Transcript Document

What have we learned from RHIC , So far?
RHIC has taken data in:
2001: AuAu (130GeV)
2002: AuAu , pp(200 GeV)
2003: pp, dAu (200 GeV)
Any
nucleus on
any other.
Top energies
(each beam):
100
GeV/nucleon
Au-Au.
250 GeV 2
countercirculating
rings, 3.8 km
circumference
polarized p-p.

STAR
PHENIX
9
5
°
BRAHMS
30°
2.3°
30°
15°
The STAR Collaboration
Brazil:
Universidade de Sao Paulo
China:
IHEP – Beijing
IMP - Lanzou
IPP – Wuhan
USTC
SINR – Shanghai
Tsinghua University
Great Britain:
University of Birmingham
France:
IReS Strasbourg
SUBATECH - Nantes
Germany:
MPI – Munich
University of Frankfurt
India:
IOP - Bhubaneswar
VECC - Calcutta
Panjab University
University of Rajasthan
Jammu University
IIT - Bombay
VECC – Kolcata
Poland:
Warsaw University of Tech.
Russia:
MEPHI - Moscow
LPP/LHE JINR - Dubna
IHEP - Protvino
U.S. Laboratories:
Argonne
Berkeley
Brookhaven
U.S. Universities:
UC Berkeley
UC Davis
UC Los Angeles
Carnegie Mellon
Creighton University
Indiana University
Kent State University
Michigan State University
City College of New York
Ohio State University
Penn. State University
Purdue University
Rice University
Texas A&M
UT Austin
U. of Washington
Wayne State University
Yale University
Phases of QCD
High Density QCD Matter in Laboratory
Determine its properties
QCD Prediction: Phase Transitions
Deconfinement to Q-G Plasma
Chiral symmetry restoration
Relevance to other research areas?
Quark-hadron phase transition in
early Universe
Cores of dense stars
High density QCD
Centrality and Participants in HI
spectators
Npart (Wounded Nucleons) ~ soft production
Nbin ~ hard processes
Preliminary sNN = 200 GeV
peripheral (grazing shot)
participants
Uncorrected
Centrality classes based on mid-rapidity
multiplicity
central (head-on) collision
Triggering Capabilities
•Symmetric Zero Degree Calorimeters
•Central Trigger Barrel
15% Central
5% central
ZDC
Au
Au
ZDC
Understanding “Bulk” Matter
Studying Matter:
99.5%
STAR preliminary
– Global
Observables Nch,
ET, pT
 e, S, …
– Particle Yields &
Ratios
 Tch, mB, mS, …
– Particle Spectra
 Tfo, flow, stopping,
…
– Correlations
– … and all that in
pp, pA, AA
Particle Production
PHOBOS Central Au+Au (200 GeV)
• Multiplicity at low end of range
– But: Energy density 30x nuclear
matter
• Most models didn’t do so well
PHOBOS multiplicity papers:
Compilation by K. Eskola
600
1200
Rapidity Density
Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 , 3100 (2000)
Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 102303 (2001)
Phys. Rev. C 65 , 31901R (2002)
Phys.Rev. Lett. 88 , 22302 (2002)
Phys. Rev. C 65 , 061901R (2002)
nucl-ex/0210015, PRL in Press
nucl-ex/0301017, subm. to PRL
RHIC: Nch at mid-rapidity
Consistency of RHIC results
PHENIX: PC, STAR: TPC
PHOBOS: Si BRAHMS: Si & Scint.
PHENIX & STAR
preliminary
Ratio R(200/130):
BRAHMS:
1.14  0.05
PHENIX:
1.17  0.03
PHOBOS:
1.14  0.05
STAR:
1.19  (no sys. yet)
Nch(sNN) – Universality of Total
Multiplicity?
Total charged particle multiplicity / participant pair
seff  s / 2
Same for all
systems at same
s(seff for pp)
• pQCD e+eNch  Calculation
A sB exp( C /  s )
(A. Mueller,
1983)
Accidental, trivial? Is plain parton fragmentation
all there is in AA above s ~ 20 GeV?
Nch: Centrality Dependence at RHIC (SPS)
PHOBOS Au+Au |h|<1
200 GeV
130 GeV
Au+Au
_
pp
19.6 GeV
N part
dN
 (1  x)n pp
dh
2
 xnpp N coll
(preliminary)
preliminary
Everything counts:
• Nch|h=0 described nicely by KN (hard + soft)
• Nch scales with Npart
Rapidity Spectra: Boost-Invariance at RHIC
?
M. Baker (PHOBOS)
Jacobian :
y
( p / m) coshh
( p ,h ) 
h
( p / m) 2 cosh2 h  1
D. Ouerdane (BRAHMS)
ET/ Nch  from SPS to RHIC
PHENIX preliminary
Independent of centrality
Surprising fact:
PHENIX preliminary
Independent of energy
SPS  RHIC: increased flow, all particles higher pT
still ET/ Nch changes very little
Does different composition (chemistry) account for that?
Ratios, Ratios, Ratios ….
• Huge amount of results from all 4 RHIC
experiments:
• systematic studies of: p-/p+, K-/K+, p/p,/
,/,/, p/p, K/p , /, /h, p, p, fK, K*/K,
…
– many as function of pT, Npart
– at s of (20), 130, and 200 GeV
– with and without feed-down correction
()
• BRAHMS  large y coverage and reach to high pT
• PHENIX  reach to high pT
• STAR  multi-strange baryons
NEW: Rapidity dependence of ratios at RHIC
BRAHMS 200 GeV
At mid-rapidity:
Net-protons: dN/dy  7
proton yield: dN/dy  29
 ¾ of all protons from pair-production
p/p
Central
Peripheral
• Proton yield is comparable with pions @ 2 GeV in
central collisions, less in peripheral
Statistical Model: First Look at AuAu @ 200 GeV
Predictions:
phenomenologically:
mB ~ 1.3 GeV (1+s/4.5 GeV)-1
assume unified freeze-out
condition:
E/N ~ 1.1 GeV  T
Statistical Models: from AGS to RHIC
Different implementation of
statistical model (Kaneta/Nu,
Beccatini, PBM et al., …)
Fact: all work well at AGS, SPS
and RHIC
Slight variations in the models, but
roughly:
Fit by Beccatini using total yields from NA49
hadron gas fit with partial strangeness saturation
Tch [MeV]
mB [MeV]
AGS
125
540
SPS
165
250
RHIC
175
30
Does the success of the model
tells us we are dealing indeed
with locally chemically
equilibrated systems?
this+flow  If you ask me YES!
Anisotropic flow from AGS to RHIC
Picture: © UrQMD
Outline:
1.
Directed flow
(techniques, models, results)
2.
Elliptic flow
(techniques, models, results)
3.
Elliptic flow at high pt’s.
4.
Open questions
X
Z

b
XZ – the reaction plane
Anisotropic flow  correlations
with respect to the reaction plane
dpt dy dφ dpt dy 2π

( 1 2v1 cos(φ )  2v 2 cos( 2φ)  ...)
d 3N
d 2N 1
Directed flow
Elliptic flow
What flows and when?
STAR
preliminary
F. Wang
<pT> prediction with Tth
and <b> obtained from
blastwave fit (green line)
<pT> prediction for
Tch = 170 MeV
and <b>=0
pp no rescattering,
no flow
no thermal equilibrium
 and  appear to
deviate from common
thermal freeze-out
Smaller elast? Early decoupling
from expanding hadronic
medium? Less flow?
What’s about partonic flow?