1. The conical flow Where the energy of quenched jets go? Edward Shuryak (with Jorge Casalderrey-Solana, Derek Teaney) Department of Physics and Astronomy, University at Stony Brook NY 11794 USA Large papers are hep-ph/0602183, 0511263

2. outline dE/dx, jet energy loss in pQCD and AdS/CFT dE/dx, jet energy loss in pQCD and AdS/CFT Conical flow :solutions Conical flow :solutions A growing wave as matter gets diluted (adiabatic invariants) A growing wave as matter gets diluted (adiabatic invariants) Is it observed? Is it observed? conclusions conclusions

3. Sonic boom from quenched jets Casalderrey,ES,Teaney, hep-ph/0410067; H.Stocker… the energy deposited by jets into strongly coupled QGP goes into conical shock waves Outside of a mini- fireball relativistic hydrodynamics gives the flow picture (If there are the start and end points, Mach cone => two spheres and a cone tangent to both)

4. Excitations: Radiative: may be large but energy in small-angle comoving gluons which are still moving relativistically => mini-fireball Collisional and ionization losses: produce the ``tail” of extra matter (extra entropy…) Hydrodynamical shocks: solution far away allows to calculate the hydro drag force F

5. 2 Mach cones in strongly coupled plasmas (thanks to B.Jacak)

6. dE/dx mechanisms Radiative (BDMPS,Zakharov,Gyulassy,Wang…): well developed pQCD theory including LPM effect Collisional now included as well But: charm RAA and v2 shows no expected reduction, why? => no pQCD Casimir scaling … strong coupling? =>Medium seem to be correlated, not a free gas of light quasiparticles

7. QED reminder (``ionization” of new bound states in QGP?)

8. Calculation of the ionization rate ES+Zahed, hep-ph/0406100 Smaller than radiative loss if L>.5-1 fm Is there mostly near the zero binding lines, Thus it is different from both radiative and elastic looses, which are simply proportional to density Relates to non-trivial energy dependence of jet quenching (smaller at 62 and near absent at SPS) dE/dx in GeV/fm vs T/T c for a gluon 15,10,5 GeV. Red-elastic, black -ionization

9. Recent AdS/CFT applications Herzog et al, HKKKY hep-th/0605158 Casalderrey and Teaney, hep/ph/0605199 These results are related via the Einstein relation =>AdS gravity knows about fluct.-diss. theorems! Different coordinates: HKKKY are in a single universe restricted by a horizon CT bravely connected two Universes (forward and backward ones) through the black hole using the Kruskal metric/Penrose diagram

10. The result is in a way small but in a way large… If Stokes formula for drag is used the size of mini-fireball is very small The viscous length is much larger => ``non-hydro” core But jets of all energies are quenched at the sane distance LT=m/sqrt(lambda)T= m/Meff As anticipated by Zahed/Sin

11. One can get a flow picture from a graviton propagator Soon to be done As a prop. at large times/distances is sound, Mach cone shocks must be there!

12. flows in heavy ion collisions provide info about EoS and viscosity A ``Bang” was observed at RHIC like other magnificent explosions -- Supernova or Big Bang-- radial and elliptic flows => new form of matter formed, a strongly coupled Quark-Gluon Plasma, a near-perfect liquid in regime with very small dissipative terms  /s=.1-.2<<1 Conical flow has larger gradients and is even more sensitive to viscosity

13. Local perturbation is large => non-hydrodynamical core+viscous zone High excitation The drag force: A(z)=area

14. Two hydro modes can be excited: a ``diffuson” a sound

15. Those two lead to quite different spectra, the right (sound) with a Mach cone:

16. Dependence on the viscosity is indeed strong

17. Shocks in medium with variable sound speed:adiabatic invariants Casalderrey,ES,hep-ph/0511263 Applicability condition

18. Sound waves in expanding Universe (or ``tsunami going onshore”) Effective oscillator => v/T by freezeout grows by about factor 3, it enters the exponent of the Cooper-Fry

19. The 1 st order transition => c_s=0 frozen => reflected waves which are not observed => excluded already?

20. Is such a sonic boom already observed? Mean Cs=.33 time average over 3 stages=> M.Miller, QM04 flow of matter normal to the Mach cone seems to be observed! See data from STAR,  +/- 1.23=1.91,4.37

21. PHENIX jet pair distribution Note: it is only projection of a cone on phi Note 2: more recent data from STAR find also a minimum in at 180 degr., with a value Consistent with background

22. PHENIX: Reaction Plane Angle Dependence (from B.Cole) –Flow systematics change completely vs  trig  Shoulder and dip seen in all  trig bins.  Has the sonic boom been already seen? Mean Cs=.33 time average over 3 stages=>  =  +/-1.23=1.91  trig ? From Poster by J. Jia

23. Away vs centrality Away core drops with centrality faster than corona. Core hadrons almost identical to medium in central collisions. A punch-thorugh at the highest trigger? STAR,Preliminary

24. away dependence on angle (STAR,preliminary) Preliminary (phi) has a dip structure in central AA. Mach shock wave?

25. Conclusions sQGP leads to dE/dx in excess of pQCD. AdS/CFT results are still mysterious, very robust collective flows =>sQGP seems to be the most ideal fluid known  /s=.1-.2 <<1 All of this hints that quenched energy is not dissipated but propagates Hydro solution with Mach cones is worked out, hydro drag force calculated Case with expansion and variable c^2(t) => Factor 3 enhancement of v/T Peaks at about 60 degrees are predicted and seen by PHENIX and STAR shape and position corresponds to expected Mach angle No peaks for reflected shocks =>1 st order excluded