1:
2: \documentclass[prd,preprint]{revtex4}
3: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
4: \usepackage{url}
5:
6: \oddsidemargin 0in \evensidemargin 0in \topmargin 0in \textwidth
7: 6.5in \textheight 9.0in \linespread{1.5}
8:
9: \newcommand{\cmd}[1]{{\tt #1}}
10: \newcommand{\ff}{\textbf}
11:
12:
13: \begin{document}
14:
15:
16: \title{Classical QGP : IV. Thermodynamics}
17:
18: \author{Sungtae Cho and Ismail Zahed}
19: \email{scho@grad.physics.sunysb.edu,
20: zahed@zahed.physics.sunysb.edu}
21: \address{Department of Physics and Astronomy \\
22: State University of New York, Stony Brook, NY, 11794}
23:
24: \begin{abstract}
25: We construct the equation of a state of the classical QGP valid
26: for all values of $\Gamma=V/K$, the ratio of the mean Coulomb to
27: kinetic energy. By enforcing the Gibbs relations, we derive the
28: pertinent pressure and entropy densities for all $\Gamma$. For the
29: case of an SU(2) classical gluonic plasma our results compare well
30: with lattice simulations. We show that the strongly coupled component
31: of the classical QGP contributes significantly to the bulk thermodynamics
32: across $T_c$.
33: \end{abstract}
34:
35: \maketitle
36:
37: \newpage
38:
39: \section{Introduction}
40:
41: Classical Plasmas are statistical systems with constituents that
42: are locally charged but globally neutral. An example is the
43: electromagnetic one component plasma (OCP) also referred to as
44: Jelium. A number of many body theories have been devised to
45: analyze the OCP in the regime of small $\Gamma=V/K$, the ratio of
46: the average Coulomb energy to kinetic energy~\cite{ichimaru}. Most
47: of the extensions to larger values of $\Gamma$ are based on higher
48: order transport equations~\cite{hansen&mcdonald} or classical
49: molecular dynamics~\cite{hansenetal}.
50:
51: The Classical Quark Gluon Plasma (cQGP) as developed by Gelman,
52: Shuryak and Zahed can be regarded as an extension of the OCP
53: plasma to many components with non-Abelian color charges
54: \cite{borisetal}. Stability against core collapse is enforced
55: classically through a phenomenological core potential. The origin
56: of the core is quantum mechanical. Detailed molecular dynamics
57: simulations of the cQGP~\cite{borisetal} have shown a strongly
58: coupled plasma for $\Gamma=V/K\approx 1$ or larger. The cQGP
59: maybe in a liquid state at moderate values of $\Gamma$. In a
60: recent analysis~\cite{cho&zahed} we have used analytical methods
61: of classical liquids to construct the free energy for small
62: $\Gamma$ both in the dilute case and at high temperature after
63: resummation of the screening effects.
64:
65:
66: In this paper we combine the results in~\cite{borisetal} obtained
67: from molecular dynamics with the one-loop analytical results
68: in~\cite{cho&zahed} to construct the equation of state of the cQGP
69: for all values of $\Gamma$. We will show that the strongly coupled
70: component of the cQGP contributes significantly to the
71: thermodynamics across the transition whether in the energy
72: density, pressure or entropy density. In section 2, we derive the
73: excess energy of the cQGP for small $\Gamma$ in the one-loop
74: approximation. In section 3, we use ideas from classical
75: electromagnetic plasmas to interpolate between the one-loop result
76: at low $\Gamma$ and the molecular dynamics results at large
77: $\Gamma$ for the SU(2) cQGP. Particular attention will be given to
78: the core parameter using Debye-H\"uckel plus Hole (DHH) theory. In
79: the quantum QCD plasma, $\Gamma$ runs with $T$. In section 4, we
80: use the interpolated excess energy density together with the Gibbs
81: relations to derive the pressure and entropy of the cQGP. In
82: section 5, we compare the results for the SU(2) cQGP with
83: SU(2) lattice simulations. Our conclusions are in section 6. In
84: Appendix A we show that the interaction corrections to the
85: concentration do not affect the one-loop result to order
86: $\Gamma^{\frac 52}$ with the bare particle concentration. In Appendix B
87: we summarize the Debye-H\"uckel plus Hole theory to assess the
88: range of the core in terms of the Debye length.
89:
90:
91:
92:
93: \section{Excess energy: One-Loop}
94:
95:
96: \renewcommand{\theequation}{II.\arabic{equation}}
97: \setcounter{equation}{0}
98:
99:
100: In classical plasmas the key expansion parameter at zero
101: chemical potential is $\Gamma=V/K$ the ratio of the mean
102: Coulomb to kinetic energy. For an Abelian or QED plasma,
103:
104: \begin{equation}
105: \Gamma=\frac{(Ze)^2}{a k_B T} \label{eq001f}
106: \end{equation}
107: while for a non-Abelian or QCD plasma~\cite{borisetal}
108:
109: \begin{equation}
110: \Gamma=\frac{g^2}{4\pi}\frac{C_{2}}{T a_{WS}} \label{eq002f}
111: \end{equation}
112: with $k_B=1$ and $a_{WS}$ the Wigner-Seitz
113: radius satisfying $N/V(4\pi a_{WS}^3/3)=1$. $C_2$ is the quadratic
114: Casimir ($C_2=q_2/(N_c^2-1))$ and $g$ is the strength of the
115: coupling. In the cQGP $g$ is fixed, while in the QGP $g$ runs
116: with temperature. The running is quantum mechanical and beyond
117: the present classical analysis. In sections 4,5 it will be addressed
118: phenomenologically.
119:
120:
121:
122: Since the Wigner-Seitz radius $a_{WS}$ is tied with the density or
123: concentration (the bare concentration is $c_0=N/V$), it is
124: straightforward to express the free energy in terms of $\Gamma$.
125: After resumming the screening effects and to one-loop, the free
126: energy reads~\cite{cho&zahed}
127:
128:
129: \begin{eqnarray}
130: \beta\frac{F_{loop}(\beta,c)}{V}&=&-c-\frac{2\sqrt{\pi}}{3}(N_c^2-1)
131: \gamma^{\frac{3}{2}}c^{\frac{3}{2}}+\pi(N_c^2-1)c^2\gamma^2\sigma
132: \nonumber\\ &&-2\pi^{\frac{3}{2}}(N_c^2-1)c^{\frac{5}{2}}\gamma^{\frac{5}{2}}
133: \sigma^2 + c\beta\mu_c+\mathcal{O}(\beta^3) \label{eq003f}
134: \end{eqnarray}
135: with $\gamma=g^2/4\pi\beta C_2$, $c$ the concentration and
136: $\sigma$ the core radius. The concentration is determined by the
137: chemical equation~\cite{cho&zahed} and to leading order is
138: $c_0=N/V$ as detailed in Appendix A. The core $\sigma$ is a
139: parameter in the cQGP much like in normal classical liquids. Its
140: origin is quantum mechanical. In Appendix B, we use the classical
141: Debye-H\"uckel plus Hole (DHH) theory to assess the size of the
142: core in terms of the Debye screening length.
143:
144: To see how the expansion in the concentration $c$ in
145: (\ref{eq003f}) converts to an expansion in $\Gamma$, we note that
146: the Debye-H\"uckel contributions (first two terms) can be
147: rewritten as
148:
149:
150:
151: \begin{eqnarray}
152: \frac{F_{DH}(\Gamma)}{NT}&=&-c\frac{V}{N}-c^{\frac{3}{2}}
153: \frac{V}{N}\frac{2\sqrt{\pi}}{3}(\frac{g^2}{4\pi})^{\frac{3}{2}}
154: (N_c^2-1)(\beta C_{2})^{\frac{3}{2}} \nonumber \\
155: &=&-1-c^{\frac{3}{2}}\frac{4\pi}{3}a_{WS}^3\frac{(4\pi)^{\frac{1}
156: {2}}}{3} (\frac{g^2}{4\pi})^{\frac{3}{2}}(N_c^2-1)(\beta
157: C_{2})^{\frac{3}{2}} \nonumber \\
158: &=&-1-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}c^{\frac{3}{2}} \Big( \frac{4\pi
159: a_{WS}^3}{3}\Big)^{\frac{3}{2}} (N_c^2-1) (\frac{g^2}{4\pi}\beta
160: \frac{C_{2}}{a_{WS}})^{\frac{3}{2}} \nonumber \\
161: &=& -1-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} (N_c^2-1) \Gamma^{\frac{3}{2}}
162: \label{eq004f}
163: \end{eqnarray}
164: By defining the excess free energy $F_{ex}$ as $F_{ex}(\Gamma)= F(\Gamma)-F(0)$
165: we obtain to one-loop,
166:
167:
168: \begin{equation}
169: \frac{F_{loop,ex}}{NT}=-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{3}{2}}
170: +\frac{3}{4}\delta(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^2-3\sqrt{3}\delta^2(N_c^2-1)
171: \Gamma^{\frac{5}{2}}+\mathcal{O}(\Gamma^3) \label{eq005f}
172: \end{equation}
173: with $\delta=\sigma/a_{WS}$. $F(0)$ will be identified with the
174: free gas or Stephan-Boltzman contribution.
175:
176:
177: The excess energy $U_{ex}$ of the cQGP follows from the excess free
178: energy $F_{ex}$ as
179:
180:
181: \begin{equation}
182: \frac{F_{ex}(\Gamma)}{NT}=\int_{0}^{\Gamma}\frac{U_{ex}}{NT}
183: \frac{d\Gamma'}{\Gamma'}
184: %+\frac{F_{ex}(\Gamma_1)}{NT}\,\,.
185: \label{eq006f}
186: \end{equation}
187: For instance, the Debye-H\"uckel contribution in (\ref{eq007f})
188: yields through (\ref{eq006f}) the excess energy
189:
190: \begin{equation}
191: \frac{U_{DH,ex}}{NT}=-
192: \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{3}{2}} \label{eq007f}
193: \end{equation}
194: in agreement with the Debye-H\"uckel excess energy for the cQGP
195: initially discussed in~\cite{borisetal2} using different methods.
196: In general, the energy density splits into the free plus excess
197: the contribution
198:
199:
200: \begin{equation}
201: \epsilon(\Gamma)=\frac{U(\Gamma)}{V}=\frac{U_0}{V}+\frac{U_{ex}(\Gamma)}{V}
202: =\epsilon_0+\epsilon(\Gamma) \label{eq008f}
203: \end{equation}
204: with the free contribution $\epsilon_0=\epsilon_{SB}$ identified with
205: the Stefan-Boltzmann energy density $\epsilon_{SB}$. In relative
206: notations,
207:
208: \begin{equation}
209: \frac{\epsilon(\Gamma)}{\epsilon_{SB}}=1+\frac{1}
210: {\epsilon_{SB}} \frac{U_{ex}(\Gamma)}{V} \label{eq009f}
211: \end{equation}
212: Using (\ref{eq006f}) together with (\ref{eq005f}), we obtain
213: the one-loop excess energy density
214:
215: \begin{equation}
216: \frac{U_{loop,ex}}{NT}=-\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{3}{2}}
217: +\frac{3}{2}\delta(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^2-\frac{15}{2}\sqrt{3}\delta^2(N_c^2-1)
218: \Gamma^{\frac{5}{2}}+\mathcal{O}(\Gamma^3) \label{eq014f}
219: \end{equation}
220: which is valid for small $\Gamma$. In Appendix A, we show that although
221: the concentration $c$ in $\Gamma$ is not $c_0$ because of interactions,
222: to order $\Gamma^{5/2}$ we may set $c=c_0$.
223:
224:
225:
226: \section{Excess Energy: Full}
227:
228: \renewcommand{\theequation}{III.\arabic{equation}}
229: \setcounter{equation}{0}
230:
231:
232: In~\cite{cho&zahed} the one-loop expansion was shown to converge
233: up to $\Gamma\approx 1$ for the free energy. The range is even smaller
234: for the energy with $\Gamma\approx 1/2$ (see below). Larger values of
235: $\Gamma$ have been covered by molecular dynamics simulations in~\cite{borisetal}.
236: For an SU(2) plasma (say a constituent gluonic plasma) the numerical results
237: for the excess energy were found to follow the parametric form
238: ~\cite{borisetal}
239:
240:
241: \begin{equation}
242: \frac{U_{mol}}{NT}\simeq-4.9-2\Gamma+3.2\Gamma^{\frac{1}{4}}+\frac{2.2}
243: {\Gamma^{\frac{1}{4}}}\,\,.
244: \label{eq001s}
245: \end{equation}
246: For $N_c=2$ the one-loop result (\ref{eq014f}) reads
247:
248:
249: \begin{equation}
250: \frac{U_{anal}}{NT}=-\frac{3}{2}\sqrt{3}\Gamma^{\frac{3}{2}}
251: +\frac{9}{2}\delta\Gamma^2-\frac{45}{2}\sqrt{3}\delta^2\Gamma^{\frac{5}{2}}
252: \label{eq002s}
253: \end{equation}
254: To construct the full excess energy valid for all $\Gamma$ we will
255: proceed phenomenologically by seeking an interpolating formulae
256: between (\ref{eq001s}) and (\ref{eq002s}) borrowing from ideas in
257: classical plasma physics~\cite{ichimaru2}. A similar approach was
258: also advocated in \cite{bannur} using different limits.
259:
260: In the Abelian or QED plasma, the excess energy based on
261: Debye-H\"uckel theory is evaluated for $\Gamma<0.1$. Molecular
262: dynamics simulations are generated for $1<\Gamma<180$. The two are
263: combined numerically through a power function in the
264: form~\cite{ichimaru2}
265:
266:
267: \begin{figure}[!h]
268: \begin{center}
269: \includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{u_full_emp.EPS}
270: \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{u_full_qgp.EPS}
271: \end{center}
272: \caption{Excess energy for QED (left) and $N_c=2$ QCD (right)}
273: \label{connected}
274: \end{figure}
275:
276: \begin{equation}
277: u_{full}(\Gamma)=\frac{u_{\Gamma<0.1}(\Gamma)+f(\Gamma)u_{\Gamma>1}(\Gamma)}
278: {1+f(\Gamma)} \label{eq003s}
279: \end{equation}
280: with $f(\Gamma)$ a fitting power function of the type
281: $a\Gamma^b(=3.0\times10^3\Gamma^{5.7})$. (\ref{eq003s})
282: interpolates smoothly between the exact analytical results
283: at low $\Gamma$ and the simulations at large $\Gamma$ as
284: shown in Fig.~\ref{connected} (left). In the insert we
285: show the nature of the size of the gap in the range
286: $0.1<\Gamma<1$ for the Abelian plasma.
287:
288:
289:
290: In Fig.~\ref{connected} (right) we show our $N_c=2$ results
291: at low values of $\Gamma$ (one-loop) and large values of
292: $\Gamma$ (simulations). The one-loop results depend on the
293: size of the hard core $\sigma$. Recall that the simulations
294: in ~\cite{borisetal} are carried with a fixed higher power law
295: repulsion to mock up the core. So
296: the simulations seem to favor a small hard core
297: in the Wigner-Seitz units. In fact, $\sigma$ can be set by the Debye
298: radius in the DHH theory~\cite{nordholm} detailed in Appendix B.
299: It changes with $\Gamma$. Specifically,
300:
301: \begin{figure}[!h]
302: \begin{center}
303: \includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{delta.EPS}
304: \end{center}
305: \caption{Core parameter $\delta=\sigma/a_{WS}$. See text.}
306: \label{delta}
307: \end{figure}
308:
309: \begin{equation}
310: \delta=\frac{\sigma}{a_{WS}}=\frac{1}{a_{WS}\kappa_{D}}\Big((1+(3\Gamma)
311: ^{\frac{3}{2}})^{\frac{1}{3}}
312: -1\Big)=\frac{1}{(3\Gamma)^{\frac{1}{2}}}\Big((1+(3\Gamma)
313: ^{\frac{3}{2}})^{\frac{1}{3}} -1\Big) \label{eq004s}
314: \end{equation}
315: which is shown in Fig.~\ref{delta}. The core size $\delta$ varies
316: in the range $0.2-0.5$ for $\Gamma$ in the range $0.1-1$. We fix
317: $\delta=0.4$ in the range $0.1-1$. With this in mind and following
318: the Abelian plasma construction, we find the excess energies shown
319: in Fig.~\ref{connected} (right) to be fit by
320:
321: \begin{equation}
322: u_{SU(2)}(\Gamma)=\frac{u_{anal}(\Gamma)+5.5\times10^2\Gamma^{5.4}
323: u_{mol}(\Gamma)} {1+5.5\times10^2\Gamma^{5.4}} \label{eq005s}
324: \end{equation}
325: The power function is numerically adopted to yield a small deviation
326: (less than $0.1\%$) for $\Gamma<0.1$ and $\Gamma>1$. The precise
327: choice of the core parameter is actually not very important, as small
328: changes in core size can be compensated by small changes in the power
329: function for the same overall accuracy.
330:
331:
332:
333:
334:
335:
336:
337: \section{Thermodynamics}
338:
339: \renewcommand{\theequation}{IV.\arabic{equation}}
340: \setcounter{equation}{0}
341:
342: Knowledge of the energy density for all values
343: of $\Gamma$ can be used to extract all extensive
344: thermodynamical quantities in the cQGP with the help of the
345: Gibbs relations. Indeed, the pressure and entropy
346: follow from the Gibbs relations
347:
348:
349: \begin{eqnarray}
350: &&\epsilon=T\frac{\partial{P}}{\partial{T}}-P\nonumber\\
351: &&s=\frac SV=\frac 1V \frac{\partial P}{\partial T}\,\,.
352: \label{eq010f}
353: \end{eqnarray}
354:
355:
356: In so far the classical plasma parameter $\Gamma$ as defined
357: (\ref{eq002f}) is a fixed parameter. However, in QCD it runs
358: through $\alpha_s$. It is only a function of temperature.
359: Specifically,
360:
361:
362: \begin{equation}
363: \Gamma=\frac{\alpha_s C_{2}}{T a_{WS}}=\Big(\frac{4\pi}{3}c_0
364: \Big)^{\frac{1}{3}}\beta C_2\alpha_s(T)=\Big(0.244(N_c^2-1)
365: \frac{4\pi}{3}\Big)^{\frac{1}{3}}C_{2}\alpha_s(T)
366: \label{eq012f}
367: \end{equation}
368: where $0.244 (N_c^2-1)$ is the black-body concentration for
369: adjoint gluons. The exact running of $\alpha_s(T)$ will be
370: fixed below.
371:
372:
373: Using (\ref{eq010f}) together with (\ref{eq012f}) yield the
374: pressure and the entropy density directly in terms of the
375: energy density
376:
377:
378: \begin{eqnarray}
379: &&\frac{P}{P_{SB}}=3\frac{1}{T^3}
380: \int_{T_c}^{T}dT'{T'}^2\frac{\epsilon}{\epsilon_{SB}}(T')\nonumber\\
381: %\label{eq011f}
382: &&\frac{s}{s_{SB}}=
383: %\frac{1}{4}\frac{T}{T_c}\frac{P_c}{P_{SB}}+
384: \frac{3}{4}\frac{\epsilon}{\epsilon_{SB}}(T)+\frac{3}{4}\frac{1}{T^3}
385: \int_{T_c}^{T}dT'{T'}^2\frac{\epsilon}{\epsilon_{SB}}(T')\,\,.
386: \label{eq013f}
387: \end{eqnarray}
388: Here $T_c$ is identified with the SU(2) transition with
389: $P_c=0$. For a constituent gluonic plasma $T_c=215$ MeV.
390: All bulk thermodynamics is tied to the energy density by the Gibbs
391: relations.
392:
393:
394:
395: \section{SU(2) Lattice Comparison}
396:
397: \renewcommand{\theequation}{V.\arabic{equation}}
398: \setcounter{equation}{0}
399:
400: To proceed further we need to know how $\alpha_s(T)$ runs with $T$
401: in pure YM and QCD, to determine the behavior of the extensive thermodynamical
402: quantities. The loop expansion allows a specific determination of
403: the running $\alpha_s(T)$ that is unfortunately valid at high
404: temperature or weak coupling. How $\alpha_s(T)$ runs at strong
405: coupling is unknown. Here we suggest to {\it extract}
406: $\alpha_s(T)$ from the lattice data by {\it fitting} our energy
407: density (\ref{eq009f}) valid for all couplings to the SU(2)
408: lattice data in~\cite{engelsetal}. In Fig.~\ref{energy-lattice}
409: we show the fit of the normalized energy density in the cQGP
410: to the SU(2) lattice data. The lattice results are used with
411: $\Lambda_L=5$ MeV and $T_c=215$ MeV as suggested in~\cite{engelsetal}.
412:
413:
414: \begin{figure}[!h]
415: \begin{center}
416: \includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{e_strong.EPS}
417: \end{center}
418: \caption{Energy density fit to SU(2) lattice data. See text.}
419: \label{energy-lattice}
420: \end{figure}
421:
422:
423: The energy density fit in return yields through
424: (\ref{eq009f}), (\ref{eq005s}) and (\ref{eq012f})
425: a specific running of the strong coupling constant
426: $\alpha_s(T)$ which we show in
427: Fig.~\ref{su2alpha} (left). Its corresponding running plasma
428: constant $\Gamma (T)$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{su2alpha} (right). In
429: Fig.~\ref{su2alpha} we also show two running coupling constants
430: extracted from lattice measurements in~\cite{kaczmareketal} for
431: comparison. Our energy density fit suggests lower
432: values of the running coupling constant.
433:
434:
435:
436: \begin{figure}[!h]
437: \begin{center}
438: \includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{alpha_wlattice.EPS}
439: \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{gamma_strong.EPS}
440: \end{center}
441: \caption{$\alpha_s(T)$ (left) and $\Gamma (T)$ (right) for $N_c=2$. See text.}
442: \label{su2alpha}
443: \end{figure}
444:
445:
446:
447:
448: Since we have fit the energy density to the lattice energy
449: density, to extract $\alpha_s(T)$, it follows from the Gibbs
450: relations that all the extensive thermodynamical quantities are
451: fixed for the SU(2) cQGP. In Fig.~\ref{e_p_plot_of_su2} (left) we show the
452: behavior of the energy density, pressure and entropy density
453: across $T_c$. In Fig.~\ref{e_p_plot_of_su2} (right) the trace of
454: the energy momentum tensor is shown versus SU(2) lattice data.
455:
456:
457: \begin{figure}[!h]
458: \begin{center}
459: \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{esp.EPS}
460: \includegraphics[width=0.51\textwidth]{e-3p_strong.EPS}
461: \end{center}
462: \caption{Bulk Thermodynamics from the cQGP versus SU(2) lattice. See text.}
463: \label{e_p_plot_of_su2}
464: \end{figure}
465:
466:
467:
468: Our current analysis of the bulk thermodynamics of the cQGP allows
469: us through the excess energy (\ref{eq005s}) and the Gibbs
470: relations (\ref{eq010f}) to assess the role of the strongly
471: coupled component of the cQGP. In Fig.~\ref{separated} we show the
472: two contributions (loop and molecular) to the bulk thermodynamics
473: following from the separation
474:
475:
476: \begin{figure}[!h]
477: \begin{center}
478: \includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{separated_e.EPS}
479: \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{separated_p.EPS}
480: \end{center}
481: \begin{center}
482: \includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{separated_s.EPS}
483: \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{separated_e-3p.EPS}
484: \end{center}
485: \caption{Relative contributions in the cQGP bulk thermodynamics. See text.}
486: \label{separated}
487: \end{figure}
488:
489: \begin{eqnarray}
490: & & u_{SU(2),anal}(\Gamma)=\frac{u_{anal}(\Gamma)}
491: {1+5.5\times10^2\Gamma^{5.4}} \nonumber \\
492: & & u_{SU(2),mol}(\Gamma)=\frac{5.5\times10^2\Gamma^{5.4}
493: u_{mol}(\Gamma)} {1+5.5\times10^2\Gamma^{5.4}} \label{eq006s}
494: \end{eqnarray}
495: in the energy density. The strongly coupled component of the cQGP
496: generated by the molecular dynamics simulations contribute
497: significantly across the transition temperature, say in the range
498: $(1-2.5)\,T_c$.
499:
500:
501:
502:
503:
504:
505:
506:
507: \section{Conclusion}
508:
509:
510:
511: We have constructed the energy density of the cQGP valid for
512: all values of the plasma parameter $\Gamma$, that interpolates
513: between the one-loop result at small $\Gamma$ and the molecular
514: dynamics simulations at large $\Gamma$. We have used it in
515: conjunction with the Gibbs relations to derive the Pressure
516: and entropy of the cQGP.
517:
518:
519: In quantum QCD $\Gamma$ runs through the QCD coupling constant
520: at weak coupling. The running at strong coupling is unknown in
521: general except for some recent lattice simulations
522: \cite{kaczmareketal}. We have suggested that a fit of our
523: energy density to the lattice energy density \cite{engelsetal}
524: allows an extraction of the running coupling that is smaller
525: than the one suggested by direct lattice simulations
526: \cite{kaczmareketal}.
527:
528:
529: We have used the extracted running coupling constant to predict
530: the entropy density, pressure and energy-momentum trace of the
531: cQGP. The latter compares well to direct lattice SU(2)
532: simulations. We have shown that the strongly coupled component of
533: the cQGP contributes significantly to the bulk thermodynamics
534: across the transition temperature. We expect transport properties
535: such as diffusion and viscosity, as well as energy loss to be also
536: significantly affected in this transition region in the cQGP as we
537: discuss next~\cite{CHOV}.
538:
539:
540:
541:
542: \section{Acknowledgments}
543: This work was supported in part by US-DOE grants DE-FG02-88ER40388
544: and DE-FG03-97ER4014.
545:
546:
547: \appendix
548:
549:
550: \section{Concentration}
551:
552: \renewcommand{\theequation}{A.\arabic{equation}}
553: \setcounter{equation}{0}
554:
555: The bare concentration $c_0=N/V$ which is identified with
556: the black-body radiation in the cQGP is in general
557: modified to $c=c_0+\Delta c$ due to interactions. As a
558: result, the plasma parameter $\Gamma$ (\ref{eq012f}) is
559: in principle different from the one used in the text.
560: The corrected plasma constant is
561:
562:
563: \begin{eqnarray}
564: \Gamma_c& &=\Big(\frac{4\pi}{3}c \Big)^{\frac{1}{3}}\beta
565: C_2\alpha_s(T)=\Big(\frac{4\pi}{3}(c_0 +\triangle c)
566: \Big)^{\frac{1}{3}}\beta C_2\alpha_s(T)=\Big(
567: \frac{4\pi}{3}c_0\Big)^{\frac{1}{3}}(1+\frac{\triangle c}{c_0})^{
568: \frac{1}{3}}\beta C_2\alpha_s(T) \nonumber \\
569: & & \simeq\Big(\frac{4\pi}{3}c_0\Big)^{\frac{1}{3}} \beta
570: C_2\alpha_s(T)+\Big(\frac{4\pi}{3}c_0\Big)^{\frac{1}{3}}
571: \frac{1}{3} \frac{\triangle c}{c_0}\beta
572: C_2\alpha_s(T)+\mathcal{O}((\frac{\triangle c}{c_0})^2)
573: \label{eq015f}
574: \end{eqnarray}
575: From~\cite{cho&zahed}, the shift in the concentration reads
576:
577: \begin{equation}
578: c=c_0+\triangle c=c_0+c_0^{\frac{3}{2}}\pi^{\frac{1}{2}}(N_c^2-1)
579: (\beta C_2)^{\frac{3}{2}}\alpha_s^{\frac{3}{2}}(T)+\mathcal{O}
580: (\beta^2) \label{eq016f}
581: \end{equation}
582: The corrected plasma constant becomes
583:
584: \begin{eqnarray}
585: \Gamma_c & &\simeq\Big(\frac{4\pi}{3}c_0\Big)^{\frac{1}{3}} \beta
586: C_2\alpha_s(T)+\Big(\frac{4\pi}{3}c_0\Big)^{\frac{1}{3}}
587: \frac{1}{3} c_0^{\frac{1}{2}}\pi^{\frac{1}{2}}(N_c^2-1)(\beta
588: C_2)^{\frac{5}{2}}\alpha_s^{\frac{5}{2}}(T) \nonumber \\
589: & & =\Gamma+\frac{\sqrt{3}}{6}(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{5}{2}}
590: \nonumber \\
591: & & =\Big(0.244(N_c^2-1)\frac{4\pi}{3}\Big)^{\frac{1}{3}}C_{2}
592: \alpha_s(T)+\frac{\sqrt{3}}{6}(N_c^2-1)\Big(0.244(N_c^2-1)
593: \frac{4\pi}{3}\Big)^{\frac{1}{3}\cdot\frac{5}{2}}C_{2}^{\frac{5}{2}}
594: \alpha_s^{\frac{5}{2}}(T) \nonumber \\
595: \label{eq017f}
596: \end{eqnarray}
597: Inserting (\ref{eq017f}) in the excess energy density yields
598:
599:
600: \begin{eqnarray}
601: \frac{U_{loop,ex}(\Gamma)}{\epsilon_{SB}}& & =-\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}
602: (N_c^2-1)\Gamma_c^{\frac{3}{2}}+\frac{3}{2}\delta(N_c^2-1)\Gamma_c^2
603: -\frac{15}{2}\sqrt{3}\delta^2(N_c^2-1)\Gamma_c^{\frac{5}{2}}+\mathcal{O}
604: (\Gamma_c^3) \nonumber \\
605: & & \simeq -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}(N_c^2-1)\Big(\Gamma+\frac{
606: \sqrt{3}}{6}(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{5}{2}}\Big)^{\frac{3}{2}}+\frac{3}{2}
607: \delta(N_c^2-1)\Big(\Gamma+\frac{\sqrt{3}}{6}(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{5}
608: {2}}\Big)^2 \nonumber \\
609: & &-\frac{15}{2}\sqrt{3}\delta^2(N_c^2-1)\Big(\Gamma+\frac{
610: \sqrt{3}}{6}(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{5}{2}}\Big)^{\frac{5}{2}} \nonumber \\
611: & & \simeq -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}
612: (N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{3}{2}}+\frac{3}{2}\delta(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^2
613: -\frac{15}{2}\sqrt{3}\delta^2(N_c^2-1)\Gamma^{\frac{5}{2}}+\mathcal{O}
614: (\Gamma^3)\label{eq018f}
615: \end{eqnarray}
616: which shows that to order $\Gamma^{\frac 52}$ the replacement
617: $\Gamma_c=\Gamma$ is allowed.
618:
619:
620:
621:
622: \section{Debye-H\"uckel plus hole (DHH) theory}
623:
624: \renewcommand{\theequation}{B.\arabic{equation}}
625: \setcounter{equation}{0}
626:
627: At strong coupling the Debye-H\"uckel (DH) theory which is
628: essentially a classical screening theory fails. Debye-H\"uckel
629: plus Hole (DHH) theory is a way to address DH shortcomings at
630: strong coupling by building a hole around each charge to account
631: for the non-penetrability or core in classical
632: liquids~\cite{nordholm} at higher density or larger $\Gamma$.
633: As a result, in DHH theory of the cQGP a
634: color charge density around a test charge is
635:
636:
637: \begin{equation}
638: \rho^{\alpha}(r) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
639: -c\frac{g}{\sqrt{4\pi}}Q^{\alpha} & (r<\sigma) \nonumber \\
640: -c\frac{g}{\sqrt{4\pi}}Q^{\alpha}
641: \frac{\sigma}{r}e^{(-\kappa_{D}(r-\sigma))} & (r\geq \sigma)
642: \end{array} \right. \label{eqa01}
643: \end{equation}
644: $\sigma$ is the size of the hole, $\alpha$ is a classical color index $(1,..,N_c^2-1)$,
645: $\beta=1/T$ and $\kappa_D$ is the Debye momentum
646:
647:
648: \begin{equation}
649: \kappa_D^2=\frac{g^2}{N_{c}^2-1}c \beta
650: \sum_{\alpha}^{N_c^2-1}{Q^{\alpha}}^2\,\,. \label{eqa02}
651: \end{equation}
652: The negative sign in (\ref{eqa01}) reflects on the screening, with
653: the Debye cloud left unchanged outside $\sigma$. The hole size
654: $\sigma$ is fixed by demanding that each test particle is
655: completely screened through
656:
657: \begin{equation}
658: \int_{0}^{\infty}dr 4\pi r^2 \rho^{\alpha}(r)=-
659: \frac{g}{\sqrt{4\pi}}Q^{\alpha} \label{eqa03}
660: \end{equation}
661: This condition, fixes the size of the hole
662:
663:
664: \begin{equation}
665: \sigma=\frac{1}{\kappa_{D}}\Big((1+\frac{3\kappa_{D}^3} {4\pi c}
666: )^{\frac{1}{3}}-1\Big) \label{eqa04}
667: \end{equation}
668: In terms of
669:
670: \begin{equation}
671: \Gamma=\frac{g^2}{4\pi}\frac{C_{2}}{T a_{WS}} \label{eqa05}
672: \end{equation}
673: the hole radius is
674:
675: \begin{equation}
676: \sigma=\frac{1}{\kappa_{D}}\Big((1+(3\Gamma)
677: ^{\frac{3}{2}})^{\frac{1}{3}} -1\Big)\label{eqa06}
678: \end{equation}
679: after fixing the Wigner-Seitz radius $a_{WS}$ through $c_0 (4\pi
680: a_{WS}^3/3)=1$. Again we have set $c=c_0$. From (\ref{eqa06}) it
681: follows that the hole size is smaller the higher the density or
682: temperature.
683:
684:
685:
686: \begin{thebibliography}{1}
687:
688: \bibitem{ichimaru} S.Ichimaru, Rev. Mod. Phys. \textbf{54}, 1017 (1982)
689: \bibitem{hansen&mcdonald} J.Hansen and I.Mcdonald, \textit{Theory of Simple Liquids} (Academic Press, 2006)
690: \bibitem{hansenetal} J.Hansen, I.McDonald and E.Pollock, Phys. Rev. A \textbf{11}, 1025 (1975)
691: \bibitem{borisetal} B.A.Gelman, E.V.Shuryak and I.Zahed, Phys. Rev. C \textbf{74}, 044908 (2006)
692: [arXiv:nucl-th/0601029]
693: \bibitem{cho&zahed} S.Cho and I.Zahed [arXiv:0812.1736]
694: \bibitem{borisetal2} B.A.Gelman, E.V.Shuryak and I.Zahed, Phys. Rev. C \textbf{74}, 044909 (2006)
695: [arXiv:nucl-th/0605046]
696: \bibitem{ichimaru2} S.Ichimaru, \textit{Statistical Plasma Physics Vol II:Condensed Plasmas} (Westview Press, 2004)
697: \bibitem{bannur} V.Bannur, Eur. Phys. J. C \textbf{11}, 169 (1999)
698: [arXiv:hep-ph/9811397]
699: \bibitem{nordholm} S.Nordholm, Chem. Phys. Lett. \textbf{105}, 302 (1984)
700: \bibitem{engelsetal} J.Engels, F.Karsch and H.Satz, Phys. Lett. B \textbf{101}, 89 (1981)
701: \bibitem{kaczmareketal} O.Kaczmarek, F.Karsch, F.Zantow and P.Petreczky, Phys. Rev. D \textbf{70}, 070405
702: (2004) [arXiv:hep-lat/0406036]
703: \bibitem{CHOV} S. Cho and I. Zahed, in preparation.
704:
705:
706:
707:
708:
709: \end{thebibliography}
710:
711:
712: \end{document}
713: