Current status of Thermalization from available STAR results

1. Current status of Thermalizationfrom available STAR results Outline Why we need to address this issue What are the characteristic signatures What have we learned so far Bedanga Mohanty VECC,Kolkata

2. Thermalization : Why address this topic (A) To establish Quark-Gluon Plasma “For our purposes here, we take the QGP to be a (locally) thermally equilibrated state of matter in which quarks and gluons are deconfined from hadrons, so that color degrees of freedom become manifest over nuclear, rather than merely nucleonic, volumes.” STAR Collaboration : Nucl. Phys. A 757 (2005) 102

3. Thermalization : Why address this topic (B) To explore the QCD Phase Diagram Temperature for in the phase diagram has a meaningful definition for a system in thermal equilibrium Our Run 10 physics

4. (C) To understand several physics conclusions at RHIC Most theories in our field based on assumption of thermal equilibrium or close to thermal equilibrium Thermalization : Why address this topic (1) (2) Lattice QCD assumes it and provides EOS for many phenomenology/theoretical work Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 112301 (3) Boltzman equation for isotropic system, no external force and with relaxation time approximation -df/dt = f - f0/relax f = f0 + A exp (-t/relax) f --> f0 (equilibrium dist) if t >> relax Most models now days work with such approximations Recombination/coalescence

5. What happens when we have a thermalized system : Basic features for a Thermalized System (A) Maximum Entropy - dS/dt = 0 Processes are reversible (Initial <===> Final) (Ideal case) -- To show experimentally is challenging (impossible?) (B) Space-momentum distributions reach equilibrium values -- Can we access this experimentally (C ) Interactions among constituents saturate. (State in thermal equilibrium has no knowledge of past) -- Can we demonstrate this experimentally

6. STAR Experiment

7. Exponential distribution does not uniquely mean we have a thermal system. Kinetic Freeze-out Distributions Multi-particle production process (no assumption of thermalization) dN/dyd2pT ~ Exp ( - pT/E/2N )* Thermal system dN/dyd2pT ~ Exp ( - pT/E/3N ) Factor of 3/2 : invariant momentum space (d3p/E) not equal to Thermodynamic Momentum space (d3p). Experimentally difficult to distinguish the two. Assumption : average matrix element square is not strongly pT dependent.

8. Slope of pT distribution : Two component - Random part + Collective part Kinetic Freeze-out Distributions Random Part ~ E/N Intensive quantity independent of system size Collective part can also occur for systems away from equilibrium Indicates final state interactions, which will eventually drive system towards equilibrium. scattering > expansion STAR : Phys. Rev. C 79 (2009) 64903 Comparison with pp leads to Interpretations being inconclusive ? STAR : Phys. Rev. C 78 (2008) 44906

9. Kinetic Freeze-out Distributions STAR : Phys. Rev. C 74 (2006) 54902 Ideal hydrodynamics Rx ~ 1/√mT Viscous terms break scaling R2L ~ 0 T/mT - 19/16 s/0 STAR Preliminary Both Au+Au and p+p show scaling with 1/√mT Conclusions inconclusive ?

10. Chemical Freeze-out Distributions Tch = 163 ± 4 MeV B = 24 ± 4 MeV STAR : Phys. Rev. C 79 (2009) 34909 In central collisions, thermal model fit well with S = 1. The system is thermalized at RHIC ? .

11. (A) Assumptions : ,T are constant along freeze-out hyper surface Simultaneous freeze-out (but mean free path different for different particles) Flow 4-velocity common to all particle species Hadron masses and decay widths do not change with T Chemical Freeze-out Distributions (B) Nice fits also to e+e-, pA ( C )Multi-particle production Ed/d3p1 ~ F(P-p1) < | M (P, p1…pN)|2> Matrix element For 2->N process Phase space + Conservation ~ Exp(-pT1/Tslope) Fugacity ~ exp (/T) Decides yields J. Cleymans, K. Relich Phys.Rev.C60:054908,1999 Equilibrium picture not unique

12. Freeze-Out Distributions By definition a state in thermodynamic equilibrium has no knowledge of past May be we should look at early time distributions

13. Early time Collectivity Substantial portion of Elliptic flow developed early Low pT : Heavier hadrons lower flow ( ~ hydrodynamic pattern) High pT : Flow grouped along baryon-meson lines ( ~ Hadronization by partonic recombination) All pT : Flow similar for hadrons with strange and light quark (~ developed at partonic stage) Does this collectivity reflect enough partonic interactions to claim Thermalization ?

14. Early Time collectivity STAR : Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 152301 Away side associated hadron mean pT The away side jet traverses a large amount of matter. The interactions seem to drive particles from the two sources, jet fragmentation and the bulk medium, toward equilibration. This may in turn imply a high degree of thermalization within the medium itself.

15. Loss of correlation due to interactions For a thermal system Correlations (in momentum) reach equilibrium values Physical observables which are sensitive to interactions - Such as average elliptic flow saturate with density and time Momentum correlations saturate with density and time Hints available : But we have not ruled out other physical Processes (minijets ?)

16. Saturation of interactions : v2 saturate Proposed by Borghini & Ollitrault, PLB 642 227 (2006) v4/v22 Part of it in STAR : Phys. Rev. C 66 (2002) 34904 The scaling is expected to be poor for pions. It is expected to break down when pt/m exceeds umax, the maximum value of the transverse 4-velocity of the fluid. Hints available, but U+U collisions in Run 11 Or LHC Heavy Ions will hopefully settle the issue High statistics PID results needed

17. Other STAR Measurements Heavy quark Meson (D-Dbar) Correlations Loss of correlations in AA relative to pp

18. Conclusions Next talks what we can do in coming years in STAR to address this important topic

19. Back ups Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 62301