1: \documentstyle[buckow,graphicx]{article}
2:
3: % put your own definitions here:
4: % \newcommand{\cZ}{\cal{Z}}
5: % ...
6: \newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134}
7: \newcommand{\AmS}{{\protect\the\textfont2
8: A\kern-.1667em\lower.5ex\hbox{M}\kern-.125emS}}
9:
10: % add words to TeX's hyphenation exception list
11: \hyphenation{author another created financial paper re-commend-ed Post-Script}
12:
13: \begin {document}
14:
15:
16: \def\titleline{
17: {\vskip-2.0cm\hfill\small hep-ph/0112269, TIFR/TH/01-50\vskip1.5cm }
18: Quark number susceptibilities from lattice QCD\footnote{Based on work done
19: \cite{qsus,fsus} with Sourendu Gupta and Pushan Majumdar.}
20: }
21:
22: \def\authors{Rajiv V. Gavai}
23:
24: \def\addresses{
25: Department of Theoretical Physics \\
26: Tata Institute of Fundamental Research \\
27: Homi Bhabha Road, Mumbai 400 005, India \\
28: {\tt E-mail: gavai@tifr.res.in}
29: }
30:
31:
32:
33: \def\abstracttext{
34: Results from our recent investigations of quark number susceptibilities
35: in both quenched and 2-flavour QCD are presented as a function of valence quark
36: mass and temperature. A strong reduction ($\sim$40\%) is seen in the strange
37: quark susceptibility above $T_c$ in both the cases. A comparison of our isospin
38: susceptibility results with the corresponding weak coupling expansion reveals
39: once again the non-perturbative nature of the plasma up to $3T_c$. Evidence
40: relating the susceptibility to another non-perturbative phenomena,
41: pionic screening lengths, is presented.}
42:
43: \large
44: \makefront
45:
46: \section{Introduction}
47:
48: Quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is the theory of interactions of quarks and gluons
49: which are the basic constituents of strongly interacting particles such as
50: protons, neutrons and pions. A complete lack of any experimental observation
51: of a free quark or gluon led to the hypothesis of their permanent confinement
52: in the observable particles. As pointed out by Satz \cite{satz} in his talk,
53: relativistic heavy ion collision experiments at BNL, New York, and CERN, Geneva
54: offer the possibility of counting the number of degrees of freedom of strongly
55: interacting matter at high temperatures, thereby providing a strong argument
56: for Heisenberg to accept the physical reality of quarks and gluons in spite of
57: their confinement at lower temperatures. The basic idea here is to look for
58: the production of quark-gluon plasma (QGP), predicted by QCD to exist beyond a
59: transition temperature $T_c$, in the heavy ion collisions and when found,
60: determine its thermodynamical properties, such as, {\it e.g.}, its energy
61: density. At very high temperatures, these properties can be computed
62: theoretically and are seen to be directly proportional to the number of quarks
63: and gluons. In order to test this idea, however, one has to face the fact that
64: the temperatures reached in the current, and near future, experiments are
65: likely to lie below about 5-10 $T_c$. The current best theoretical estimates
66: for thermodynamic observables in this temperature range are provided by
67: numerical simulations of QCD defined on a discrete space-time lattice
68: \cite{creutz}. It seems therefore prudent to evaluate as many independent
69: observables as possible and compare them with both experiments and approximate
70: analytical methods. Quark number susceptibilities constitute a useful
71: independent set of observables for testing this basic idea of counting the
72: degrees of freedom of strongly interacting matter.
73:
74: Investigations of quark number susceptibilities from first principles can have
75: direct experimental consequences as well since quark flavours such as electric
76: charge, strangeness or baryon number can provide diagnostic tools for the
77: production of flavourless quark-gluon plasma in the central region of heavy
78: ion collisions. It has been pointed out recently \cite{bm,vk} on the basis of
79: simple models for the hadronic and QGP phases that the fluctuations of such
80: conserved charges can be very different in these two phases and thus can act as
81: probes of quark deconfinement. Indeed, excess strangeness production has been
82: suggested as a signal of quark-gluon plasma almost two decades ago \cite{jrbm}.
83: Lattice QCD can provide a very reliable and robust estimate for these
84: quantities in {\em both} the phases since in thermal equilibrium they are
85: related to corresponding susceptibilities by the fluctuation-dissipation
86: theorem:
87: \begin{equation}
88: \langle \delta Q^2 \rangle \propto {T \over V} {{\partial^2 \log Z} \over
89: \partial \mu_Q^2 } = \chi_Q(T, \mu_Q=0) ~.
90: \label{flds}
91: \end{equation}
92: Here $\mu_Q$ is the chemical potential for a conserved charge $Q$, and $Z$ is
93: the partition function of strongly interacting matter in volume $V$ at
94: temperature $T$. Unfortunately, the fermion determinant in QCD becomes complex
95: for any nonzero chemical potential for most quantum numbers including those
96: mentioned above. Consequently, Lattice QCD is unable to handle finite chemical
97: potential satisfactorily at present, and cannot thus yield any reliable
98: estimates of any number density. However, the susceptibility above, i.e., the
99: first derivative of the number density at zero chemical potential, can be
100: obtained reasonably well using conventional simulation techniques,
101: facilitating thereby a nontrivial extension of our theoretical knowledge
102: in the nonzero chemical potential direction.
103:
104:
105: Quark number susceptibilities also constitute an independent set of observables
106: to probe whether quark-gluon plasma is weakly coupled in the temperature regime
107: accessible to the current and future planned heavy ion experiments (say, 1 $
108: \le T/T_c \le $ 10). A lot of the phenomenological analysis of the heavy ion
109: collisions data is usually carried out assuming a weakly interacting plasma
110: although many lattice QCD results suggest otherwise. It has been suggested
111: \cite{resum} that resummations of the finite temperature perturbation theory
112: may provide a bridge between phenomenology and the lattice QCD by explaining
113: the lattice results starting from a few $T_c$. As we will see below, quark
114: number susceptibilities can act as a cross-check of the various resummation
115: schemes. Earlier work on susceptibilities \cite{rly} did not attempt to
116: address this issue and were mostly restricted to temperatures very close to
117: $T_c$. Furthermore, the quark mass was chosen there to vary with temperature
118: linearly. We improve upon them by holding quark mass fixed in physical units
119: ($m/T_c$ = constant). We also cover a larger range of temperature up to 3
120: $T_c$ and the accepted range of strange quark mass in our simulations.
121:
122:
123: \section{Formalism}
124:
125: After integrating the quarks out, the partition function $Z$ for QCD at finite
126: temperature and density is given by
127: \begin{equation}
128: Z = \int{\cal D}U {\rm e}^{-S_g}
129: \det M(m_u,\mu_u)\det M(m_d,\mu_d)\det M(m_s,\mu_s).
130: \label{zqcd}
131: \end{equation}
132: Here $\{U_\nu(x)\}$, $\nu$ = 0--3, denote the gauge variables and $S_g$ is the
133: gluon action, taken to be the standard \cite{creutz} Wilson action in our
134: simulations. Due to the well-known ``fermion doubling problem'' \cite{creutz},
135: one has to face the choice of fermion action with either exact chiral symmetry
136: or violations of flavour symmetry. The Dirac matrices $M$ depend on this
137: choice. Since we employ staggered fermions, the matrices, $M$, are of
138: dimensions 3$N_s^3 N_t$, with $N_s(N_t)$ denoting the number of lattice sites
139: in spatial(temporal) direction. These fermions preserve some chiral symmetry at
140: the expense of flavour violation. Although, they are strictly defined for four
141: flavours, a prescription exists to employ them for arbitrary number of flavours
142: which we shall use. $m_f$ and $\mu_f$ are quark mass and chemical potential
143: (both in lattice units) for flavour $f$, denoting up(u), down(d), and
144: strange(s) in eq.(\ref{zqcd}). The chemical potential needs to be introduced
145: on lattice as a function $g(\mu)$ and $g(-\mu)$ multiplying the gauge variables
146: in the positive and negative time directions respectively, such that
147: \cite{chem} i) $g(\mu) \cdot g(-\mu)$ = 1 and ii) the correct continuum limit
148: is ensured. While many such functions $g$ can be constructed, $\exp(\mu)$
149: being a popular choice, the results for susceptibilities at $\mu=0$ can easily
150: be shown to be independent of the choice of $g$ even for finite lattice spacing
151: $a$. From the $Z$ in eq. (\ref{zqcd}), the quark number densities and the
152: corresponding susceptibilities are defined as
153: \begin{equation}
154: n_f \equiv \frac{T}{V}\frac{\partial\ln Z}{\partial\mu_f} \qquad
155: % = \frac{T}{V}
156: % \left\langle{\rm tr} M_f^{-1} M_f'\right\rangle, \qquad
157: \chi_{ff'} \equiv \frac{\partial n_f}{\partial \mu_{f'}}
158: = \frac{T}{V}
159: \left[\frac1Z\frac{\partial^2Z}{\partial\mu_f\partial\mu_{f'}}
160: -\frac1Z\frac{\partial Z}{\partial\mu_f}\,
161: \frac1Z\frac{\partial Z}{\partial\mu_{f'}}\right]~,
162: \label{incomplete}
163: \end{equation}
164: where the volume $V = N_s^3 a^3$ and the temperature $T = (N_t a)^{-1}$.
165: To lighten the notation, we shall put
166: only one subscript on the diagonal parts of $\chi$.
167:
168: In order to obtain information for quark-gluon plasma in the central region,
169: we evaluate the susceptibilities at the point $\mu_f=0$ for all $f$. In this
170: case, each $n_f$ vanishes, a fact that we utilize as a check on our numerical
171: evaluation. Moreover, the product of the single derivative terms in eq.\
172: (\ref{incomplete}) vanishes, since each is proportional to a number density.
173: We set $m_u=m_d<m_s$. Noting that staggered quarks have four flavours by
174: default, $N_f=4$, and defining $\mu_3 = \mu_u - \mu_d$, one finds from eq.
175: (\ref{incomplete}) that the isotriplet and strangeness susceptibilities are
176: given by
177: \begin{equation}
178: \chi_3 = {T \over 2V} {\cal O}_1(m_u), \qquad
179: \chi_s = {T \over 4V} [{\cal O}_1(m_s) + {1 \over 4} {\cal O}_2(m_s)]~,~
180: \label{susc}
181: \end{equation}
182: where ${\cal O}_1 = \langle {\rm Tr} (M''M^{-1} - M'M^{-1}M'M^{-1}) \rangle$,
183: ${\cal O}_2 = \langle ({\rm Tr} M'M^{-1})^2 \rangle$,
184: $M'=\partial M/\partial\mu$ and $M''=\partial^2 M/\partial\mu^2$.
185: The angular brackets denote averaging with respect to the $Z$ in
186: eq. ({\ref{zqcd}). One can similarly define
187: baryon number and charge susceptibilities. We refer the reader for more details
188: on them to Ref. \cite{fsus}.
189:
190: In the discussion above, quark mass appears as an argument of ${\cal O}_i$ and
191: implicitly in the Boltzmann factor of $Z$. Let us denote it by $m_{val}$ and
192: $m_{sea}$ respectively. While the two should ideally be equal, we evaluated
193: the expressions above in steps of improving approximations (and increasing
194: computer costs) by first setting $m_{sea} = \infty $ for all flavours (quenched
195: approximation \cite {qsus}) and then simulating two light dynamical flavours,
196: by setting $m_{sea}/T_c = 0.1$ (2-flavour QCD \cite{fsus}). In each case we
197: varied $m_{val}$ over a wide range to cover both light u,d quarks as well as
198: the heavier strange quark. Details of our simulations as well as the technical
199: information on how the thermal expectation values of ${\cal O}_i$ were
200: evaluated are in Refs. \cite{qsus,fsus}.
201:
202:
203: \section{Results}
204:
205: \begin{figure}[htb]
206: \vspace{-0.5cm}
207: \begin{center}
208: \includegraphics*[width=28pc]{tdep.eps}
209: \vspace{-0.5cm}
210: \caption{$\chi/\chi_{FFT}$ as a function of temperature for various
211: valence quark masses.}
212: \vspace{-0.5cm}
213: \label{fg.sus}
214: \end{center}
215: \end{figure}
216:
217: Based on our tests \cite{qsus} of volume dependence, made by varying $N_s$ from
218: 8 to 16, we chose $N_s =12$, as the susceptibilities differed very little from
219: those obtained on an $N_s=16$ lattice. Choosing $N_t=4$, the temperature is $T
220: = (4a)^{-1}$, where the lattice spacing $a$ depends on the gauge coupling
221: $\beta$. Using the known $\beta_c(N'_t)$ for $N'_t = 6, 8,
222: 12$, where $\beta_c$ is the gauge coupling at which chiral (deconfinement)
223: transition/cross-over takes place for lattices with temporal extent $N'_t$, we
224: obtained results at $T/T_c = N'_t/N_t$ =1.5, 2 and 3 in both the quenched
225: approximation and the 2-flavour QCD. From the existing estimates \cite{tc} of
226: $T_c$ for 2-flavour QCD, one finds that the sea quark mass in our dynamical
227: simulations corresponds to 14-17 MeV. Fig. \ref{fg.sus} shows our results,
228: normalized to the free field values on the same size lattice, $\chi_{FFT}$.
229: These can be computed by setting gauge fields on all links to unity: $U_\nu(x)
230: =1$ for all $\nu$ and $x$. Note that due this choice of our normalization, the
231: overall factor $N_f$ for degenerate flavours cancels out, permitting us to
232: exhibit both $\chi_3$ and $\chi_s$ of eq.(\ref{susc}) on the same scale in Fig.
233: \ref{fg.sus}. The continuous lines in Fig. \ref{fg.sus} were obtained from the
234: interpolation of the data obtained in the quenched approximation (the data are
235: not shown for the sake of clarity), while the results for two light dynamical
236: flavours are shown by the data points. In each case the value of $m_{val}/T_c$
237: is indicated on the left. Due to the fact \cite{fsus} that the contribution of
238: ${\cal O}_2$ to $\chi_s$ turns out to be negligibly small for $T > T_c$,
239: $\chi_3$ and $\chi_s$ appear coincident in Fig. \ref{fg.sus}. For the real
240: world QCD, the low valence quark mass results are relevant for $\chi_3$ and
241: those for moderate valence quark masses are for $\chi_s$.
242:
243: Although $T_c$ differs in the quenched and 2-flavour QCD by a factor of
244: 1.6-1.7, the respective susceptibilities shown in Fig. \ref{fg.sus} as a
245: function of the dimensionless variable $T/T_c$ change by at most 5-10\% for
246: any $m_{val}/T$. Thus the effect of ``unquenching'', i.e., making 2 flavours
247: of quarks (u and d) light enough to include the contribution of the
248: corresponding quark loops, appears to be primarily a change of scale set by
249: $T_c$. Since the strange quark is a lot heavier than the up and down quarks,
250: this suggests further that including its loop contributions, i.e., including a
251: dynamical but heavier strange quark, may not change the results in Fig.
252: \ref{fg.sus} significantly. For a wide range for strange quark mass of 75 to
253: 170 MeV, the strangeness susceptibility can be read off from the shaded region.
254: It is smaller by about 40\% compared to its ideal gas value near $T_c$ and the
255: suppression shows a strong temperature dependence. This has implications for
256: the phenomenology of particle abundances, where an ideal gas model without such
257: a suppression of strangeness is employed and could therefore result in
258: underestimates of the temperatures reached.
259:
260: \begin{figure}[htb]
261: \vspace{-0.5cm}
262: \begin{center}
263: \includegraphics*[angle=270,width=25pc]{pert.ps}
264: \vspace{-0.5cm}
265: \caption{$\chi/\chi_{FFT}$ as a function of $\alpha_s/\pi$ for $N_f$ dynamical
266: massless quarks.}
267: \vspace{-0.5cm}
268: \label{fg.pert}
269: \end{center}
270: \end{figure}
271:
272: For the smallest $m_{val}/T$ and highest temperature we studied, the ratio
273: $\chi/\chi_{FFT}$ in Fig. \ref{fg.sus} is seen to be 0.88 (0.85) for 2-flavour
274: (quenched) QCD, with a mild temperature variation in the large $T$-region.
275: Since its variation with valence quark mass is negligibly small for small
276: $m_{val}/T$, one can assume the results for massless valence quarks to be
277: essentially the same as those for $m_{val}/T =0.03$ in Fig. \ref{fg.sus}. In
278: order to check whether the degrees of freedom of QGP can really be counted
279: using these susceptibilities, one needs to know whether the deviation from
280: unity can be explained in ordinary perturbation theory or its improved/resummed
281: versions. Usual weak coupling expansion \cite{jk} yields $\chi/\chi_{FFT} = 1
282: - 2{\alpha_s \over \pi} [1 - 4 \sqrt{{\alpha_s \over \pi}(1 + {N_f \over
283: 6})}]$. Fig. \ref{fg.pert} shows these predictions for various $N_f$ along
284: with the leading order $N_f$-independent prediction. Using a scale $2\pi T$
285: for the running coupling and $T_c/\Lambda_{\overline{MS}} = 0.49 (1.15)$ for
286: the $N_f = 2(0)$ theory \cite{tc}, the values $T/T_c$ =1.5 and 3 are marked on
287: the figure as the second (first) set. As one can read off from the Fig.
288: \ref{fg.pert}, the ratio decreases with temperature in {\it both} the cases in
289: the range up to 3$T_c$ whereas our results in Fig. \ref{fg.sus} display an
290: increase. Furthermore, the perturbative results
291: \begin{figure}[htb]
292: \vspace{-0.5cm}
293: \begin{center}
294: \includegraphics*[width=28pc]{isopi.eps}
295: \vspace{-0.5cm}
296: \caption{$4\chi_3/T^2$ (open symbols) and $\chi_\pi/10T^2$ (filled symbols)
297: as a function of $M_\pi/T$ at $2T_c$ (circles) and $3T_c$ (boxes).}
298: \vspace{-0.5cm}
299: \label{fg.pi}
300: \end{center}
301: \end{figure}
302: lie significantly above in
303: each case, being in the range 1.027--1.08 for 2-flavour QCD and 0.986--0.994
304: for quenched QCD. Although the order of magnitude of the degrees of freedom
305: can be gauged from these results and their eventual comparison with
306: experiments, they do call for clever resummations of perturbation theory for a
307: more convincing and precise count.
308:
309: Alternatively, the deviations from free field theory could stem from
310: non-perturbative physics. One known indicator of non-perturbative physics in
311: the plasma phase is the screening length in the channel with quantum numbers of
312: pion. While it exhibits chiral symmetry restoration above $T_c$ by being
313: degenerate with the corresponding scalar screening length, its value is known
314: to be much smaller than the free field value unlike that for other screening
315: lengths. Fig. \ref{fg.pi} shows our results for $\chi_3$ and $\chi_\pi$
316: (defined as a sum of the pion correlator over the entire lattice) as a function
317: of the inverse pionic screening length, $M_\pi/T$. It suggests the
318: non-perturbative physics in the two cases to be closely related, if not
319: identical.
320:
321: \section{Acknowledgments}
322: It is a pleasure to thank my collaborators Sourendu Gupta and Pushan Majumdar.
323: I am also thankful to the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation for organizing
324: this wonderful symposium in its characteristic perfect style. It is a delight to
325: acknowledge the warm hospitality of the Physics Department of the University of
326: Bielefeld, especially that from Profs. Frithjof Karsch and Helmut Satz.
327:
328:
329: \begin{thebibliography}{9}
330: \bibitem{qsus} R. V. Gavai and S. Gupta, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 64} (2001) 074506.
331: \bibitem{fsus} Rajiv V. Gavai, Sourendu Gupta and Pushan Majumdar,
332: {\tt hep-lat/0110032}, Phys. Rev. {\bf D}, in press.
333: \bibitem{satz} H. Satz, in these proceedings.
334: \bibitem{creutz} M. Creutz, {\sl ``Quarks, Gluons and Lattices''\/}, 1985,
335: Cambridge University Press.
336: \bibitem{bm} M. Asakawa, U. W. Heinz, and B. M\"uller, Phys. Rev. Lett.
337: {\bf 85} (2000) 2072.
338: \bibitem{vk} S. Jeon and V. Koch, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 85} (2000) 2076.
339: \bibitem{jrbm}J. Rafelski and B. M\"uller, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 46}
340: (1982) 1066; erratum-ibid {\bf 56} (1986) 2334.
341: \bibitem{resum}
342: J. P. Blaizot {\sl et al.\/}, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 63} (2001) 065003;
343: J. O. Andersen {\sl et al.\/}, Phys. Rev.{\bf D 63} (2001) 105008;
344: K. Kajantie {\sl et al.\/}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 86} (2001) 10.
345: \bibitem{rly}
346: S. Gottlieb {\sl et al.\/}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 59} (1987) 1513;
347: R. V. Gavai {\sl et al.\/}, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 40} (1989) 2743;
348: S. Gottlieb {\sl et al.\/}, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 55} (1997) 6852.
349: \bibitem{chem}
350: R. V. Gavai, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 32} (1985) 519.
351: \bibitem{tc}
352: A. Ali Khan {\sl et al.\/}, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 63} (2001) 034502;
353: F. Karsch {\sl et al.\/}, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 605} (2001) 579;
354: S. Gupta, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 64} (2001) 034507.
355: \bibitem{jk}
356: J. I. Kapusta, {\sl ``Finite-temperature Field Theory''\/}, 1989,
357: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 132-133.
358: \end{thebibliography}
359:
360: \end{document}
361: