Gravity meets QCD and inertia Round Table What next?: Theoretical and Experimental Physics after the discovery of the Brout-Englert-Higgs boson March 4, 2014 What next?: Theoretical and Experimental Physics after the discovery of the Brout-Englert-Higgs boson Oleg Teryaev Bogoliubov Theoretical Laboratory, JINR

Main Topics Hadronic Physics and quarks/gluons couplings to gravity: Gravitational Formfactors Equivalence Principle and Spin: rotating frames Extension of Equivalence Principle (validity separately for quarks and gluons) : probes Quadrupole formfactors and cosmological constant: annihilation and inflation Rotation in heavy-ion collisions

Heavy Ion and Hadronic Physics after BEH boson discovery QCD studies via quark-gluon matter and hadron structure Advanced high accuracy programs – RHIC, JLab, J-Parc, COMPASS (talk of O. Denisov), GSI, NICA(talks of V. Kekelidze and I. Savin) Relation of QCD to fundamental physics? Particular example: coupling of quarks and gluons to gravity/inertia(rotation)

Gravity for quarks and gluons Current or constituent quark mass?! Neither: matrix elements of energy momentum tensor May be extracted from cross sections of hard inclusive ( ) and exclusive ( ) processes The weakness of gravity does not matter!

From axial to gravitational formfactors Axial FFs – crucial for determination of neutrino-nucleon inetractions In principle: may be extracted from hard electromagnetic processes Should the weak interaction be much weaker, axial FFs are still accessible The same is true for gravitational FFs Unique way to probe seprately gravity couplings to quarks and gluons

Gravitational Formfactors Conservation laws - zero Anomalous Gravitomagnetic Moment : (g=2) May be extracted from high-energy experiments/NPQCD calculations Describe the partition of angular momentum between quarks and gluons Describe interaction with both classical and TeV gravity

G eneralized Parton Diistributions (related to matrix elements of non local operators ) – models for both EM and Gravitational Formfactors (Selyugin,OT ’09) Smaller mass square radius (attraction vs repulsion!?)

Equivalence principle Newtonian – “Falling elevator” – well known and checked (also for elementary particles) Post-Newtonian – gravity action on SPIN – known since 1962 (Kobzarev and Okun’); rederived from conservarion laws - Kobzarev and Zakharov Anomalous gravitomagnetic (and electric-CP- odd) moment iz ZERO or Classical and QUANTUM rotators behave in the SAME way

Electromagnetism vs Gravity Interaction – field vs metric deviation Static limit Mass as charge – equivalence principle

Gravitomagnetism Gravitomagnetic field (weak, except in gravity waves) – action on spin from spin dragging twice smaller than EM Lorentz force – similar to EM case: factor ½ cancelled with 2 from Larmor frequency same as EM Orbital and Spin momenta dragging – the same - Equivalence principle

Equivalence principle for moving particles Compare gravity and acceleration: gravity provides EXTRA space components of metrics Matrix elements DIFFER Ratio of accelerations: - confirmed by explicit solution of Dirac equation (Silenko, OT, ‘05) Arbitrary fields – Obukhov, Silenko, OT, ‘09, ‘11, ‘13

Gravity vs accelerated frame for spin and helicity Spin precession – well known factor 3 (Probe B; spin at satellite – probe of PNEP!) – smallness of relativistic correction (~P 2 ) is compensated by 1/ P 2 in the momentum direction precession frequency Helicity flip – the same! No helicity flip in gravitomagnetic field – another formulation of PNEP (OT’99) Never tested on purpose; reinterpretation (Silenko,OT’07) of EDM searches data – test with % accuracy for atomic spins

Gyromagnetic and Gravigyromagnetic ratios Free particles – coincide = P {m /e up to the terms linear in q Special role of g=2 for any spin (asymptotic freedom for vector bosons) Should Einstein know about PNEP, the outcome of his and de Haas experiment would not be so surprising Recall also g=2 for Black Holes. Indication of “quantum” nature?!

Cosmological implications of PNEP Necessary condition for Mach’s Principle (in the spirit of Weinberg’s textbook) - Lense-Thirring inside massive rotating empty shell (=model of Universe) For flat “Universe” - precession frequency equal to that of shell rotation Simple observation-Must be the same for classical and quantum rotators – PNEP! More elaborate models - Tests for cosmology ?!

Generalization of Equivalence principle Various arguments: AGM 0 separately for quarks and gluons – most clear from the lattice (LHPC/SESAM) confirmed by subsequent calculations

Extended Equivalence Principle=Exact EquiPartition In pQCD – violated Reason – in the case of ExEP- no smooth transition for zero fermion mass limit (Milton, 73) Conjecture (O.T., 2001 – prior to lattice data) – valid in NP QCD – zero quark mass limit is safe due to chiral symmetry breaking Gravity proofed confinement (also when falling to Black Hole?) - gravity does not “unbalance” quark and gluon angular momenta Supported by smallness of E (isoscalar AMM)

Vector mesons and EEP J=1/2 -> J=1. QCD SR (Samsonov) calculation of Rho’s AMM gives g close to 2. Maybe because of similarity of moments g-2= ; B= Directly for charged Rho (combinations like p+n for nucleons unnecessary!). Not reduced to non-extended EP: Gluons momentum fraction sizable

EEP and AdS/QCD Calculation of Rho formfactors in Holographic QCD (Grigoryan, Radyushkin) provides g=2 identically! Experimental test at time –like region possible

Another manifestation of post- Newtonian (E)EP for spin 1 hadrons Tensor polarization - coupling of EMT to spin in forward matrix elements - inclusive processes Second moments of tensor distributions should sum to zero =0 for EEP

HERMES – data on tensor spin structure function Isoscalar target – proportional to the sum of u and d quarks – combination required by EEP Second moment – compatible to zero better than the first one (collective glue << sea) – for valence: Tests at new Drell-Yan experiments with deuteron targets (COMPASS, NICA)?

Quadrupole FF: Inflation and annihilation Quadrupole gravitational FF Positive fo nucleons, photons, Q-balls,…. Related to stability Vacuum – Cosmological Constant 2D effective CC – negative in scattering, positive in annihilation (=classical gravity + crossing invariance) Similarity of inflation and Schwinger pair production – Starobisnky, Zel’dovich NEC is also violated (should be restored by other FFs) Was OUR Big Bang resulting from one graviton annihilation at extra dimensions?? Version of “ekpyrotic” (“pyrotechnic”) universe?

Rotation in “Small Bang” 4-velocity -> gauge field, chemical potential -> charge : eJ µ A µ -> µJ µ v µ Vorticity (= curl v) acts on spin like (gravito) magnetism µ curl v ~ eH ~ m curl g 0i HIC – largest possible vorticity: velocity ~c changes at the distances ~ Compton wavelength Inertial effects (~ gravity by EP) are LARGE Manifestations (Rogachevsky,Sorin,OT): Chiral vortical effect – charges separation (baryon charge – Baryons polarization: anomalous VVA correlator in medium

Model calculations (Baznat,Gudima,Sorin,OT) Phys.Rev. C88 (2013)

Structure of velocity and vorticity fields (5 GeV/c)

Hydrodynamical Helicity (=v rot v) separation

CONCLUSIONS Quarks/Gl couplings to gravity may be studied in hadronic process and NPQCD Evidences for EP valid separately for quarks and gluons: gravity proofed (also at BH?) confinement? EP for deutrons may be studied in and NICA HIC – strongest possible vorticity Manifestations under scrutiny

Black holes at LHC Safe Mini BH – immediately evaporated Production mechanism – another gravity/QCD meeting point What can QCD factorization tell?

QCD factorization Hard subprocess (calculable) + soft parton distributions –HADRONIC matrix elements of quark and gluon operators (uncalculable but universal)-Politzer, Collins, Efremov, Radyushkin Do not have physical meaning separately Hard scale required

Hadronic collisions Different types of distributions contribute (quark, GLUON, generalized, unintegrated…) Hard subprocesses - calculable

What about BH? Usually – parton distributions +classical geometric cross-section Intrinsic contradiction (parts of the same QUANTUM amplitude) Hard scale – BH mass – MUST enter the original amplitude to extract parton distributions Def: BH -> Quantum state with definite mass + Hawking decay

BH a la heavy meson Meson: Coupling to gluons related to decay width Up to normalization – also for BH What is BH decay width to 2 gluons -> 2 jets (q-h duality)?!

32 Final state of the SM process vs typical BH decay spectra Multi-jet and hard leptons events, spherical, typical temperature about 200 GeV Pictures by Sabine Hossenfelder SM BH decay

What is the overlap of thermalaized and 2jets events? Probabilistic reasoning : | | ~ exp (-N ) Exponential suppression of BH production (cf M.B. Voloshine – from semiclassical arguments)

Relations to fundamental problems of BH? Suppression – related to information loss Classical formula - irreversibility Coupling decay width | |=| | - T(+P=C) invariance Virtual space-like (t-channel) gluons – crossing invariabce Relation of Gravity (Hawking radiation) and QCD (jet fragmentation) Classical BH – GG states should be prepared – extra suppression by hard gluon exchange – weakening CMS bound?

Other mechanisms Extra gluons – higher twists - power suppression – but not exponential! Small x – Colour Glass Condensate Heavy Ions?

CONCLUSIONS-BH QCD factorization – calls for quantum consideration of BH Coupling to partons - exponentially suppressed Related to fundamental issues of BH physics Other empirical QCD/Gravity relations BH may be better produced in heavy ions collisions

CONCLUSIONS-FF EP with spin – new problem for particle physics Spin-1 hadrons – new manifestation A number of evidences for validity of EP for quarks and gluons separately