Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byElizabeth Beldon Modified over 3 years ago

1
Huichao Song The Ohio State University Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Viscous Hydro +URQMD In collaboration with S.Bass, U.Heinz, C.Shen, P.Huovinen & T.Hirano (?) 06/14/2004 May24- July 16, INT Seattle, WA Quantifying the Properties of Hot QCD Matter Supported by DOE

2
Viscous hydrodynamics S.Bass Conservation laws: - Israel-Stewart eqns.

3
Viscous hydrodynamics S.Bass Conservation laws: - Israel-Stewart eqns. viscous hydro: near-equilibrium system pre-equilibrium dynamics + viscous hydro + hadron cascade Initial conditions viscous hydro + final conditions

4
Ideal/ViscousHydro + URQMD 2+1 Ideal/Viscous Hydro Hadron Cascade S.Bass MC- Particle Generator T sw Convertor: MC particle generator VIS -MC

5
extracting QGP viscosity from data Luzum & Romatschke, PRC 2008 GlauberCGC -Effects from highly viscous & non-chemical equilibrium hadronic stage, bulk viscosity … NOT so fast !

6
Effects of viscosity & chemical composition of HRG ~30% PCE vs.CE (HRG) Ideal hydro P. Huovinen 07 - Does hadronic viscosity and partially equilibrium chemistry balance each other in elliptic flow? Is it safe to neglect both of them, when extracting QGP viscosity? Ideal hydro vs ideal hydro +hadron cascade ~30%

7
Ideal / viscous hydro+URQMD SM-EOS Q (CE) vs. EOSL-PCE

8
ideal hydro vs. ideal hydro+URQMD (EOSL-PCE) - EOS L-PCE : Hadronic viscosity (URQMD) leads to ~20% viscous v 2 suppression EOS L-PCE

9
ideal hydro +URQMD: SM-EOSQ(CE) vs. EOSL-PCE - EOS L-PCE: Hadronic viscosity (URQMD) leads to ~20% viscous v 2 suppression - SM-EOS Q (CE): effects from hadronic viscosity and PCE (in URQMD) cancel each other in elliptic flow v 2 (Ideal hydro+URQMD) SM-EOS Q (CE)EOS L-PCE

10
SM-EOSQ(CE) : viscous vs. ideal hydro +URQMD - SM-EOS Q (CE): effects from hadronic viscosity and PCE (URQMD) cancel each other in elliptic flow v 2 (ideal hydro+URQMD) -This is no longer true in viscous hydro+URQMD -much larger v 2 suppression for P T >1GeV: effects from shear viscous correction / EOS SM-EOS Q (CE)

11
EOSL-PCE : ideal vs. viscous hydro + URQMD -EOS L-PCE: additional v 2 suppression by URQMD (ideal/viscous hydro + URQMD behave similarly) -Larger URQMD viscous v 2 suppression in ideal hydro +URQMD EOS L-PCE

12
Spectra: SM-EOS Q(CE) vs. EOSL-PCE -EOS L-PCE (correct chemistry below T ch ) is preferable EOS L-PCE SM-EOS Q (CE)

13
viscous v 2 suppression EOS L-PCE -EOS L-PCE: v 2 suppression increases from ~20% (min visc hydro) to ~30% (min visc hydro + URQMD)

14
viscous v 2 suppression EOS L-PCE -EOS L-PCE: v2 suppression increases from ~20% (min visc hydro) to ~30% (min visc hydro + URQMD) ---> significantly reduces the extracted QGP viscosity

15
ideal/viscous hydro +URQMD: mass splitting -Radial flow increases the mass splitting between pion and proton; similar behavior in ideal/ viscous hydro +URQMD EOS L-PCE

16
More Systematic study

17
Inte v 2 : hydro decouple at T sw vs. hydro+URQMD -v 2 is not fully developed at T sw ; -positive ecc. at T sw additionally increase of v 2 in URQMD

18
Inte v 2 : ideal hydro, vis hydro, vis hydro+URQMD -Additional v 2 suppression in URQMD (hadronic stage is highly viscous)

19
viscous v 2 suppression: hydro vs. hydro+URQMD -larger URQMD viscous v 2 suppression for smaller systems -viscous hydro + URQMD: smaller URQMD viscous v 2 suppression, comparing with ideal hydro + URQMD

20
ideal vs viscous hydro & ideal vs viscous hydro +URQMD -Viscous v 2 suppressions are significantly reduced after a proper treatment of hadronic matter (URQMD)

21
: ideal Hydro + URQMD -Hadronic viscosity from URQMD increase the slope of

22
: ideal /Viscous Hydro + URQMD (I) -hadronic viscosity from URQMD increases the slope of

23
-hadronic viscosity from URQMD increase the slope of - v 2 is not fully saturated at T sw the increase of the slope : ideal /Viscous Hydro + URQMD (II)

24
: experimental data Thanks for A. Tang for Exp data -Experimental data: v 2, dN/dy ; theoretical estimations: ecc. S (Glauber/CGC) -larger slope and magnitude for v 2 /ecc. for glauber initial profile GlauberCGC

25
A hint for min vis. liquid with CGC initialization Thanks for A. Tang for Exp data - v 2 /ecc from hydro +URQMD is not sensitive to Glauber /CGC or optical/ fluctuation initializations (need some further calculations) GlauberCGC -Theoretical curves are all from Glauber initialization (add cures in the future ) -Overlap area are different for CGC and Glauber initializations

26
viscous hydro+URQMD -- a try to extract the hadronic viscosity vs. viscous hydro with EOSL-PCE is an essential input for the calculations here

27
inte v2 from hydro +URQMD with diff. T sw -with a “perfect” and “correct” chemical components (PCE) for hadrons phase, final results from hydro +URQMD should not be sensitive to T sw - is not enough for hadronic viscosity

28
inte v2 from hydro +URQMD with diff. T sw - is not enough for hadronic viscosity - over suppresses v2 for T=165-150 MeV, but not enough for T<130 MeV

29
inte v2 from hydro +URQMD with diff. T sw - is not enough for hadronic viscosity - over suppresses v 2 for T=165-150 MeV, but not enough for T<130 MeV

30
extract from URQMD (a first try) a hint? - is not enough for hadronic viscosity - over suppresses v2 for T=165-150 MeV, but not enough for T<130 MeV

31
inte v2 from hydro +URQMD with diff. &T sw

33
extract from URQMD (a first try) -please do NOT take the above number too seriously -need further detailed extraction - such extraction gives a special trajectory of URQMD dynamic

34
A Short Summary -when extracting the QGP viscosity, one need to consider the effects of hadronic viscosity and the hadronic chemical components -with viscous hydro+URQMD become available, these two above uncertainties are naturally eliminated -with a EOS correctly describe PCE HG, it is “somewhat” safe to swtich hydro to URQMD at lower temperature ---> extract the effective URQMD viscosity at some specific dynamical trajectory by comparing hydro with and hydro+URQMD

35
Thank You

Similar presentations

OK

3 rd Joint Meeting of the Nuclear Physics Divisions of the APS and the JPS October 15 th 2009, Hawaii USA Akihiko Monnai Department of Physics, The University.

3 rd Joint Meeting of the Nuclear Physics Divisions of the APS and the JPS October 15 th 2009, Hawaii USA Akihiko Monnai Department of Physics, The University.

© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

To make this website work, we log user data and share it with processors. To use this website, you must agree to our Privacy Policy, including cookie policy.

Ads by Google