Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published bySamson McDonald Modified over 3 years ago

1
/36 Charmonium suppression from SPS to RHIC Raphaël Granier de Cassagnac LLR – École polytechnique / IN2P3 PHENIX & CMS experiments Seattle, 2009, June 17 th 2009, June 17th 1Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr

2
/36 Introduction “overview talk on experimental status of charmonium suppression.” Setting up the firm ground of observations Leaving on the side –Production mechanisms, polarization, feed- downs, fermilab and hera-b… Some redundancy with at least –Rapp, Redlich, Stachel, Frawley, Lansberg, Tuchin, Faccioli, Leitch, Woehri, Linden-Levy, Lourenço… 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr2

3
/36 The normal introduction In 1986, Matsui & Satz predicted an “unambiguous” signature of QGP –Onset of quarkonia melting above a certain temperature / energy density threshold Example of assumed T d (but theorists still working on it, remember yesterday): 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Matsui & Satz, PLB178 (1986) 416 3

4
/36 0. The published situation before new SPS and RHIC preliminary references shown at QM09 2009, June 17th 4Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr

5
/36 Cold and hot matter @ SPS Normal nuclear absorption alone does a splendid job describing pA, SU and peripheral InIn and PbPb: – σ abs = 4.18 ± 0.35 mb – Scaled from 400 to 158 AGeV Beyond is “anomalous suppression” – InIn looks like an onset 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr J/ψ L NA60 preliminary σ abs = 4.18 ± 0.35 mb NA50, EPJ C39 (2005) 335 NA60, PRL99 (2007) 132302 ± 10% global systematics 5

6
/36 R AuAu (y≈0 in PHENIX) ≈ R PbPb (@ SPS) Lower rapidity R AA looks surprisingly similar, while there are obvious differences: –At a given N part, different energy densities… –Cold nuclear matter effects (x Bjorken, σ abs …) –… 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr REDO Without forward PHENIX, PRL98 (2007) 232301 SPS from Scomparin @ QM06 6

7
/36 R AuAu (y≈1.7) < R AuAu (y≈0) in PHENIX @ RHIC, more J/ψ suppression at forward rapidity! While energy density should be smaller… R AA (y~1.7) R AA (y~0) 60% 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr REDO PHENIX, PRL98 (2007) 232301 What is this further 40% suppression due to? 7

8
/36 @ RHIC, more suppression at forward rapidity! Two possible theoretical explanations… A. One hot: coalescence, regeneration B. One cold: saturation, shadowing 2009, June 17th 8Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr

9
/36 A. Hot coalescence, regeneration Large variety of approaches, all justify: –R AA (y=0) > R AA (y=1.7) –(more c quarks to recombine at y=0) As an example 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Latest references R. Thews et al, EPJ C43, 97 (2005) Yan, Zhuang, Xu, PRL97, 232301 (2006) A. Andronic et al., NPA789, 334 (2007) Ravagli, Rapp, PLB655, 126 (2007) Zhao, Rapp, PLB664, 253 (2008) A. Capella et al., EPJ C58, (2008) O. Linnyk et al., NPA807, 79 (2008) Rapp and Stachel at Seattle (Apologies if I forgot somebody) Capella, Ferreiro, Tywoniuk et al. Fitting Cu+Cu, Au+Au, Mid and forward rapidity 9

10
/36 B. Cold matter Assuming two shadowing schemes, derive breakup cross sections from R dA (y) –σ EKS ≈ 2.8 +2.3 –2.1 mb –σ NDSG ≈ 2.6 +2.2 –2.6 mb Extrapolate to AuAu –(Also available for CuCu) –Mid and forward are correlated through shadowing scheme –If you believe this shadowing + absorption, there is anomalous suppression, larger at forward rapidity. 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Forward rapidity Midrapidity PHENIX, PRC 77 (2008) 024912 & erratum: PRC 79 (2009) 059901 10

11
/36 B. Cold matter More model independent… In a Glauber data-driven model, propagate what we know from R dA (y,centrality) –R AA (y,b) = Σ i R dA (–y,b i 1 ) x R dA (+y,b i 2 ) –No shadowing nor absorption schemes –Mid and forward are not correlated, less model dependent larger uncertainties (especially @ y≈0) Anomalous suppression, at least at forward rapidity! Anomalous suppression could be identical at different rapidities (No dCu, so no CuCu) 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Survival = 38 +18 – 22 % Survival = 55 +23 –38 % Forward rapidity Midrapidity RGdC, HP06 and QM06 PHENIX, PRC 77, 024912 (2008) 11

12
/36 B. Recent CGC paper 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Gluon saturation could further suppress forward J/ψ in AuAu –First numerical estimate –Absolute amount of suppression is fitted to the AuAu data! –Waiting forward to new dAu data to fit them first –However, rapidity dependence should be ok –But it does not reproduce peripheral data –Anyway… Kharzeev, Levin, Nardi, Tuchin PRL102 (2009) 152301 and arXiv: 0809.2933 dN/dy Again, J/ψ anomalous suppression could be identical at mid and forward rapidity! 12

13
/36 How to disentangle these two scenarios experimentally? (now moving to preliminary material) Two possible theoretical explanations… A. One hot: coalescence, regeneration B. One cold: saturation, shadowing 2009, June 17th 13Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr

14
/36 How to move forward experimentally? 1.Calm down? 2.Be more open? 3.Get excited? 4.Get high? 5.Broaden interest? 6.Let it flow? 7.Be upset? 8.Give up? (Better pA/dA reference) (Measure cc to constrain regen.) (ψ’, χ c ) (in mass, looking at upsilons) (in transverse momentum) (elliptically) (and search for onset) And move to the LHC? 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Some progress on all these points at this meeting ! RGdC, Quarkonia in hot and cold matters, Quark Matter 08 14

15
/36 1. New preliminary reference @ SPS NA60 pA @ 158 GeV New absorption, considering also antishadowing (EKS98)… 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr abs (400 GeV) = 4.3 ± 0.8 ± 0.6 mb In-In 158 GeV (NA60) Pb-Pb 158 GeV (NA50) Still anomalous suppression in Pb+Pb (of ψ’ and χ c ?) Not sizeable in In+In, but such a peculiar shape… ± 11% global uncertainty 15 abs (158 GeV) = 7.6 ± 0.7 ± 0.6 mb Considering shadowing ≈75% With new absorption ≈68% With old reference ≈58% Arnaldi, QM09

16
/36 1. New preliminary reference @ RHIC R dA not yet available – No data driven method Shadowing & σ abs do not describe data anymore One way is to use various (effective) σ abs vs rapidity 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr EKS σ = 0,1,2,3,4,…15 16 Linden-Levy, QM09 Frawley, Trento & Seattle

17
/36 Now, a little word of caution Tony’s extrapolation of the dAu Phenix preliminary R CP does reinforce the cold hypothesis to explain the R AA rapidity difference… However, need different σ abs for different rapidity –also seen at SPS, Fermilab So, something else or different is going on there… –Something for which the extrapolation to R AA may or may not be appropriate… So let us think! –(and wait for final R dA ) 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr17 Lourenço, Vogt, Woehri, JHEP 0902:014 Frawley, Trento & Seattle

18
/36 What else could bring information? 2. Open charm? 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr18

19
/36 2. Measuring open charm… … could constrain both – Regeneration α (N cc ) 2 – Initial state effect (shadowing…) shared with J/ψ A factor of 2 difference between experiments ≈25% systematic error But binary scaling (within uncertainties…) At SPS too: 1.16 ± 0.16 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr ? ??? PHENIX, PRL98 (2007) 172301 NA60, EPJ.C59 (2009) 607 10 to 20 cc pairs 19

20
/36 2. Open charm vs rapidity Only pp, and very poorly known 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr To know more about open charm, wait for silicon upgrades in Phenix and Star D. Hornback, PHENIX, QM08 20

21
/36 Look at other quarkonia 3. Excited charmonia 4. Upsilons 2009, June 17th 21Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr

22
/36 3. Excited states (feed down to J/ψ) Excited states should… A. melt if J/ψ suppression is cold effects + sequential melting B. also regenerate if J/ψ do (and maybe even more) At RHIC, unfortunately only p+p for now… Feeddown ratio –ψ‘ dAu is feasible –ψ‘ AuAu needs new run ψ from ψ’ = 8.6 ± 2.5% ψ from χ c < 42% (90%CL) Beauty cross section ψ from B = 4 + – 3 2 % 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr M. Donadelli @ PANIC08 22

23
/36 Preliminary 450, 400 and 200 GeV points rescaled to 158 GeV ψ’ at SPS ψ’ are more absorbed and suppressed than J/ψ –σ abs (158 AGeV) not available 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr ψ’ J/ψ NA50, EPJC48 (2006) 329 NA50, EPJC49 (2007) 559 Scomparin @ Trento ψ’/Drell-Yan σ abs = 4.2 ± 0.5 mb σ abs = 7.7 ± 0.9 mb 7.3 ± 1.6 mb ψ pA / A at 400 AGeV close to a factor of 10 23 19.2 ± 2.4 mb

24
/36 4. Beginning of a bottomonia story R dAu = 0.98 ± 0.32 ± 0.28 (from STAR) R AuAu < 0.64 @ 90% CL (from PHENIX ) – Could be cold effects – No continuum subtraction (but < 15% from pp) – Feeddown of χ b important 50% for p T > 8 GeV/c at CDF Stay tuned… 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Atomssa, Liu, Conesa del Valle @ QM09 24 [8.5,11.5] GeV/c 2

25
/36 Look at other observables 5. p T (broadening) 6. Elliptic flow 2009, June 17th 25Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr

26
/36 5. p T broadening @ SPS ? Tested on many systems… NA60 pA slope is unique… Cronin goes like: AB = pp + α x L 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr SPS Cortese (NA60), Hard probes 08 + homemade powerpoint fits 26

27
/36 5. p T broadening @ RHIC ? vs N part ? Widely unknown initial charm production: – Recombined R AA are poorly constrained… Instead look at p T : – Hot: Inherited p T should be lower than initial – Cold: Cronin effect should broaden initial p T Cronin goes like: AB = pp + α x L 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr No strong dependence… Modest rise at forward rapidity Could be broadening No need for recombination here PHENIX, PRL 101, 122301 (2008) Mid rapidityForward rapidity 27

28
/36 5. p T broadening @ RHIC ? vs thickness ? 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr No strong dependence… Modest rise at forward rapidity Could be broadening No need for recombination here 2.7 sigma slope Widely unknown initial charm production: –Recombined R AA are poorly constrained… Instead look at p T : –Hot: Inherited p T should be lower than initial –Cold: Cronin effect should broaden initial p T Cronin goes like: AB = pp + α x L Mid rapidityForward rapidity 1.2<|y|<2.2|y|<0.35 28

29
/36 5. Reaching higher p T 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr STAR’s R CuCu (high p T ) ≈ 1 Hot wind scenario → 0 – Screening length from AdS/CFT… But several reasons for R AA to grow at high p T – Cronin effect, – Bottom contribution, – Leakage, – (Anti)shadowing… Already seen at SPS! – R CP of Pb-Pb data IMHO, not a big deal… STAR, arXiv:0904.0439 Rapp & Zhao, arxiv:0806.1239 NA50, L. Ramello, QM05 29

30
/36 6. J/ψ elliptic flow in PHENIX 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr If recombined, J/ψ should inherit the (rather large) charm quark elliptic flow. First measurement: Various levels of recombination… Will require RHIC2 for a discriminating measurement C. Silvestre @ QM08 E.T. Atomssa @ HP08 30

31
/36 6. But also J/ψ elliptic flow @ SPS Cannot be due to recombination –(≈0.05 cc pairs in In+In) Needs confirmation and understanding 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Eccentric In+In collisions F. Prino @ HP08 MinBias Pb+Pb collisions R. Arnaldi @ QM08 31

32
/36 What else ? 7. Look for onsets 8. Go to LHC, the uncharted territory 2009, June 17th 32Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr

33
/36 7. Common onset at SPS and RHIC? Clear misalignment wrt N part Better wrt dN/dη 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr33 R. Arnaldi + T. Frawley, Trento More next week… Getting closer to energy density, more next week…

34
/36 8. J/ψ at LHC ? A new story will begin ↓ More J/ψ melting ↓ Larger shadowing / saturation effects ↑ Larger recombination (maybe 200 cc pairs) If recombination prevails → golden signal If not, expect same or worse difficulties as at RHIC… 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Example of prediction A. Andronic et al., NPA789 (2007) 334 J. Stachel, Seattle That would be hot ! 34

35
/36 8. More quarkonia @ LHC A lot of Upsilons –Y’ and Y’’ should be suppressed –Y shouldn’t (apart from 50% χ b feeddown) 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr ≈ 3,700 (10 σ) ? Pb-Pb 0,5 nb –1 Frawley, Ullrich, Vogt, Phys Rept 462 (2008) 125 CMS 35

36
/36 Anomalous conclusions One strong conclusion: –“J/ψ suppression is not (well and yet) understood” –Cold and hot effects going in the same direction… Forward/mid rapidity difference could be due to: A.Regeneration / coalescence of cc pairs? B.Cold effects? more and more favored (next talk) However, conservative cold matter approaches still give significant anomalous suppression at least at SPS and at forward rapidity… –The hot matter is deconfining some quarkonia –Could be only ψ’ and χ c at SPS… New data helps further understanding –dAu and pA data, ψ’ and Upsilon, RHIC2 and LHC… 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr36

37
/36 That’s all folks 2009, June 17th 37Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr

38
/36 1. R dAu versus rapidity 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr38

39
/36 Pb/p 8. Quick look at shadowing on J/ψ 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr 2.5 < y < 4 -0.9 < y < 0.9 -4 < y < -2.5 ALICE CMSCMS (emitted gluons and p T are neglected) A factor of ≈2x2 uncertainty on charm production from current shadowing knowledge 39

40
/36 Lourenço et al, arxiv:0901.3054 E866 : flat with x F if no shadowing is assumed… Even with no shadowing, little √s dependence of σ abs 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr40

41
/36 Still open questions at SPS… Interplay shadowing – absorption √s dependence of absorption? –Lourenço et al, arxiv:0901:3054. NA60, pA @ 168 GeV? –HP08? QM09? Unexplained rapidity dependence in pA? –Eur.Phys.J.C48:329,2006 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr σ nDS (mb) σ EKS Tram & Arleo, EPJ. C 55, 449-461 (2008) 41

42
/36 J/ψ in pA, NA50 In pA, an unsolved rapidity dependence… EPJ… 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr +50% +30% 42

43
/36 R AuAu (run 4) = R AuAu (run 7) Forward rapidity only (for now) More bins at higher centrality Confirm the trend –R AA (y≈1.7) < R AA (y≈0) 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr43

44
/36 R AuAu vs R CuCu @RHIC Final CuCu analysis Slightly below 1 in CuCu 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr PHENIX, arXiv:0801.0220 R AA (y~1.7) R AA (y~0) 44

45
/36 R CuCu (STAR, high p T ) ≈ 1 2 sigma J/ψ signal in Cu+Cu STAR = PHENIX charm spectra R CuCu raising with p T 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr * These are not phenix results yet, but could become as soon as the two experiments talk to each others * * * * * * Rapp & Zhao, arxiv:0806.1231 45

46
/36 Various R XY (p T ) Several (hints of) raising R AA (p T ) 1.R CP PbPb (NA50) 2.R AuAu (PHENIX) 3.R dAu (PHENIX) Several potential reasons: –Leakage effect, J/ψ escape High p T J/ψ forming beyond QGP –Cronin effect –Raising x Bj = less shadowing 0.02 to 0.05 from 0 to 9 GeV/c See discussion in → Think about it… 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr PHENIX, arxiv:0711.3917 compared to Ferreiro, Fleuret, Rakotozafindrabe, arxiv: 0801.4949 1 2 3 46

47
/36 2. Cold matter again ? Fitting an effective break- up cross section (depending on y) and extrapolate to CuCu and AuAu… Do you agree that we have poor handle on the cold nuclear matter effect? 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr PHENIX, arxiv:0801.0220 STOP 47

48
/36 7. Search for an onset? Onset curves fit the midrapidity AuAu data… – Chaudhury, nucl-th/0610031 – Gunji et al, hep-ph/0703061 (after CNM subtraction) But so do smooth curves ! – Nagle nucl-ex/0705.1712 Density threshold @ y=0 is incompatible with SPS onset – Linnyk & al, nucl-th/0705.4443 No onset @ y=1.7 ? Wait for run7 analysis & CNM constraints! 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr Gunji et al, PRC 76 (2007) 051901 A.K. Chaudhury, nucl-th/0610031 STOP 48

49
/36 Density threshold ? No ! J. Nagle, nucl-ex/0705.1712 Onset curves fit the midrapidity data… –Chaudhury, nucl-th/0610031 –Gunji et al, hep-ph/0703061 (after CNM subtraction) So do smooth curves ! –Nagle nucl-ex/0705.1712 Density threshold @ y=0 is incompatible with SPS onset or larger suppression @ y=1.7 –Linnyk & al, nucl-th/0705.4443 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr49

50
/36 From dA to AA @ RHIC b1b1 b2b2 b AA = x J/ψ = x J/ψ RGdC, hep-ph/0701222 For a given A+A collision at b AA, Glauber provides a set of N+N collisions occurring at b i 1 and b i 2 One minimal assumption is rapidity factorization: R AA (|y|,b AA ) = Σ collisions [R dA (-y,b i 1 ) x R dA (+y,b i 2 )] / N coll Works (at least) for absorption & shadowing since production ~ pdf1 x pdf2 x exp –ρσ(L 1 +L 2 ) 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr50

51
/36 Heavy flavor elliptic flow Also a surprise! Now, do bees fly? –Need the b/c+b in AA to properly estimate the b flow… (todo : average the 2 datasets cause they have different stat/syst balance) 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr 51

52
/36 NA60 In+In 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr52 new reference curve ( abs =7.6mb) old reference curve ( abs =4.2mb)

53
/36 2009, June 17th Charmonia at SPS & RHIC - raphael@in2p3.fr53

Similar presentations

OK

INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC P T EFFECTS ON J/ SHADOWING This work, on behalf of E. G. Ferreiro F. Fleuret J.-P. Lansberg A. Rakotozafindrabe Work in progress…

INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC P T EFFECTS ON J/ SHADOWING This work, on behalf of E. G. Ferreiro F. Fleuret J.-P. Lansberg A. Rakotozafindrabe Work in progress…

© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

To ensure the functioning of the site, we use **cookies**. We share information about your activities on the site with our partners and Google partners: social networks and companies engaged in advertising and web analytics. For more information, see the Privacy Policy and Google Privacy & Terms.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.

Ads by Google

Ppt on cement industry in india Ppt on two point perspective examples Ppt on nitrogen cycle and nitrogen fixation by lightning Ppt on combination of resistances Ppt on bluetooth architecture images Ppt on structure of chromosomes proteins Ppt on congruent triangles for class 7 Ppt on construction in maths Ppt on impact of french revolution Ppt on credit policy for customers