7/7/09 William Horowitz WHDG Brick and Comparing WHDG to ASW-SH William Horowitz The Ohio State University July 7, 2009 With many thanks to Brian Cole,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Why soft interaction approximations are not strong enough for jets in the QGP Simon Wicks Work done with Miklos Gyulassy With thanks to Azfar Adil, William.
Advertisements

W. A. Horowitz Quark Matter 2005 A Promising Solution to the Elliptic Quench Puzzle at RHIC William A. Horowitz Columbia University August 4-5, 2005.
Charm & bottom RHIC Shingo Sakai Univ. of California, Los Angeles 1.
21/05/07 William Horowitz CERN Heavy Ion Forum 1 Possible String Theoretic Deviations from pQCD in Heavy Quark Energy Loss at LHC William Horowitz Columbia.
M. Djordjevic 1 Heavy quark energy loss puzzle at RHIC Magdalena Djordjevic The Ohio State University.
#: 1... and your jet energy loss calculation? What drives you? aka Perturbative jet energy loss mechanisms: Learning from RHIC, extrapolating to LHC Simon.
The EIC, Heavy Quarks, and QGP Phenomenology W. A. Horowitz University of Cape Town October 4, /22/20151EIC at the INT With many thanks to Brian.
Single & Dihadron Suppression at RHIC and LHC Xin-Nian Wang Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Last call for prediction for LHC, CERN, May 29-June 2,2007.
1 Heavy Quark Energy Loss Tatia Engelmore Journal Club 7/21.
Radiative energy loss Marco van Leeuwen, Utrecht University.
6/1/07 William Horowitz CERN Heavy Ion Forum 1 Possible String Theoretic Deviations from pQCD in Heavy Quark Energy Loss at LHC William Horowitz Columbia.
Status of the TECHQM ‘brick problem’ Marco van Leeuwen, Utrecht University.
M. Djordjevic 1 Effect of dynamical QCD medium on radiative heavy quark energy loss Magdalena Djordjevic The Ohio State University.
M. Djordjevic 1 Heavy quark energy loss in a dynamical QCD medium Magdalena Djordjevic The Ohio State University M. Djordjevic and U. Heinz, arXiv:
Marco van Leeuwen, Marta Verweij, Utrecht University Energy loss in a realistic geometry.
Anomaly of over ratios in Au+Au collision with jet quenching Xiaofang Chen IOPP, CCNU Collaborator: Enke Wang Hanzhong Zhang Benwei Zhang Beijing Mar.
Precision Probes for Hot QCD Matter Rainer Fries Texas A&M University & RIKEN BNL QCD Workshop, Washington DC December 15, 2006.
6/26/07 William Horowitz SQM pQCD vs. AdS/CFT Tested by Heavy Quark Energy Loss William Horowitz Columbia University Frankfurt Institute for Advanced.
1/31/07William Horowitz Yale-Columbia Fest Spring ‘07 1 pQCD vs. String Theory: LHC Heavy Flavors to Decide William Horowitz Columbia University January.
11/15/06 William Horowitz 1 LHC Predictions 1 from an extended theory 2 with Elastic, Inelastic, and Path Length Fluctuating Jet Energy Loss William Horowitz.
6/6/06William Horowitz Hard Probes Overcoming Fragility William Horowitz Columbia University June 14, 2006 With many thanks to Simon Wicks, Azfar.
10/26/07 William Horowitz AdS Strings Intersect with Nuclear Beams at Columbia 1 Probing AdS/CFT with Heavy Quarks William Horowitz Columbia University.
6/6/06William Horowitz RHIC & AGS Annual Users’ Meeting ‘06 1 Heavy Quark Energy Loss William Horowitz Columbia University June 6, 2006 With many thanks.
11/1/06William Horowitz 1 Jet Quenching at RHIC and the LHC William Horowitz Columbia University November 1, 2006 With many thanks to Simon Wicks, Azfar.
Luan Cheng (Institute of Particle Physics, Huazhong Normal University) I.Introduction II. Potential Model with Flow III.Flow Effects on Parton Energy Loss.
Jet energy loss at RHIC and LHC including collisional and radiative and geometric fluctuations Simon Wicks, QM2006 Work done with Miklos Gyulassy, William.
Comparing energy loss models Marco van Leeuwen Utrecht University What have we learned from the TECHQM brick problem? With many contributions from TEHCQM.
9/22/06William Horowitz 1 Surface or Volume Emission at RHIC: Is Jet Tomography Possible? William Horowitz Columbia University September 22, 2006 With.
Jet Physics in ALICE Mercedes López Noriega - CERN for the ALICE Collaboration Hot Quarks 2006 Villasimius, Sardinia - Italy.
M. Djordjevic 1 Theoretical predictions of jet suppression: a systematic comparison with RHIC and LHC data Magdalena Djordjevic Institute of Physics Belgrade,
11/02/07 William Horowitz Heavy Quark Workshop, LBNL 1 Falsifying AdS/CFT Drag or pQCD Heavy Quark Energy Loss with A+A at RHIC and LHC William Horowitz.
Simon Wicks Columbia University Work done with William Horowitz, Magdalena Djordjevic and Miklos Gyulassy with input from Azfar Adil BNL Heavy Flavor Workshop,
Third TECHQM Collaboration Meeting, CERN July 6-10, 2009 Xin-Nian Wang Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory The Brick Problem in High-Twist Approximation.
Parton energy loss Marco van Leeuwen. 2 Hard probes of QCD matter Use ‘quasi-free’ partons from hard scatterings to probe ‘quasi-thermal’ QCD matter Interactions.
Comparing energy loss phenomenology Marco van Leeuwen Utrecht University.
String Theory meets Field Theory in Heavy Ion Collisions W. A. Horowitz The Ohio State University October 23, 2009 With many thanks to Brian Cole, Miklos.
Elastic, Inelastic and Path Length Fluctuations in Jet Tomography Simon Wicks Hard Probes 2006 Work done with William Horowitz, Magdalena Djordjevic and.
Enke Wang (Institute of Particle Physics, Huazhong Normal University) I.Jet Quenching in QCD-based Model II.Jet Quenching in High-Twist pQCD III.Jet Tomography.
QM04 1/12/04M. Djordjevic 1 Heavy quark energy loss-Applications to RHIC Magdalena Djordjevic and Miklos Gyulassy Columbia University The Ter-Mikayelian.
12/16/08 William Horowitz TECHQM 2 nd Workshop, LBNL 1 DGLV : M. Djordjevic and M. Gyulassy, Nucl.Phys.A733, 265 (2004) [nucl-th/ ] WHDG : S. Wicks,
M. Djordjevic 1 Heavy quark energy loss in a dynamical QCD medium Magdalena Djordjevic The Ohio State University M. Djordjevic and U. Heinz, arXiv:
M. Djordjevic 1 Hard probes at RHIC and LHC Magdalena Djordjevic Ohio State University.
Heavy Flavor Measurements at RHIC&LHC W. Xie (Purdue University, West Lafayette) W. Xie (Purdue University, West Lafayette) Open Heavy Flavor Workshop.
Production, energy loss and elliptic flow of heavy quarks at RHIC and LHC Jan Uphoff with O. Fochler, Z. Xu and C. Greiner Hard Probes 2010, Eilat October.
12/12/05William Horowitz Heavy Flavor Productions Workshop Role of Dynamic Geometry in Jet Tomography William Horowitz Columbia University December 12,
Two particle correlations: from RHIC to LHC Francesco Noferini Bologna University INFN – sez. Bologna ALICE-TOF Tuesday, May 16th Villasimius (Italy) HOT.
F. Dominguez, CM, A. Mueller, B. Xiao and B. Wu, arXiv:
W. A. Horowitz The Ohio State University February 23, 2010
RHIC Challenges and LHC Outlook
Status of the TECHQM ‘brick problem’
Energy loss in a realistic geometry
Heavy Ion Physics and Electron Ion Colliders
Qualitative and Quantitative Energy Loss?
Status and Implications of PID measurements at high pT
Qualitative Successes of AdS/CFT at RHIC
W. A. Horowitz The Ohio State University March 12, 2010
Theory Update on Energy Loss
Testing Energy Loss and the Pion Puzzle (?) at LHC
Energy Loss Mechanisms and Jet Physics
Comparing energy loss models
RHIC in the Age of the LHC
Heavy Quark Energy Loss
Qualitative and Quantitative Energy Loss?
Testing pQCD and AdS/CFT Energy Loss at RHIC and LHC
Understanding Energy Loss of Heavy Quarks
The EIC, Heavy Quarks, and QGP Phenomenology
Energy Loss in the Hot QCD Brick I
Uncertainties and Consistency (?) in pQCD and AdS/CFT Jet Physics
W. A. Horowitz The Ohio State University June 19, 2010
Modified Fragmentation Function in Strong Interaction Matter
Presentation transcript:

7/7/09 William Horowitz WHDG Brick and Comparing WHDG to ASW-SH William Horowitz The Ohio State University July 7, 2009 With many thanks to Brian Cole, Ulrich Heinz, and Yuri Kovchegov

7/7/09 William Horowitz Outline Context Pedagogy (Some) brick results Comparing WHDG to ASW-SH Pedagogy Surprise! Conclusions CERN2

7/7/09 William Horowitz CERN3 pQCD Success at RHIC: –Consistency: R AA (  )~R AA (  ) –Null Control: R AA (  )~1 –GLV Prediction: Theory~Data for reasonable fixed L~5 fm and dN g /dy~dN  /dy Y. Akiba for the PHENIX collaboration, hep-ex/ (circa 2005)

7/7/09 William Horowitz CERN4 Trouble for High-p T wQGP Picture –v 2 too small –NPE supp. too large STAR, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, (2007)  0 v 2 PHENIX, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, (2007) NPE v 2 Pert. at LHC energies? C. Vale, QM09 Plenary (analysis by R. Wei) WHDG

7/7/09 William Horowitz CERN5 Multiple Models –Inconsistent medium properties –Distinguish between models Bass et al., Phys.Rev.C79:024901,2009 WHDG, Nucl.Phys.A784: ,2007 Bass et al.

7/7/09 William Horowitz CERN6 Quantitative Parameter Extraction Vary input param. Find “best” value PHENIX, PRC77:064907,2008 Need for theoretical error

7/7/09 William Horowitz pQCD Rad. Opacity Exp. (I) All orders in L / expression for d N g /d x N g : number of emitted gluons x : “momentum fraction carried by gluon” –Small x regime, x << 1 –Assumed length scales:    << << L Debye screening mass  Mean free path Medium length L –Localized scattering centers; partons see many centers and radiate coherently (crucial!) CERN7

7/7/09 William Horowitz pQCD Rad. Opacity Exp. (II) Eikonality assumed p + >> p - k + >> k - –Radiation emitted forward –Parent parton continues moving forward –Partons move on straight-line paths First order in opacity –Interference w/ vacuum rad. crucial 8 mgmg M CERN

7/7/09 William Horowitz FOO dN g /dx WHDG Rad: , M, m g depend on T CERN9

7/7/09 William Horowitz d N g /d x to P (  ) –Opacity expansion => d N g /d x Single gluon emission spectrum –Approx. multi-gluon fluct. w/ Poisson conv. Prob. to lose mom. frac.  p f = (1-  ) p i Assumes incoherent emission of non-Abelian gluons CERN 10

7/7/09 William Horowitz CERN11 WHDG Collisional Loss –Gaussian distribution Mean loss for light quarks: –Braaten-Thoma, PRD44, 2625 (1991) –Width given by Fluctuation-Dissipation theorem –Poisson conv. not well approx by Gaussian for realistic, small num of scatterings See Simon Wicks’ thesis

7/7/09 William Horowitz Typical Results Original Brick CERN12 Wiedemann Brick =.4

7/7/09 William Horowitz CERN13 Running  s ? –  s =.2,.3 – Not surprisingly, changes in  s make huge difference to P(  ) –  s =.3,.4

7/7/09 William Horowitz CERN14 WHDG thru KKP –Facilitate comparison between WHDG and HT –Elastic gain => D(z > 1) > 0

7/7/09 William Horowitz FOO dN g /dx WHDG Rad: , M, m g depend on T CERN15

7/7/09 William Horowitz Differences WHDG Rad m g =  /√2 M =  /2 k max = 2 x (1- x ) E  exp ( z ) L/ (T) q max = √(3  E )  s =.3 ASW-SH m g =  M =  k max = x E  theta ( z ) L/ q max = ∞  s = 1/3 CERN16

7/7/09 William Horowitz Where Did k max ’s Come From? (I) DGLV –Light cone momenta –Note x + def.! –Always on-shell ASW-SH –4-momenta –Note x E def.! –Always on-shell CERN17 The same in the eikonal limit!

7/7/09 William Horowitz Where Did k max ’s Come From? (II) DGLV –Light cone momenta –Note x + def.! –Always on-shell – k T < x + E + = 2 x + E –Forward travel ASW-SH –4-momenta –Note x E def.! –Always on-shell – k T < x E E –Forward travel CERN18 Same physics: cutoff when gluons radiated at 90 o

7/7/09 William Horowitz Compare Apples to Apples Differences must be due to non-eikonality GLV( x E ) in red; ASW-SH( x E ) in blue CERN19

7/7/09 William Horowitz Large E Limit – GLV( x E ) in red; ASW-SH( x E ) in blue –For most values of x, naïve interpretation holds What’s going on at small x ? CERN20

7/7/09 William Horowitz Interpretation Physically: –Typical k T ~  => typ.  ~  System wants to radiate lots of glue at x ~  / E BUT, this is right at our k T cutoff: –k T ~  <  ~ k T, max : the system will always take advantage of all the “phase space” we give it Analytically: –More natural way to write d N g /d x CERN21

7/7/09 William Horowitz Consequences At large energies, is E ind. –Large irreducible systematic uncertainty for some observables –For T = 485 GeV, L = 2 fm,  s = 0.3: ≈ 1, k max = x E ≈ 2, k max = 2 x E –Note that R AA becomes insensitive to details of k max (goes to 1) CERN22

7/7/09 William Horowitz Conclusions –Current phen. comparisons of pQCD to data unsatisfactory –WHDG not oversuppressed Opacity expansion suffers from large systematic errors –Strong dependence on k max = # x E # is not specified by framework –Similar dependence on IR cutoff, m g –Irreducible? Consequences for other models, parameter extractions? WHDG Brick and Comparison to ASW-SH23

7/7/09 William Horowitz Supplement CERN

7/7/09 William Horowitz Eikonality Sets in for all x CERN25 X =.1 E X =.01 E X =.001 E X = E