1:
2: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{article}
3: \usepackage{amsmath}
4: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
5: \input epsf
6: \usepackage{times}
7: \begin{document}
8: \begin{titlepage}
9: \title{Transient state of matter in hadron and nucleus collisions}
10: \author{S.M. Troshin,
11: N.E. Tyurin\\[1ex]
12: \small \it Institute for High Energy Physics,\\
13: \small \it Protvino, Moscow Region, 142281, Russia}
14: \normalsize
15: \date{}
16: \maketitle
17:
18: \begin{abstract}
19: We discuss properties of the specific strongly interacting
20: transient collective state of matter in hadron and nuclei
21: reactions and emphasize similarity in their dynamics. We consider
22: elliptic flow introduced for description of nucleus collisions
23: and discuss its possible behavior in hadronic reactions due to rotation
24: of the transient matter.
25: \\[2ex]
26: PACS: 12.38.Mh, 21.60.Ev\\
27: Keywords: transient state,
28: hadron interactions, collective effects of rotation,
29: elliptic flow
30:
31:
32:
33: \end{abstract}
34: \end{titlepage}
35: \setcounter{page}{2}
36:
37: \section*{Introduction}
38: Multiparticle production in hadron and nucleus collisions and
39: corresponding observables provide a clue to the mechanisms of
40: confinement and hadronization. Discovery of the deconfined state
41: of matter has been announced by four major experiments at RHIC
42: \cite{rhic}. Despite the highest values of energy and density have
43: been reached, a genuine quark-gluon plasma QGP (gas of the free
44: current quarks and gluons) was not found. The deconfined state
45: reveals the properties of the perfect liquid, being strongly
46: interacting collective state and therefore it was labelled as sQGP
47: \cite{denteria}. These results immediately have became a subject
48: for an active theoretical studies. The nature of this new form of
49: matter is not known and the variety of models has been proposed to
50: treat its properties \cite{models}. The importance of this result
51: is that the matter is still strongly correlated
52: and reveals high degree of the coherence when it is
53: well beyond the critical values of density and
54: temperature. The elliptic flow and constituent quark scaling of the
55: observable $v_2$ demonstrated an importance of the constituent quarks
56: \cite{volosh} and their role as
57: effective degrees of freedom of the newly discovered form of matter.
58: Generally speaking this result has shown an importance of the nonperturbative
59: effects in the region where such effects were not expected.
60: Review paper which provides
61: an emphasis on the historical aspects of the QGP searches was published in \cite{weiner}.
62: The important conclusion made in this paper is that the deconfined state
63: of matter has already been observed in hadronic reactions and it would be interesting
64: to study collective properties of transient state in reactions with hadrons and nuclei
65: simultaneously.
66:
67: In this paper we also note that the behavior of collective observables
68: in hadronic and nuclear
69: reactions could have similarities. We discuss the role of the coherent rotation
70: of the transient matter in hadron and nuclei reactions and dependence of the anisotropic
71: flows.
72:
73: \section{Experimental probes of collective dynamics. Constituent quark scaling.}
74:
75: There are several experimental probes of collective dynamics in
76: $AA$ interactions \cite{voloshin,molnar}. A most widely discussed one
77: is the elliptic flow
78: \begin{equation}\label{v2}
79: v_2(p_\perp)\equiv \langle \cos(2\phi)\rangle_{p_\perp}=\langle \frac{p_x^2-p_y^2}{p_\perp^2}\rangle,
80: \end{equation}
81: which is the second Fourier moment of the azimuthal momentum distribution of particles
82: at fixed value of $p_\perp$.
83: The common origin of the elliptic flow is considered to be an almond shape of
84: the overlap region of the two spherically symmetrical colliding
85: nuclei and strong interaction in this region. The azimuthal angle $\phi$ is
86: the angle of the detected particle with respect to the reaction
87: plane, which is spanned by the collision axis $z$ and the impact parameter vector $\mathbf b$. The impact
88: parameter vector $\mathbf b$ is directed along the $x$ axis. Averaging is taken over large number
89: of the events. Elliptic flow can be expressed in covariant form in
90: terms of the impact parameter and transverse momentum
91: correlations as follows
92: \begin{equation}\label{v2a}
93: v_2(p_\perp)=\langle \frac{(\hat{\mathbf b}\cdot {\mathbf p}_\perp)^2}{p_\perp^2}\rangle-
94: \langle\frac{(\hat{\mathbf b}\times {\mathbf p}_\perp)^2}{p_\perp^2}\rangle ,
95: \end{equation}
96: where $\hat{\mathbf b}\equiv \mathbf b /b$. In more general
97: terms, the momentum anisotropy $v_n$ can be characterized
98: according
99: to the Fourier expansion of the freeze-out source distribution \cite{molnar}:
100: \begin{equation}\label{sor}
101: S(x,\mathbf{p}_\perp,y)\equiv dN/d^4xd^2p_\perp dy
102: \end{equation}
103: in terms of the momentum azimuthal angle.
104:
105: The observed elliptic flow $v_2$ is the weighted
106: average of $v_2(x,p_\perp,y)$ defined in the infinitesimal spacetime volume $d^4x$.
107: Common explanation of the dynamical origin of elliptic flow is the strong scattering during the early
108: stage of interaction in the overlap region.
109:
110: There is an extensive set of the experimental data for the elliptic flow $v_2$
111: in nucleus-nucleus collisions (see for the recent review, e.g. \cite{lacey}).
112: Integrated elliptic flow $v_2$ has a nontrivial dependence on $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$:
113: at low energies it demonstrates sign-changing behavior, while at high energies
114: $v_2$ is positive and increases with $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ linearly.
115:
116: The differential elliptic flow $v_2(p_\perp)$ increases with $p_\perp$
117: at small values of transverse
118: momenta, then it becomes flatten in the region of the intermediate transverse
119: momenta and decreases at large $p_\perp$, but to a non-zero value. The magnitude
120: of $v_2$ in the region of intermediate $p_\perp$ is rather high at RHIC
121: and has a value about $0.2$ close to hydrodynamical limit \cite{lacey} indicating
122: presence of order and pair correlations relevant for the liquid phase. The increase
123: of elliptic flow at small transverse momenta is in a good agreement with hydrodinamical
124: model while the experimental data deviate from this model at higher values of transverse
125: momenta \cite{hydro}.
126:
127:
128: An interesting property
129: of the differential elliptic flow $v_2(p_\perp)$ in $AA$-collisions --- the constituent
130: quark scaling \cite{volosh}. We discuss
131: it in a some detail now. The scaling occurs if hadronization mechanism
132: goes via coalescence of the constituent quarks and it is expressed as an approximate relation
133: $v_2(p_\perp)\simeq n_Vv_2(p_\perp/n_V)$, where $n_V$ is the number of the valence constituent quarks
134: in the hadron. This scaling takes place in the region of the intermediate transverse
135: momenta and reveals important role of constituent quarks in the deconfined phase
136: reached in nucleus collisions \cite{eremin}. The quantity $v_2/n_V$ can be interpreted
137: as an elliptic flow of a constituent quark $v^{Q}_{2}$. It increases with transverse
138: momentum in the region $0 \leq p^{Q}_{\perp} \leq 1$ $GeV/c$ and with a rather
139: good accuracy does not depend on $p^{Q}_{\perp}$
140: at $p^{Q}_{\perp}\geq 1$ $GeV/c$.
141:
142: In the following section we will discuss energy and transverse momentum dependencies of $v_2$
143: in hadron collisions at
144: fixed impact parameters and extend this consideration for nucleus
145: collisions with emphasis on the similarity of the transient states in hadron
146: and nucleus collisions. We consider non-central hadron collisions
147: and apply notions acquired from heavy-ion studies. It is reasonable to do so in the framework
148: of the constituent quark model picture for hadron structure where hadrons look similar to the
149: light nuclei. In particular, we amend the model \cite{csn} for hadron interactions based on the chiral quark
150: model ideas and consider the effect of collective rotation of the quark matter in the overlap region.
151: All that was said above might have a particular interest under studies of hadron collisions in the new
152: few TeV energy region where number of secondary particles will increase
153: significantly indicating importance of collective effects.
154:
155:
156:
157:
158: \section{Transient state of matter in hadron collisions}
159: In principle, the geometrical picture of hadron collision is in complete analogy
160: with nucleus collisions and we believe that the assumption \cite{polvol} on the possibility to
161: determine reaction plane in the non-central hadronic collisions can be
162: justified experimentally and the standard procedure\cite{poskanz} can be used.
163: It would be useful to perform the measurements of the characteristics of
164: multiparticle production processes in hadronic collisions
165: at fixed impact parameter by selecting
166: specific events sensitive to its value and direction.
167: The relationship of the impact parameter with the
168: final state multiplicity is a useful tool in these studies similar to the studies
169: of the nuclei interactions, e.g in the Chou-Yang approach \cite{chyn} one can restore the
170: values of impact parameter from the charged particle multiplicity
171: \cite{chmult}.
172: Thus, the impact parameter can be determined through
173: the centrality \cite{bron} and then, e.g. elliptic flow, can be analyzed selecting events
174: in a specific centrality ranges. Indeed, in the work \cite{bron} the following relation
175: \begin{equation}\label{cent}
176: c(N)\simeq \frac{\pi b^2(N)}{\sigma_{inel}},
177: \end{equation}
178: for the values of the impact parameter $b< \bar{R}$ can be
179: extended straightforwardly to the case of hadron scattering.
180: Then we should consider $\bar{R}$ as a sum of the two radii of colliding hadrons
181: and $\sigma_{inel}$ as the total inelastic hadron-hadron cross--section. The centrality
182: $c(N)$ is the centrality of the events with the multiplicity larger than $N$ and $b(N)$ is
183: the impact parameter where the mean multiplicity $\bar n (b)$ is equal to $N$.
184: The centrality can be determined by the fraction of the events with the largest number of
185: produced particles which are registered by detectors \cite{bron,antinori}.
186:
187: Of course, the standard inclusive cross-section for unpolarized
188: particles being integrated over impact parameter $\mathbf b $,
189: cannot depend on the azimuthal angle of the detected particle
190: transverse momentum. We need to be a more specific at this
191: point and consider for discussion of the azimuthal angle dependence
192: some particular form for the inclusive
193: cross-section.
194: For example, with account for
195: $s$--channel unitarity inclusive cross-section can be written in the following form
196: \begin{equation}
197: \frac{d\sigma}{d\xi}= 8\pi\int_0^\infty
198: bdb\frac{I(s,b,\xi)}{|1-iU(s,b)|^2}\label{unp}.
199: \end{equation}
200: Here the function $U(s,b)$ is similar to an input Born amplitude and
201: related to the elastic scattering scattering amplitude through an algebraic
202: equation which enables one to restore unitarity \cite{umat}. The set of kinematic variables denoted
203: by $\xi$ describes the state of the detected particle.
204: This function is constructed from the multiparticle analogs $U_n$ of the function $U$
205: and is in fact an
206: inclusive cross-section in the impact parameter space without account for the unitarity corrections, which
207: are given by the factor
208: \[
209: w(s,b)\equiv |1-iU(s,b)|^{-2}
210: \]
211: in Eq. (\ref{unp}).
212: Unitarity, as it will be evident from the following, modifies anisotropic flow.
213: When the impact parameter vector $ \mathbf {b}$ and transverse momentum ${\mathbf p}_\perp $
214: of the detected particle are fixed,
215: the function $I=\sum_{n \geq 3} I_n$, where $n$ denotes a number of particles in the final state,
216: depends on the azimuthal angle $\phi$ between
217: vectors $ \mathbf b$ and ${\mathbf p}_\perp $.
218: It should be noted that the impact parameter
219: $ \mathbf {b}$ is the variable conjugated to the transferred momentum
220: $ \mathbf {q}\equiv \mathbf {p}'_a-\mathbf {p}_a$ between two incident channels
221: which describe production processes
222: of the same final multiparticle state.
223: The dependence on the azimuthal angle $\phi$ can be written in explicit form through the Fourier
224: series expansion
225: \begin{equation}\label{fr}
226: I(s,\mathbf b, y, {\mathbf p}_\perp)=\frac{1}{2\pi}I_0(s,b,y,p_\perp)[1+
227: \sum_{n=1}^\infty 2\bar v_n(s,b,y,p_\perp)\cos n\phi].
228: \end{equation}
229: The function $I_0(s,b,\xi)$ satisfies to the
230: following sum rule
231: \begin{equation}\label{sumrule}
232: \int I_0(s,b,y,p_\perp) p_\perp d p_\perp dy=\bar n(s,b)\mbox{Im} U(s,b),
233: \end{equation}
234: where $\bar n(s,b)$ is the mean multiplicity depending on impact parameter.
235: Thus, the bare flow $\bar v_n(s,b,y,p_\perp)$ is related to the
236: measured flow $v_n$ as follows
237: \[
238: v_n(s,b,y,p_\perp)=w(s,b)\bar v_n(s,b,y,p_\perp).
239: \]
240: In the above formulas the variable $y$ denotes rapidity, i.e. $y=\sinh^{-1}(p/m)$,
241: where $p$ is a longitudinal momentum.
242: Thus, we can see that unitarity corrections are mostly important
243: at small impact parameters, i.e. they modify flows at small centralities,
244: while peripheral collisions are almost not affected by unitarity.
245: The following limiting behavior of $v_n$ at $b=0$ can be easily obtained:
246: \[
247: v_n(s,b=0, y,p_\perp)\to 0
248: \]
249: at $s\to\infty$ since $U(s,b=0)\to\infty$ in this limit.
250:
251:
252:
253: General considerations demonstrate that we could expect significant
254: values of directed $v_1$ and elliptic $v_2$ flows in hadronic interactions.
255: For example,
256: according to the uncertainty principle we can estimate the value
257: of $p_x$ as $1/\Delta x$ and correspondingly $p_y\sim 1/\Delta y $
258: where $\Delta x$ and $\Delta_y$ characterize the size of the
259: region where the particle originate from. Taking $\Delta x \sim
260: R_x$ and $\Delta_y \sim R_y$, where $R_x$ and $R_y$ characterize
261: the sizes of the almond-like overlap region in transverse plane,
262: we can easily
263: obtain proportionality of $v_2$ to the eccentricity of the overlap
264: region, i.e.
265: \begin{equation}\label{exc}
266: v_2(p_\perp)\sim \frac{R_y^2-R_x^2}{R_x^2+R_y^2}.
267: \end{equation}
268: The presence of correlations of impact parameter vector $\mathbf
269: b$ and $\mathbf p_\perp$ in hadron interactions follows also from the relation between
270: impact parameters in the multiparticle production\cite{webb}:
271: \begin{equation}\label{bi}
272: {\mathbf b}=\sum_i x_i{ \tilde{\mathbf b}_i}.
273: \end{equation}
274: Here $x_i$ stand for Feynman $x_F$ of $i$-th particle, the impact
275: parameters $\tilde {\mathbf b}_i$ are conjugated to the transverse
276: momenta $\tilde {\mathbf p}_{i,\perp}$. Such correlation should be
277: more prominent in the large-$x_F$ (fragmentation) region\footnote{It
278: should be noted that the directed flow
279: $v_1(p_\perp)\equiv \langle \cos \phi \rangle_{p_\perp}=\langle
280: {\hat{\mathbf b}\cdot {\mathbf p}_\perp} /{p_\perp}\rangle
281: $
282: the measurements at RHIC \cite{dir} are in agreement with the above conclusion.}.
283:
284:
285: The above considerations are based on the uncertainty principle and angular momentum
286: conservation, but they do not preclude an existence of the dynamical description in the
287: terms similar to the ones used in heavy-ion collisions, i.e.
288: the underlying dynamics could be the same as the dynamics of the elliptic flow in
289: nuclei collisions and transient state can originate from the
290: nonperturbative sector of QCD.
291:
292: We would like to point out to the possibility that
293: the transient state in both cases can be related to
294: the mechanism of spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking ($\chi$SB) in QCD \cite{bjorken},
295: which leads
296: to the generation of quark masses and appearance of quark condensates. This mechanism describes
297: transition of current into constituent quarks, which are
298: the quasiparticles with masses
299: comparable to a hadron mass scale.
300: The gluon field is responsible for providing quarks
301: masses and internal structure through the instanton
302: mechanism of the spontaneous chiral symmetry
303: breaking \cite{inst}.
304:
305: Collective excitations of the condensate are the Goldstone bosons
306: and the constituent quarks interact via exchange
307: of the Goldstone bosons; this interaction is mainly due to a pion field\cite{diak}.
308: The general form of the effective Lagrangian (${\cal{L}}_{QCD}\rightarrow {\cal{L}}_{eff}$)
309: relevant for
310: description of the non--perturbative phase of QCD proposed in \cite{gold}
311: and includes the three terms \[
312: {\cal{L}}_{eff}={\cal{L}}_\chi +{\cal{L}}_I+{\cal{L}}_C.\label{ef} \]
313: Here ${\cal{L}}_\chi $ is responsible for the spontaneous
314: chiral symmetry breaking and turns on first. To account for the
315: constituent quark interaction and confinement the terms ${\cal{L}}_I$
316: and ${\cal{L}}_C$ are introduced. The ${\cal{L}}_I$ and
317: ${\cal{L}}_C$ do not affect the internal structure of the constituent
318: quarks.
319:
320: The picture of a hadron consisting of constituent quarks embedded
321: into quark condensate implies that overlapping and interaction of
322: peripheral clouds occur at the first stage of hadron interaction.
323: At this stage the part of the effective lagrangian ${\cal{L}}_C$ is turned off
324: (it is turned on again in the final stage of the reaction).
325: Nonlinear field couplings transform then the kinetic energy to
326: internal energy and mechanism of such transformations was discussed
327: by Heisenberg \cite{heis} and Carruthers \cite{carr}.
328: As a result the massive
329: virtual quarks appear in the overlapping region and some effective
330: field is generated. This field is generated by $\bar{Q}Q$ pairs and
331: pions strongly interacting with quarks. Pions themselves are the bound states of massive
332: quarks. This part of interaction is described by ${\cal{L}}_I$ and
333: a possible form of ${\cal{L}}_I$ was discussed in \cite{diakp}.
334:
335: The generation time of the effective field (transient phase) $\Delta t_{eff}$
336: \[
337: \Delta t_{eff}\ll \Delta t_{int},
338: \]
339: where $\Delta t_{int}$ is the total interaction time. This assumption on the almost instantaneous
340: generation of the effective field has obtained support in the very short thermalization time revealed
341: in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC \cite{therm}.
342:
343: Under construction of particular model \cite{csn} for the function
344: $U(s,b)$ it was supposed that the valence quarks located in the
345: central part of a hadron were scattered in a
346: quasi-independent way by the effective field.
347: In accordance with the
348: quasi-independence of valence quarks the basic
349: dynamical quantity is represented in the form of the product \cite{csn} of factors
350: $\langle f_{Q}(s,b)\rangle$ which correspond to the individual quark
351: scattering
352: amplitudes which are integrated over transverse position distribution of $Q$
353: inside its parent hadron
354: and the longitudinal momentum distribution carried by quark $Q$.
355: The integrated amplitude $\langle f_Q(s,b)\rangle $ describes averaged elastic
356: scattering of a single
357: valence quark $Q$ in the effective field, its interaction radius is determined
358: by the quark mass:
359: \begin{equation}\label{rq}
360: R_Q=\xi/m_Q.
361: \end{equation}
362: Factorization in the impact parameter representation reflects the coherence in the valence
363: quark scattering, it corresponds to the simultaneous
364: scattering of valence quarks by the effective field. This mechanism
365: resembles Landshoff mechanism of the simultaneous quark--quark independent
366: scattering \cite{landso}. However, in our case we suppose validity of
367: the Hartree--Fock approximation for the
368: constituent quark scattering in the mean field. Thus, $U$-matrix is a product
369: of the averaged single quark scattering amplitudes, but the resulting $S$-matrix
370: cannot be factorized and therefore the term quasi-independence is relevant.
371: The above picture assumes deconfinement at the initial stage of
372: the hadron collisions and generation of common for both hadrons mean field during the first stage.
373: Those notions were used in the model \cite{csn} which has
374: been applied to description of elastic scattering. Here we will extend them to particle
375: production with account of the geometry of the region where the effective field (quarks interacting
376: by pion exchange) is located and conservation of angular momentum.
377:
378: To estimate the number
379: of scatterers in the effective field one could assume that part of hadron energy carried by
380: the outer condensate clouds is being released in the overlap region
381: to generate massive quarks. Then this number can be estimated by:
382: \begin{equation} \tilde{N}(s,b)\,\propto
383: \,\frac{(1-\langle k_Q\rangle)\sqrt{s}}{m_Q}\;D^{h_1}_c\otimes D^{h_2}_c
384: \equiv N_0(s)D_C(b),
385: \label{Nsbt}
386: \end{equation} where $m_Q$ -- constituent quark mass, $\langle k_Q\rangle $ --
387: average fraction of
388: hadron energy carried by the valence constituent quarks. Function $D^h_c$
389: describes condensate distribution inside the hadron $h$, and $b$ is
390: an impact parameter of the colliding hadrons.
391: In elastic scattering the massive
392: virtual quarks are transient
393: ones: they are transformed back into the condensates of the final
394: hadrons.
395: The overlap region, which described by the function $D_C(b)$,
396: has an ellipsoidal form similar to the overlap region in the nucleus collisions (Fig. 1).
397: \begin{figure}[hbt]
398: \begin{center}
399: \epsfxsize= 70 mm \epsfbox{overlape.eps}
400: \end{center}
401: \caption{Schematic view in frontal plane of the hadron collision as extended objects.
402: Collision occurs along the z-axis.}
403: \end{figure}
404:
405: Valence constituent quarks would excite a part of the cloud of the virtual massive
406: quarks and those
407: quarks will subsequently hadronize and form the multiparticle
408: final state. Existence of the massive quark-antiquark matter in the stage
409: preceding
410: hadronization seems to be
411: supported by the experimental data obtained
412: at CERN SPS and RHIC (see \cite{biro} and references therein)
413:
414:
415: The geometrical picture of hadron collision discussed above
416: implies that the generated massive
417: virtual quarks in overlap region carries large orbital angular momentum
418: at high energies and non-zero impact parameters. The total orbital angular
419: momentum can be estimated
420: as follows
421: \begin{equation}\label{l}
422: L \simeq \alpha b \frac{\sqrt{s}}{2}D_C(b),
423: \end{equation}
424: where parameter $\alpha$ is related to the fraction of the initial energy carried by the condensate
425: clouds which goes to rotation of the quark system.
426: Due to strong interaction
427: between quarks this orbital angular momentum leads to the coherent rotation
428: of the quark system located in the overlap region as a whole in the
429: $xz$-plane (Fig. 2). This rotation is similar to the liquid rotation
430: where strong correlations between particles momenta exist.
431: This point is different from the parton picture used in \cite{wang},
432: where collective rotation of a parton system as a whole
433: was not anticipated.
434: \begin{figure}[hbt]
435: \begin{center}
436: \epsfxsize= 70 mm \epsfbox{rote.eps}
437: \end{center}
438: \caption{Collective rotation of the overlap region, view in the $xz$-plane.}
439: \end{figure}
440: This is a main point of the proposed mechanism of the elliptic flow in hadronic collisions
441: --- collective rotation
442: of the strongly interacting system of massive
443: virtual quarks. Number of the quarks in this system
444: is proportional to $N_0(s)$ and it is natural to expect therefore that the integrated elliptic flow
445: $v_2\propto \sqrt{s}$. Such dependence of $v_2$ is in a good agreement with experimental
446: data for nucleus collisions and this implies already mentioned similarity between hadron and nucleus
447: reactions. The same origin, i.e. proportionality to the quark number in
448: the transient state, has the preasymptotic increase of the total cross-sections \cite{nadol}.
449: \begin{equation}
450: \sigma_{tot}(s)=a+b\sqrt{s}
451: \end{equation}
452: in the region up to $\sqrt{s}\sim 0.5$ $TeV$. At higher energies unitarity transforms
453: such dependence into $\ln^2 s$.
454:
455: We consider now effects of rotation for the differential elliptic flow $v_2(p_\perp)$.
456: We would like to recall that the assumed particle production mechanism is
457: the excitation of a part of the rotating cloud of the virtual massive constituent
458: quarks by the one of the valence constituent quarks with subsequent hadronization.
459:
460: Different
461: mechanisms of the hadronization will be discussed later, and now we will concentrate on
462: the differential elliptic flow $v^Q_2(p_\perp)$ for constituent quarks. It is natural to
463: suppose that the size of the region where the virtual massive quark $Q$ is knocked out from the cloud
464: is determined by its transverse momentum, i.e. $\bar R\simeq 1/p_\perp$. However, it is
465: evident that $\bar R$ cannot be larger than the interaction radius of the valence
466: constituent quark $R_Q$ which
467: interacts with the massive
468: virtual quarks quarks from the cloud.
469: It is also clear that $\bar R$ cannot be less than the geometrical size of the valence constituent
470: quark $r_Q$. The magnitude of the quark interaction radius was
471: obtained under analysis of elastic scattering \cite{csn}
472: and has the following dependence on the valence constituent quark mass in the form (\ref{rq}),
473: where $\xi \simeq 2$ and therefore $R_Q\simeq 1$ $fm$, while the geometrical radius of quark $r_Q$
474: is about $0.2$ $fm$.
475: The size of the region\footnote{For simplicity we suppose that this region has a spherically
476: symmetrical form} which is responsible for the small-$p_\perp$ hadron production is large,
477: valence constituent quark excites rotating cloud of quarks with various values and directions
478: of their momenta in that case. Effect of rotation will be smeared off in the volume $V_{\bar R}$
479: and therefore $\langle \Delta p_x \rangle_{V_{\bar R}} \simeq 0$ (Fig. 3, left panel). Thus,
480: \begin{equation}
481: \label{larg}
482: v^Q_2(p_\perp)\equiv\langle v_2\rangle_{V_{\bar R}}\simeq 0
483: \end{equation}
484: at small $p^Q_\perp$.
485: \begin{figure}[hbt]
486: \begin{center}
487: \epsfxsize= 40 mm \epsfbox{rotle.eps}\,\quad\quad\,
488: \epsfxsize= 40 mm \epsfbox{rotse.eps}
489: \end{center}
490: \caption{Schematic view of the rotation effect in the production of constituent quarks
491: with small $p^Q_\perp$ (left panel) and with large $p^Q_\perp$ (right panel),
492: view in the $xz$-plane.}
493: \end{figure}
494: When we proceed to the region of higher values of $p^Q_\perp$, the radius $\bar R$ is decreasing
495: and the effect of rotation becomes more and more prominent, valence quark excites now the region
496: where most of the quarks move coherently, i.e. in the same direction, with approximately
497: the same velocity
498: (Fig. 3, right panel). The mean value $\langle \Delta p_x \rangle_{V_{\bar R}} > 0$ and
499: \begin{equation}
500: \label{smal}
501: v^Q_2(p_\perp)\equiv\langle v^Q_2\rangle_{V_{\bar R}}> 0
502: \end{equation}
503: and increase with increasing $p_\perp$.
504: However, as is was already mentioned $\bar R$ cannot be smaller than the geometrical radius
505: of constituent quark and therefore the increase of $v^Q_2$ with $p^Q_\perp$ will disappear when
506: $\bar R =r_Q$, i.e. at $p^Q_\perp \geq 1/r_Q$, and saturation will take place.
507: The value of transverse
508: momentum where the saturation starts is about $1$ $GeV/c$ for $r_Q\simeq 0.2$ $fm$.
509: Thus, the qualitative dependence of $v^Q_2(p_\perp)$\footnote{It is worth to note that the subscript
510: $Q$ is used for the incoming constituent quark, while the superscript $Q$ being used for
511: the outgoing constituent quarks} will have a form depicted in Fig. 4.
512: \begin{figure}[hbt]
513: \begin{center}
514: \epsfxsize= 70 mm \epsfbox{v2e.eps}
515: \end{center}
516: \caption{Qualitative dependence of the elliptic flow $v^Q_2$ of constituent quarks
517: on transverse momentum.}
518: \end{figure}
519:
520:
521:
522: Predictions for the elliptic flow for the particular
523: hadron depends on the supposed mechanism of hadronization. For the
524: region of the intermediate values of $p_\perp$ the constituent
525: quark coalescence mechanism \cite{volosh} would be dominating one.
526: In that case values for hadron elliptic flow can be obtained from
527: the constituent quark one by the replacement $v_2\to n_Vv^Q_2$ and
528: $p_\perp\to p^Q_\perp/n_V$.
529:
530: However,
531: the fragmentation mechanism should also be present at small and large
532: transverse momenta, and it will survive at large $p_\perp$.
533: As a possible choice for the fragmentation
534: mechanism, the chiral quark models can be used and it implies that
535: the virtual massive quark $Q$
536: fluctuates into Goldstone boson and
537: another constituent quark $Q'$ \cite{cheng}:
538: \begin{equation}\label{trans}
539: Q\to GB+Q',
540: \end{equation}
541: where $GB$ denotes Goldstone bosons (Fig. 5).
542: \begin{figure}[h]
543: \begin{center}
544: \resizebox{4cm}{!}{\includegraphics*{fre.eps}}
545: \end{center}
546: \caption{Schematical view of the quark fragmentation into $\pi^0$ in the chiral quark models.
547: \label{ts1}}
548: \end{figure}
549:
550: Elliptic flow of the quarks and elliptic flow of the
551: hadron are approximately equal for the fragmentation process . Thus, in the region of the
552: intermediate transverse momenta
553: elliptic flow of quarks will be enhanced due to quark coalescence and at higher
554: transverse momenta the elliptic flow will level off and return to the flat dependence
555: of the quark elliptic flow (Fig. 4).
556:
557:
558: The considered mechanism of particle production has a two-step nature and based on the independent
559: excitation of the rotating cloud by the valence quarks. It would lead therefore to the negative
560: binomial form of the multiplicity distribution
561: \begin{equation}\label{md}
562: P_n=\frac{\Gamma(n+k)}{\Gamma(n+1)\Gamma(k)}\left[\frac{\bar n}{\bar n+k}\right]^n\left[\frac{k}{\bar n+k}\right]^k,
563: \end{equation}
564: where parameter $k=\langle N\rangle $, i.e. it should be interpreted
565: as the averaged over impact parameter number of the active valence quarks (quarks which excite the cloud)
566: at the given high energy:
567: \begin{equation}\label{kp}
568: \langle N\rangle=\frac{\int_0^\infty bdb N(b)\eta(s,b)}{\int_0^\infty bdb \eta(s,b)},
569: \end{equation}
570: where $N(b)$ is the distribution of the quark number over impact parameter and
571: \[
572: \eta(s,b)\equiv\frac{1}{4\pi}\frac{d\sigma_{inel}}{db^2}
573: \]
574: is the inelastic overlap function. Since we adopted hadron structure with the valence constituent
575: quarks in the central part, the function $N(b=0)=N$, where $N=n_{h_1}+n_{h_2}$ is the total number
576: of the valence quarks in the colliding hadrons. Eq. (\ref{kp}) implies that the probability of
577: inelastic interaction of valence quark is proportional to the probability of the hadron inelastic interaction.
578: The form (\ref{md}) for the multiplicity distribution is in a good agreement
579: with experimental data, e.g. at CERN SPS energy, where parameter $k$ varies in the region from 4.6 to 3.2
580: \cite{chyn}. The parameter $k$ is decreasing with energy.
581:
582: It would be useful to asses other effects of the proposed mechanism, where rotation of cloud of the
583: virtual massive quarks appears as a main point. Due to this rotation the density of massive quarks will be
584: different in the different parts of the cloud, it will be smaller in the central part and bigger at
585: the peripheral part of cloud due to the centrifugal effect. At the same time the quarks
586: in the peripheral part have a maximal transverse momenta and therefore we should observe correlation
587: of the multiplicity and transverse momentum. Indeed, in the assumed mechanism of particle production
588: with large
589: transverse momenta ($p_\perp \geq 1$ GeV/c) the interaction region of valence constituent quark
590: with the cloud is determined
591: by the geometrical radius of the quark $r_Q$ and therefore the mean associated multiplicity at fixed impact
592: parameter $\bar n(s,\mathbf b, {\mathbf p}_\perp)$ should increase with $p_\perp$ and depend on the azimuthal
593: angle between vectors $\mathbf b$ and ${\mathbf p}_\perp$. It should be noted that
594: \begin{equation}\label{ns}
595: \bar n(s,\mathbf b, {\mathbf p}_\perp)=\frac{\sum_{n\geq 3} n\int dy I_n(s,\mathbf b, y,{\mathbf p}_\perp)}
596: {\sum_{n\geq 3} \int dy I_n(s,\mathbf b, y,{\mathbf p}_\perp)}
597: \end{equation}
598: and, contrary to the flows, does not affected by the unitarity correction.
599:
600: Assuming the linear dependence of the quark density
601: on the distance from the cloud center and that all parts of the rotating cloud have
602: the same angular velocity $\omega$, we will then obtain simple linear dependence of the mean associated
603: multiplicity
604: \begin{equation}\label{asm}
605: \bar n (p_\perp)\simeq d(r_z)V_{r_Q}\simeq a+b p_\perp,
606: \end{equation}
607: where $d(p_\perp)$ is the density dependence on $r_z=p_\perp/\omega$, where $r_z$ is the distance
608: from the center of the cloud. Parameters $a$ and $b$ depend on
609: the energy and impact parameter and the
610: parameter $a$ should be interpreted as a quark density at the center of the constituent quark cloud.
611: Such linear dependence can be in fact an oversimplification, however increase of the associated multiplicity
612: with transverse momentum seems to be a direct consequence of the assumed constituent quark cloud rotation.
613: It should be noted that the $p_\perp$ and $n$ correlations
614: were considered as a signal for the deconfinement transition of hadronic matter long time ago by
615: Van Hove\cite{vanhove}. Here we consider how the rotation effects affect such correlations.
616: It would be interesting to perform measurements of the associated multiplicity dependence
617: on transverse momentum
618: and its azimuthal dependence at fixed impact parameter at RHIC and the LHC.
619:
620: \section*{Discussion and conclusion}
621: We discussed here the nature transient state in hadronic
622: collisions. We believe that the same state of matter has been
623: revealed at RHIC in nuclei collisions. We were concentrated on the
624: hadron interactions, however, we believe that the main features remain valid
625: and for nucleus interactions also,
626: i.e. the nature of transient state as a coherent system of
627: strongly interacting massive quarks is the same, its rotation
628: as a result of the angular momentum conservation and strong
629: interaction, collective effects of this rotation for the particle
630: production are the same too. The mechanism of particle production
631: in the nuclei collisions can be different, in particular the
632: discussed unitarity effects would
633: not play a role in the case of nuclei collisions, however the role of the
634: valence constituent quarks with a finite
635: size\footnote{We would like to speculate at this point and to mention the possibility that the same
636: reason, namely the geometric size of constituent quark, can lead to the appearance of the scale
637: $\langle k_\perp^2\rangle \simeq 1$ $(GeV/c)^2$ in heavy quark production (cf. e.g. \cite{huang}).}\cite{morp}
638: as the objects exciting the rotating
639: cloud of the other massive quarks seems to remain significant.
640: The qualitative dependence of elliptic flow for hadron collisions
641: is in agreement with the relevant experimental data for nuclei
642: collisions: increase with $p_\perp$ at small transverse momenta,
643: weak dependence on $p_\perp$ in the intermediate region and
644: decreasing behavior with levelling off at high transverse momenta.
645: The new PHENIX experimental data \cite{winter} are in agreement
646: with this qualitative picture. It should be noted that the rotation
647: effects compensate effects
648: of absorption and therefore the nuclear modification factor $R_{AA}$
649: should have a nontrivial azimuthal dependence decreasing with $\phi$.
650: Since the correlations are maximal
651: in the rotation plane, a similar dependence should be observed in the azimuthal dependence
652: of the two-particle correlation function.
653: Effect of rotation should be maximal for the peripheral collisions and therefore the
654: dependence on $\phi$ should be most steep at large values of impact parameter.
655: We would also like to stress
656: that linear increase with energy of the elliptic flow in the
657: preasymptotic energy range is due to increasing
658: density of quarks proportional to $\sqrt{s}$ in the
659: transient state which also is a reason for high parton opacity at RHIC. It
660: would be interesting to perform studies of transient matter at the
661: LHC not only in heavy ion collisions but also in $pp$--collisions
662: and find possible existence or absence of the rotation effects.
663: Such effects should be absent if the genuine quark-gluon plasma
664: (gas of free quarks and gluons) would be formed at the LHC energies.
665:
666:
667:
668: \small
669: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
670: \bibitem{rhic}
671: Quark Gluon Plasma. New Discoveries at RHIC: A Case of Strongly Interacting Quark Gluon Plasma.
672: Proceedings, RBRC Workshop, Brookhaven, Upton, USA, May 14-15, 2004:
673: D. Rischke, G. Levin, eds; 2005, 169pp; J. Adams et al. (STAR Collaboration)
674: Nucl. Phys. A 757 (2005)102;
675: K. Adcox et al (PHENIX Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A 757 (2005) 184.
676: \bibitem{denteria}
677: D. d'Enterria, nucl-ex/0611012, 2006.
678: \bibitem{models}
679: A. Peshier, W Cassing, Phys. Rev. Lett., 94 (2005) 172301;\\
680: M. Bluhm, B. K\"ampfer, G. Soff,
681: J. Phys. G 31 (2005) S1151;\\
682: J. Liao, E.V. Shuryak, hep-ph/0508035, 2005;\\
683: G.E. Brown, B.A. Gelman, M. Rho,
684: Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 132301 \\
685: the most recent review is E. V. Shuryak, hep-ph/0608177.
686: \bibitem{volosh}
687: D. Molnar, and S.A. Voloshin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 092301\\
688: S.A. Voloshin, Acta Physica Polonica B 36 (2005) 551;
689: \bibitem{weiner}
690: R.M. Weiner, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 15 (2005) 37.
691: \bibitem{voloshin}
692: J.-Y. Ollitrault,
693: Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 229; recent review can be found in
694: S.A. Voloshin, Nucl. Phys. A715 (2003) 379.
695: \bibitem{dir}
696: A.H. Tang (for the STAR collaboration), J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 31 (2005) S35;
697: J. Adams et al. (STAR Collaboration), Phys. Rev. C 73 (2006) 034903;
698: B.B. Back et al.(PHOBOS Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97
699: (2006) 012301.
700: \bibitem{molnar}
701: D. Molnar, nucl-th/0408044.
702: \bibitem{webb}
703: B.R. Webber, Nucl. Phys. B87 (1975) 269.
704: \bibitem{lacey}
705: R.A. Lacey,
706: nucl-ex/0510029.
707: \bibitem{hydro}
708: P.F. Colb, J. Sollfrank, U.W. Heinz, Phys. Lett. B 459 (1999) 667; Phys. Rev. C. 62 (2000) 054909;
709: D. Teaney, J. Lauret, E.V. Shuryak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 4783.
710: \bibitem{eremin}
711: S. Eremin, S. Voloshin, Phys. Rev. C 67, (2003) 064905.
712: \bibitem{csn}
713: S. M. Troshin, N. E.Tyurin, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 4427.
714: \bibitem{biro}
715: J. Zim\'anyi, P. L\'evai, T.S. Bir\'o, Heavy Ion Phys. 17 (2003) 205;
716: J. Phys. G31, (2005) 711.
717: \bibitem{chyn}
718: T.T. Chou, C.-N. Yang, International Journal of Modern Physics A, 6 (1987) 1727;
719: Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 2 (1988) 510.
720: \bibitem{polvol}
721: S.A. Voloshin, nucl-th/0410089, 2004.
722: \bibitem{poskanz}
723: S.A. Voloshin, A.M. Poskanzer, Phys. Lett. B 474 (2000) 27.
724: \bibitem{chmult}
725: T.T. Chou, C.N. Yang, Phys. Lett. 128B (1983) 457;
726: Phys. Rev. D, 32 (1985) 1692.
727: \bibitem{bron}
728: W. Broniowski, W. Florkowski,
729: Phys. Rev. C 65 (2002) 024905.
730: \bibitem{antinori}
731: F. Antinori, Proc. of the XXXII International Symposium on Multiparticle Dynamics, Alushta, Crimea, Ukraine,
732: September 2002, Eds. A. Sissakian, G. Kozlov, E. Kolganova, 77.
733: \bibitem{umat}
734: S.M. Troshin, N.E. Tyurin,
735: J. Phys. G 29 (2003) 1061;
736: Teor. Mat. Fiz. 28 (1976) 139; Z. Phys. C 45 (1989) 171.
737: \bibitem{landso} P. V. Landshoff,
738: Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 1024.
739: \bibitem{bjorken}
740: J.D. Bjorken, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Supl. 25B (1992) 253.
741: \bibitem{inst}
742: D. Diakonov, V. Petrov, Nucl. Phys. B 245 (1984) 259.
743: \bibitem{diak}
744: D. Diakonov, hep-ph/0406043, JLAB-THY-04-12, Eur. Phys. J. A 24, (2005) 3.
745: \bibitem{gold} T. Goldman, R.W. Haymaker,
746: Phys. Rev. D24 (1981) 724.
747: \bibitem{heis}
748: W. Heisenberg, Z. Phys. 133 (1952) 65.
749: \bibitem{carr}
750: P. Carruthers, Nucl. Phys. A 418 (1984) 501.
751: \bibitem{diakp}
752: D. Diakonov, V. Petrov, Phys. Lett. B 147 (1984) 351.
753: \bibitem{therm}
754: K. Adcox, et al., Nucl. Phys. A757 (2005) 184;\\
755: J. Castillo (for the STAR Collaboration), Int. J. Mod. Phys. A20 (2005) 4380.
756: \bibitem{wang}
757: Z.-T. Liang, X.-N. Wang,
758: Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 102301, ibid. 96 (2006) 039901.
759: \bibitem{nadol}
760: P.M. Nadolsky, S.M. Troshin and N.E. Tyurin, Z. Phys. C 69 (1995) 131.
761: \bibitem{cheng}
762: E.J. Eichten, I. Hinchliffe, C. Quigg, Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) 2269;\\
763: T.P. Cheng, L.-F. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett 80 (1998) 2789.
764: \bibitem{vanhove}
765: L. Van Hove, Phys. Lett. B118 (1982) 138.
766: \bibitem{huang}
767: H.Z. Huang (for the STAR Collaboration), J. Phys. G: Nucl. Phys. 31 (2005) S971.
768: \bibitem{morp}
769: G. Morpurgo, Physics (N.Y.) 2 (1965) 95;
770: reproduced in J.J.J. Kokkedee, The Quark Model (Benjamin, New York, 1969), p. 132;
771: G. Morpurgo, in Proceedings of the XIV International Conference on High Energy Physics,
772: Vienna, 1968, edited by J. Prentki and J. Steinberger
773: (CERN Scientific Information Service, Geneva, 1968), pp. 225–249;
774: G. Morpurgo, in The Rise of the Standard Model, edited by L. Hoddeson, L. Brown, M. Riordan, and M.
775: Dresden (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1997), Chap. 31, p. 561; and the references cited there.
776: \bibitem{winter}
777: D.L. Winter (for the PHENIX Collaboration), nucl-ex/0607009.
778: \end{thebibliography}
779: \end{document}
780: