1 / 26

А.Б.Курепин – ИЯИ РАН, Москва

Столкновение релятивистских тяжелых ядер и загадка чармония. А.Б.Курепин – ИЯИ РАН, Москва. VI Марковские чтения 15 Мая 2008 г. ОИЯИ, Дубна. Charmonium. 33 years ago: discovery of J/ ψ , 21 years ago: Matsui & Satz colour screening in deconfined matter → J/ ψ suppression

hop-moss
Download Presentation

А.Б.Курепин – ИЯИ РАН, Москва

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Столкновение релятивистских тяжелых ядер и загадка чармония А.Б.Курепин – ИЯИ РАН, Москва VI Марковские чтения 15 Мая 2008 г. ОИЯИ, Дубна

  2. Charmonium • 33 years ago:discovery of J/ψ, 21 years ago: Matsui & Satz • colour screening in deconfined matter →J/ψ suppression • →possible signature of QGP formation • Experimental and theoretical progress since then → situation is much more complicated • cold nuclear matter / initial state effects • “normal” absorption in cold matter • (anti)shadowing • saturation, color glass condensate • suppression via comovers • feed down from cc, y’ • sequential screening (first: cc, y’, J/y only well above Tc) • regeneration via statistical hadronization or charm coalescence • important for “large” charm yield, i.e. RHIC and LHC

  3. NA50 experimental setup The J/ is detected via its decay into muon pairs Dimuon spectrometer: Centrality detectors: EM calorimeter (1.1< lab<2.3) 2.92 < ylab< 3.92 ZDC calorimeter (lab> 6.3) cos CS < 0.5 Multiplicity detector (1.9<lab<4.2) Pb-Pb 158 GeV/c p – A 400 GeV/c 2000 year Data period Subtargets Number of J/ Target Number of J/ 1995 7 50000 Be 38000 1996 7 190000 Al 48000 1998 1 49000 Cu 45000 2000 1 in vacuum 129000 Ag 41000 W 49000 Pb 69000 J/y suppression is generally considered as one of the most direct signatures of QGP formation (Matsui-Satz 1986)

  4. Fit to the mass spectrum

  5. Light systems and peripheral Pb-Pb collisions:J/ψ is absorpted by nuclear matter . The scaling variable -L (length of nuclear matter crossed by the J/ψ) •  (J/ψ) ~ exp( -abs L) • Central Pb-Pb collisions:the L scaling is broken - anomalous suppression J/ψ suppression from p-A to Pb-Pb collisions J/ψ production has been extensively studied inp-A, S-UandPb-Pbcollisions by the NA38 and NA50 experiments at the CERN SPS Projectile J/y Target J/y normal nuclear absorption curve NA60 : is anomalous suppression present also in lighter In-In nuclear systems ?Scaling variable- L, Npart, ε ?

  6. MWPC’s m ~ 1m Muon Spectrometer Iron wall Hadron absorber Toroidal Magnet Target area m beam Trigger Hodoscopes Dipole field2.5 T ZDC TARGET BOX MUON FILTER Matching in coordinate and in momentum space BEAM BEAMTRACKER VERTEX TELESCOPE IC  not to scale • Origin of muons can be accurately determined • Improved dimuon mass resolution allows studies vs. collision centrality  ZDC NA60 experimental setup High granularity and radiation-hard silicon tracking telescope in the vertex region before the absorber

  7. Comparison of NA50 and NA60results An “anomalous suppression” is presented already in In-In The normal absorption curve is based on NA50 results. Its uncertainty (~ 8%) at 158 GeV is dominated by the (model dependent) extrapolation from the 400 and 450 GeV p-A data. need p-A measurements at 158 GeV

  8. Сomparison J/resultsversus Npart NA50: Npart ftom Et (left) and from Ezdc (right, as in NA60) J/ysuppression inIn-Inis in agreement withPb-Pb S-Uhas different behaviour

  9. Preliminary! ’ suppression(NA38, NA50, NA60) abs=8±1 mb abs~20 mb Small statistics in NA60 In-In for’ (~300) The most peripheral point (Npart~60)– normal nuclearabsorption

  10. Suppression by produced hadrons (“comovers”) The model takes into account nuclear absorption and comovers interaction with σco = 0.65 mb (Capella-Ferreiro) EPJ C42(2005) 419 In-In 158 GeV J/y / NColl nuclear absorption comover + nuclear absorption (E. Ferreiro, private communication) Pb-Pb 158 GeV NA60 In-In 158 GeV

  11. QGP + hadrons + regeneration + in-medium effects The model simultaneously takes into account dissociation and regeneration processes in both QGP and hadron gas (Grandchamp, Rapp, Brown EPJ C43 (2005) 91) In-In 158 GeV fixed thermalization time centrality dependent thermalization time BmmsJ/y/sDY Nuclear Absorption Suppression + Regeneration QGP+hadronic suppression Regeneration Number of participants Pb-Pb 158 GeV centrality dependent thermalization time fixed thermalization time NA60 In-In 158 GeV

  12. Suppression due to a percolation phase transition Model based on percolation (Digal-Fortunato-Satz) Eur.Phys.J.C32 (2004) 547. Prediction: sharp onset (due to the disappearance of the cc meson) at Npart ~ 125 for Pb-Pb and ~ 140 for In-In Pb-Pb 158 GeV NA60 In-In 158 GeV The dashed line includes the smearing due to the resolution

  13. J/transverse momentum distribution Study <pT2> and T dependence on centrality NA60 In-In

  14. J/transverse momentum distribution <pT2> versus L Fitting: <pT2>(L) = <pT2>pp + αgN L <pT2>pp= 1.08 ± 0.02 GeV2/c2 χ2= 0.85  αgN = 0.083 ± 0.002 GeV2/c2fm-1 The observed dependence could simply result from parton initial state multiple scattering

  15. NA50 and NA38 Teff recalculated to 158 GeV vs energy density T(=0) =( 182)2 MeV Tslope = ( 20.16  1.04)  10-3 fm3 Tslope(cent Pb-Pb)=(8.87  2.07) 10-3 fm3 R(slopes)=2.27 +/- 0.54 InNA38 and NA50 TJ/ ψ grows linearly with the energy density and with L. Model dependent recalculation 400 and 200 GeV data to 158 GeV- scaling. For the most central Pb-Pb collisions more flat behaviour could be seen.

  16. J/ψ suppression versus pT. F=(J//DY>4.2 )acc vs pT in 5 ET bins F NA50 Pb-Pb 2000 F Et bins in GeV 1. 5 - 20 2. 20 - 40 3. 40 - 70 4. 70 - 100 5. >100 pT

  17. Suppression vs pT for p-A, S-U and Pb-Pb Rcp p-A S-U ~Aα Cronin effect- enhancement at pT>2 GeV/c Pb-Pb 2000 Rcp Et bins GeV 5 - 40 40 - 80 80 – 125

  18. 1.5-5% 5-10% 10-16% 0-1.5% RCP 23-33% 16-23% 33-47% pT (GeV/c) Rcp vs pT. NA60 In-In Rcp = (J/ψi(pT)/Ncolli)/(J/ψ1(pT)/Ncoll1) The ratios to the peripheral i=1 (47-57%)bin. Large suppression at low pT, growing with centrality- as in RAA NA60 and in Rcp NA50.

  19. J/ in PHENIX J/  e+e– identified in RICH and EMCal • |y| < 0.35 • Pe > 0.2 GeV/c •  =  J/μ+μ– identified in 2 fwd spectrometers South : • -2.2 < y < -1.2 North : • 1.2 < y < 2.4 • P > 2 GeV/c •  = 2  Event centrality and vertex given by BBC in 3<||<3.9 (+ZDC) Centrality is calculated to Npart (Ncoll) using Glauber model

  20. Yan, Zhuang, Xu nucl-th/0608010 All models for y=0 nucl-ex/0611020 nucl-ex/0611020 J/,’,c Satz Capella Rapp Suppression RAA vs Npart at RHIC. PHENIX Au-Au data Models for mid-rapidity Au-Au data Without regeneration With regeneration

  21. J/ψ suppression (SPS and RHIC) J/ψ yield vs Npart, normalized on Ncoll. Unexpected good scaling. Coherent interpretation- problem for theory. Work start - : Karsch, Kharzeev and Satz., PRL637(2006)75

  22. arXiv:0801.0220 [nucl-ex] J/ψ suppression RAA vs pT at PHENIX. Au-Au Cu-Cu nucl-ex/0611020 For low pT suppression grows with centrality.

  23. Comparison SPS (NA60) and RHIC (PHENIX) data The same suppression at low pT. Larger values of <pT2> at RHIC

  24. Suppression RAA in Au-Au (PHENIX) vs pT. P J/ψ up to only 5 GeV Central events The same RAA for 0,  at all pT and J/ (up to 4 GeV/c). RAA for  is higher. RAA for direct  <1 for high pT.

  25. J/ψ suppression RAA at RHIC. PHENIX and STAR Cu-Cu data • Data consistent with no suppression at high pT: RAA(pT > 5 GeV/c) = 0.9 ± 0.2 • At low-pT RAA: 0.5—0.6 (PHENIX) • RAA increase from low pT to high pT • Most models expect a decrease RAA at high pT: X. Zhao and R. Rapp, hep-ph/07122407 H. Liu, K. Rajagopal and U.A. Wiedemann, PRL 98, 182301(2007) and hep-ph/0607062 •  But some models predict an increase RAA • at high pT: • K.Karch and R.Petronzio, 193(1987105; • J.P.Blaizot and J.Y.Ollitrault, PRL (1987)499

  26. Conclusions • At SPS energiesthe J/y shows an anomalous suppression discovered in Pb-Pb and existing already in In-In • None of the available models properly describes the observed suppression pattern simultaneously in Pb-Pb and In-In • The  shows an anomalous suppression for S-U, In-In • and Pb-Pb • At RHIC energies the J/suppression is of the same order as at SPS • None of the theoretical model could describe all the data • The transverse momentum dependence of J/ψ suppression shows • suppression mainly ay low pT, growing with centrality • Need information at high pT.

More Related