1: \documentstyle[epsf,aps]{revtex}

2: \textwidth 16.5cm

3: \oddsidemargin 0cm

4: \topmargin -1 cm

5: \textheight 22.4cm

6: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}

7: \begin{document}

8: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}}

9: \newcommand{\dlq}{\lq\lq}

10: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}

11: \newcommand{\ben}{\begin{eqnarray*}}

12: \newcommand{\een}{\end{eqnarray*}}

13: \newcommand{\stackeven}[2]{{{}_{\displaystyle{#1}}\atop\displaystyle{#2}}}

14: \newcommand{\lsim}{\stackeven{<}{\sim}}

15: \newcommand{\gsim}{\stackeven{>}{\sim}}

16: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.0}

17: \newcommand{\as}{\alpha_s}

18: \def\eq#1{{Eq.~(\ref{#1})}}

19: \def\fig#1{{Fig.~\ref{#1}}}

20: \begin{flushright}

21: NT@UW-00-031

22: \end{flushright}

23: \vspace*{1cm} 

24: \setcounter{footnote}{1}

25: \begin{center}

26: {\Large\bf Classical Initial Conditions for Ultrarelativistic

27: Heavy Ion \\ ~~ \\ Collisions}

28: \\[1cm]

29: Yuri V.\ Kovchegov \\ ~~ \\

30: {\it Department of Physics, University of Washington, Box 351560} \\ 

31: {\it Seattle, WA 98195-1560} \\ ~~ \\ ~~ \\

32: \end{center}

33: \begin{abstract} 

34: We construct an analytical expression for the distribution of gluons

35: in the state immediately following a heavy ion collision in the

36: quasi--classical limit of QCD given by McLerran--Venugopalan

37: model. The resulting gluon number distribution function includes the

38: effects of all multiple rescatterings of gluons with the nucleons of

39: both colliding nuclei. The typical transverse momentum $k_\perp$ of

40: the produced gluons is shown to be of the order of the saturation

41: scale of the nuclei $Q_s$, as predicted by Mueller. We analyze the

42: properties of the obtained distribution and demonstrate that due to

43: multiple rescatterings it remains finite (up to logarithms of

44: $k_\perp$) in the soft transverse momentum limit of $k_\perp \,

45: \ll \, Q_s$ unlike the usual perturbative initial conditions given by

46: collinear factorization. We calculate the total number of produced

47: gluons and show that it is proportional to the total number of gluons

48: inside the nuclear wave function before the collision with the

49: proportionality coefficient $c \, \approx \, 2 \, \ln 2$.

50: \end{abstract}

51: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}}

52: \setcounter{footnote}{0}

53: 

54: \section{Introduction}

55: 

56: Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven National

57: Laboratory has recently became operational with new data already being

58: produced \cite{pho,star}. One of the challenges facing theoretical

59: heavy ion community is the correct interpretation of the newly

60: obtained data. It has been conjectured that in a high energy heavy ion

61: collision a thermalized state of quarks and gluons, usually referred

62: to as quark--gluon plasma (QGP), may be produced \cite{qgp}, allowing

63: us to explore the properties of QCD matter under extreme

64: conditions. Understanding the experimental signatures of QGP is a very

65: difficult task.  The first important step in that direction is finding

66: a correct description of the state of gluons and quarks immediately

67: following a heavy ion collision but preceding the anticipated onset of

68: thermalization. Distribution of partons in this state has become known

69: as the initial conditions for QGP formation. The succeeding evolution

70: of this quark-gluon system and its possible thermalization can be

71: studied by Monte-Carlo simulations \cite{gmgw}, by invoking the

72: formalism of transport theory \cite{dg} or by analytical estimates of

73: \cite{bmss,Mueller2}.

74: 

75: 

76: One may try to model the initial condition by considering pairwise

77: interactions of nucleons in the colliding nuclei. The particle

78: production would be described by applying collinear factorization

79: formalism to each individual nucleon-nucleon collision and

80: superimposing the results \cite{coll}. Unfortunately the approach has

81: several shortcomings. In the integration over the transverse momentum

82: of one of the produced partons one is forced to introduce an infrared

83: cutoff $p_0$ in order to make the integral finite. The resulting

84: production cross section depends very strongly on the cutoff $p_0$

85: which makes it difficult to determine the initial conditions with high

86: precision. Another (related) problem of the purely collinear

87: factorization approach is that it does not include the effects of

88: multiple rescatterings of the produced partons with each other and

89: other nucleons, which seem to be, at least intuitively, characteristic

90: to heavy ion collisions where the number of scattering particles is

91: large. This phenomenon is intimately related to the problems of

92: nuclear shadowing and higher twist resummation. There have been made

93: several attempts to correct the problem by redefining the nucleons'

94: parton distributions to include the nuclear saturation effects and

95: then using collinear factorization mechanism to describe particle

96: production \cite{coll2}.

97: 

98: 

99: An interesting model of nuclear collisions has been proposed recently

100: by McLerran and Venugopalan \cite{mv}, which was designed to both

101: explain the nuclear shadowing phenomenon and to provide us with the

102: strategy of deriving the initial state parton distributions free of

103: problems typical to collinear factorization approaches. The model is

104: based on the observation that at very high energies the parton

105: densities in large nuclei reach saturation \cite{GLR} and the number

106: of partons becomes very large. Then due to a large number of color

107: charge sources the gluon emission can be described by the solution of

108: the classical Yang-Mills equations of motion \cite{mv}.

109: 

110: \begin{figure}

111: \begin{center}

112: \epsfxsize=8cm

113: \leavevmode

114: \hbox{ \epsffile{ww.eps}}

115: \end{center}

116: \caption{Non-Abelian Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams field of a large nucleus, 

117: as derived in \protect\cite{me,jklw,me2}. }

118: \label{wwfig}

119: \end{figure}

120: 

121: To describe the saturation philosophy let us start by considering a

122: small-$x$ gluon distribution function of a single ultrarelativistic

123: nucleus. Let us suppose that Bjorken $x$ is small, $x \, \ll \, 1$,

124: but not too small for quantum corrections to become important

125: \cite{M3,bdmps}. The quantum corrections at small $x$ bring in the

126: powers of $\as \ln 1/x$ and are resummed for the case of one

127: rescattering by the BFKL equation \cite{BFKL}. If $\as \ln 1/x \, \ll

128: \, 1$ we can describe the gluon distribution in the nuclear wave function 

129: including multiple rescatterings on the nucleons by the classical

130: gluon field calculated in light cone gauge \cite{mv}. The field has

131: been found in \cite{me,jklw} and was dubbed the non-Abelian

132: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams field of a large nucleus. In the $A_+ = 0$

133: light cone gauge (with the nucleus moving in the ``plus'' direction

134: along the light cone) the field has only transverse components which

135: are given by \cite{me,jklw}

136: \be\label{ww}

137: {\underline A}^{WW} ({\underline x},x_-) \ = \ \int \ d^2 z \ d z_-

138: \theta (z_- - x_-) \ {\hat \rho}^a ({\underline z},z_-) \

139: \frac{{\underline x} - {\underline z}}{|{\underline x} - {\underline z}|^2} 

140: \ S_0 ({\underline x},z_-) T^a S_0^{-1} ({\underline x},z_-)

141: \ee

142: with the gauge rotation matrix given by a path-ordered integral

143: \be

144: S_0 ({\underline x},x_-) \ = \ \mbox{P} \exp \left( i g T^a \int \ d^2

145: z \ d z_- \theta (z_- - x_-) \ {\hat \rho}^a ({\underline z},z_-) \ \ln

146: (|{\underline x} - {\underline z}| \mu) \right).

147: \ee

148: ${\hat \rho}^a$ is a color charge density operator normalized

149: according to

150: \be\label{dcorr}

151: \left< {\hat \rho}^a ({\underline x},x_-) \ {\hat \rho}^b ({\underline y},y_-) 

152: \right> \ = \ \frac{\as}{2 N_c \pi} \, \rho ({\underline x},x_-) \, 

153: \delta (x_- - y_-) \,  \delta^2 ({\underline x} - {\underline y}) \, \delta^{ab}

154: \ee

155: with $\rho ({\underline x},x_-)$ the normal nuclear density in the

156: infinite momentum frame of the nucleus, obeying

157: \be\label{dens}

158: \int \ d^2 x \ d x_- \ \rho ({\underline x},x_-) = \ A.

159: \ee

160: Here we have used the notation of \cite{meM} to describe the

161: non-Abelian Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams field. Feynman diagrams

162: corresponding to this classical field were found in \cite{me2} and are

163: depicted in \fig{wwfig}. As was discussed in some detail in \cite{me2}

164: the multiple rescatterings are included in the non-Abelian

165: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams field in the form of gauge rotations. In

166: \fig{wwfig} the field of the rightmost nucleon effectively gets rotated 

167: by the fields of all the other nucleons in the nucleus (see

168: \fig{wwfig}). As was argued in \cite{me2} classical approximation

169: corresponds to the limit of no more than two gluons interacting with

170: each nucleon, which formally means resummation of all powers of the

171: parameter $\as^2 A^{1/3}$ with $A$ the atomic number of the

172: nucleus. Each additional power of $\as^2 A^{1/3}$ corresponds to an

173: extra rescattering and resummation of all of such terms corresponds to

174: resummation of multiple rescatterings.  For a large nucleus with

175: $\as^2 A^{1/3} \, \sim \, 1$ all multiple rescatterings are important.

176: 

177: 

178: The unintegrated gluon distribution function of a nucleus is

179: proportional to Fourier transform of the correlator of two

180: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams fields in the nuclear wave function, which was

181: calculated in \cite{jklw,meM} and is given by \eq{wwcorr} below.  This

182: classical unintegrated gluon distribution has a very peculiar

183: features: at large values of transverse momentum it falls off like

184: $1/k_\perp^2$, which is a usual perturbative result. As the transverse

185: momentum becomes smaller the distribution increases. However below

186: certain momentum scale, which is called the saturation scale and is

187: given below by \eq{qs}, the growth of the classical gluon distribution

188: slows down to just a logarithmic increase, proportional to $\ln

189: Q_s/k_\perp$. This suggests that multiple rescatterings may help us to

190: avoid the singularities of collinear factorization by introducing the

191: saturation scale $Q_s$, which effectively regulates the parton

192: distributions in the soft momentum region. In terms of this saturation

193: scale parameter resummation of multiple rescatterings corresponds to

194: resummation of powers of $Q_s^2/k^2_\perp$, since $Q_s^2 \, \sim \,

195: \as^2 A^{1/3}$ (see \eq{qs}). The scale determining the value of the

196: strong coupling constant $\as$ is also the saturation momentum

197: $Q_s$. Therefore applicability of perturbative QCD and quasi-classical

198: physics depends strongly on how big $Q_s$ is. If $Q_s^2 \, \gg \,

199: \Lambda_{QCD}^2$ then $\as (Q_s^2) \, \ll \, 1$ and the physics

200: described above is applicable to the nuclear scattering process.

201: 

202: As the energy increases (or, equivalently, as we go towards smaller

203: values of $x$) the quantum corrections become important. Multiple

204: rescatterings enhanced by quantum corrections become multiple pomeron

205: exchanges.  There were developed several techniques which resum

206: multiple pomeron exchanges. The techniques based on resummation of

207: successive classical emissions in the framework of effective

208: lagrangian of McLerran-Venugopalan model led to a renormalization

209: group functional differential equation of \cite{JKLW}. There are

210: different effective lagrangian approaches, such as the one developed

211: by Lipatov and collaborators \cite{lks} and another one by Balitsky

212: \cite{bal}. Finally there is an integral evolution equation which was

213: obtained in \cite{mme} using the techniques of Mueller's dipole model

214: \cite{dip}. The equation is similar to the GLR equation of \cite{GLR}

215: and was also obtained in \cite{bal} for the evolution of the Wilson

216: lines' correlators. The approach of \cite{JKLW} also seems to be

217: converging to the equation of \cite{mme} (see

218: \cite{cons}). Nevertheless, as was argued in \cite{M4,mv} the net

219: effect of quantum corrections is to increase the saturation scale

220: $Q_s$ without significantly changing the shape and main qualitative

221: features of the classical gluon distribution.

222: 

223: 

224: \begin{figure}

225: \begin{center}

226: \epsfxsize=7cm

227: \leavevmode

228: \hbox{ \epsffile{intr.eps}}

229: \end{center}

230: \caption{A collision of two ultrarelativistic nuclei at high energies.}

231: \label{coll}

232: \end{figure}

233: 

234: 

235: But what does the saturation physics teach us about the initial

236: conditions for the heavy ion collisions? Similarly to how it was done

237: for the case of a single nucleus structure functions one has to start

238: by considering purely classical case, neglecting the quantum

239: corrections. This of course corresponds to not extremely high energy

240: scattering, $\as \ln s \, \ll \, 1$. For realistic high energies one

241: has to include quantum evolution corrections, but classical initial

242: conditions (in the QCD evolution sense) are necessary in order to do

243: so. Quantum corrections may again only modify the saturation scale in

244: the classical distribution without significantly changing its shape,

245: as it happened for nuclear structure functions \cite{M4,mv}. The

246: problem of inclusion of quantum corrections still has not been

247: solved. However, since the quantum evolution can be represented as a

248: series of classical emissions \cite{JKLW,dip} the qualitative picture

249: of particle production has been constructed in \cite{klm} and certain

250: physical consequences, such as multiplicity correlations in rapidity

251: in the produced particle spectrum have been predicted \cite{klm}.

252: 

253: 

254: The classical gluon production problem for nuclear or hadronic

255: collisions has been formulated in \cite{kmw} by Kovner, McLerran and

256: Weigert. They consider scattering of two ultrarelativistic nuclei from

257: McLerran-Venugopalan model (see \fig{coll}). The valence quarks of the

258: nuclei just pass through each other during the collision without

259: deflection from their straight line light cone

260: trajectories. Corrections to this approximation are proportional to

261: positive powers of $x$, and $x \, \ll \, 1$. However, the gluonic

262: field generated by the collision has non-zero field strength in the

263: forward light cone and contributes to the gluon production.  If we

264: would like to obtain an expression for the distribution of produced

265: gluon which includes all powers of $\as^2 A^{1/3}$ (or, equivalently,

266: $Q_s/k_\perp$), we can do it by solving classical Yang-Mills equation

267: with the ultrarelativistic nuclei providing us with the source current

268: \cite{kmw}. The gluon field given by the solution of the classical

269: equations of motion in the forward light cone would describe the gluon

270: production (see \fig{coll}), and, consequently, the initial conditions

271: for heavy ion collisions. This is the problem we are going to address

272: in this paper.

273: 

274: The classical field of two nuclei in the forward light cone has been

275: found in the usual perturbation theory to order $g^3$ in

276: \cite{kmw,med,mg}. The answer for the distribution of produced gluons 

277: is proportional to $Q_{s1}^2 Q_{s2}^2 / k_\perp^4$, where $Q_{s1}$ and

278: $Q_{s2}$ are the saturation scales of the colliding nuclei. This is

279: the first (lowest order) term of the expansion in powers of

280: $Q_{s1,2}^2 / k_\perp^2$ and corresponds in this sense to

281: proton-proton scattering. The answer agrees with the production rate

282: one would get from employing the so-called Lipatov effective vertex

283: \cite{BFKL,GLR}, or, equivalently, with the result of Gunion and Bertsch 

284: \cite{gb}.

285: 

286: A gluon production cross section for a slightly more complicated case

287: of proton-nucleus interactions was derived in \cite{meM}. In the

288: formal language of the saturation scale parameters $Q_{s1}$ and

289: $Q_{s2}$ that cross section includes all powers of $Q_{s1}^2 /

290: k_\perp^2$ keeping only the leading power of $Q_{s2}^2 / k_\perp^2$.

291: 

292: 

293: The problem of finding the classical gluon field in nucleus-nucleus

294: collisions has been addressed in lattice simulations of Krasnitz and

295: Venugopalan \cite{kv}. The numerical distribution of the produced

296: particles has been found and exhibited saturation properties expected,

297: such as finiteness in the small transverse momentum limit. Mueller

298: \cite{Mueller2} suggested that the total number of the produced gluons has to 

299: be proportional to the total number of gluons in the nuclear wave

300: function with the proportionality coefficient $c$ of order one. The

301: numerical value of the coefficient was determined in \cite{kv} to be

302: $c = 1.29 \pm 0.09$.

303: 

304: 

305: In this paper we are going to write down an analytical expression for

306: the distribution of produced gluons which resums all powers of both

307: $Q_{s1}^2 / k_\perp^2$ and $Q_{s2}^2 / k_\perp^2$. That is we are

308: going to address the problem of nucleus-nucleus scattering

309: analytically. The paper is organized as follows: in Sect. II we will

310: formulate the problem of classical gluon production and make some

311: useful observations revealing the advantages and disadvantages of

312: viewing the process in different gauges. In Sect.  IIIA we will review

313: the solution of the proton-nucleus (pA) problem in covariant gauge

314: which was given in \cite{meM}, showing how multiple {\it final} state

315: rescatterings play crucial role in gluon production. In Sect. IIIB we

316: will analyze the same process of gluon production in pA collisions in

317: light cone gauge and demonstrate that an entirely different set of

318: {\it initial} state interactions is important there. We will outline

319: certain important cancellations of diagrams, which would allow us to

320: write down an expression for the produced gluons' distribution in

321: nucleus-nucleus (AA) collisions in Sect. IV. This distribution is

322: given by \eq{aasol} and is the central result of this paper. It gives

323: the distribution of gluons in the state immediately following a heavy

324: ion collision providing initial condition for possible thermalization

325: of the gluonic system at later times. We explore the properties of the

326: distribution of \eq{aasol} in Sect. V. There we first obtain a

327: simplified expression for the distribution in the case of not very

328: large transverse momenta $k_\perp \, \lsim \, Q_s$, which is given by

329: \eq{dist2}. We demonstrate that the distribution of produced gluons

330: (\ref{aasol}) is finite up to $\ln Q_s/k_\perp$ in the soft transverse

331: momentum limit and scales as $1/k_\perp^4$ when the transverse

332: momentum gets large. We calculate the typical momentum of the produced

333: gluons and find that for the case of identical nuclei it is of the

334: order of the saturation scale $Q_s$, as was conjectured by Mueller in

335: \cite{Mueller2}. Finally we estimate the coefficient $c$ from

336: \cite{Mueller2} and find $c \, \approx \, 2 \ln 2$, which is close to 

337: the result of \cite{kv}. In Sect. VI we estimate the saturation scale

338: using the new data from PHOBOS experiment at RHIC \cite{pho} and

339: obtain $Q_s^2 \, \approx \, 2 \, \mbox{GeV}^2$, which is marginally in

340: the perturbative QCD region and agrees with the result of

341: \cite{ekrt}. We end the paper with a summary of the results obtained.

342: 

343: 

344: 

345: 

346: 

347: \section{Formulation of the Problem}

348: 

349: In this section we are going to review the formulation of the problem

350: of finding the classical gluon field of two colliding nuclei and make

351: some observations which will be useful later.

352: 

353: As was originally stated in \cite{kmw} one needs to solve the

354: classical Yang--Mills equations

355: \be\label{ym}

356: D_\mu F^{\mu \nu} = J^{\nu}\,\, ,

357: \ee

358: with the current $J^{\mu}$ arising due to the valence quarks in the

359: colliding nuclei. The valence quarks move ultra-relativistically along

360: the straight lines on the light cone and do not get deflected in the

361: collision. (Deflection is suppressed by a power of the center of mass

362: energy of the colliding system.) Thus the current generated by them

363: has non-zero light cone components $J_+$ and $J_-$ and zero transverse

364: component ${\underline J} \, = \, 0 $. In a non-Abelian theory the

365: source current is not gauge invariant, it gets rotated under gauge

366: transformations. We will first construct the current in a particular

367: gauge --- covariant gauge

368: \be

369: \partial_\mu \, A_\mu \, = \, 0.

370: \ee

371: Before the collision the nuclei do not see each other and do not

372: interact. The current is given by the sum of the currents of two free

373: nuclei on the light cone. As was shown in \cite{me,med} the current of

374: a free nucleus in covariant gauge is given by a simple superposition

375: of the currents of the point color charges (valence quarks) in the

376: nucleus, each of them being parametrically of order $g$ in strong

377: coupling constant. For example, in the model of quarkonium nucleus

378: considered in \cite{me,med}, where the nucleus was envisaged as an

379: ensemble of point color charges, with each nucleon consisting of two

380: valence quarks (a quark and an antiquark), the free current is

381: \begin{mathletters} \label{current0}

382: \begin{eqnarray} 

383: J_+^{cov \ (0)} & = & g \sum_{i=1}^{A_1} T^a \, (T_i^a)\, [\delta(x_- -

384: x_{i-})\, \delta( {\underline x}-{\underline x}_i ) - \delta(x_- -

385: x'_{i-})\, \delta( {\underline x}-{\underline x}'_i ) ]\,\, , \\ 

386: J_-^{cov \ (0)}

387: & = & g \sum_{j=1}^{A_2} T^a \, (\tilde{T}_j^a)\, [\delta(x_+ -

388: y_{j+})\, \delta( {\underline x}-{\underline y}_j ) - \delta(x_+ -

389: y'_{j+})\, \delta( {\underline x}-{\underline y}'_j )]\,\, , \\ 

390: {\underline J}^{cov \ (0)} & = & 0\,\, .

391: \end{eqnarray}

392: \end{mathletters}

393: Here $x_i$'s ($x'_i$'s) and $y_j$'s ($y'_j$'s) are positions of the

394: quarks (antiquarks) in the $i$th nucleon of the first and in the $j$th

395: nucleon of the second nucleus correspondingly. The first nucleus is

396: moving in the ``+'' direction, while the second is moving in the

397: ``$-$'' direction (\fig{coll}). $(T_i^a)$ and $(\tilde{T}_j^a)$ are

398: $SU(3)$ color generators of the $i$th nucleon in the first nucleus and

399: of the $j$th nucleon in the second nucleus. $A_1$ and $A_2$ are the

400: atomic numbers of the nuclei.

401: 

402: \eq{ym} implies conservation of the classical current $J_\mu$

403: \be\label{ccons}

404: D_\mu \, J_\mu \, = \, 0.

405: \ee

406: Similarly to what was done in \cite{med} we will use this condition to

407: construct the covariant gauge current $J^{cov}_\mu$ during and after

408: the collision. The valence quarks do not get deflected from their

409: light cone trajectories in the collision. The only non-zero components

410: of the current are therefore $J_+$ and $J_-$. We can rewrite

411: \eq{ccons} as

412: \be\label{ccons1}

413: \partial_+ \, J^{cov}_- +  \partial_- \, J^{cov}_+ - i g [A^{cov}_+ , J^{cov}_- ] 

414: - i g [A^{cov}_-, J^{cov}_+] = 0. 

415: \ee

416: \eq{ccons1} can be satisfied with the following ansatz for the current

417: \be\label{covcur}

418: J^{cov}_+ \, = \, U^{-1} (x) \, J^{cov \ (0)}_+ (x) \, U (x), \hspace*{1cm}

419: J^{cov}_- \, = \, S^{-1} (x) \, J^{cov \ (0)}_- (x) \, S (x),

420: \ee

421: where

422: \be\label{u}

423: U (x) \, = \, \mbox{P} \exp \left( - i g \int_{-\infty}^{x_+} \ d x'_+ \

424: A^{cov}_- \right)

425: \ee

426: and

427: \be\label{s}

428: S (x) \, = \, \mbox{P} \exp \left( - i g \int_{-\infty}^{x_-} \ d x'_- \

429: A^{cov}_+ \right),

430: \ee

431: with $A^{cov}_\pm$ the components of the unknown solution of

432: \eq{ym}. Thus generally speaking the matrices $U (x)$ and $S (x)$ are

433: not known. In arriving at the solution of \eq{ccons1} given by

434: Eqs. (\ref{covcur}), (\ref{u}) and (\ref{s}) we have fixed the initial

435: conditions for \eq{ccons1}: we required that before the collision the

436: current $J^{cov}_\mu$ should be given by the free nuclear current

437: $J^{cov \ (0)}_\mu$ of \eq{current0}. This is just a casuality

438: requirement which makes sure that there is no interactions between the

439: nuclei prior to collision.  Eqs. (\ref{covcur}), (\ref{u}) and

440: (\ref{s}) certainly satisfy this initial condition, since before the

441: collision $U \ = \ S \ = \ 1$, as the fields of free nuclei are

442: non-zero only on light cone (see for instance

443: \cite{me,Mueller1}). Since \eq{ccons1} is a linear differential

444: equation the solution of \eq{covcur} is unique for the given initial

445: condition of \eq{current0}. 

446: 

447: 

448: \eq{covcur} has a very simple physical interpretation: the 

449: valence quarks in the nuclei during and after the collision are still

450: moving along the same straight lines on the light cone. The only

451: effect of the collision on these valence quarks is the rotation of

452: their color charges by the gluon field created in the collision and by

453: the gluon field of the other nucleus. This has been discussed and

454: illustrated in \cite{med} at the lowest nontrivial order in $\as$.

455: 

456: Eqs. (\ref{ym}) and (\ref{covcur}) provide us with complete

457: formulation of the problem in covariant gauge. We have to solve the

458: Yang-Mills equations (\ref{ym}) with the conserved current

459: (\ref{covcur}). We are now going to demonstrate an interesting

460: property of the current.

461: 

462: 

463: Let us perform a gauge transformation with the matrix $S (x)$.  The

464: new gluon field will be given by

465: \be

466: A^{LC}_\mu \, = \, S \ A^{cov}_\mu S^{-1} \, - \, \frac{i}{g} \

467: (\partial_\mu S) \ S^{-1}.

468: \ee

469: As easy to see $A^{LC}_+ \, = \, 0$, which means that the gauge

470: transformation with the matrix $S (x)$ transforms the field into the

471: light cone gauge. The current in the light cone gauge is

472: \be\label{lccur}

473: J^{LC}_+ \, = S (x) \, U^{-1} (x) \, J^{cov \ (0)}_+ (x) \, U (x) \,

474: S^{-1} (x) , \hspace*{1cm} J^{LC}_- \, = \, J^{cov \ (0)}_- (x) .

475: \ee

476: From \eq{lccur} it follows that the ``$-$'' component of the current

477: in the $A^{LC}_+ \, = \, 0$ light cone gauge remains unchanged

478: throughout the collision and is equal to the order $g$ ``initial''

479: free nucleus current in the covariant gauge. That means that the

480: charges of the second nucleus in the light cone gauge do not get

481: rotated in the collision. Let us illustrate what this statement means

482: in terms of diagrams.

483: 

484: \begin{figure}

485: \begin{center}

486: \epsfxsize=15cm

487: \leavevmode

488: \hbox{ \epsffile{lip.eps}}

489: \end{center}

490: \caption{Diagrams contributing to the classical gluon field in covariant 

491: gauge at order $g^3$.}

492: \label{lip}

493: \end{figure}

494: 

495: In \cite{kmw,med,mg} the classical gluon field of two colliding nuclei

496: was found perturbatively at the lowest non-trivial order in $g$, which

497: happened to be order $g^3$. The diagrams contributing to the gluon

498: field at this order in covariant gauge are shown in

499: Fig. \ref{lip}. There we present a collision of two ultrarelativistic

500: nucleons, the upper one of which is moving in the light cone ``plus''

501: direction while the lower one is moving in the ``minus''

502: direction. The straight lines in \fig{lip} correspond to the valence

503: quarks. The cross denotes the point in coordinate space where one

504: measures the field.

505: 

506: 

507: The interpretation of the diagrams of Fig. \ref{lip} has been given in

508: \cite{med}. In diagram A two gluon fields merge to produce the final field.  

509: In the diagrams B and C the current of the upper quark gets rotated by

510: the field of the lower quark and a gluon is emitted off the modified

511: current. In the diagrams D and E the opposite happens: the current of

512: the lower quark gets rotated by the field of the upper quark and

513: emits a gluon. In both cases of B,C and D,E the current of one of the

514: quarks gets a rotational correction of the order $g^2$ (one gluon

515: exchange contribution) which could also be obtained from \eq{covcur}

516: by perturbative expansion of the matrices $U (x)$ and $S (x)$ to the

517: lowest non-trivial order \cite{med}. 

518: 

519: \begin{figure}

520: \begin{center}

521: \epsfxsize=10cm

522: \leavevmode

523: \hbox{ \epsffile{lcexp.eps}}

524: \end{center}

525: \caption{$A_+ = 0$ light cone gauge diagrams: A contributes to the classical gluon 

526: field while B does not.}

527: \label{lcexp}

528: \end{figure}

529: 

530: 

531: Now looking at the light cone gauge current given by \eq{lccur} we

532: see that $J^{LC}_\mu$ does not get any rotational corrections

533: whatsoever and remains at the lowest order in $g$ (free nucleus

534: current). Therefore we can conclude that, for instance, diagrams D and

535: E of \fig{lip} do not contribute to the classical gluon field in $A_+

536: \ = \ 0$ light cone gauge, which is a self-evident statement. However, 

537: we can draw more general and less trivial conclusions from

538: \eq{lccur}. Since the current of the second nucleus does not get

539: rotated it means that it only rotates the current and/or the field of

540: another nucleus. This also implies that there is no diagrams with more

541: than one gluon line connecting to any quark line in the second nucleus

542: (except for virtual diagrams where two gluons can connect to a single

543: quark line -- see \cite{me2}). The statement is illustrated in

544: \fig{lcexp}. Diagram in \fig{lcexp}A has only one gluon line attaching

545: to the quark line in the second (lower) nucleus moving in the

546: ``minus'' direction and therefore may contribute to the classical

547: field. The diagram of \fig{lcexp}B has two gluons interacting with the

548: quark in a nucleon of the second nucleus, and the nucleon remains in a

549: color non-neutral state at the end. This diagram does not contribute

550: to the classical field according to what we have shown in

551: \eq{lccur}.

552: 

553: 

554: 

555: 

556: \section{Proton-Nucleus Collisions Revisited}

557: 

558: 

559: Before addressing the issue of nucleus--nucleus collisions (AA) let us

560: first consider a somewhat easier problem of proton--nucleus collisions

561: (pA). Below we are going to review the solution of the problem in

562: covariant gauge given in \cite{meM} and then proceed by analyzing the

563: same pA process in the light cone gauge of the nucleus.  Our

564: interpretation of the underlying light cone gauge physics will be

565: slightly different from the one presented in \cite{meM}.

566: 

567: 

568: \subsection{Covariant Gauge}

569: 

570: Consider a collision of an ultrarelativistic nucleus moving in the

571: ``plus'' light cone direction and a proton moving in the ``minus''

572: light cone direction. For pA collisions we want to solve the same

573: problem of classical gluon production as was stated above for AA

574: collisions. In this subsection we will just follow the discussion of

575: \cite{meM}. We will work in $A_- \ = \ 0$ gauge with polarization vector 

576: also taken in that gauge, $\epsilon_- \ = \ 0$, which for the nucleus

577: moving in the ``plus'' direction is equivalent to covariant gauge

578: ($\partial \cdot A \ = \ 0$) \cite{meM}. Following \cite{meM} we will

579: consider the process in the rest frame of the nucleus and perform the

580: calculations in the light cone perturbation theory (see \cite{bl} and

581: references therein). Then the physical picture of the gluon production

582: is the following: the incoming proton may already have a gluon in its

583: light cone wave function before the collision with the nucleus and the

584: system of the proton and gluon multiply rescatters on the nucleons in

585: the nucleus. Alternatively the proton can emit the gluon after the

586: multiple rescatterings in the nucleus. The diagrams where the gluon is

587: emitted during the proton's passing through the nucleus are suppressed

588: by powers of its large light cone momentum $p_-$, i.e., by powers of

589: center of mass energy of the system (eikonal approximation)

590: \cite{meM}. Multiple rescatterings are easier to resum by calculating 

591: the amplitude in the transverse coordinate space \cite{bdmps,meM}. To

592: obtain the gluon production cross section we have transform the

593: amplitude into the momentum space and square it. The diagrams

594: contributing to the gluon production cross section are shown in

595: \fig{pafig}. The graph in \fig{pafig}A corresponds to the square of

596: the amplitude corresponding to the case when the gluon is present in

597: proton's wave function before the collision. The diagram in

598: \fig{pafig}B gives the interference term between the amplitude from

599: \fig{pafig}A and the amplitude in which the gluon is emitted by the proton 

600: after the collision. Of course a diagram complex conjugate to

601: \fig{pafig}B should also be included. It can be shown that the square of 

602: the diagram with late gluon emission does not have any interactions in

603: it and can be neglected. (The gluon exchanges between the proton and

604: the nucleus cancel.) In \cite{meM} the interactions counting was a

605: little different from the one we will present below and that diagram

606: was included, leading to the same result.

607: 

608: 

609: 

610: \begin{figure}

611: \begin{center}

612: \epsfxsize=15cm

613: \leavevmode

614: \hbox{ \epsffile{pa.eps}}

615: \end{center}

616: \caption{Covariant gauge (or more accurately $A_- = 0$ gauge) gluon 

617: production diagrams for proton--nucleus collision as considered in

618: \protect\cite{meM}. Multiple rescatterings in the nucleus determine the 

619: interactions in this gauge.}

620: \label{pafig}

621: \end{figure}

622: 

623: 

624: Note also that in the quasi--classical approximation depicted in

625: \fig{pafig} the interaction is modeled by single and double gluon

626: exchanges. The limit of no more than two gluons per nucleon is imposed

627: \cite{me2}. If a particular nucleon exchanges a gluon with the rest of

628: the system in the amplitude then it has to exchange a gluon in the

629: complex conjugate amplitude to remain color neutral. Alternatively the

630: nucleon can exchange two gluon in the amplitude (complex conjugate

631: amplitude) , but then it can not interact in the complex conjugate

632: amplitude (amplitude). This is done in the spirit of the

633: quasi--classical approximation resumming all powers of $\as^2 \

634: A^{1/3}$, as was discussed in the Introduction.

635: 

636: 

637: In the graph of \fig{pafig}A the nucleons of the nucleus interact with

638: both the proton and the gluon by gluon exchanges. It was noticed in

639: \cite{meM} that the interactions with the proton can be neglected due

640: to real--virtual cancellation. Moving a gluon exchanged between the

641: nucleus and the proton across the cut does not change the momentum of

642: the produced gluon in \fig{pafig}A but does change the sign of the

643: whole term, causing the cancellation. That is why we have to consider

644: only the interactions with the gluon in \fig{pafig}A.  Similar kind of

645: cancellation does {\it not} happen in \fig{pafig}B. Moving an

646: exchanged (Coulomb) gluon across the cut would force us to move it

647: across the gluon emission vertex for the produced gluon on the right

648: hand side, thus changing the momentum of the produced gluon. Thus all

649: the possible interactions have to be included in \fig{pafig}B. On the

650: right hand side of the diagram in \fig{pafig}B only the interactions

651: with the proton are possible.

652: 

653: 

654: To obtain the answer for the gluon production cross section in pA in

655: the quasi--classical approximation we have to convolute the wave

656: function of the proton with a soft gluon in it with the Glauber-type

657: propagator. The answer has been derived in \cite{meM} (see also

658: \cite{kst} and references therein). The diagram in \fig{pafig}A gives \cite{meM}

659: \begin{mathletters} \label{pasol}

660: \be

661: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_1}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \frac{1}{\pi} \, \int \ d^2 b \, d^2 x 

662: \, d^2 y \, \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^2} \, \frac{\as C_F}{\pi} \frac{{\underline x} 

663: \cdot {\underline y}}{{\underline x}^2 {\underline y}^2} \, e^{i {\underline k} 

664: \cdot ({\underline x} - {\underline y})} \, \left( e^{- ({\underline x} - 

665: {\underline y})^2 \ Q_s^2 /4 } - 1 \right)

666: \ee

667: and the diagram in \fig{pafig}B plus its complex conjugate after a

668: somewhat more sophicticated calculation \cite{meM} gives

669: \cite{meM}

670: \be

671: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{2+3}}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \frac{1}{\pi} \, \int \ d^2 b \, d^2 x 

672: \, d^2 y \, \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^2} \, \frac{\as C_F}{\pi} \frac{{\underline x} 

673: \cdot {\underline y}}{{\underline x}^2 {\underline y}^2} \, e^{i {\underline k} 

674: \cdot ({\underline x} - {\underline y})} \, \left( 1 -  e^{- {\underline x}^2 \ 

675: Q_s^2 /4 } + 1 -  e^{- {\underline y}^2 \ Q_s^2 /4 } \right).

676: \ee

677: \end{mathletters}

678: The total gluon production cross section is equal to the sum of the

679: terms in \eq{pasol}

680: \be

681: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_1}{d^2 k \ dy} 

682: + \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{2+3}}{d^2 k \ dy}.

683: \ee

684: In \eq{pasol} ${\underline x}$ and ${\underline y}$ are the transverse

685: coordinates of the gluon in the amplitude and the complex conjugate

686: amplitude correspondingly counted with respect to the transverse

687: position of the quark in the proton off which the gluon is emitted

688: (${\underline 0}$). $b$ is the impact parameter. ${\underline k}$ is

689: the gluon's transverse momentum. Same as in \cite{meM} we use a

690: shorthand notation (see also

691: \cite{bdmps})

692: \be\label{xqs}

693: {\underline x}^2 Q_s^2 \ = \ {\underline x}^2 \ \frac{8 \pi^2 \as N_c

694: R}{N^2_c - 1} \, \rho \, xG (x, 1/{\underline x}^2),

695: \ee

696: with $\rho$ the density of \eq{dens} taken in the nuclear rest frame.

697: In the two gluon approximating the gluon distribution function of a

698: nucleon is

699: \be\label{xg}

700: xG (x, 1/{\underline x}^2) \ = \ \frac{\as C_F}{\pi} \, \ln

701: \frac{1}{{\underline x}^2 \mu^2},

702: \ee

703: with $\mu$ some infrared cutoff. For simplicity of calculations

704: throughout the paper we assume that the nucleus has a cylindrical

705: shape, with radius $R$ and the height of the cylinder $2 R$. The

706: cylinder is lined up along the $z$ axis. Generalization of our results

707: to a spherical nucleus is trivial.

708: 

709: 

710: In general the saturation scale $Q_s^2$ has to be found from the

711: following implicit equation \cite{meM,bdmps}

712: \be\label{qs}

713: Q_s^2 \ = \ \frac{8 \pi^2 \as N_c R}{N^2_c - 1} \, \rho \, xG (x,

714: Q_s^2).

715: \ee

716: However, since the logarithm in \eq{xg} is a slowly varying function

717: we can assume that in our classical approximation without any QCD

718: evolution in the structure functions the gluon distribution function

719: is approximately a constant and the right hand side of \eq{qs} is

720: independent of $Q_s$. Thus \eq{qs} turns from implicit equation into

721: an equality.

722: 

723: To summarize the results reviewed here we note that the gluon

724: production in pA collisions in covariant gauge is driven by the

725: multiple final state interactions. Now we will explore how this

726: picture changes in the light cone gauge of the nucleus.

727: 

728: 

729: \subsection{Light Cone Gauge}

730: 

731: 

732: Let us now consider pA scattering in the $A_+ = 0$ light cone

733: gauge with polarization vector also taken in the same gauge

734: $\epsilon_+ \ = \ 0$. A direct analysis of the light cone gauge

735: diagrams could be a little difficult \cite{meM}. We are going to use a

736: different strategy, which was already employed previously in

737: \cite{me2}. We know the answer for the gluon production cross section 

738: given by \eq{pasol}. Here we are going to guess the diagrams in the

739: $A_+ = 0$ light cone gauge which give us the same answer. Once we

740: guessed the correct diagrams we can conclude that the remaining

741: diagrams should cancel with each other, since they do not contribute

742: to the cross section.

743: 

744: \begin{figure}

745: \begin{center}

746: \epsfxsize=15cm

747: \leavevmode

748: \hbox{ \epsffile{palc.eps}}

749: \end{center}

750: \caption{Gluon production in proton--nucleus collisions in $A_+ = 0$ light 

751: cone gauge (see text).}

752: \label{palc}

753: \end{figure}

754: 

755: The light cone gauge diagrams contributing to the gluon production

756: cross section in proton--nucleus collisions are depicted in

757: \fig{palc}. The pA scattering process could be viewed in either rest 

758: frame of the proton or in the center of mass frame. Again we are going

759: to perform the calculation in the framework of the light cone

760: perturbation theory. Similar to the covariant gauge case considered

761: above the incoming nucleus can emit a gluon in its wave function

762: either before or after the collision with the proton. The one gluon

763: light cone wave function of an ultrarelativistic nucleus is given by

764: ${\underline A}^{WW} ({\underline x}) \cdot {\underline\epsilon}$,

765: with ${\underline A}^{WW}$ the non-Abelian Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams

766: field of the nucleus given by \eq{ww} with suppressed $x_-$ dependence

767: \cite{me,jklw} and ${\underline\epsilon}$ the polarization vector in

768: light cone gauge. (One can see that it is the case for instance by

769: calculating the one gluon rescattering diagram on the left hand side

770: of \fig{palc}A with this wave function and by using conventional

771: perturbation theory. Both results give the same answer.)

772: Diagrammatically the light cone wave function corresponds to the same

773: set of diagrams as was depicted above in \fig{wwfig}. The fields of

774: the nucleons in the nucleus ``gauge rotate'' the

775: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams field of one of the nucleons \cite{me2}. The

776: interaction with the proton can only be by the means of single or

777: double gluon exchanges, as was shown in Sect. II. \eq{lccur} shows

778: that the ``minus'' component of the current does not get rotated

779: implying that there could not be more than two gluons exchanged with

780: the proton in the $A_+ = 0$ light cone gauge.

781: 

782: 

783: Before colliding with the proton the nucleus can develop the

784: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams one gluon light cone wave function which then

785: interacts with the proton by means of one or two gluon exchanges,

786: according to the rules of the quasi--classical approximation

787: \cite{me2,meM}.  The square of the graph corresponding to this scenario

788: is shown in \fig{palc}A. As in \fig{pafig} the interactions of the

789: proton with the nucleons in the nucleus cancel through the

790: real--virtual cancellation leaving only the interactions with the

791: gluon line. One may notice that the final state interactions are left

792: out in the diagram of \fig{palc}A, but as we will show below we do not

793: need them to reproduce the contribution of the graph in \fig{pafig}A,

794: which implies that they cancel with each other. 

795: 

796: 

797: The second possible scenario corresponds to the case when there is no

798: gluon in the nuclear wave function by the time the collision happens

799: and the gluon is emitted by the nucleus after the interaction with the

800: proton. Then the nuclear wave function without an emitted gluon

801: corresponds to the fields of the nucleons rotating the current of one

802: of the nucleons in the nucleus. This is shown on the right hand side

803: of \fig{palc}B. The nucleon then interacts with the proton by

804: exchanging one or two gluons with it. After that the nucleus can emit

805: a gluon to be produced in the final state. Another possibility which

806: is not shown in \fig{palc}B but which contributes to the gluon

807: production corresponds to the case when the Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams

808: gluon is present in the nuclear wave function by the time of the

809: collision, similar to \fig{palc}A, but after the interaction with the

810: proton the gluon merges into the quark line of one of the nucleons,

811: which later re-emits the gluon. We could not find an {\it a priori}

812: argument prohibiting an emission of the whole Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams

813: field after the interaction. However, as we will see below one needs

814: to emit only one gluon to be able to reproduce the results of the

815: previous section. The square of the diagram on the right hand side of

816: \fig{palc}B is zero since the interactions cancel due to real--virtual

817: cancellation \cite{meM}. The only contribution we get from it is the

818: interference term depicted in \fig{palc}B. There on the left hand side

819: we have the same diagram as in \fig{palc}A except that now

820: interactions of the proton with the ``last'' nucleon in the nucleus do

821: not cancel. We will show that the diagram of \fig{palc}B provides us

822: with the contribution equal to that of the graph in \fig{pafig}B.

823: 

824: 

825: Let us now calculate the diagrams in \fig{palc}. The contribution of

826: \fig{palc}A can be obtained by convoluting the correlation function of

827: the fields on both sides of the cut with the gluon--proton

828: interactions amplitude. The result yields

829: \be\label{lc11}

830: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{LC1}}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \int \frac{d^2 x \ 

831: d^2 y}{(2 \pi)^2} \, e^{i {\underline k} \cdot ({\underline x} -

832: {\underline y})}\, \frac{2}{\pi} \, \mbox{Tr} \, \left< {\underline A}^{WW}

833: ({\underline x}) \cdot {\underline A}^{WW} ({\underline y}) \right> \,

834: \frac{- \as \pi^2 N_c}{N_c^2 - 1} \, ({\underline x} - {\underline y})^2

835: \, xG (x, 1/({\underline x} - {\underline y})^2).

836: \ee

837: In \cite{jklw,meM} the correlation function of two non-Abelian

838: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams fields in the nuclear wave function was found

839: to be

840: \be\label{wwcorr}

841: \mbox{Tr} \left< {\underline A}^{WW} ({\underline x}) \cdot {\underline A}^{WW} 

842: ({\underline y}) \right> \, = \, \frac{C_F}{\pi \as ({\underline x} -

843: {\underline y})^2} \, \left(1 - e^{ - ({\underline x} - {\underline

844: y})^2 \, Q_s^2 / 4 } \right).

845: \ee

846: Employing Eqs. (\ref{wwcorr}) and (\ref{xg}) in \eq{lc11} and defining

847: new variables ${\underline z} = {\underline x} - {\underline y}$ and

848: ${\underline b} = {\underline y}$ we obtain

849: \be\label{lc12}

850: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{LC1}}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \int \, d^2 b \, d^2 z \, 

851: e^{i {\underline k} \cdot {\underline z}} \, \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^2} \,

852: \frac{\as C_F}{\pi} \, \ln \frac{1}{{\underline z}^2 \mu^2} \, \left( 

853: e^{ - {\underline z}^2 \, Q_s^2 / 4 } - 1 \right).

854: \ee

855: Using Eqs. (63) and (64) from \cite{meM} one can see that

856: \be\label{for}

857: \ln \frac{1}{{\underline z}^2 \mu^2} \, = \, \frac{1}{\pi} \, \int 

858: d^2 y \, \frac{{\underline y} \cdot ({\underline z} + {\underline

859: y})}{{\underline y}^2 ({\underline z} + {\underline y})^2}

860: \ee

861: where the $y$ integration is cut off by $1/\mu$ in the infrared

862: limit. Inserting \eq{for} into \eq{lc12} and comparing the result to

863: Eq. (\ref{pasol}a) one can see that

864: \be

865: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{LC1}}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{1}}{d^2 k \ dy}.

866: \ee

867: Thus we have shown that the contribution of the diagrams in

868: \fig{palc}A is equal to the contribution of the diagrams in

869: \fig{pasol}A.

870: 

871: The calculation of the graphs depicted in \fig{palc}B is a little more

872: complicated. Similar to diagrams of \fig{palc}A a correlator of two

873: gluonic fields is involved. However, in the field on the right hand

874: side of the cut in \fig{palc}B only rotations of the source are

875: allowed. Similarly to what was done in \cite{me2,meM} we argue that

876: the fields of the nucleons rotate the quark line to which the emitted

877: final state gluon is attached, as well as the Coulomb gluon's field

878: coming from the proton below. Everything is gauge rotated, except for

879: the gluon line of the emitted gluon. After applying Ward identities we

880: conclude that effectively only the vertex where the emitted gluon

881: connects to the quark line on the right hand side of \fig{palc}B is

882: rotated. This corresponds to rotation of the source of the gluon field

883: emitted \cite{me2}. The effect of this gauge rotation is modification

884: of the expression for the field from \eq{ww} into

885: \be\label{wwm}

886: {\underline A}^{WW}_{mod} ({\underline x},x_-) \ = \ \int \ d^2 z \ d z_-

887: \theta (z_- - x_-) \ {\hat \rho}^a ({\underline z},z_-) \

888: \frac{{\underline x} - {\underline z}}{|{\underline x} - {\underline z}|^2} 

889: \ S_0 ({\underline z},z_-) T^a S_0^{-1} ({\underline z},z_-).

890: \ee

891: After we sum over the all possible connections of the Coulomb gluon

892: lines to the ``last'' nucleon in the nucleus in \fig{palc}B the

893: resulting expression would depend on the transverse coordinate of the

894: quark in that nucleon to which the Coulomb gluon couples. Thus we can

895: not factorize the averaging in the nuclear wave function from the

896: interaction terms anymore, like it was done in obtaining

897: \eq{lc11}. With all the above-mentioned complications in mind we write

898: the contribution of the diagram in \fig{palc}B as (see \cite{meM} for

899: a similar calculation)

900: \ben

901: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{LC2}}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \frac{2}{\pi} \, \int 

902: \frac{d^2 x \ d^2 y}{(2 \pi)^2} \, e^{i {\underline k} \cdot ({\underline x} -

903: {\underline y})} \, \int d^2 z \, d z_- \, d^2 z' \, d z'_- \, \left<

904: \frac{{\underline x} - {\underline z}}{|{\underline x} - {\underline

905: z}|^2} \cdot \frac{{\underline y} - {\underline z'}}{|{\underline y} -

906: {\underline z'}|^2} \, {\hat \rho}^a ({\underline z},z_-) \, {\hat

907: \rho}^b ({\underline z}',z'_-) \right.

908: \een

909: \be\label{lc21}

910: \left. \times \mbox{Tr} \left[ S_0 ({\underline x},z_-) 

911: T^a S_0^{-1} ({\underline x},z_-) S_0 ({\underline z}',z'_-) T^b

912: S_0^{-1} ({\underline z}',z'_-) \right] \, \frac{\as \pi^2 N_c}{N_c^2

913: - 1} \, ({\underline x} - {\underline z})^2

914: \, xG (x, 1/({\underline x} - {\underline z})^2)\right>

915: \ee

916: Similar to what was done before in \cite{me,meM} we argue that we can

917: average the densities ${\hat \rho}^a ({\underline z},z_-) \, {\hat

918: \rho}^b ({\underline z}',z'_-)$ in the nuclear wave function

919: independently and we can employ \eq{dcorr} to do so. In \cite{meM} the

920: following result was derived (see Eq. (48) in \cite{meM})

921: \ben

922: \left< \mbox{Tr} \left[ S_0 ({\underline x},z_-) 

923: T^a S_0^{-1} ({\underline x},z_-) S_0 ({\underline z},z_-) T^a

924: S_0^{-1} ({\underline z},z_-) \right] \right> \ = 

925: \een

926: \be\label{scorr}

927: = \ C_F N_c \exp \left( - \frac{\as \pi^2 N_c}{N_c^2 - 1} \, ({\underline

928: x} - {\underline z})^2 \, \rho ({\underline x},z_-) \, xG (x,

929: 1/({\underline x} - {\underline z})^2) \, (z_- + z_{0-})\right),

930: \ee

931: with $\pm z_{0-}$ is the upper (lower) limit of the $z_-$ integration

932: in \eq{lc21}. In \eq{scorr} we assume that $\rho ({\underline x},z_-)$

933: does not vary much between ${\underline x}$ and ${\underline z}$,

934: which is justified for a large nucleus. Using Eqs. (\ref{dcorr}) and

935: (\ref{scorr}) in \eq{lc21} we obtain

936: \be\label{lc22}

937: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{LC2}}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \frac{1}{\pi} \, \int 

938: \frac{d^2 x \ d^2 y}{(2 \pi)^2} \, e^{i {\underline k} \cdot ({\underline x} -

939: {\underline y})} \, d^2 z \, \frac{\as C_F}{\pi} \,

940: \frac{{\underline x} - {\underline z}}{|{\underline x} - {\underline

941: z}|^2} \cdot \frac{{\underline y} - {\underline z}}{|{\underline y} -

942: {\underline z}|^2} \, \left(1 - e^{ - ({\underline x} - {\underline

943: z})^2 \, Q_s^2 / 4 } \right).

944: \ee

945: Defining new variables ${\underline x} = {\underline x} - {\underline

946: z}$, ${\underline y} = {\underline y} - {\underline z}$ and

947: ${\underline b} = {\underline z}$ and adding the contribution of the

948: complex conjugate to \fig{palc}B diagram ($ d

949: \sigma^{pA}_{LC3} / d^2 k \ dy$) we can compare the result with

950: Eq. (\ref{pasol}b) and conclude that

951: \be

952: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{LC2}}{d^2 k \ dy} + 

953: \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{LC3}}{d^2 k \ dy} \ = \ \frac{d \sigma^{pA}_{2+3}}{d^2 k \ dy}.

954: \ee

955: We have thus shown that the contribution of the diagrams in

956: \fig{palc}B is equal to the contribution of the diagrams in

957: \fig{pafig}B.

958: 

959: 

960: We have proved that the diagrams in \fig{palc} are the only diagrams

961: contributing to the gluon production cross section in $A_+ = 0$ light

962: cone gauge. Thus a whole class of diagrams with final state

963: interactions does not contribute to the cross section. Several

964: examples of such graphs are shown in \fig{zero}.

965: 

966: 

967: The diagram in \fig{zero}A represents a class of diagrams where the

968: non-Abelian Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams wave function of the nucleus after

969: interaction with the proton merges with another (non-interacting)

970: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams wave function. The graph in \fig{zero}B can be

971: viewed as a similar to \fig{zero}A process, where after proton-nucleon

972: interaction a gluon field is emitted, which later on merges with the

973: non-Abelian Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams wave function of the

974: nucleus. There is another class of diagrams which do not contribute to

975: the cross section where two Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams wave functions

976: merge with each other and with a Coulomb gluon coming from the proton

977: through a four-gluon vertex, producing a gluon in the final

978: state. Those diagrams are probably suppressed in the old-fashioned

979: light cone perturbation theory as requiring the gluon fields' merger

980: to happen at a particular light cone time when the system is passing

981: the proton.

982: 

983: 

984: As was shown above all of the final state interactions shown in

985: \fig{zero} do not contribute to the gluon production cross section in

986: pA collisions. Therefore they should cancel, either with each other or

987: individually due to some other cancellation mechanism. From

988: considering gluon production in pA collisions in the light cone gauge

989: we may draw the following conclusion: the gluons produced by the

990: collision do not merge with the non-Abelian Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams

991: wave function of the nucleus.

992: 

993: \begin{figure}

994: \begin{center}

995: \epsfxsize=15cm

996: \leavevmode

997: \hbox{ \epsffile{zero.eps}}

998: \end{center}

999: \caption{Some of the final state interaction diagrams which do not 

1000: contribute to gluon production in pA collisions in $A_+ = 0$ light 

1001: cone gauge.}

1002: \label{zero}

1003: \end{figure}

1004: 

1005: 

1006: Another important diagram which {\it a priori} should be contributing

1007: to the gluon production in pA scattering is shown in \fig{zeropa}. The

1008: diagram contains virtual interaction between the proton and the field

1009: of the nucleus. Even though there is no interaction on the right hand

1010: side of the diagram it is allowed by the ruled of the old fashioned

1011: light cone perturbation theory, where the energy is not conserved in

1012: the vertices \cite{meM,bl}. The diagram of \fig{zeropa} has a

1013: remarkable feature in it, which was absent in the graphs shown in

1014: \fig{zero}: merger of two produced gluons. In \fig{zeropa} two

1015: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams wave functions of the nucleus first interact

1016: with the proton producing gluons, which then merge with each

1017: other. This merging is different from the ones considered in

1018: \fig{zero}. There one of the merging gluons was produced in the 

1019: interaction with the proton while the other one was just given by the

1020: non-interacting Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams wave function of the

1021: nucleus. In \fig{zeropa} both merging gluons were first ``produced''

1022: by the interactions and then merged together. Here again, since the

1023: diagram of \fig{zeropa} does not contribute to the gluon production

1024: cross section it has to either be zero or cancel with some other

1025: diagrams. This gives us a very strong reason to conclude that the

1026: gluons produced during the collision do not merge with each other at

1027: later times in $A_+ = 0$ light cone gauge. Even a more general

1028: conclusion can be conjectured: gluons produced in the interactions do

1029: not interact with any other gluons afterwards in $A_+ = 0$ gauge.

1030: 

1031: 

1032: \begin{figure}

1033: \begin{center}

1034: \epsfxsize=9cm

1035: \leavevmode

1036: \hbox{ \epsffile{zeropa.eps}}

1037: \end{center}

1038: \caption{A virtual diagram which does not contribute to the gluon 

1039: production process in pA collisions in $A_+ = 0$ light cone

1040: gauge. Triple gluon vertices are marked with black dots.}

1041: \label{zeropa}

1042: \end{figure}

1043: 

1044: 

1045: To conclude we note that the physical interpretation of the scattering

1046: process appears to be gauge dependent: in the covariant gauge case

1047: considered in the previous section the gluon production was dominated

1048: by multiple final state rescatterings. In the light cone gauge

1049: multiple rescatterings vanish. The information about them is now

1050: contained in the light cone wave function of the nucleus. The same

1051: observation about the interplay of initial and final state

1052: interactions was made in \cite{meM} for the case of current--nucleus

1053: scattering with the current $j = - \frac{1}{4} F^{a \, 2}_{\mu\nu}$.

1054: 

1055: 

1056: 

1057: \section{Nucleus--Nucleus Collisions}

1058: 

1059: 

1060: Now we can employ the results we have obtained in Sect. III to write

1061: down an ansatz for the distribution of produced gluons in

1062: nucleus--nucleus collisions. Let us consider a head-on central

1063: collision of two ultrarelativistic nuclei, as was shown in

1064: \fig{coll}. We will be working in $A_+ = 0$ light cone gauge. The

1065: calculations can be done either in the center of mass frame or in the

1066: rest frame of one of the nuclei. We will work in the rest frame of the

1067: second nucleus. The diagrams contributing to gluon production in AA

1068: are depicted in \fig{aafig}. They are somewhat similar to the diagrams

1069: of \fig{palc} and of \fig{pafig}. The incoming nucleus may or may not

1070: have a Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams gluon in it. In the first case the

1071: system multiply rescatters in the second nucleus at rest. This is

1072: illustrated in \fig{aafig}A. Similar to pA case multiple rescatterings

1073: between the first and the second nuclei cancel. Only the interactions

1074: with the gluon survive.  The interference graph of the amplitude from

1075: \fig{aafig}A and the amplitude where the gluon is emitted after the

1076: interaction is shown in \fig{aafig}B. Analogous to pA case we work

1077: with diagrams where the final state interactions are limited to

1078: multiple rescatterings in the second nucleus and a single gluon

1079: emission (or absorption) by the first nucleus. As was demonstrated in

1080: Sect. III in the case of proton-nucleus scattering all other final

1081: state interactions including ``produced'' gluons' merging cancel. Here

1082: we argue that this also happens in the nucleus-nucleus collisions.

1083: 

1084: \begin{figure}

1085: \begin{center}

1086: \epsfxsize=15cm

1087: \leavevmode

1088: \hbox{ \epsffile{aafig.eps}}

1089: \end{center}

1090: \caption{Diagrams contributing to the gluon production in nucleus-nucleus 

1091: collisions in the $A_+ = 0$ light cone gauge.}

1092: \label{aafig}

1093: \end{figure}

1094: 

1095: In Sect. III, analyzing proton-nucleus scattering we concluded that

1096: the diagrams where the gluon produced by interaction with the proton

1097: merges with the non-Abelian Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams wave function of

1098: the nucleus cancel. That allowed us to neglect similar diagrams in

1099: \fig{aafig} above. However, there exists also a somewhat

1100: different class of diagrams, one of which is shown in

1101: \fig{zeroaa}. There the gluons that merge in the later stages of the

1102: collision both were produced in the interaction of the

1103: Weizs\"{a}cker-Williams wave function with the second nucleus. This

1104: brings us back to the class of diagrams depicted in \fig{zeropa},

1105: where there is also a merger of two ``produced'' gluons. Since the

1106: diagrams of \fig{zeropa} canceled in the case of pA collisions we have

1107: a strong reason to believe that the graphs of the type shown in

1108: \fig{zeroaa} also cancel in AA collisions. Thus

1109: \fig{aafig} contains all the diagrams that contribute to gluon production 

1110: in nucleus-nucleus collisions.

1111: 

1112: 

1113: \begin{figure}

1114: \begin{center}

1115: \epsfxsize=8cm

1116: \leavevmode

1117: \hbox{ \epsffile{zeroaa.eps}}

1118: \end{center}

1119: \caption{An example of a diagram which is not included in the gluon 

1120: production mechanism of \fig{aafig}. To avoid possible confusion the

1121: three gluon vertices in this diagram are marked by black dots.}

1122: \label{zeroaa}

1123: \end{figure}

1124: 

1125: 

1126: We can calculate the diagrams in \fig{aafig} along the lines outlined

1127: in the previous section. The contribution of the graphs of

1128: \fig{aafig}A is obtained by a simple eikonalization of \eq{lc11}, 

1129: and, correspondingly \fig{palc}A. The result for the number

1130: distribution of the produced gluons yields

1131: \be\label{aa11}

1132: \frac{d N^{AA}_1}{d^2 k \, dy} \ = \ \int \frac{d^2 x \ 

1133: d^2 y}{(2 \pi)^2} \, e^{i {\underline k} \cdot ({\underline x} -

1134: {\underline y})}\, \frac{2}{\pi} \, \mbox{Tr} \, \left< {\underline

1135: A}_1^{WW} ({\underline x}) \cdot {\underline A}_1^{WW} ({\underline

1136: y}) \right>_1 \, \left(e^{ - ({\underline x} - {\underline y})^2

1137: \, Q_{s2}^2 / 4 } - 1 \right).

1138: \ee

1139: Here the indices $1$ and $2$ denote the fields and the saturation

1140: scales of the first and the second nuclei correspondingly, as well as

1141: over which nucleus wave function the quantities are being

1142: averaged. With the help of \eq{wwcorr} we rewrite \eq{aa11} as

1143: \be\label{aa12}

1144: \frac{d N^{AA}_1}{d^2 k \, dy} \ = \  - \frac{2 \, C_F}{\as \pi^2} \, \int \frac{d^2 x \ 

1145: d^2 y}{(2 \pi)^2} \, e^{i {\underline k} \cdot ({\underline x} -

1146: {\underline y})} \, \frac{1}{|{\underline x} - {\underline y}|^2} \,

1147: \left(1 - e^{ - ({\underline x} - {\underline y})^2

1148: \, Q_{s1}^2 / 4 } \right) \, \left(1 - e^{ - ({\underline x} - {\underline y})^2

1149: \, Q_{s2}^2 / 4 } \right).

1150: \ee

1151: As was demonstrated in Appendix A of \cite{meM} multiple rescatterings

1152: of \fig{aafig}B also just exponentiate. Therefore, in order to

1153: calculate the contribution of the diagram of \fig{aafig}B we should

1154: substitute

1155: \be

1156: \frac{\as \pi^2 N_c}{N_c^2 - 1} \, ({\underline x} - {\underline z})^2

1157: \, xG (x, 1/({\underline x} - {\underline z})^2)

1158: \ee

1159: in \eq{lc21} by 

1160: \be

1161: 1 - e^{ - ({\underline x} - {\underline z})^2 \, Q_{s2}^2 / 4 }.

1162: \ee

1163: Performing all the same integrations and averaging that were done in

1164: obtaining \eq{lc22} we end up with

1165: \be\label{aa21}

1166: \frac{d N^{AA}_2}{d^2 k \, dy} \ = \  \frac{2 \, C_F}{\as \pi^2} \, \int \frac{d^2 x \ 

1167: d^2 y}{(2 \pi)^3} \, e^{i {\underline k} \cdot ({\underline x} -

1168: {\underline y})} \, d^2 b \, \frac{{\underline x}}{{\underline x}^2}

1169: \cdot \frac{{\underline y}}{{\underline y}^2} \, \frac{1}{{\underline x}^2 

1170: \, \ln \frac{1}{|{\underline x}| \mu}} \, \left(1 - e^{ - {\underline x}^2 

1171: \, Q_{s1}^2 / 4 } \right) \, \left(1 - e^{ - {\underline x}^2

1172: \, Q_{s2}^2 / 4 } \right).

1173: \ee

1174: To get the full answer we have to add the contribution of the diagram

1175: which is complex conjugate to the one shown in \fig{aafig}B. Summing

1176: up Eqs. (\ref{aa12}), (\ref{aa21}) and its complex conjugate, we

1177: obtain the expression for the number distribution of gluons produced

1178: in a heavy ion collision

1179: \ben

1180: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 k \, d^2 b \, dy} \ = \ \frac{2 \, C_F}{\as \pi^2} \, 

1181: \left\{  -  \int \frac{d^2 z}{(2 \pi)^2} \,  e^{i {\underline k} \cdot 

1182: {\underline z}} \, \frac{1}{{\underline z}^2} \, \left(1 - e^{ -

1183: {\underline z}^2 \, Q_{s1}^2 / 4 } \right) \, \left(1 - e^{ -

1184: {\underline z}^2 \, Q_{s2}^2 / 4 } \right) + \right.

1185: \een

1186: \ben

1187: + \left. \int \frac{d^2 x \ d^2

1188: y}{(2 \pi)^3} \, e^{i {\underline k} \cdot ({\underline x} -

1189: {\underline y})} \,  \frac{{\underline x}}{{\underline x}^2}

1190: \cdot \frac{{\underline y}}{{\underline y}^2} \,  \left[ \frac{1}{{\underline x}^2 

1191: \, \ln \frac{1}{|{\underline x}| \mu}} \, \left(1 - e^{ - {\underline x}^2 

1192: \, Q_{s1}^2 / 4 } \right) \, \left(1 - e^{ - {\underline x}^2

1193: \, Q_{s2}^2 / 4 } \right) + \right. \right.

1194: \een

1195: \be\label{aasol}

1196: + \left. \left.  \frac{1}{{\underline y}^2 

1197: \, \ln \frac{1}{|{\underline y}| \mu}} \, \left(1 - e^{ - {\underline y}^2 

1198: \, Q_{s1}^2 / 4 } \right) \, \left(1 - e^{ - {\underline y}^2

1199: \, Q_{s2}^2 / 4 } \right) \right] \right\}.

1200: \ee

1201: \eq{aasol} is our main result. It provides us with the number of gluons 

1202: produced in a head-on zero impact parameter heavy ion collision per

1203: unit transverse momentum phase space, per unit rapidity interval at

1204: the given impact parameter $b$. \eq{aasol} includes the

1205: nucleon-nucleon scattering result of \fig{lip} calculated in

1206: \cite{kmw,med,mg} as well as the proton-nucleus scattering contribution 

1207: of \fig{palc} found in \cite{meM}. We are going to explore the

1208: properties of the distribution (\ref{aasol}) in the next section.

1209: 

1210: 

1211: 

1212: \section{Properties of the Classical Distribution}

1213: 

1214: 

1215: Let us evaluate \eq{aasol} in the approximation in which we neglect

1216: all the logarithms of the transverse coordinates \cite{meM}, since

1217: logarithm is a slowly varying function and can be assumed to be a

1218: constant compared to powers. That technically means putting $\ln

1219: \frac{1}{|{\underline x}| \mu} \, \sim \, \ln \frac{1}{|{\underline y}| 

1220: \mu} \, \sim \, 1 $ in \eq{aasol}. That also concerns terms like 

1221: ${\underline x}^2 \, Q_{s}^2$, which in general also have logarithms

1222: of $|{\underline x}|$ in them, as follows from Eqs. (\ref{xqs}) and

1223: (\ref{xg}). There we also put the logarithms to be of the order of

1224: one, similar to how it was done in \cite{meM}. We have to note that

1225: this approximation is good only for not very large transverse momenta

1226: $k_\perp \lsim Q_s$. When gluon's momentum is large, $k_\perp \gg

1227: Q_s$, the logarithms of the transverse coordinate are crucial for

1228: deriving the correct asymptotics of the distribution function of

1229: \eq{aasol}.

1230: 

1231: Employing the fact that

1232: \be

1233: \int \frac{d^2 y}{(2 \pi)^2} \, e^{- i {\underline k} \cdot {\underline y}} 

1234: \, \frac{{\underline y}}{{\underline y}^2} \,  = \, - \frac{i}{2 \pi} \, 

1235: \frac{{\underline k}}{{\underline k}^2}

1236: \ee

1237: in the second term of \eq{aasol}, integrating over the angles of

1238: ${\underline z}$ and ${\underline x}$ and performing similar

1239: integrations in the third term of \eq{aasol} we get

1240: \be\label{dist1}

1241: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 k \, d^2 b \, dy} \ = \ \frac{C_F}{\as \pi^3} \, 

1242: \int_0^\infty \frac{d x}{x} \, J_2 (k x) \, \left(1 - e^{ - {\underline x}^2 

1243: \, Q_{s1}^2 / 4 } \right) \, \left(1 - e^{ - {\underline x}^2

1244: \, Q_{s2}^2 / 4 } \right).

1245: \ee

1246: Integrating over $x$ in \eq{dist1} we find

1247: \be\label{dist2}

1248: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 k \, d^2 b \, dy} \ = \ \frac{C_F}{\as 2 \pi^3} \, 

1249: \frac{1}{{\underline k}^2} \, \left[ (Q_{s1}^2 + Q_{s2}^2) \, e^{- 

1250: \frac{{\underline k}^2}{Q_{s1}^2 + Q_{s2}^2}} - Q_{s1}^2 \, e^{- 

1251: \frac{{\underline k}^2}{Q_{s1}^2}} - Q_{s2}^2 \, e^{- 

1252: \frac{{\underline k}^2}{Q_{s2}^2}}\right].

1253: \ee

1254: The distribution of \eq{dist2} is plotted in \fig{dist} as a function

1255: of $k/Q_s$ for the case of two identical cylindrical nuclei with

1256: $Q_{s1} = Q_{s2} = Q_s$ and with the cross sectional area $S_\perp \,

1257: = \, \pi \, R^2 \, \approx \, 50 \, \mbox{fm}^2 \, \approx \, 1250 \,

1258: \mbox{GeV}^{-2}$. Note again that \eq{dist2} is valid only in the not 

1259: very large transverse momentum region $k_\perp \lsim Q_s$.

1260: 

1261: 

1262: \begin{figure}

1263: \begin{center}

1264: \epsfxsize=9cm

1265: \leavevmode

1266: \hbox{ \epsffile{dist.eps}}

1267: \end{center}

1268: \caption{Distribution of the produced gluons given by \eq{dist2} for a 

1269: central AA collision as a function of $k/Q_s$ with the transverse area

1270: of the nuclei being $S_\perp = 50 \, \mbox{fm}^2$. The approximation

1271: of \eq{aasol} is valid only for $k_\perp \, \ll \, Q_s$.}

1272: \label{dist}

1273: \end{figure}

1274: 

1275: 

1276: As one can see the distribution in \fig{dist} remains finite as

1277: $k_\perp/Q_s \rightarrow 0$. If one takes the $k_\perp \, \ll \, Q_s$

1278: limit of \eq{dist2} then the distribution goes to a constant

1279: \be\label{ir}

1280: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 k \, d^2 b \, dy} \ \rightarrow \ \ \frac{C_F}{\as 2 \pi^3} 

1281: \hspace*{1cm} \mbox{as} \hspace*{1cm} \frac{k_\perp}{Q_s} \, \ll \, 1.

1282: \ee 

1283: This means that the exact expression of \eq{aasol} may only have

1284: logarithmic divergences in the infrared limit. This conclusion is very

1285: interesting, since the initial conditions for heavy ion collisions

1286: which are generated by pairwise interactions between nucleons in

1287: nuclei without multiple rescatterings have a power-law divergences in

1288: the infrared limit \cite{coll}. Even the pA gluon production cross

1289: section of \eq{pasol} diverges as $1/k_\perp^2$ at small transverse

1290: momenta because it includes multiple rescatterings in only one

1291: nucleus, since one nucleus is involved in the scattering

1292: process. Therefore finiteness of \eq{dist2} at small transverse

1293: momenta demonstrates that multiple rescatterings are the reason the

1294: hadronic and nuclear single particle inclusive production cross

1295: sections remain finite in the soft momentum region.

1296: 

1297: Since the distribution of \eq{aasol} contains the lowest order in

1298: $\as$ diagrams in it (see \fig{lip}) one readily derives that in the

1299: $k_\perp/Q_s \rightarrow \infty$ limit the distribution falls off as

1300: $1/k_\perp^4$ \cite{kmw,med,mg}

1301: \be\label{uv}

1302: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 k \, d^2 b \, dy} \ \sim \ \frac{Q_{s1}^2 \, Q_{s2}^2}

1303: {\as \, {\underline k}^4} \hspace*{1cm} \mbox{as} \hspace*{1cm}

1304: \frac{k_\perp}{Q_s} \rightarrow \infty

1305: \ee

1306: which is a well-known perturbative result. As one can see

1307: extrapolation of the usual perturbative expression of \eq{uv} into the

1308: soft momentum region would lead to singularities and strong cutoff

1309: dependence of the total number of the produced gluons. The multiple

1310: rescatterings of \eq{aasol} resolve this problem.

1311: 

1312: A simple calculation shows that the typical transverse momentum of the

1313: gluons in the distribution of \eq{dist2} is given by

1314: \be\label{typk}

1315: \left< {\underline k}^2 \right> \ = \ \frac{2 \, Q_{s1}^2 \, Q_{s2}^2 }{(Q_{s1}^2 

1316: + Q_{s2}^2) \, \ln (Q_{s1}^2 + Q_{s2}^2) - Q_{s1}^2 \, \ln Q_{s1}^2 -

1317: Q_{s2}^2 \, \ln Q_{s2}^2 }.

1318: \ee

1319: For two identical cylindrical nuclei \eq{typk} gives

1320: \be\label{typkn}

1321: \left< {\underline k}^2 \right> \ = \ \frac{Q_{s}^2}{\ln 2}.

1322: \ee

1323: That is, the typical transverse momentum of the produced gluons is of

1324: the order of the saturation scale, as was conjectured by Mueller in

1325: \cite{Mueller2}. Since the saturation scale for a large nucleus scales

1326: as $Q_s^2 \, \sim \, A^{1/3}$ with atomic number, as could be seen for

1327: instance from \eq{qs}, it may get quite large, much larger than the

1328: non-perturbative QCD scale $\Lambda_{QCD}$. Then most of the produced

1329: gluons would have momenta high above $\Lambda_{QCD}$ which would

1330: justify the use of perturbative QCD in the problem \cite{mv,Mueller2}.

1331: 

1332: 

1333: Finally, the total number of gluons produced in the collision can be

1334: found by integrating \eq{dist2} over $k_\perp$. The result yields 

1335: \be

1336: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 b \, dy} \ = \ \frac{C_F}{\as 2 \pi^2} \, \left[ (Q_{s1}^2 

1337: + Q_{s2}^2) \, \ln (Q_{s1}^2 + Q_{s2}^2) - Q_{s1}^2 \, \ln Q_{s1}^2 -

1338: Q_{s2}^2 \, \ln Q_{s2}^2 \right],

1339: \ee

1340: which, for the case of identical nuclei gives

1341: \be\label{tot}

1342: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 b \, dy} \ = \ \frac{C_F \, Q_s^2 \, \ln 2}{\as \pi^2}.

1343: \ee

1344: In \cite{Mueller2} Mueller suggested that in a high energy nuclear

1345: collision the gluons in the wave function of the incident nucleus get

1346: liberated by the interactions with the nucleus at rest. The coherence

1347: of the incoming nucleus gluonic wave function is broken by the second

1348: nucleus. Thus the total number of produced gluons should be

1349: proportional to the total number of gluons in the wave function of one

1350: of the nuclei before the collision with the proportionality

1351: coefficient $c$, which should be of order one

1352: \cite{Mueller2}. Therefore one may write

1353: \cite{Mueller2}

1354: \be

1355: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 b \, dy} \ = \ c \ \frac{d N^{WW}}{d^2 b \, dy} \,

1356: = \, c \ \frac{2}{\pi} \, \mbox{Tr} \left< {\underline A}^{WW}

1357: ({\underline x}) \cdot {\underline A}^{WW} ({\underline x}) \right>,

1358: \ee

1359: which, using \eq{wwcorr} can be rewritten as

1360: \be\label{totmu}

1361: \frac{d N^{AA}}{d^2 b \, dy} \ = \ c \ \frac{C_F \, Q_s^2}{\as \, 2 \, \pi^2}.

1362: \ee

1363: Comparing \eq{totmu} to \eq{tot} we conclude that

1364: \be\label{coef}

1365: c \ = \ 2 \, \ln 2 \ \approx \ 1.39 ,

1366: \ee

1367: which is very close to the result of the numerical estimates of

1368: Krasnitz and Venugopalan giving $c \, = \, 1.29 \, \pm \, 0.09$

1369: \cite{kv}. The obtained value for the ``gluon liberation'' coefficient 

1370: $c = 2 \ln 2$ is close to one, as was originally suggested by Mueller

1371: \cite{Mueller2}.

1372: 

1373: 

1374: \section{Discussion}

1375: 

1376: 

1377: \eq{tot} allows us to estimate the saturation scale $Q_s$ knowing the 

1378: multiplicity of produced particles. Of course one should be careful in

1379: interpreting this estimate, since at high energies the purely

1380: classical picture considered here breaks down and quantum corrections

1381: bringing in powers of $\as \ln s$ become important. It has been

1382: conjectured though \cite{mv,klm} that these corrections would not

1383: change \eq{tot} and would only (considerably) increase the value of

1384: the saturation scale $Q_s$ on the right hand side of it. Another issue

1385: one should be worried about in this kind of an estimate is that the

1386: classical gluon production picture presented here does not include the

1387: interactions at late times, which may lead to thermalization of quarks

1388: and gluons produced, and may also modify the total number of gluons

1389: \cite{bmss}. \eq{tot} gives us the total number of gluons immediately 

1390: after the collision, which may be different from what the detectors

1391: count at the end due to the importance of $2 \rightarrow 3$ and $3

1392: \rightarrow 2$ processes at the later stages of the collision

1393: \cite{bmss}. Also \eq{tot} gives us the total number of gluons

1394: produced, which is not quite equal to the total number of pions, kaons

1395: and other hadrons observed in the detector. Here we will just assume

1396: that due to entropy conservation the numbers are very close to each

1397: other \cite{klm}.  Keeping all the above mentioned restrictions in

1398: mind we may nevertheless try to estimate $Q_s$ in our classical

1399: picture here using the newly emerging RHIC data \cite{pho}. PHOBOS

1400: experiment has measured total charge multiplicity per unit

1401: pseudorapidity in Au$+$Au collisions yielding the result \cite{pho}

1402: \be\label{pmult}

1403: \frac{dN^{Au+Au}_{ch}}{d \eta} \ = \ 555 \, \pm \, 12 (\mbox{stat}) \, \pm \, 

1404: 35 (\mbox{syst})

1405: \ee

1406: at the center of mass energy $\sqrt{s} \, = \, 130 \, \mbox{AGeV}$. In

1407: our crude estimate we will multiply the number given in \eq{pmult} by

1408: $3/2$ to account for charge neutral particles and use the resulting

1409: number as a lower bound estimate of $dN/dy$ in \eq{tot}. ($dN/dy$ is a

1410: little larger than $dN/d\eta$.) Again we use a cylindrical nucleus

1411: approximation with the cross sectional area $S_\perp \, = \, 50 \,

1412: \mbox{fm}^2$. We assume that the strong coupling constant is $\as \, 

1413: \approx \, 0.3$. (In general $\as \, = \, \as (Q_s^2)$ and we have 

1414: to treat \eq{tot} as an implicit equation.) The result for the

1415: saturation scale is

1416: \be\label{qsn}

1417: Q_s^2 \ \approx \ 2.1 \, \mbox{GeV}^2 \hspace*{1cm} \mbox{for} \ Au+Au

1418: \ \mbox{at} \ \sqrt{s} \, = \, 130 \, \mbox{AGeV},

1419: \ee

1420: which is close to and even a little larger than the estimate of

1421: \cite{ekrt}.  The saturation scale of \eq{qsn} appears to be

1422: marginally in the perturbative region. As energy of the RHIC beam

1423: reaches $200 \, \mbox{AGeV}$ the particle multiplicity will increase

1424: too, leading to an even larger saturation scale, which would make the

1425: use of perturbative QCD at RHIC even better justified.

1426: 

1427: 

1428: To summarize the results of this paper we repeat again that we have

1429: derived the classical distribution of gluons produced in the

1430: ultrarelativistic heavy ion collision (\eq{aasol}), thus constructing

1431: classical initial conditions for the evolution of the gluon system

1432: leading to a possible gluon thermalization. It would be very

1433: interesting and important to analyze the subsequent evolution of the

1434: gluonic system in the framework of McLerran-Venugopalan model and see

1435: whether the onset of thermalization is possible before the system

1436: falls apart and to what experimental consequences that would

1437: lead. Important first steps in that direction have already been made

1438: \cite{dg,bmss,Mueller2}. \eq{aasol} can also be applied to describe 

1439: minijet production in the proton-proton collisions at very high

1440: energies \cite{kmw,mg}. The proton's high energy wave function

1441: consists of many sea partons which may serve as color charge sources

1442: for the classical field similar to nucleons in the nuclear case

1443: \cite{mv,JKLW,bal}. We have derived a simplified expression for the distribution of

1444: \eq{aasol} which is given in \eq{dist2}. We have demonstrated that the

1445: distribution is finite in the soft transverse momentum region

1446: (\eq{ir}) and approaches the usual perturbative result when the

1447: transverse momentum becomes large (\eq{uv}). We have shown that the

1448: typical transverse momentum of the produced gluons in the collision of

1449: two identical nuclei is of the order of the saturation scale $Q_s$

1450: (\eq{typkn}). Finally we have observed that the total number of the

1451: produced gluons is proportional to the total number of the gluons in

1452: the nuclear wave function with the proportionality coefficient $c = 2

1453: \ln 2$ (\eq{coef}).

1454: 

1455: 

1456: \section*{Acknowledgements}

1457: 

1458: I would like to thank Ian Balitsky, Larry McLerran, Jerry Miller, Al

1459: Mueller and Raju Venugopalan for many informative discussions on the

1460: subject. This work has been supported in part by the U.S. Department

1461: of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG03-97ER41014.

1462: 

1463: 

1464: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

1465: 

1466: \bibitem{pho}

1467: PHOBOS Collaboration, B.B. Back et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 85}, 3100 (2000). 

1468: 

1469: \bibitem{star}

1470: STAR Collaboration, K.H. Ackermann et al., Report No. nucl-ex/0009011. 

1471: 

1472: \bibitem{qgp}

1473: E.V. Shuryak, Phys. Lett. {\bf B78}, 150 (1978); L.D. McLerran,

1474: B. Svetitsky, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 24}, 450 (1981).

1475: 

1476: \bibitem{gmgw} 

1477: K. \ Geiger, Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 104}, 70 (1997); K.\ Geiger and

1478: B.\ M\"uller, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B369}, 600 (1992); \\ X.N.\ Wang and

1479: M.\ Gyulassy, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 44}, 3501 (1991); Phys.\ Rev.\ D

1480: {\bf 45}, 844 (1992); Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 68}, 1480 (1992);

1481: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 282}, 466 (1992); Comp.\ Phys.\ Comm.\ {\bf 83},

1482: 307 (1994); B. Zhang, Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 109}, 193 (1998).

1483: 

1484: \bibitem{dg}

1485: A. Dumitru, M. Gyulassy, Report No. hep-ph/0006257; J. Bjoraker,

1486: R. Venugopalan, Report No. hep-ph/0008294 and references therein.

1487: 

1488: \bibitem{bmss} 

1489: R. Baier, A.H. Mueller, D. Schiff, D.T. Son, Report No. hep-ph/0009237.

1490: 

1491: \bibitem{Mueller2}

1492: A.H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B572}, 227 (2000). 

1493: 

1494: \bibitem{coll}

1495: J. P. Blaizot, A. H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 289}, 847 (1987);

1496: K. J. Eskola, K. Kajantie, and J. Lindfors,  Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 323}, 37 (1989).

1497: 

1498: \bibitem{coll2}

1499: K. J. Eskola, V.J. Kolhinen, and P.V. Ruuskanen, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B

1500: 535}, 351 (1998); K.J. Eskola, V.J. Kolhinen, C.A. Salgado,

1501: Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C9}, 61 (1999); N. Hammon, H. Stocker, W. Greiner,

1502: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 61}, 014901 (2000).

1503: 

1504: \bibitem {mv} 

1505: L.\ McLerran and R.\ Venugopalan, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 49}, 2233

1506: (1994); {\bf 49}, 3352 (1994); {\bf 50}, 2225 (1994).

1507: 

1508: \bibitem{GLR} 

1509: L.V.\ Gribov, E.M.\ Levin, and M.G.\ Ryskin, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B188},

1510: 555 (1981); Phys.\ Reports {\bf 100}, 1 (1983); A.H. Mueller,

1511: J.-W. Qiu, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B268}, 427 (1986).

1512: 

1513: \bibitem{M3}

1514: A.H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B335}, 115 (1990). 

1515: 

1516: \bibitem{bdmps} 

1517: R. Baier, Yu.L. Dokshitzer, A.H. Mueller, S. Peigne, D. Schiff,

1518: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B484}, 265 (1997); 

1519: 

1520: \bibitem{BFKL}

1521: E.A. Kuraev, L.N. Lipatov and V.S. Fadin, {\em Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf

1522: 45}, 199 (1977); Ya.Ya. Balitsky and L.N. Lipatov, {\em Sov. J. Nucl.

1523: Phys.} {\bf 28}, 22 (1978).

1524: 

1525: \bibitem{me} 

1526: Yu.V.\ Kovchegov, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54}, 5463 (1996).

1527: 

1528: \bibitem {jklw} 

1529: J.\ Jalilian-Marian, A.\ Kovner, L.\ McLerran, and 

1530: H.\ Weigert, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 55},5414 (1997). 

1531: 

1532: \bibitem{meM}

1533: Yu. V. Kovchegov, A.H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B529}, 451 (1998). 

1534: 

1535: \bibitem{me2} 

1536: Yu.V.\ Kovchegov, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 55}, 5445 (1997).

1537: 

1538: \bibitem{JKLW} J. Jalilian-Marian, A. Kovner, A. Leonidov, and H.

1539:   Weigert, Nucl. \ Phys. {\bf B 504}, 415 (1997); Phys.\ Rev. {\bf D

1540:     59} 014014 (1999); Phys. Rev. {\bf D59}, 034007 (1999); J.

1541:   Jalilian-Marian, A. Kovner, and H.  Weigert, Phys.\ Rev. {\bf D 59}

1542:   014015 (1999).

1543: 

1544: \bibitem{lks} 

1545: R. Kirschner, L.N. Lipatov, L. Szymanowski, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B425}, 579 (1994). 

1546: 

1547: \bibitem{bal}

1548: I. I. Balitsky, Report No. hep-ph/9706411; Nucl. Phys. {\bf B463}, 99 (1996).

1549: 

1550: \bibitem{dip}

1551: A.H.\ Mueller, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B415}, 373 (1994); A.H.\ Mueller and

1552: B. Patel, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B425}, 471 (1994); A.H.\ Mueller, Nucl.\

1553: Phys.\ {\bf B437}, 107 (1995); Z.\ Chen, A.H.\ Mueller, Nucl.\ Phys.\

1554: {\bf B451}, 579 (1995).

1555: 

1556: \bibitem{mme} 

1557: Yu. V. Kovchegov, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 60}, 034008 (1999); D {\bf 61},

1558: 074018 (2000).

1559: 

1560: \bibitem{cons}

1561: A. Kovner, J. G. Milhano, H. Weigert, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 62},

1562: 114005 (2000); E. Iancu, A. Leonidov, L. McLerran, in preparation.

1563: 

1564: \bibitem{M4}

1565: A.H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B558}, 285 (1999).  

1566: 

1567: \bibitem{klm}

1568: Yu. V. Kovchegov, E. Levin, L. McLerran, Report No. hep-ph/9912367. 

1569: 

1570: \bibitem {kmw} 

1571: A.\ Kovner, L.\ McLerran, and H.\ Weigert, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf

1572: 52}, 6231 (1995); {\bf 52}, 3809 (1995).

1573: 

1574: \bibitem{med}

1575: Yu.V.\ Kovchegov, D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 56}, 1084 (1997). 

1576: 

1577: \bibitem{mg}

1578: M. Gyulassy, L. McLerran, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 56}, 2219 (1997). 

1579: 

1580: \bibitem{gb} 

1581: J.F.\ Gunion and G.\ Bertsch, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 25}, 746

1582: (1982).

1583: 

1584: \bibitem{kv} A. Krasnitz, R. Venugopalan, Report No. hep-ph/0007108; 

1585: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 4309 (2000); Nucl. Phys. {\bf B557}, 237 (1999).   

1586: 

1587: \bibitem{ekrt}

1588: K.J. Eskola, K. Kajantie, P.V. Ruuskanen, K. Tuominen,

1589: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B570}, 379 (2000).

1590: 

1591: \bibitem{Mueller1}

1592: A.H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B307}, 34 (1988).

1593: 

1594: \bibitem{bl}

1595: S.J. Brodsky, G.P. Lepage, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 22}, 2157 (1980).

1596: 

1597: \bibitem{kst}

1598: B. Z. Kopeliovich, A. Schafer, A. V. Tarasov, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 62},

1599: 054022 (2000); B. Z. Kopeliovich, I.K. Potashnikova, B. Povh,

1600: E. Predazzi, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 85}, 507 (2000).

1601: 

1602: 

1603: 

1604: 

1605: \end{thebibliography}

1606: 

1607: \end{document}

1608: