* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Greco1 - INFN - Torino Personal pages
Double-slit experiment wikipedia , lookup
Interpretations of quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Density matrix wikipedia , lookup
Coherent states wikipedia , lookup
Probability amplitude wikipedia , lookup
Quantum state wikipedia , lookup
Dirac equation wikipedia , lookup
Symmetry in quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Wave–particle duality wikipedia , lookup
Quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Matter wave wikipedia , lookup
Quantum electrodynamics wikipedia , lookup
Elementary particle wikipedia , lookup
Topological quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Aharonov–Bohm effect wikipedia , lookup
Yang–Mills theory wikipedia , lookup
Hidden variable theory wikipedia , lookup
Lattice Boltzmann methods wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical and experimental justification for the Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup
Path integral formulation wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization group wikipedia , lookup
Relativistic quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Scale invariance wikipedia , lookup
Canonical quantization wikipedia , lookup
Quantum chromodynamics wikipedia , lookup
Transport Theory for the Quark-Gluon Plasma V. Greco UNIVERSITY of CATANIA INFN-LNS Quark-Gluon Plasma and Heavy-Ion Collisions – Turin (Italy), 7-12 March 2011 All the observables are in a way or the other related with the evolution of the phase space density : z y dN f ( x, p , t ) 3 3 d xd p x Hydrodynamics No microscopic descriptions (mean free path -> 0, h=0) implying f=feq What happens if we drop such assumptions? There is a more “general” transport theory valid also in non-equilibrium? T ( x) 0 + EoS P(e) Is there any motivation to look for it? j B ( x) 0 Picking-up four main results at RHIC Nearly Perfect Fluid, Large Collective Flows: Hydrodynamics good describes dN/dpT + v2(pT) with mass ordering BUT VISCOSITY EFFECTS SIGNIFICANT (finite and f ≠feq) High Opacity, Strong Jet-quenching: RAA(pT) <<1 flat in pT - Angular correlation triggered by jets pt<4 GeV STRONG BULK-JET TALK: Hydro+Jet model non applicable at pt<8-10 GeV Hadronization modified, Coalescence: B/M anomalous ratio + v2(pT) quark number scaling (QNS) MICROSCOPIC MECHANISM RELEVANT Heavy quarks strongly interacting: small RAA large v2 (hard to get both) pQCD fails: large scattering rates NO FULL THERMALIZATION ->Transport Regime Initial Conditions Quark-Gluon Plasma BULK (pT~T) CGC (x<<1) Gluon saturation MINIJETS (pT>>T,LQCD) Hadronization Microscopic Mechanism Matters! Heavy Quarks (mq>>T,LQCD) pT>> T , intermediate pT m >> T , heavy quarks h/s >>0 , high viscosity Initial time studies of thermalizations Microscopic mechanism for Hadronization can modify QGP observable Non-equilibrium + microscopic scale are relevant in all the subfields Plan for the Lectures Classical and Quantum Transport Theory - Relation to Hydrodynamics and dissipative effects - density matrix and Wigner Function Relativistic Quantum Transport Theory - Derivation for NJL dynamics - Application to HIC at RHIC and LHC Transport Theory for Heavy Quarks - Specific features of Heavy Quarks - Fokker-Planck Equation - Application to c,b dynamics Classical Transport Theory For a classical relativistic system of N particles NN f (rx, p,)t) 4 (3x(ix(i ()t )xx) ) 4 3((ppi (i(t)) pp)) i 1i 1 dP dP dd43xxdd43 pp f(x,p) is a Lorentz scalar & P0=(p2+m2)1/2 Gives the probability to find a particle in phase-space If one is interested to the collective behavior or to the behavior of a typical particle knowledge of f(x,p) is equivalent to the full solution … to study the correlations among particles one should go to f(x1,x2,p1,p2) and so on… Liouville Theorem: if there are only conservative forces -> phase-space density is a constant o motion df ( x, p ) dx dp 0 f ( x, p ) d d p d x p F ( x ) f ( x, p ) p m x Force Relativistic Vlasov Equation p 1 F ( x ) f ( x , p ) 0 p F ( x ) x p f ( x, p) p m m x The non-relativistic reduction f v r f F p f 0 t Liouville -> Vlasov -> No dissipation + Collision= Boltzmann-Vlasov Dissipation Entropy production Allowing for scatterings particles go in and out phase space (d/dt) f(x,p)≠0 Collision term 1 p F ( x ) x p f ( x, p ) C[ f ]( x, p ) m The Collision Term It can be derived formally from the reduction of the 2-body distribution Function in the N-body BBGKY hierarchy. The usual assumption in the most simple and used case: 1) Only two-body collisions 2) f(x1,x2,p1.p2)=f(x1,p1) f(x2,p2) The collision term describe the change in f (x,p) because: a) particle of momentum p scatter with p2 populating the phase space in (p’1,p’2) Closs d 3 p2 d 3 p1d 3 p2 w( p1 , p2 , p1, p2 ) f [ 2] ( x, p1 , p2 ) Sum over all the Probability to make momenta the kick-out the transition The particle in (x,p) probability finding 2 particles in p e p2 and space x w(12 1 2)d 3 p1d 3 p2 v12 d Collision Rate C gain d 3 p2 d 3 p1d 3 p2 w( p1, p2 , p1 , p2 ) f [ 2] ( x, p1, p2 ) In a more explicit form and covariant version: gain loss At equilibrium in each phase-space region Cgain =Closs C [ f 0 ( x, p)] 0 When one is close to equilibrium or when the mfp is very small One can linearize the collision integral in f=f-f0 <<f C[ f ] f f0 What is the f0(x,p)=0? 1 v v Relaxation time time between 2 collisions Local Equilibrium Solution C[ f ] d 3 p2 d 3 p1d 3 p2 w( p1 , p2 , p1, p2 ) f ( x, p1 ) f ( x, p2 ) f ( x, p1 ) f ( x, p2 ) The necessary and sufficient condition to have C[f]=0 is f ( x, p1 ) f ( x, p2 ) f ( x, p1) f ( x, p2 ) Noticing that p1+p2=p’1+p’2 such a condition is satisfied by the relativistic extension of the Boltzmann distribution: f juttner ( p) exp ( p u ) =1/T temperature u collective four velocity chemical potential It is an equilibrium solution also with LOCAL VALUES of T(x), u(x), m(x) The Vlasov part gives the constraint and the relation among T,u, locally Main points: • Boltzmann-Vlasov equation gives the right equilibrium distributions • Close to equilibrium there can be many collisions with vanishing net effect Relation to Hydrodynamics General definitions Ideal Hydro j d 4 p p f ( x, p ) T ( x) 0 j ( x) 0 T d 4 p p p f ( x, p ) Inserting Vlasov Eq. Notice in Hydro appear only p-integrated quantities f f0 m 4 j d p p f d p mF ( x) p f m d p( f f 0 ) 4 4 Integral of a divergency We can see that ideal Hydro can be satisfied only if f=feq , on the other hand the underlying hypothesis of Hydro is that the mean free path is so small that the f(x,p)is always at equilibrium during the evolution. Similarly ∂T , for f≠feq and one can do the expansion in terms of transport coefficients: shear and bulk viscosity , heat conductivity [P. Romatschke] At the same time f≠feq is associated to the entropy production -> Entropy Production <-> Thermal Equilibrium S ( x) d 4 p p f ( x, p)1 ln f ( x, p) f S d p p f (1 ln f ) d p ( p f )ln f ... d p( f f 0 ) ln f0 Boltzmann-Vlasov Eq. ( x 1) ln x 0 , x 0 4 x 4 x m 4 Approach to thermal equlibrium is always associated to entropy production All these results are always valid and do not rely on the relaxation time approx. more generally: s S s d p C ff 2 f1' f 2 ' ln f t DS=0 <-> C[f]=0 Collision integral is associated to entropy production but if a local equilibrium is reached there are many collisions without dissipations! Does such an approach can make sense for a quantum system? One can account also for the quantum effect of Pauli-Blocking in the collision integral f1f 2 f1 f 2 f1f 2(1 f1 )(1 f 2 ) f1 f 2 (1 f1)(1 f 2) does not allow scattering if the final momenta have occupation number =1 -> Boltzmann-Nordheim Collision integral This can appear quite simplistic, but notice that C[f]=0 now is 1 f FD ( p) 1 exp ( p u ) So one gets the correct quantum equilbrium distribution, but what is F(x,p) for a quantum system? Quantum Transport Theory In quantum theory the evolution of a system can be described in terms of the density matrix operator: ˆ ̂ wi i i and any expectation value O(t ) Tr (t )O can be calculated as i For any operator one can define the Weyl transform of any operator: dy ipy ~ A( x, p) e x Aˆ x 2 x x y / 2 ~ ~ ˆ ˆ Tr AB A( x, p) B ( x, p) dxdy which has the property (*) The Weyl transform of the density operator is called Wigner function ipy dy ipy dy f W ( x, p ) e x ˆ x e ( x ) ( x ) 2 2 and by (*) ~ ˆ O Tr ̂ O fW ( x, p)O ( x, p) dxdp fW plays in many respects the same role of the distribution function in statistical mechanics Properties of the Wigner Function ~ O Tr ̂ Oˆ fW ( x, p)O ( x, p) dxdp dp f ( x , p ) ( x) ( x) ( x) W dx f ( x , p ) ( p) ( p) ( p) W However for pure state fW can be negative so it cannot be a probability On the other hand if we interpret its absolute value as a probabilty it does not violate the uncertainty principle because one can show: fW ( x , p ) 1 1 dN 1 2 dxdp DN 1 2 DxDp 1 So if we go in a phase space smaller than DxDp<h/2 one can never locate a particle In agreement with the uncertainty principle Quantum Transport Equation One can Wigner transform this or the Schr. Equation ˆ ˆ , Hˆ t ˆ x ˆ , Hˆ x 0 t dy i py ˆ pˆ 2 ˆ 2 e x t ˆ , 2m U x 0 After some calculations one gets the following equation 2 3 2 k 1 fW p fW 1 xU ( x) p fW ( xU, (px))( x px)U ( xf)w( x3p, fpW)(x,0 p) ... 0 t m x k 0 (2k 1)! 2 12 2k This exactly equivalent to the Equation for the denity matrix or the Schr. Eq. NO APPROXIMATION but allows an approximation where h does not appear explicitly and still accounting for quantum evolution when the gradient of the potential are not too strong : This has the same form of the classical fW p fW xU p f w 0 transport equation, but it is for example t m x exact for an harmonic potential See : W.B. Case, Am. J. Phys. 76 (2008) 937 Transport Theory in Field Theory One can extend the Wigner function (4x4 matrix): d 4 y i py F ( x, p) e : ( x ) ( x ) : 4 (2) , x x y / 2 It can be decomposed in 16 indipendent components (Clifford Algebra) 1 F FS FV 5 FP i 5 F5 FT 2 For example the vector current j d 4 p Tr F ( x, p) 4 d 4 p FV ( x, p) In a similar way to what done in Quantum mechanics one can start from the Dirac equation for the fermionic field d(iR e ggVV ()(xx )())M ((igM)ggV( x((x)x)))0 ((Mx ) g 0 ( x ) ( x ) 0 4 (2 ) ipRVV 4 s s V See : Vasak-Gyulassy- Elze, Ann. Phys. 173(1987) 462 Elze and Heinz, Phys. Rep. 183 (1989) 81 Blaizot and Iancu, Phys. Rep. 359 (2002) 355 s Just for simplicity lets consider the case with only a scalar field i d 4 R ipR e : ( x ) ( x ) : : ( x ) : 0 p m F ( x, p) 4 2 (2 ) This is the semiclassical approximation. R x ( x ) ( x) ( x) ... If one include higher order derivatives gets 2 For the NJL G an expansion in terms of higher order derivatives of the field and of the Wigner function The validity of such an expansion is based on the assumption ħ∂x∂pFW >>1 Again the point is to have not too large gradients: X F PW 1 XF typical length scale of the field PW typical momentum scale of the system A very rough estimate for the QGP XF ~ RN ~ 4-5 fm , PW ~ T ~ 1-3 fm-1 -> XF·PW ~ 5-15 >> 1 better for larger and hotter systems Substituting the semiclassical approximation one gets: i i p p [ m ( x )] ( x ) x FW ( x, p ) 0 2 2 There is a real and an imaginary part Which contains the 2 *2 p M FS ( x, p) 0 in medium mass-shell Including more terms in the gradient expansion would have brougth terms breaking the mass-shell constraint p M FˆW ( x, p) 0 * M ( x) x M ( x) p FˆW ( x, p) 0 * * FW FS FV Decomposing, using both real and imaginary part and taking the trace Vlasov Transport Equation in QFT p p F m m p* FS ( x, p ) 0 This substitute the force term mF(x) of classical transport Quantum effects encoded in the fields while f(x,p) evolution appears as the classical one. Transport solved on lattice p f C 22 ... Solved discretizing the space in h, x, y cells Rate of collisions per unit of phase space D3x Dt0 D3x0 Putting massless partons at equilibrium in a box than the collision rate is See: Z. Xhu, C. Greiner, PRC71(04) exact solution Approaching equilibrium in a box Highly non-equilibrated distributions where the temperature is anisotropy in p-space F.Scardina Transport vs Viscous Hydrodynamics in 0+1D Knudsen number-1 K K K0 2 Huovinen and Molnar, PRC79(2009) L 1 T 5h /s 4h 1.2 T0 0 s Transport Theory p p F m m p* f ( x, p ) C22 C23 ... valid also at intermediate pT out of equilibrium: region of modified hadronization at RHIC valid also at high h/s LHC and/or hadronic phase Relevant at LHC due to large amount of minijet production Appropriate for heavy quark dynamics can follow exotic non-equilibrium phase CGC: A unified framework against a separate modelling with a wider range of validity in h, z, pT + microscopic level. Applications of transport approach to the QGP Physics - Collective flows & shear viscosity - dynamics of Heavy Quarks & Quarkonia First stage of RHIC Hydrodynamics No microscopic details (mean free path -> 0, h=0) T ( x) 0 + EoS P(e) j B ( x) 0 Parton cascade Parton elastic 22 interactions 1/ - P=e/3) p f C 22 v2 saturation pattern reproduced Information from non-equilibrium: Elliptic Flow z y v2/e measures the efficiency of the convertion of the anisotropy from Coordinate to Momentum space Fourier expansion in p-space x y x 2 e x 2 y2 x2 1 | viscosity c2s=dP/de | EoS Hydrodynamics Parton Cascade 2v2/e c2s= 0.6 Massless gas e=3P -> c2s=1/3 More generally one can distinguish: =0 c2s= 1/3 dN dN 1 2 v 2 cos(2 ) ... dpT d dpT c2s= 0.1 Measure of P gradients time -Short range: collisions -> viscosity -Long range: field interaction -> e ≠ 3P Bhalerao D. Molnaret&al., M.PLB627(2005) Gyulassy, NPA 697 (02) If v2 is very large P. Kolb More harmonics needed to describe an elliptic deformation -> v4 v4 cos( 4 ) p x4 6 p x2 p y2 p y4 ( p x2 p y2 ) 2 To balance the minimum v4 >0 require v4 ~ 4% if v2= 20% At RHIC a finite v4 observed for the first time ! Viscosity cannot be neglected Fx v x h Ayz y T Tideal dissip Relativistic Navier-Stokes but it violates causality, II0 order expansion needed -> Israel-Stewart tensor based on entropy increase ∂ s 0 h,z two parameters appears + f ~ feq reduce the pT validity range P. Romatschke, PRL99 (07) Transport approach p p F m m p* f ( x, p ) C22 C23 ... Free streaming Field Interaction -> e≠3P Collisions -> h≠0 C23 better not to show… Discriminate short and long range interaction: Collisions (≠0) + Medium Interaction ( Ex. Chiral symmetry breaking) ,T decrease We simulate a constant shear viscosity Cascade code Relativistic Kinetic theory h 4 p cost. s 15 tr n(4 T ) tr ( (r ), T ) tr , p 4 1 (*) 15 n 4 T h / s =cell index in the r-space Time-Space dependent cross section evaluated locally The viscosity is kept constant varying A rough estimate of (T) Neglecting and inserting in (*) h 1 s 4 s 4n 1 tr 2 T e P T 2 2g 3 T 45 At T=200 MeV tr10 mb G. Ferini et al., PLB670 (09) V. Greco at al., PPNP 62 (09) Two kinetic freeze-out scheme Finite lifetime for the QGP small h/s fluid! a) collisions switched off for e<ec=0.7 GeV/fm3 No f.o. tr b) h/s increases in the cross-over region, faking the smooth transition between the QGP and the hadronic phase 1 p 1 15 n h / s This gives also automatically a kind of core-corona effect At 4h/s ~ 8 viscous hydrodynamics is not applicable! Role of ReCo for h/s estimate Parton Cascade at fixed shear viscosity Hadronic h/s included shape for v2(pT) consistent with that needed by coalescence Agreement with Hydro at low pT A quantitative estimate needs an EoS with e≠ 3P : cs2(T) < 1/3 -> v2 suppression ~ 30% -> h/s ~ 0.1 may be in agreement with coalescence 4h/s >3 too low v2(pT) at pT1.5 GeV/c even with coalescence 4h/s =1 not small enough to get the large v2(pT) at pT2 GeV/c without coalescence Short Reminder from coalescence… dNq dNM ( p ) α ( p 2 ) T T d 2 p d 2 pT T 2 dNq dN B ( p ) ( p 3 ) T T d 2 p d 2 pT T dN q dN q 1 2v 2q Quark Number Scaling 3 cos( 2 ) pT dpT dφ pT dpT Molnar and Voloshin, PRL91 (03) Greco-Ko-Levai, PRC68 (03) Fries-Nonaka-Muller-Bass, PRC68(03) 1 pT V2 n n I° Hot Quark Is it reasonable the v2q ~0.08 needed by Coalescence scaling ? Is it compatible with a fluid h/s ~ 0.1-0.2 ? Effect of h/s of the hadronic phase Hydro evolution at h/s(QGP) down to thermal f.o. ~50% Error in the evaluation of h/s Uncertain hadronic h/s is less relevant Effect of h/s of the hadronic phase at LHC Suppression of v2 respect the ideal 4h/s=1 LHC – 4h/s=1 + f.o. RHIC – 4h/s=1 + f.o. RHIC – 4h/s=2 +No f.o. At LHC the contamination of mixed and hadronic phase becomes negligible Longer lifetime of QGP -> v2 completely developed in the QGP phase S. Plumari, Scardina, Greco in preparation Impact of the Mean Field and/or of the Chiral phase transition - Cascade Boltzmann-Vlasov Transport - Impact of an NJL mean field dynamics - Toward a transport calculation with a lQCD-EoS NJL Mean Field free gas scalar field interaction d3p M (T ) m 4 gN f N c M (T ) 1 f ( T ) f (T ) 3 (2 ) E p L Associated Gap Equation Two effects: e ≠ 3p no longer a massless free gas, cs <1/3 Chiral phase transition gas Boltzmann-Vlasov equation for the NJL Numerical solution with -function test particles Contribution of the NJL mean field Test in a Box with equilibrium f distribution Simulating a constant h/s with a NJL mean field Massive gas in relaxation time approximation =cell index in the r-space M=0 h 4 pn 15 Theory Code =10 mb The viscosity is kept modifying locally the cross-section Dynamical evolution with NJL Au+Au @ 200 AGeV for central collision, b=0 fm. Does the NJL chiral phase transition affect the elliptic flow of a fluid at fixed h/s? S. Plumari et al., PLB689(2010) - NJL mean field reduce the v2 : attractive field - If h/s is fixed effect of NJL compensated by cross section increase - v2 h/s not modified by NJL mean field dynamics! Next step - use a quasiparticle model with a realistic EoS [vs(T)] for a quantitative estimate of h/s to compare with Hydro… Using the QP-model of Heinz-Levai U.Heinz and P. Levai, PRC (1998) WB=0 guarantees Thermodynamicaly consistency M(T), B(T) fitted to lQCD [A. Bazavov et al. 0903.4379 ]data on e and P e NJL P ° A. Bazavov et al. 0903.4379 hep-lat QP Summary for ligth QGP Transport approach can pave the way for a consistency among known v2,4 properties: breaking of v2(pT)/e & persistence of v2(pT)/<v2> scaling v2(pT), v4(pT) at h/s~0.1-0.2 can agree with what needed by coalescence (QNS) NJL chiral phase transition do not modify v2 h/s Signature of h/s(T): large v4/(v2)2 Next Steps for a quantitative estimate: Include the effect of an EoS fitted to lQCD Implement a Coalescence + Fragmentation mechanism A Nearly Perfect Fluid T ( x) 0 jB ( x) 0 f eq ( x, p) g e E pu T g e mT T * Tf ~ 120 MeV <T> ~ 0.5 1 T * Tf m v T2 2 No microscopic description (->0) Blue shift of dN/dpT hadron spectra Large v2/e Mass ordering of v2(pT) For the first time very close to ideal Hydrodynamics Finite viscosity is not negligible Jet Quenching How much modification respect to pp? Nuclear Modification Factor Jet triggered angular correl. Jet gluon radiation observed: all hadrons RAA <<1 and flat in pT near photons not quenched -> suppression due to QCD Medium away Surprises… Baryon/Mesons Quenching p+p PHENIX, PRL89(2003) In vacuum p/ ~ 0.3 due to Jet fragmentation Jet quenching should affect both 0 suppression: evidence of jet quenching before fragmentation Protons not suppressed Hadronization has been modified pT < 4-6GeV !? Hadronization in Heavy-Ion Collisions Initial state: no partons in the vacuum but a thermal ensemble of partons -> Use in medium quarks No direct QCD factorization scale for the bulk: dynamics much less violent (t ~ 4 fm/c) Parton spectrum More easy to produce baryons! d 3NH f q f q M f q DqH 3 d P Baryon Fragmentation: energy needed to create quarks from vacuum hadrons from higher pT Meson H Coalescence: partons are already there $ to be close in phase space $ ph= n pT ,, n = 2 , 3 baryons from lower momenta (denser) V. Greco et al./ R.J. Fries et al., PRL 90(2003) ReCo pushes out soft physics by factors x2 and x3 ! Hadronization Modified Baryon/Mesons Quark number scaling p+p v2q fitted from v2 GKL PHENIX, PRL89(2003) dN q pT dpT dφ dN q pT dpT 1 2v 2 cos(2 ) dN q dN H ( pT ) 2 ( pT n) 2 d pT d pT n Coalescence scaling Enhancement of v2 v 2,M (p T1) 2v p2,Tq (p T /2) V2 v 2,B (p Tn) 3v n2,q (p T /3) Dynamical quarks are visible Collective flows Heavy Quarks mc,b >> LQCD produced by pQCD processes (out of equilibrium) eq > QGP with standard pQCD cross section (and also with non standard pQCD) Hydrodynamics does not apply to heavy quark dynamics (f≠feq) Equilibration time pQCD QGP- RHIC “D”npQCD What about v4 ? Relevance of time scale ! v4 more sensitive to both h/s and f.o. v4(pT) at 4h/s12 could also be consistent with coalescence v4 generated later than v2 : more sensitive to properties at TTc Effect of EOS on v2 Decrease in v2 of about 40% H. Song and U.Heinz Very Large v4/(v2)2 ratio Same Hydro with the good dN/dpT and v2 Ratio v4/v22 not very much depending on h/s and not on the initial eccentricity and not on particle species … see also M. Luzum, C. Gombeaud, O. Ollitrault, arxiv:1004.2024 Effect of h/s(T) on the anisotropies 4h/s V2 develops earlier at higher h/s V4 develops later at lower h/s -> v4/(v2)2 larger 2 1 QGP T/Tc 2 1 Au+Au@200AGeV-b=8fm |y|<1 v4/(v2)2 ~ 0.8 signature of h/s close to phase transition! Effect of h/s(T) + f.o. Hydrodynamics Effect of finite h/s+f.o. p p F m m p* f S ( x, p ) C[ f s ] If the system if very dense 1/3 one can derive and add the three-body collision that make the transition from the dilute to the dense system: See: Zhu and Greiner PRC71 (2004)