1. Quasiparticle Perspective on CEP B. Kämpfer Research Center Rossendorf/Dresden Technical University Dresden with M. Bluhm, R. Schulze, D. Seipt, supported by BMBF, GSI, EU - Quasiparticle Model vs. Lattice QCD - Including the CEP - Somewhat Hydro

2. NJL Model (Schaefer-Wambach) NJL Perspective PNJL: Weise, Ratti,... nothing (Fodor et al.)

3. Lattice QCD Results 1. Phase Boundary 2. EoS = 0 Taylor expansion reweighting, overlapping, complex mu Improved calculs.

4. Quasiparticle Model lattice effective1-loop selfenergies stat. + thermo.consist.

5. Bielefeld 2001 E. Shuryak:

6. Bielefeld-Swansea data c0 c2 c4 c6 phase transition Important for Cosmology: T(t) Important for Cosmology: n(t)

7. c2  QPM  susceptibility peak: crit. behavior

8. Isentropic Expansion chemical freeze-out: T, muB  s/n QPM thermodynamics looks fine Nf=2

9. Including the CEP 1. ) (T,(r,h) 2. h r T kink in div. of Phenomenological Construction (holds only near CEP) Gebhard, Krey QPM

10. 3. Singular Part of EoS: Parametric Form QCD: 3D Ising Model Guida+Zinn-Justin

11. (r,h) (R, ) h=const r=const R=const 0=const

13. Toy Model I: smooth reg. EoS 1. 2. critical curve 3. CEP: additional information Allton et al. 2002170 MeV Fodor-Katz pQCD 333

14. Finite Grid Effects

15. CEP: Attractor - Repulsor no focusing effect Wambach et al. unphysical CEP

16. Barz, Kämpfer, Csernai, Lukacs PLB 1984 A Funnel Effect due to Phase Transition? 1D Hydro & relaxation time approx. focusing effect squeezing of chem. freeze-out points exp. not observed

17. Toy Model II: 2-Phase Ansatz Nonaka, Asakawa (2004) critical curve: given by

18. Toy Model III: QPM & CEP

19. change of effective carriers of baryon number fluctuations lattice

20. Need of Modifying lQCD by CEP? Conjecture: hydro evolution of v2, pT at top-RHIC & LHC does not feel CEP using P. Kolbs code + init.parameters Kolb-Rapp off-equilibrium hadron EoS with U. Heinz/Ohio K. Paech et al. Hydro with CEP

22. Aoki Karsch Bernard 0.1 Bernard 0.2 2+1 EoS ready? RHIC Init.conds.

23. A Family of EoS‘s QPM lin.interpol. * fix + + + interpolation is better than extrapolation sound waves

24. Strange Baryons data disfavor phase transition Huovinen 2005: opposite conclusion (inspection of small pT)

25. non-hydro behavior of open charm? D MesonsMeson or K?

26. Looking for Hydro Scaling

27. To Do List 1. shape fluctuations K. Werner (core-corona) 2. shape & energy density fluctuations T. Kodama et al.

28. Summary & Outlook -- Lattice QCD vs. Quasiparticle Model: perfect description of either p(T,0) or p(T,mu) extrapolation to larger mu consistency of chem.freeze-out and isentropes -- Toy models for including CEP: many free parameters, size of critical region = ? lattice QCD + CEP = small effects allowed -- v2 hydro: RHIC: EoS at Tc does not matter too much -- CERN-SPS – CBM-FAIR: very different

30. QPM lQCD QCD EoS hydro

31. Relativistic Hydro Init. Conds.: b dependent profiles from wounded nucleon & binary collisions s < 110 fm-3, nB < 0.4 fm-3: RHIC200 Freeze-out: Cooper-Frye, T = 100 MeV Kolb-Rapp off-equilibrium EoS: p(e,nB), T(e,nB), muB(e,nB) P. Kolb et al. with U. Heinz/Ohio

32. Interpolation is Better than Extrapolation lQCD lQCD/res.gas/KR * V2: weak dependence on EoS

34. w/o CEP

35. The 10% Problem c0 c2  c0

36. Weak Dependence of v2 on EoS

37. High Density EoS : bag model x Progress of lQCD: High-density part fixed Progress of lQCD: Low-density part fixed tiny baryon density effects (=resonance gas: Redlich) QPM(1.0) QPM(2.0)

38. with CEP