wojciech broniowski · standardmodeloflittlebangs wojciech broniowski ifj pan & ujk ncbj,...
Post on 25-Aug-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Standard Model of Little Bangs
Wojciech Broniowski
IFJ PAN & UJK
NCBJ, 27.03.17
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 1 / 43
Little Bangs
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 2 / 43
[U. Heinz 2000]: analogous to . . . Big Bang . . . the Hubble expansion (which goeson until today), the cosmic microwave background of thermal photons (whichdecoupled when our universe was about 300,000 years old), and the measuredabundances of light atomic nuclei . . .
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 3 / 43
Analogy of fluctuations in Little Bangs to the Face of God – the CMBinhomogeneities, originating from primordial fluctuations during the inflationphase
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 3 / 43
3 stages of the “Standard Model”
time −→partons hydrodynamization quark-gluon plasma freeze-out hadrons
1 Initial pre-equilibrium dynamics: instabilities [Mrówczyński 1988],AdS/CFT [. . . Janik, Heller, Spaliński . . . ], color glass condensate,wounded nucleon model [Białas, Błeszyński, Czyż 1976]
2 Collective evolution: hydrodynamics, large anisotropy [. . . Florkowski,Ryblewski . . . ], viscous, event-by-event [. . . Bożek . . . ]
3 Freeze-out and production of hadrons (hydrodynamics takes care ofthis by passing through the cross over, supported by the thermalmodel for hadron yields) [. . . Kraków, Wrocław . . . ]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 4 / 43
Collectivity
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 5 / 43
Initial geometry
Au+Au collision at RHIC(view along the beam)
-10 -5 5 10x
-6
-4
-2
2
4
6
8
y
1 Participants determine the geometryof the overlap region
2 Initial entropy distribution in moremicroscopic approaches (IP Glasma)also follows the geometry of theoverlap region
3 Strong radial flow4 Initial eccentricity → anisotropic flow
of hadrons [Ollitrault 1992]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 6 / 43
Initial geometry
Au+Au collision at RHIC(view along the beam)
-7.5 -5 -2.5 2.5 5 7.5x
-7.5
-5
-2.5
2.5
5
7.5
y
1 Participants determine the geometryof the overlap region
2 Initial entropy distribution in moremicroscopic approaches (IP Glasma)also follows the geometry of theoverlap region
3 Strong radial flow4 Initial eccentricity → anisotropic flow
of hadrons [Ollitrault 1992]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 6 / 43
Rescattering/collectivity essential
[ALICE]
dN/dφ = A
(1 + 2
∑n
vn cos[n(φ−Ψn)]
)WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 7 / 43
Fluctuations
Collapse of the nuclear wavefunction → each Little Bangdifferent
-7.5 -5 -2.5 2.5 5 7.5x
-7.5
-5
-2.5
2.5
5
7.5
y 1 Higher Fourier components appear2 Odd harmonics also show up,
triangular flow3 Fluctuations dominant for central
A+A and for small systems, such asp+A
New thinking since [Miller and Snellings 2003]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 8 / 43
Collectivity: shape/size – flow transmutation
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 9 / 43
Doppler effect
Emission from a fast movingelement of fluidCollimation of hadrons(increasing with mass)Thermal motion
Scan
ned
by C
amSc
anne
r
Multi-particle correlations in the azimuth are used in cumulant methods toextract flow coefficients without the non-flow contamination from jets orresonance decays
[Borghini, Ollitrault 2001]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 10 / 43
Signatures of flow
1 Mass ordering in pT spectra from radial flow2 Mass ordering of harmonic flow coefficients vn3 Higher harmonics suppressed4 Near-side ridge (discussed later on) - the real “proof” of harmonic flow
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 11 / 43
Signatures of flow
1 Mass ordering in pT spectra from radial flow2 Mass ordering of harmonic flow coefficients vn3 Higher harmonics suppressed4 Near-side ridge (discussed later on) - the real “proof” of harmonic flow
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 11 / 43
Signatures of flow
1 Mass ordering in pT spectra from radial flow2 Mass ordering of harmonic flow coefficients vn3 Higher harmonics suppressed4 Near-side ridge (discussed later on) - the real “proof” of harmonic flow
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 11 / 43
Role of viscosity
perfect shear shear+bulk
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 0.5 fm/c, ideal
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 0.5 fm/c, shear
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 0.5 fm/c, shear/bulk
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 2 fm/c, ideal
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 2 fm/c, shear
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 2 fm/c, shear/bulk
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 6 fm/c, ideal
1
2
3
4
5
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 6 fm/c, shear
1
2
3
4
5
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 6 fm/c, shear/bulk
1
2
3
4
5
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 10 fm/c, ideal
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 10 fm/c, shear
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
5 0 5x [fm]
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
y[fm
]
= 10 fm/c, shear/bulk
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Quenching of flow withviscosityIncreasing with theFourier rankSets limits on viscosity,which is close to the KSSbound η/s = 1/4π
... but many other modelparameters
Figure:[Bazow, Heinz, Strickland 2016]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 12 / 43
Event-by-event pT fluctuations
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 13 / 43
Size – radial flow transmutation
smaller size → stronger flowlarger size → weaker flow
[WB, Chojnacki, Obara 2009]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 14 / 43
E-by-e size fluctuations
[Bożek, WB 2012]
Same number of participants, NW = 100
Different size (and shape)
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 15 / 43
Transverse momentum fluctuations in Au+Au@200GeV
STAR PHENIXred points – model
Measure removes trivial fluctuations from finite sampling
Model overshoots the data by about 50% for most central collisions
Hydro response not modified by viscosity, freeze-out temperature, smearing,core-corona, total momentum conservation, centrality definition∆〈pT 〉/〈〈pT 〉〉 ' 0.4∆〈r〉/〈〈r〉〉Need to decrease the fluctuations in the initial state
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 16 / 43
Transverse momentum fluctuations with wounded quarks
Wounded quark model as implemented in [Bożek, WB, Rybczyński 2016]:more participants → less fluctuation
●●
●
●
●
■
■■
■■■
Pb+Pb@2.76TeV
● quarks
■ nucleons
● ALICE
○○□□ p+Pb@5.02TeV
○ quarks
□ nucleons
0 500 1000 15000.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
dNch/dη
<ΔpTΔpT>1/2/<<pT>>
[Bożek, WB 2017]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 17 / 43
Transverse momentum fluctuations with wounded quarks
Wounded quark model as implemented in [Bożek, WB, Rybczyński 2016]:more participants → less fluctuation
●
●
●
●
●
■
■■
■■■
Pb+Pb@2.76TeV
● quarks
■ nucleons
● ALICE
○○□□
p+Pb@5.02TeV
(a)
○ quarks
□ nucleons
10 50 100 500 1000
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.10
dNch/dη
<ΔpTΔpT>1/2/<<pT>>
[Bożek, WB 2017]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 17 / 43
Transverse momentum fluctuations with wounded quarks
Nontrivial dependence on multiplicity
●
●
●●
●
■■
■
■
■
■
○○□□
(b)
0 500 1000 1500
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
dNch/dη
<ΔpTΔpT>1/2(dNch/dη)1
/2/<<pT>>
Excludes independent production from sources (would be flat)
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 18 / 43
Size – flow anti-correlation
Very strong e-by-e anti-correlation of size and 〈pT 〉
▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
Pb+Pb 10-20%(b)
quarksnucleons
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
Δ(<r>/N1/3)/<<r>/N1/3>
<ΔpT>/<<pT>>
This is the mechanism for pT fluctuations!
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 19 / 43
Back to harmonic flow . . .
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 20 / 43
Proportionality of flow to eccentricity
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6ǫ2
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
v 2
c(ǫ2 ,v2 ) =0.996
C2 =0.153
sWN η/s=0.16
20−30 %
(c)
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40ǫ3
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
v 3
c(ǫ3 ,v3 ) =0.973
C3 =0.093
sWN η/s=0.16
20−30 %
(c)
[Niemi, Denicol, Holopainen, Huovinen 2012]
vn = κnεn
Allows us to build scale-less combinations independent of the responsecoefficient κn
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 21 / 43
Flow fluctuations
←√
4/π − 1
[WB 2007]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 22 / 43
Flow fluctuations
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
σ(vn
)/〈v n〉
Nw
σ (v2) /〈v2〉σ (v3) /〈v3〉
σ (ε2) /〈ε2〉 (mixed+Γ)σ (ε3) /〈ε3〉 (mixed+Γ)σ (ε2) /〈ε2〉 (mixed)σ (ε3) /〈ε3〉 (mixed)
←√
4/π − 1
[ WB, Rybczyński 2016]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 22 / 43
Flow fluctuations
Fn =
√εn{2}2 − εn{4}2εn{2}2 + εn{4}2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
F
Nw
F (v2) (ALICE)F (v2) (CMS)F (v2) (ATLAS cum.)F (v2) (ATLAS EbyE)
F (ε2) (mixed+Γ)F (ε2) (mixed)
[ WB, Rybczyński 2016]WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 22 / 43
Flow fluctuations
Fn =
√εn{2}2 − εn{4}2εn{2}2 + εn{4}2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
F
Nw
F (v3) (ATLAS)F (v3) (CMS)
F (ε3) (mixed+Γ)F (ε3) (mixed)
[ WB, Rybczyński 2016]WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 22 / 43
Going longitudinal
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 23 / 43
Non-flow events
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 24 / 43
Factorization of the transverse and longitudinal distributions
left-moving participants strings right-moving participants
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 25 / 43
Factorization of the transverse and longitudinal distributions
left-moving participants strings right-moving participants
Approximate (up to fluctuations) alignment of F and B event planesCollimation of flow at very distant longitudinal separations → ridges!
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 25 / 43
Surfers - the near-side ridge
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 26 / 43
Ridge
Near-side ridge indicates collectivity
Total surprise in p-p!
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 27 / 43
Triangles
Extracted from the d-Au collisions at RHIC:
[Białas, Czyż 2004]
Source emits mostly in its own froward hemisphereWB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 28 / 43
Triangles
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 28 / 43
Triangles
[. . . Bierlich, Gustafson, Lönnblad 2016, Monnai, Schenke 2015, Schenke,Schlichting 2016 . . . Brodsky, Gunion, Kuhn, 1977]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 28 / 43
Torque
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 29 / 43
Torque effect (event-by-event)
Transverse sections with triangles e-by-e longitudinal twist (a few degrees)
Scan
ned
by C
amSc
anne
r
Both e-by-e fluctuations and longitudinal asymmetry of the emissionprofile needed
[prediction in PB, WB, Moreira 2010 & PB, WB, Olszewski 2015, PB, WB 2016]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 30 / 43
Fluctuating strings
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 31 / 43
Torque in Pb+Pb
aη0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4
)b η,a η( nr
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1 < 5bη(b) c=20-30% Pb+Pb@2.76TeV 4.4 <
thin - trianglesthick - string breaking
v2 and v3
rn(ηa, ηb) =〈〈cos(n[φi(−ηa)− φj)ηb)])〉〉〈〈cos(n[φi(ηa)− φj)ηb)])〉〉
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 32 / 43
Torque in p-Pb
aη0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4
)b η,-a η
(- 2)
rb η,a η( 2r
0.7
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
< 150offlinetrk
CMS, 120 < Ntorque model, c=0-3.4%model w/ no length fluct.
< 5bη p+Pb@5.02TeV 4.4 <
String breaking essential to describe torque in p-Pb
With triangles:
Scan
ned
by C
amSc
anne
r
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 33 / 43
Slope of rn
●●●●●●●●
●
● ■■■
■■■■■
▽▽▽▽
▽
▲▲▲
● n=2, Pb+Pb
■ n=3, Pb+Pb
▽ n=2, p+Pb
▲ n=4 (x1/4), Pb+Pb
200 500 1000 2000 50000.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
Ntrk
Fnη
Fair description of mid-central collisionsWay too much decorrelation in central collisionsF4 ' 4F2
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 34 / 43
Small systems
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 35 / 43
d-A
d has an intrinsic dumbbell shape with a large deformation: rms ' 2 fm
Initial entropy density in a d-Pb collision with Npart = 24 [Bożek 2012]
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
x @fmD
y@f
mD
(GeV/c)T
±hp0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
2v
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30 [0.48,0.7]∈|η∆PHENIX, 200 GeV, d+Au, 0-5%, | [2,5]∈|η∆ATLAS, 5.02 TeV, p+Pb, 0-2%, | [0.48,0.7]∈|η∆PHENIX, 200 GeV, d+Au, 0-5%, |
[2,5]∈|η∆ATLAS, 5.02 TeV, p+Pb, 0-2%, |
Bozek, priv. comm.,Bzdak, et al. 1304.3403, priv comm:
= 20part
/s = 0.08, IP-Glasma, Nη = 20
part/s = 0.08, MC-Glauber, Nη
=200 GeVNNshydro., d+Au
Resulting large elliptic flow confirmed with the later RHIC analysis(geometry + fluctuations)
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 36 / 43
d-A
d has an intrinsic dumbbell shape with a large deformation: rms ' 2 fm
Initial entropy density in a d-Pb collision with Npart = 24 [Bożek 2012]
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
x @fmD
y@f
mD
(GeV/c)T
±hp0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
2v
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30 [0.48,0.7]∈|η∆PHENIX, 200 GeV, d+Au, 0-5%, | [2,5]∈|η∆ATLAS, 5.02 TeV, p+Pb, 0-2%, | [0.48,0.7]∈|η∆PHENIX, 200 GeV, d+Au, 0-5%, |
[2,5]∈|η∆ATLAS, 5.02 TeV, p+Pb, 0-2%, |
Bozek, priv. comm.,Bzdak, et al. 1304.3403, priv comm:
= 20part
/s = 0.08, IP-Glasma, Nη = 20
part/s = 0.08, MC-Glauber, Nη
=200 GeVNNshydro., d+Au
Resulting large elliptic flow confirmed with the later RHIC analysis(geometry + fluctuations)
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 36 / 43
Collectivity in p+A
Practically no geometry, only fluctuations
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 3500
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12p-Pb 5.02TeVCMS
|>2η∆ |{2}2v
<20 sub.track
|>2, Nη∆ |{2}2v
|>2 3+1D Hydroη∆ |{2}2v
trackN
2v
[Bożek, WB, Torrieri 2013]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 37 / 43
Collectivity in p+A
Practically no geometry, only fluctuations
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 3500
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04p-Pb 5.02TeVCMS
|>2η∆ |{2}3v
<20 sub.track
|>2, Nη∆ |{2}3v
|>2 3+1D Hydroη∆ |{2}3v
trackN
3v
[Bożek, WB, Torrieri 2013]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 37 / 43
3He-Au at RHIC
φ∆1− 0 1 2 3 4 5η∆
3.8−3.6−
3.4−3.2−
3−
)φ∆, η∆C
(
0.980.99
11.011.021.03
a) Au-side 0-5%
φ∆1− 0 1 2 3 4 5η∆
33.2
3.43.6
3.84
)φ∆, η∆C
(
0.980.99
11.011.021.03
He-side 0-5%3b)
● ●●
●● ●
●●
● ●●
●
●
●● ●
●
●
●
●●
□□□□□
□□□
□□□□
□
□□
□□
□□□
□□□□□
a) Au-side 0-5%
-3.7<η assoc<-3.1
● PHENIX Data
0.98
0.99
1.00
1.01
1.02
C(Δϕ)
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
●●
● ● ●●
●●
●●□□□
□□□□
□□□□
□□□
□□□□□□
□
□□□
□
b) 3He-side 0-5%
1GeV<pT,trig <3GeV, |η trig |<0.350.1GeV<pT,assoc<5GeV, 3.1<η assoc<3.9
□ 3+1D hydro
-1 0 1 2 3 4
0.98
0.99
1.00
1.01
1.02
Δϕ
C(Δϕ)
(seen on both pseudorapidity sides) [Bożek, WB 2015]WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 38 / 43
12C-Pb – role of α clusters
Nuclear structure from ultra-relativistic collisions!Probe to what degree 12C is made of three α’s
Specific features of the 12C collisions with a “wall”:
Generated by CamScanner from intsig.com
The cluster plane parallel or perpendicular to the transverse plane:
higher multiplicity lower multiplicityhigher triangularity lower triangularitylower ellipticity higher ellipticity
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 39 / 43
Ellipticity and triangularity vs multiplicity
wN
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5wounded nucleon model
> (BEC)22∈<> (BEC)2
3∈<> (uniform)2
2∈<> (uniform)2
3∈<
10% 1% 0.1%
wounded nucleon model
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 40 / 43
Ellipticity and triangularity vs multiplicity
wN
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
(wounded){2}n/v{4}nv
n=2, BECn=3, BECn=2, VMCn=3, VMC
10%
1%0.1%
(wounded){2}n/v{4}nv
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 40 / 43
Conclusions
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 41 / 43
Conclusions
Standard model (almost) works!Collectivity in A+A beyond doubtExplanation of the near-side ridgeCognitive role of e-by-e fluctuationsMechanism for pT fluctuations (seem too much for central)Torque (event-plane angles decorrelation)Torque in p-Pb → longitudinal fluctuations (string breaking). . .
Not mentioned:
Jet quenching by the mediumEarly probesFemtoscopyChiral magnetic effectVorticity and Λ polarization. . .
[RHIC simulation, Pang et al. 2016]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 42 / 43
Conclusions
Standard model (almost) works!Collectivity in A+A beyond doubtExplanation of the near-side ridgeCognitive role of e-by-e fluctuationsMechanism for pT fluctuations (seem too much for central)Torque (event-plane angles decorrelation)Torque in p-Pb → longitudinal fluctuations (string breaking). . .
Not mentioned:
Jet quenching by the mediumEarly probesFemtoscopyChiral magnetic effectVorticity and Λ polarization. . .
[RHIC simulation, Pang et al. 2016]
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 42 / 43
Thank you!
WB (IFJ PAN & UJK) SM of Little Bangs NCBJ, 27.03.17 43 / 43
top related