16 GB/s readout/ 6GB/s on disk after HLT compression.

Masahiro Konno (Univ. of Tsukuba) for the PHENIX　Collaboration Contact

Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica, Bari (Italy)

Presentation transcript:

STAR Surprises from RHIC John G. Cramer Department of Physics University of Washington John G. Cramer Department of Physics University of Washington Colloquium UW Physics Department March 4, 2002 Colloquium UW Physics Department March 4, 2002

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer2 Part 1 About RHIC (The Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider) About RHIC (The Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider)

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer3 Brookhaven/RHIC Overview Systems: Au + Au CM Energies: 130 GeV/A 200 GeV/A 1 st Collisions: 06/13/2000 Location: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Long Island, NY

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer4 Booster Ring AGS Switchyard RHIC Tandem Van de Graaff The RHIC Accelerator System Blue Ring Yellow Ring

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer5 What does RHIC do? RHIC accelerates gold nuclei in two beams to about 100 Gev/nucleon each (i.e., to kinetic energies that are over 100 times their rest mass-energy) and brings these beams into a 200 GeV/nucleon collision. Four experiments, STAR, PHENIX, PHOBOS, and BRAHMS study these collisions. In the year 2000 run, RHIC operated at a collision energy of 130 Gev/nucleon. In it operated at 200 GeV/nucleon.

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer6 About the STAR Detector. ZCl Barrel EM Calorim eter Endcap Calorime ter Magn et Coils TPC Endcap & MWPC ZC al FTPCs Vertex Positio n Detect ors Central Trigger Barrel or TOF Time Projecti on Chamb er Silicon Vertex Tracker RI CH STAR is a large solenoidal detector based on a time- projection chamber. It uses a 0.5 tesla magnetic field to momentum-analyze about 2,000 charged particles per collision.

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer7 The STAR Collaboration

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer8 Run: , Event: 32, central colors ~ momentum: low high Central Au +Au Collision at  s NN = 130 GeV

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer9 Part 2 RHIC Surprises

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer10 In Search of the Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP) A QGP should have more degrees of freedom than a pion gas. Entropy should be conserved during the fireball’s evolution. Hence, look in phase space for evidence of: Large size, Long lifetime, Extended expansion……

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer11 Surprises from RHIC 1.Relativistic hydrodynamic calculations work surprisingly well, while cascade string-breaking models have problems. Near-threshold QGP behavior is not observed. The “Hydro Paradox”. 2.There is evidence for strong “quenching” of high momentum pions. QGP Absorption? 3.The ratio of the HBT radii R out /R side is ~1, while the closest model predicts 1.2, and most models predict 4 or more. In essence, all models on the market have been falsified. The “HBT Puzzle” 4.The pion phase space density is much larger than that observed at CERN or predicted by simple thermal models. A pion chemical potential ~ 50 MeV is needed to explain it. Stimulated emission of pions?

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer12 Surprise 1 Event-by-Event Elliptic Flow and Hydrodynamics

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer13 Elliptic Flow and V 2 Sensitive to initial/final conditions and equation of state (EOS) ! coordinate-space-anisotropy  momentum-space-anisotropy y x pypy pxpx

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer14 Elliptic Flow and Hydrodynamics

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer15 The Hydrodynamic Paradox The system behaves as if it has reached thermodynamic equilibrium. How could there be enough time (in ~10 fm/c) for the system to come to thermal equilibrium, as relativistic hydrodynamics assumes? Quantum effects? Perhaps the multiparticle wave function collapses into a maximum entropy state => TD equilibrium. The system behaves as if it has reached thermodynamic equilibrium. How could there be enough time (in ~10 fm/c) for the system to come to thermal equilibrium, as relativistic hydrodynamics assumes? Quantum effects? Perhaps the multiparticle wave function collapses into a maximum entropy state => TD equilibrium.

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer16 Surprise 2 Pion Spectrum Measurements: Strong Absorption of 2 to 6 GeV/c Pions Pion Spectrum Measurements: Strong Absorption of 2 to 6 GeV/c Pions

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer17 Gedankenexperiments:  + QGP or HG High momentum pion beam Lower momentum pions QGP High momentum pion beam Hadron gas High momentum pions (Transparent) (Opaque) Target

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer18 High-Momentum  Absorption (1) Au+Au p+p Preliminary Scales approximately A 2 at high p T. (h + + h - )/2 Syst. errors from UA1 extrapolation MinBias/ UA1

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer19 High-Momentum  Absorption (2) Suppression factor ~2 Systematic errors from UA1 extrapolation from 200 to 130 GeV Central/ UA1 Conclusion: Central RHIC Au+Au collisions show strong absorption of high energy pions that is not observed in Pb+Pb collisions at the CERN SPS or in less central collisions at RHIC. Smoking gun for QGP?

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer20 Surprise 3 Source Radii and Emission Duration from Bose-Einstein Interferometry

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer21 The Hanbury-Brown-Twiss Effect Neglects q Momentum dependence of source Quantum mechanics up to x and y q Final State Interactions after x and y Nonetheless q C2(q) contains shape information q True component-by-component in q For non-interacting identical bosons: S(x,p)=S(x)S(p) Coherent interference between incoherent sources!

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer22 Bertsch-Pratt Momentum Coordinates

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer23 A Bose-Einstein Correlation “Bump” This 3D histogram has been corrected for Coulomb repulsion of identical     pairs and is a projection slice near q long =0. The “bump” results from Bose-Einstein statistics of identical pions (J  =0  ).

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer24 Expectations: Pre-RHIC HBT Predictions “Naïve” picture (no space-momentum correlations):  R out 2 = R side 2 +(  pair  ) 2 One step further:  Hydro calculation of Rischke & Gyulassy expects R out /R side ~ 2- k t = 350 MeV.  Looking for a “soft spot”  Small R out /R side only for T QGP =T f (unphysical)). R out R side

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer25 Reality: STAR/RHIC HBT Measurements ~10% Central AuAu(PbPb) events y ~ 0 k T  0.17 GeV/c No significant increase in spatio-temporal size of the  emitting source at RHIC. Note the ~100 GeV gap from SPS to RHIC and the gap between AGS and SPS data. Ro/Rs ~ 1

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer26 Conclusion: Transverse Size ~ Constant vs. Energy R out and R side are energy independent within error bars. Smooth energy dependence in R long No immediate indication of very different physics Fit R long to: AGS: A = /-.05 SPS: A = /-.10 RHIC: A = /-.03 A =  0 T in 1 st order T/m T calculation -- M. Lisa et al., PRL 84, 2798 (2000) R. Soltz et al., to be sub PRC C. Adler et al., PRL 87, I.G. Bearden et al., EJP C18, 317 (2000)  0 = average freeze-out time T = freezeout temperature

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer27 R O /R S : STAR and PHENIX Agree, Models Fail. Compiled by S. Johnson STAR and PHENIX agree Best hydro model does not reproduce the data

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer28 Remedies for RHIC HBT Puzzle? Problems: Ro/Rs (and implied emission duration) are too small, implying near-instantaneous emission. R l is also uncomfortably small, calling into question Bjorken “boost invariance”. Solutions?: Allow single “avalanche” freezeout: t PT =t CF =t F ? Abandon outside-in freezeout scenario? Assume some mysterious energy-loss process at hottest part of collision fireball? Abandon boost invariance?

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer29 Surprise 4 Particle Spectrum Measurements + Bose-Einstein Interferometry: Pion Phase Space Density Particle Spectrum Measurements + Bose-Einstein Interferometry: Pion Phase Space Density

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer30 2D Fit to Pion Spectrum (only) We can do a global fit of the uncorrected pion spectrum vs. centrality by: (1)Assuming that the spectrum has the form of a Bose-Einstein distribution: d 2 N/m T dm T dy=A/[Exp(E/T) –1] and (2)Assuming that A and T have a quadratic dependence on the number of participants : A(p) = A 0 +A 1 +A 2 2 T(p) = T 0 +T 1 +T 2 2 STAR Preliminary

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer31 A 3D Correlation Histogram

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer32 Pion Phase Space Density at Midrapidity The Lorentz scalar phase space density  f(m T )  is the dimensionless average number of pions per 6-dimensional phase space cell Ñ 3. At midrapidity  f  is given by the expression: Momentum Spectrum HBT “volume” PurityJacobian Average phase space density

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer33 Momentum Volume The momentum volume can be determined in two ways: (1)Fit the correlation function with a 3D Gaussian and use the fit parameters to estimate the momentum volume v mom, (2)Direct summation of the 3D histogram channels. Method (1) is traditional, but Method (2) is less model-dependent and gives the best statistical accuracy.

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer34 from Direct Histogram Sums STAR Preliminary

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer35 Tomasik & Heinz PSD Paper The longitudinal expansion has reduced the phase space density and broken the rule that the PSD goes to a Bose-Einstein distribution when  t =p t =0 (no flow). The reduction in the PSD leads to a need for a non-zero chemical potential  0 to reach high enough PSD values to match RHIC/STAR observations. Notice that there is a “sweet spot” near p T =0.1 GeV/c at which is independent of  t.

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer36 T&H Fit to Pion Spectra Because the longitudinal expansion reduces the phase space density, a non-zero chemical potential   is required to reproduce the most central data. Pion phase space density depends on   and T in essentially the same way, changing the PSD strength but not its shape. However, the spectrum slope has very different dependences on   and T, breaking this ambiguity. Therefore, fitting PSD and spectra together constrains the parameters. However, the lowest curves would prefer a negative   -value to reproduce the spectrum slope while fitting the PSD. STAR Preliminary

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer37 T&H Fit to STAR Phase Space Density (HBT) STAR Preliminary Phase space density ~ 1 Multiparticle and laser-like stimulated emission effects?

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer38 Summary What does it all mean?

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer39 Conclusion (1) The theoretical models of RHIC physics now on the market allow the source to expand for too long, so that the theoretical predictions “outrun” the boundaries of experimental observation. Something is seriously wrong with our understanding of the dynamics of RHIC collisions.

STAR March 4, 2002 John G. Cramer40 Conclusion (2) The useful theoretical models that has served us so well at the AGS and SPS for heavy ion studies have now been overloaded with a large volume of puzzling new data from RHIC, and things are a bit up in the air. We need more theoretical help and more experimental data to meet the challenge of understanding what is going on in the RHIC regime. It’s a very exciting time for us STAR experimentalists!