Proceedings of International Conference on Physics in ... - KEK

More documents

Recommendations

Info

different masses m 0 i ̸= mi only for the Nambu-Goldstone bosons and ground state octet and decouplet baryons. We put m0 π = m0 K = 0 and m0N = 750 MeV [16]; these are the most important inputs as the contributions to the thermodynamic quantities are dominated by these hadrons. For the vector and axial vector mesons, we assume m0 ρ = mρ and m0 a1 = ma1. We also assume m0 ∆ = m∆. Furthermore, taking the flavor SU(3) limit, we also put m0 f0 = m0σ, m0 ϕ = m0ω = m0 K∗ = m0ρ. m0 Λ = m0Ξ = m0Σ = m0N , m0 Σ∗ = m0Ξ ∗ = m0Ω = m0∆ . In general AiG can differ for hadrons. We, however, put Ai G (8m2c) = 0.9 for all the can be shown to deviate little from hadrons because Aπ G this value at such a high energy scale. At vanishing chemical potential, lattice calculations <strong>of</strong> the equation <strong>of</strong> state with physical quark mass are available [17, 18, 19]. The results have been compared with the resonance gas. However, there is still uncertainty in the lattice results due to the discretization [20]. To take this uncertainty into account, we introduce an excluded volume <strong>of</strong> hadrons v0 as a fitting parameter in the model by following a prescription <strong>of</strong> Ref. [21]. While vanishing excluded volume, v0 = 0, fits the lattice equation <strong>of</strong> state by the Wuppertal-Budapest collaboration well [19], v0 = 1.19 fm3 reproduces the scalar gluon condensates by HotQCD collaboration [18]. Figure 3 shows the comparison <strong>of</strong> the lattice data and the resonance gas model. From this result, we may regard our v0 = 0 and v0 = 1.19 fm3 results as maximum and minimum M0, respectively. After fixing parameters, we can extend the model to include finite chemical potential. Table 1: Temperatures and chemical potentials at chemical freeze-out in heavy ion collisions at various energies. Data are taken from Ref. [13]. √ sNN [GeV] T [MeV] µB[MeV] 8.76 156 403 12.3 154 298 17.3 160 240 130 165.5 38 200 160.5 20 Here we consider several sets <strong>of</strong> temperature and chemical potential which are estimated by the statistical model [13] and summarized in Table 1. The electric condensates are obtained by putting M0(T, µB) and M2(T, µB) [Eqs. (6) and (7)] into Eq. (5) with Nf = 3. We depict some examples <strong>of</strong> the electric condensate in Fig. 4 for illustrating the effect <strong>of</strong> the chemical potential. One sees at µB = 403 MeV, the change <strong>of</strong> the electric condensate is much larger than the one at µB = 20 MeV. Hence one expects a larger mass shift at lower collision energies. Figure 5 shows the mass shift obtained from the electric condensate <strong>of</strong> the resonance gas and the second order Stark effect. The band indicates the possible range <strong>of</strong> the mass shift incorporating the uncertainty <strong>of</strong> the lattice data M 0 [GeV 4 ] (ε-3p)/T 4 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0 HotQCD N τ =8, p4 HotQCD N τ =8, asqtad WB, Continuum limit Model, v 0 =1.19 fm 3 0.57 fm 3 0 fm 3 HotQCD N τ =8, p4 HotQCD N τ =8, asqtad WB full e-3p (not M 0 ) Model, v 0 =1.19 fm 3 0.57 fm 3 0 fm 3 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180 T [MeV] Figure 3: Upper: interaction measure (ε − 3p)/T 4 . Lower : its gluonic part M0. The points are taken from Refs. [18] for the “HotQCD” data and [19] for the “WB” (Wuppertal- Budapest) data while each line shows the result corresponding to various v0. through varying v0. Since the hadronization temperature is not monotonic against colliding energy, the mass shift does not exhibit so in spite <strong>of</strong> the decreasing chemical potential. Nevertheless, one sees the largest mass shift at the lowest colliding energy and the magnitude is 10–20 MeV at the higher ones. IMPLICATION FOR EXPERIMENTS Finally we discuss possible implications <strong>of</strong> the results for heavy ion experiments. Unfortunately, the complexity <strong>of</strong> the collision process prevents us from directly detecting the mass shift through the shift <strong>of</strong> the peak in the dilepton spectrum, even if the detector resolution is fine enough to cover the magnitude <strong>of</strong> the shift. In this case, a dynamical model is indispensable to describe the space-time evolution <strong>of</strong> the created matter and one needs to estimate the number <strong>of</strong> charmonium which decay inside the medium [2, 22]. Here we consider the possibility <strong>of</strong> the statistical hadronization <strong>of</strong> charmonium [23, 24] and influence <strong>of</strong> the mass shift on the charmonium production. In fact, a measurement in the Pb+Pb collisions at CERN-SPS seems to support this scenario, because ψ ′ ratio to J/ψ can be well reproduced by the statistical production while that in the elementary collision such as p + p cannot be done so [25]. We do not have to take into account charm conservation if we restrict ourselves to the charmonium-charmonium ratio. To compare the experimental data, we need to include J/ψ from decay <strong>of</strong> higher resonances. Since the second order Stark effect applies to such resonances, pro-
(α s /π)∆E 2 [GeV 4 ] 0.003 0.002 0.001 v 0 =0 fm 3 , µ B =403 MeV v 0 =1.19 fm 3 , µ B =403 MeV v 0 =0 fm 3 , µ B =20 MeV v 0 =1.19 fm 3 , µ B =20 MeV 0 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 T [MeV] Figure 4: Electric condensates as functions <strong>of</strong> temperature. Each line stands for different chemical potential and the excluded volume. 0 ∆m [MeV] -10 -20 -30 -40 J/ψ v 0 =1.19fm 3 v 0 =0fm 3 Stark 10 1/2 100 sNN [GeV] Figure 5: Mass shift <strong>of</strong> J/ψ at hadronization temperature and chemical potentials for various colliding energies. duction <strong>of</strong> those resonances is also influenced by the mass shift. Based on the dipole nature (2), we assume the mass shift scales with the size <strong>of</strong> the resonance. Then we have ∆mχc ≃ −24 ∼ −49 MeV and ∆mψ ′ ≃ −40 ∼ −82 MeV, respectively. In fact, this crude estimate for χc is close to more precise one obtained from QCD sum rules [26]. Assuming the same branching ratio in medium as in vacuum, we calculate the number ratio <strong>of</strong> ψ ′ to J/ψ including decay contribution to J/ψ from mass-shifted χc and ψ ′ . The result is shown in Fig. 6 together with the experimental data. We plot the result as a function <strong>of</strong> ψ ′ mass shift which is not known well. One sees an enhancement <strong>of</strong> the ratio for large ψ ′ mass shift. While larger mass shift <strong>of</strong> ψ ′ than 100 MeV does not seem consistent with the experimental data, our rough estimation is still inside the experimental band. If such an enhancement is confirmed, it will prove the mass shift <strong>of</strong> the charmonia as a precursor <strong>of</strong> the confinement-deconfinement transition. Details including analyses with QCD sum rules have been presented in Ref. [26]. REFERENCES [1] T. Matsui, H. Satz, Phys. Lett. B 178 (1986) 416. [2] T. Hashimoto, O. Miyamura, K. Hirose, T. Kanki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 (1986) 2123. σ ψ′ /σ J/ψ 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 Exp. data Statistical production w/ mass shift No mass shift 0 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 ψ′ mass shift [MeV] Figure 6: Ratio <strong>of</strong> ψ ′ to J/ψ as a function <strong>of</strong> ψ ′ mass shift. The horizontal band indicates the experimental data measured in Pb+Pb collisions at √ sNN = 17 GeV. [3] E. Eichten, K. Gottfried, T. Kinoshita, K. D. Lane, T. M. Yan, Phys. Rev. D 17 (1978) 3090. [4] M. E. Peskin, Nucl. Phys. B 156 (1979) 365. [5] G. Bhanot, M. E. Peskin, Nucl. Phys. B 156 (1979) 391. [6] H. Fujii, D. Kharzeev, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 114039. [7] M. Luke, A. V. Manohar, M. J. Savage, Phys. Lett. B 288 (1992) 355. [8] S. H. Lee, K. Morita, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 011501. [9] G. Boyd, J. Engles, F. Karsch, E. Laermann, C. Legeland, M. Lütgemeier, B. Petersson, Nucl. Phys. B469 (1996) 419. [10] O. Kaczmarek, F. Karsch, F. Zantow, P. Petreczky, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 074505, [Erratum-ibid. D 72 (2005) 059903]. [11] E. Manousakis, J. Polonyi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58 (1987) 847. [12] M. A. Shifman, Nucl. Phys. B 173 (1980) 13. [13] A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, J. Stachel, Nucl. Phys. A772 (2006) 167. [14] F. Klingl, S. Kim, S. H. Lee, P. Morath, W. Weise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 3396. [15] K. Nakamura, et al., J. Phys. G.: Nucl. Part. Phys. 37 (2010) 075021. [16] B. Borasoy, U. G. Meißner, Phys. Lett. B 365 (1996) 285. [17] M. Cheng et al., Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 014511. [18] A. Bazavov, et al., Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 014504. [19] S. Borsányi, G. Endrödi, Z. Fodor, A. Jakovác, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti, K. K. Szabó, arXiv:1007.2580. [20] P. Huovinen, P. Petreczky, Nucl. Phys. A837 (2010) 26. [21] D. H. Rischke, M. I. Gorenstein, H. Stöcker, W. Greiner, Z. Phys. C 51 (1991) 485. [22] T. Song, W. Park, S. H. Lee, Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 034914. [23] M. Ga´zdzicki, M. I. Gorenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 4009. [24] A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich, J. Stachel, Phys. Lett. B 571 (2003) 36. [25] A. Andronic and F. Beutler and P. Braun-Munzinger and K. Redlich and J. Stachel, Phys. Lett. B 678 (2009) 350. [26] K. Morita, S. H. Lee. arXiv:1012.3110.
Page 1 and 2: Proceedings <stron
Page 3: Conference poster
Page 7: Preface The international conferenc
Page 10: Recent progress of
Page 13 and 14: Figure 1: The Pulse Intensity-Durat
Page 15: Figure 3: The attosecond metrology
Page 18 and 19: THE QED EFFECTIVE ACTION In quantum
Page 20 and 21: Figure 2: Turning points in the com
Page 22 and 23: [5] A. Ringwald, “Pair production
Page 24 and 25: QED IN ULTRA-INTENSE LASER FIELDS
Page 26 and 27: form e + nγL → e ′ + γ where
Page 28 and 29: ection(s) associated with the exter
Page 30 and 31: This is listed in Tab.1. The effect
Page 32 and 33: the spectrum of ph
Page 34 and 35: pf f f pi p x2 x1 k ki p pi Figure
Page 36 and 37: STRONG FIELD DYNAMICS IN HEAVY-ION
Page 38 and 39: Possible effects of</strong
Page 40 and 41: Figure 3: Flux tube structure <stro
Page 42 and 43: Abstract Yoctosecond photon pulse g
Page 44 and 45: emsstrahlung or inelastic pair anni
Page 46 and 47: Abstract Fields, Instantons, and Cu
Page 48 and 49: the dispersion relation p0 = Ep −
Page 50 and 51: CRITICAL BEHAVIOR OF CHARMONIUM: QC
Page 54 and 55: ON THE UNRUH EFFECT ∗ Ralf Schüt
Page 56 and 57: Abstract Can we detect ”Unruh rad
Page 58 and 59: Equipartition Theorem The stochasti
Page 60 and 61: Abstract Quantum fields and static
Page 62: The relation between acceleration a
Page 65 and 66: = γ WISP ; ; ALP HP(mγ ′ > 0) .
Page 67 and 68: Figure 4: Exclusion limit (95% C.L.
Page 69 and 70: Probing extremely light fields via
Page 71 and 72: Figure 1: Second harmonic generatio
Page 73 and 74: Abstract Dynamical view of<
Page 75 and 76: (a) longitudinal momentum distribut
Page 77 and 78: Exact solutions of
Page 79 and 80: Pair production in heat bath Finall
Page 81: Table 1: Related ideas in strong fi
Page 84 and 85: Abstract Non-linear charge transpor
Page 86 and 87: under the assumption of</st
Page 88 and 89: Brilliant hardγ-production ande +
Page 90 and 91: each other. Thus the E field rotate
Page 92 and 93: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work is based
Page 94 and 95: ϵ is the energy of</strong
Page 96 and 97: of the sampling eq
Page 98 and 99: Abstract SCHWINGER LIMIT ATTAINABIL
Page 100 and 101: To find it we use the integral calc
Page 102 and 103:
cloud with a size of</stron
Page 104 and 105:
A way to quantify the irreversible
Page 106 and 107:
Figure 4: Pair production vs time f
Page 108 and 109:
of the quantum flu
Page 110 and 111:
Phenomena H. Schwarz and H. Hora Ed
Page 112 and 113:
In USA, LLNL has a user’s facilit
Page 114 and 115:
field triggering such phenomena is
Page 116 and 117:
QGP is studied by using the particl
Page 118 and 119:
Fig. (1): Presentation of</
Page 120 and 121:
REFERENCES [1] P.A. Franken, A.E. H
Page 122 and 123:
of electron. When
Page 124 and 125:
splitting, no one has succeeded to
Page 126 and 127:
Abstract WIDE-BAND X-RAY OBSERVATIO
Page 128 and 129:
Radiation from Rotation-Powered Pul
Page 130 and 131:
2 -2 -1 keV (ph cm s keV -1 ) 0.1 0
Page 132 and 133:
Zero temperature case There are sti
Page 134 and 135:
M|, is realized in their case, and
Page 136 and 137:
egime. As analogous to a convention
Page 138 and 139:
With extremely high-peak power lase
Page 140 and 141:
Abstract Flying Mirror as a tool to
Page 142 and 143:
Reflected light intensity (μJ/sr/n
Page 144:
4-mirror laser stacking cavity for
Page 147 and 148:
CURRENT STATUS OF LFEX LASER AND EX
Page 149 and 150:
which were comparable to those befo
Page 151 and 152:
Abstract X-ray Emission from Magnet
Page 153 and 154:
sometimes exceed the Eddington lumi
Page 155 and 156:
1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 B 2 z E 2 T 0.5 1
Page 157 and 158:
First order quantum correction to t
Page 159 and 160:
dE (1) dt = ¯he4 m 2 12πɛ0p 5 i
Page 161 and 162:
Next, let us consider the origin <s
Page 163 and 164:
Abstract NONCANONICAL LIE PERTURBAT
Page 165 and 166:
with C (2) µ = Γ (2) µ − ˆ L
Page 167 and 168:
log N (PIC particle) When the condi
Page 169:
Abstract X-RAY GENERATION VIA LASER
Page 173 and 174:
The electron beam is bent to the du
Page 175 and 176:
INVESTIGATING THE ONE-PHOTON ANNIHI
Page 177:
As a representative characteristics
Page 182 and 183:
the interference terms ⟨ϕIϕh⟩
Page 184 and 185:
P r o g r a m of P
Page 186 and 187:
11:55 lunch & group photo [85] [Rec
Page 188:
List of Participan
show all

Proceedings of International Conference on Physics in ... - KEK

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?