1: % manuscript NUCPHA 3099; accepted for publication in Nucl. Phys. A
2: % 13.12.2000
3: \documentstyle[prc,aps,preprint,psfig]{revtex}
4: \topmargin 10pt
5: \draft
6: \begin{document}
7: %--------------------------------------------------------------------
8:
9: \title{Open charm production in relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions
10: \thanks{supported by GSI Darmstadt and FZ J\"ulich} }
11:
12: \author{W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya, A. Sibirtsev \\[5mm]
13: {\normalsize Institut f\"{u}r Theoretische Physik,}\\ {\normalsize
14: Universit\"{a}t Giessen,} {\normalsize 35392 Giessen, Germany} }
15: %\date{ }
16: \maketitle
17:
18: \begin{abstract}
19: We calculate excitation functions for open charm mesons in $Au+Au$
20: reactions from AGS to RHIC energies within the HSD transport
21: approach which is based on string, quark, diquark ($q, \bar{q},
22: qq, \bar{q}\bar{q}$) and hadronic degrees of freedom. The open
23: charm cross sections from $pN$ and $\pi N$ reactions are fitted to
24: results from PYTHIA and scaled in magnitude to the available
25: experimental data. From our dynamical calculations we find an
26: approximate $m_T$-scaling for pions, kaons, $D$-mesons and
27: $J/\Psi$ -- when discarding final state elastic scattering of
28: kaons and $\phi$-mesons with pions -- in central collisions of $Au
29: + Au$ at 160 A$\cdot$GeV (with an apparent slope of 176 MeV)
30: without employing the assumption of a Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP). We
31: demonstrate that this result is essentially due to a relative
32: $m_T$-scaling in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} \approx$ 17.3 GeV.
33: At lower bombarding energies of 25 A$\cdot$GeV a suppression of
34: $D$-mesons by a factor of $\sim$ 10 relative to a global
35: $m_T$-scaling with slope 143 MeV is expected. However, when
36: incorporating attractive $D$-meson self energies as suggested by
37: QCD sum rules, an approximate $m_T$-scaling is regained even at 25
38: A$\cdot$GeV. The effects of $D$-meson rescattering and charmonium
39: absorption are discussed, furthermore, with respect to rapidity
40: and transverse mass distributions in central collisions of $Au +
41: Au$ at 25, 160 A$\cdot$GeV and 21.3 A$\cdot$TeV.
42: \end{abstract}
43:
44: \noindent
45: \vspace{10mm} \noindent
46: PACS: 25.75.-q; 13.60.L2; 14.40.Lb; 14.65.Dw
47:
48: \noindent Keywords: Relativistic heavy-ion collisions; Meson
49: production; Charmed mesons; Charmed quarks
50:
51: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
52: \narrowtext
53: \newpage
54:
55: \section{Introduction}
56:
57: Apart from the light and strange flavor
58: ($u,\bar{u},d,\bar{d},s,\bar{s}$) quark physics and their hadronic
59: bound states in the vacuum ($\pi, K, \phi$ etc.) the interest in
60: hadronic states with charm flavors ($c, \bar{c}$) has been rising
61: continuously in line with the development of new experimental
62: facilities \cite{QM96,QM97,QM99,SQM99}. This relates to the charm
63: production cross section in $pN$ and $\pi N$ reactions as well as
64: to their interactions with baryons and mesons which determine
65: their properties (spectral functions) in the hadronic medium.
66:
67: The charm quark degrees of freedom have gained vivid interest
68: especially in the context of a phase transition to the quark-gluon
69: plasma (QGP) \cite{Heinz} where $c\bar{c}$ meson states should no
70: longer be formed due to color screening \cite{Satz,Satznew}.
71: However, the suppression of $J/\Psi$ and $\Psi^\prime$ mesons in
72: the high density phase of nucleus-nucleus collisions
73: \cite{NA50b,NA50a} might also be attributed to inelastic comover
74: scattering (cf.
75: \cite{Cass99,Vogt99,Gersch,Seattle98,Cass00,Capella} and Refs.
76: therein) provided that the corresponding $J/\Psi$-hadron cross
77: sections are in the order of a few mb
78: \cite{Haglin,Haglin2,Konew,Ko,Sascha,Sascha2}. Present theoretical
79: estimates here differ by more than an order of magnitude
80: \cite{Bernd} especially with respect to $J/\Psi$-meson scattering
81: such that the question of charmonium suppression is not yet
82: settled. On the other hand, the enhancement of 'intermediate-mass
83: dileptons' in $Pb + Pb$ collisions at the SPS has been tentatively
84: attributed to an enhancement of 'open charm' in nucleus-nucleus
85: collisions relative to $pA$ reactions at the same invariant energy
86: $\sqrt{s}$ \cite{NA50d}. It should be mentioned that this
87: enhancement does not stem from the charmonium dissociation since
88: it is about two orders of magnitude larger the total charmonium yield.
89: Thus 'charmonium suppression' and 'open
90: charm enhancement' are present facets of relativistic heavy-ion
91: collisions.
92:
93: Furthermore, it is well known experimentally \cite{PDG} that the
94: $D,\bar{D}$ and $D^*, \bar{D}^*$ mesons show some analogy to the
95: $K, \bar{K}$ and $K^*, \bar{K}^*$ mesons with respect to their
96: excitation spectrum because the strange (antistrange) quark is
97: replaced by a charm (anticharm) quark in the hadronic state. Since
98: quite substantial in-medium potentials have been suggested for
99: antikaons in dense nuclear matter \cite{Cass99,Brown}, the latter
100: might also show up for the corresponding $D$-mesons in view of a
101: similar wavefunction for the light quark \cite{Alex99}. In fact,
102: QCD sum rule studies point towards attractive potentials for the
103: $D$-mesons \cite{Weise} which might lead to enhanced production
104: cross sections of open charm especially at low bombarding energies
105: close to threshold. Substantially lower in-medium effects are expected
106: for the $J/\Psi$ or $\eta_c$ do to a small coupling of the $c, \bar{c}$
107: quarks to the nuclear medium \cite{Weise2}. Thus the charm-meson sector, which is
108: insufficiently known so far, provides a theoretical
109: \cite{Ko,Johanna,Peter,Rafelski,Wang,Lin00} and experimental
110: challenge for the future \cite{NA50new,NA49new}.
111:
112:
113: In this work we will explore the perspectives for open charm
114: production in nucleus-collisions from AGS to RHIC energies
115: employing the HSD transport approach \cite{Cass99,Cass00} for the
116: overall reaction dynamics using parametrizations for the
117: elementary production channels including the charmed hadrons $D,
118: \bar{D}, D^*, \bar{D}^*, D_s, \bar{D}_s, D_s^*, \bar{D}_s^*,$
119: $J/\Psi, \Psi(2S), \chi_{2c}$ from $NN$ and $\pi N$ collisions.
120: The latter parametrizations are fitted to PYTHIA calculations
121: \cite{PYTHIA} above $\sqrt{s}$ = 10 GeV and extrapolated to the
122: individual thresholds, while the absolute strength of the cross
123: sections is fixed by the experimental data
124: \cite{NA16,NA27,E743,E653,E789,NA32,E653b,NA32b,E769,WA92,E791}
125: similar to Ref. \cite{Peter} (Section 2). The production of open
126: charm in central collisions of $Au + Au$ at 25, 160 A$\cdot$GeV
127: and 21.3 A$\cdot$TeV is studied in Section 3 with respect to
128: transverse mass ($m_T$) and rapidity distributions. We will first
129: switch off elastic collisions of kaons and $\phi$-mesons with
130: pions in nucleus-nucleus collisions to allow for a more
131: transparent comparison to the spectra from $pp$ collisions (Sect.
132: 3.1 -- 3.3). The modifications of the $m_T$-spectra due to the
133: latter elastic interactions will be discussed in Section 3.4 while
134: an excitation function for various mesons in central $Au + Au$
135: collisions is presented in Section 3.5. Section 4 concludes this
136: study with a summary and discussion of open problems.
137:
138:
139:
140:
141: \section{Elementary cross sections from $pN$ and $\pi N$
142: collisions}
143:
144: Before examining nucleus-nucleus collisions we have to specify the
145: differential open charm cross sections from $pN$ and $\pi N$
146: reactions that will enter the HSD approach. Contrary to light
147: meson production in hadronic reactions the creation of a
148: $c\bar{c}$ pair is due to a hard process and dominated by
149: gluon-gluon fusion at high $\sqrt{s}$. Using MRS G (next to
150: leading order) structure functions from the PDFLIB package
151: \cite{MRS} for the gluon distribution of the proton, a bare charm
152: quark mass $m_c=$ 1.5 GeV and $k_T$ = 1 GeV we obtain the cross
153: sections for $D, \bar{D}, D^*, \bar{D}^*, D_s, \bar{D}_s, D_s^*,
154: \bar{D}_s^*,$ as a function of $\sqrt{s}\geq $ 10 GeV from PYTHIA
155: \cite{PYTHIA} as displayed in Fig. 1 (upper part). Corresponding
156: results for $\pi N$ reactions are shown in the lower part. Since
157: the individual lines are hard to distinguish, some general trends
158: are pointed out: All cross sections indicate a common (smooth)
159: energy dependence. The $D^*$-mesons are created more abundantly
160: than the $D$-mesons roughly by a factor of 3 due to the three
161: different spin polarizations; the small mass difference between
162: $D$- and $D^*$-mesons of $\approx$ 140 MeV plays almost no role
163: for $\sqrt{s} \ge$ 10 GeV. On the other hand, an exchange of a
164: light ($u,d$) quark by a strange ($s$) quark costs a factor of
165: 3-4. Consequently, the cross sections of $D^0, \bar{D}^0, D^+,
166: D^-$ and $D_s^*, \bar{D}_s^*$ are roughly comparable at high
167: $\sqrt{s}$. These simple considerations specify the relative
168: abundance of the open charm mesons. However, the absolute
169: magnitude of the cross sections is not expected to match
170: experimental data due to the perturbative nature of these
171: calculations and rescaling factors $K$ have to be introduced
172: \cite{Peter}.
173:
174: In this spirit we fit the individual results from PYTHIA
175: (multiplied by factors of 12 and 7 for $pN$ and $\pi N$,
176: respectively) by an expression of the form,
177: \begin{equation}
178: \sigma_X(s) = a_X (1 - Z)^\alpha \ Z^{-\beta},
179: \label{fit}
180: \end{equation}
181: with $Z = {\sqrt{s^0_X}}/{\sqrt{s}}$ where $\sqrt{s^0_X}$ denotes
182: the threshold for the channel $X$ in $pN$ or $\pi N$ reactions.
183: Note that close to threshold the production for
184: $\bar{D}(\bar{c})$-mesons is enhanced relative to $D(c)$-mesons
185: since the $c$-quark can end up in $\Lambda_c, \Sigma_c,
186: \Sigma_c^*$ baryons with lower threshold, while $D(c)$-mesons
187: require the associated production with a $\bar{D}(\bar{c})$ meson.
188: These threshold phenomena are in close analogy to the strangeness
189: sector, where the mesons with a $\bar{s}$-quark are produced close
190: to threshold essentially together with hyperons ($\Lambda,
191: \Sigma$), whereas antikaons require the associated production with
192: a kaon.
193:
194: The formula (\ref{fit}) ensures the proper thresholds by construction
195: while the exponents $\alpha$ and $\beta$ describe the rise at threshold
196: and the asymptotic behaviour, respectively. In order to properly
197: 'normalize' the results from Fig. 1 we address to the experimental
198: data from Refs.
199: \cite{NA16,NA27,E743,E653,E789,NA32,E653b,NA32b,E769,WA92,E791} that
200: have been extrapolated to full open charm cross sections by using the
201: charge ratio's as given by PYTHIA. Furthermore, we have used a factor
202: of 2 when extrapolating data for $x_F > 0$ to the full Feynman $x_F$
203: regime for $pN$ collisions and a factor of 1.6 for $\pi N$ reactions
204: \cite{Frixione}. The results of the fits are given in Tables 1 and 2
205: for the parameters $a_X, \alpha$ and $\beta$. We mention that the high
206: value of the exponent $\alpha$ compared to related fits for $\rho$,
207: $\omega$ or $\phi$ production \cite{Cass99} indicates the different
208: production mechanism for $c\bar{c}$ pairs compared to light quark
209: pairs.
210:
211:
212: The parametrized results from this extrapolation are displayed in
213: Fig. 2 for $pN$ (upper part) and $\pi N$ reactions (lower part)
214: for the full charm cross section including all mesons as specified
215: above with their individual thresholds. The solid lines in Fig. 2
216: represent the sum over all open charm mesons (within the
217: parameters given in Tables 1 and 2) while the individual lines refer to the
218: individual mesons that are somewhat hard to disentangle.
219: As in Fig. 1 these cross sections group to 3 bunches at
220: high $\sqrt{s}$ where the upper bundle of lines corresponds to
221: $D^{*+},D^{*-}, D^{*0}$ and $\bar{D}^{*0}$, the middle bundle to
222: $D^{+},D^{-}, D^{0}, \bar{D}^{0}$ and the vector states with a
223: strange quark $D_s^{*}, \bar{D}_s^*$, while the lower bundle gives
224: the cross section for $D_s, \bar{D}_s$.
225:
226: It is interesting to compare these results with the cross sections
227: for $J/\Psi$ (including $\chi_c$ decay) and $\Psi^\prime \
228: (\Psi(2S))$ which are displayed in Fig. 3 as a function of
229: $\sqrt{s}$ together with the parametrizations (solid lines) for
230: $pN$ and $\pi N$ reactions (taken from Ref.
231: \cite{Vogt99,schuler}). Note that at $\sqrt{s}$ = 20 GeV open
232: charm is enhanced by about a factor of 50 relative to $J/\Psi$ and
233: that this ratio increases with the available energy. Since the
234: parametrization from Ref. \cite{schuler} approaches some constant
235: value at high $\sqrt{s}$ contrary to the PYTHIA calculations (cf.
236: Fig. 1 of Ref. \cite{Vogt99}) we have fitted the total cross
237: section by the function
238: \begin{equation}
239: \sigma_X(s) = b_X (1 - Y)^\alpha \ Y^{-\beta} \ \Theta(\sqrt{s}-\sqrt{s_0})
240: \label{fitj}
241: \end{equation}
242: with $Y=m_X/\sqrt{s}$ and $\alpha$ = 10, while $\sqrt{s_0}$
243: denotes the threshold in vacuum. Again the parameter $\beta$
244: governs the high energy rise of the cross section which for $\beta
245: \approx$ 1 is now in line with the PYTHIA calculations specified
246: above. Our fits give $b_{J/\Psi}$ = 96 nb, $b_{\chi_c}$ = 64 nb,
247: $b_{\Psi^\prime}$ = 20 nb; the results for $J/\Psi$ (including the
248: $\chi_c$ decay) are shown in the upper part of Fig. 3 in terms of
249: the dashed line.
250:
251:
252:
253: The cross sections (\ref{fit}),(\ref{fitj}) will be used in the
254: transport calculations to be discussed below which, apart from the
255: total cross sections, also need the differential distribution of
256: the produced mesons in the transverse momentum $p_T$ and the
257: rapidity $y$ (or Feynman $x_F$) from each individual collision. We
258: recall that $x_F = p_z/p_z^{max} \approx 2 p_z/\sqrt{s}$ with
259: $p_z$ denoting the longitudinal momentum. For the differential
260: distribution in $x_F$ and $p_T$ we use the ansatz,
261: \begin{equation}
262: \frac{1}{2 p_T} \frac{dN}{dx_F dp_T} \sim (1 - |x_F|)^\gamma \ \exp(-b p_T),
263: \label{fit2}
264: \end{equation}
265: with $\gamma \approx $ 4.5 and $b \approx$ 3.0 GeV$^{-1}$. With
266: these parameters the differential transverse momentum
267: distributions of $D/\bar{D}$ mesons in $pp$ (and $\pi N$)
268: reactions at 250 GeV \cite{E769} may reasonably be described as
269: shown in Fig. 4. The $x_F$ and $p_T$ distribution for charmonium
270: production, furthermore, is taken from Ref. \cite{Rvogt}.
271:
272: We have to point out that our parametrizations for the
273: differential and total cross sections for open charm (as well as
274: charmonia) become questionable at low energy, but also at high
275: energy. It is thus mandatory that they have to be controlled by
276: experimental data from $pp$, $pA$ and $\pi N$ reactions before
277: reliable conclusions on open charm dynamics in nucleus-nucleus
278: reactions can be drawn.
279:
280: For the interpretation of the results from nucleus-nucleus
281: collisions (cf. Section 3) it is worth to compare to $pp$
282: collisions at different energies, respectively. To this aim we
283: display in Figs. 5--7 the differential multiplicities $(2
284: m_T)^{-1} dN_X/dm_T$ in the transverse mass
285: \begin{equation}
286: m_T = \sqrt{p_T^2 + m_X^2} \end{equation}
287: for all final pions,
288: kaons, $\phi$-mesons, $D + \bar{D}$ mesons and charmonia from $pp$
289: reactions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7.1 GeV, 17.3 GeV and 200 GeV,
290: respectively. The pion spectra describe the sum of $\pi^+, \pi^0,
291: \pi^-$, the kaon spectra the sum of $K^+, K^0, \bar{K}^0, K^-$,
292: the $D$-meson spectra the sum of all $D, D^*,D_s,D_s^*$ and their
293: antiparticles while the spectrum denoted by $c\bar{c}$ includes
294: the $J/\Psi$, the $\chi_c$ as well as the $\Psi^\prime$, where the
295: latter contribution starts at $m_T \approx 3.7$ GeV and becomes
296: visible as a tiny kink in the $m_T$-spectra. Here the open charm
297: and charmonia results stem from the parametrizations specified
298: above (including the decay $\chi_c \rightarrow J/\Psi + \gamma$)
299: while the spectra for pions, kaons and $\phi$-mesons are from the
300: LUND string model \cite{LUND} (as implemented in the HSD transport
301: approach). For orientation we also show exponential spectra with
302: slope parameters of 143 MeV, 176 MeV and 225 MeV, respectively,
303: which describe the $m_T$-spectra of pions rather well. The kaon
304: spectra at all energies are down by a factor of $\sim$ 3, the
305: $\phi$ spectra by a factor of 9-10 relative to this line due to
306: strangeness suppression in $pp$ collisions. However, it is quite
307: remarkable that the charmonia spectra fit well to this approximate
308: $m_T$-scaling (within a factor of 2-3) at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7.1, 17.3
309: and 200 GeV, respectively. Furthermore, the spectrum of open charm
310: is roughly compatible with $m_T$-scaling at $\sqrt{s}$ = 17.3 and
311: 200 GeV, while the $D, \bar{D}$ mesons are suppressed relative to
312: the scaling by a factor $\sim$ 30 close to threshold ($\sqrt{s}$ =
313: 7.1 GeV). Whereas these results basically stem from our
314: parametrizations at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7.1 and 200 GeV, the spectra at
315: $\sqrt{s}$ = 17.3 are controlled by experimental data. Such an
316: 'apparent' statistical production of mesons in elementary
317: reactions has been advocated before by Becattini \cite{Becattini}.
318:
319: We point out that also the approximate $m_T$-scaling from Figs.
320: 5--7 has to be controlled by explicit experimental measurements.
321: Data in a limited rapidity range might lead to somewhat different
322: results since the rapidity distributions of pions, kaons,
323: $\phi$'s, $D$'s, $D^*$'s and charmonia differ substantially due to
324: kinematical reasons, i.e. the width of the rapidity distribution
325: decreases with increasing meson mass.
326:
327: \section{Nucleus-nucleus collisions}
328:
329: Inspite of the inherent uncertainties pointed out above it is
330: worthwhile to explore the dynamics of open charm mesons in
331: relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions. Experiments are planned
332: at the SPS \cite{NA50new} as well as at RHIC and might be even
333: performed in the 20--30 A$\cdot$GeV region \cite{GSI}. Here we
334: will employ the HSD transport approach for the nucleus-nucleus
335: dynamics that has been tested in detail for $pp$, $pA$ and $AA$
336: reactions from SIS to SPS energies \cite{Cass99,Ko95,Geiss} and
337: been used for the description of charmonium production and
338: propagation as well \cite{Cass00,Cass97,Geiss99}.
339:
340: We recall that (as in Refs. \cite{Cass97,Geiss99}) the charm
341: degrees of freedom are treated perturbatively and that initial
342: hard processes (such as $c\bar{c}$ or Drell-Yan production from
343: $NN$ collisions) are 'precalculated' to achieve a scaling of the
344: inclusive cross section with the number of projectile and target
345: nucleons as $A_P \times A_T$. To implement this scaling we
346: separate the production of the hard and soft processes: The
347: space-time production vertices of the $c\bar{c}$ pairs are
348: calculated in each transport run by neglecting the soft processes,
349: i.e. the production of light quarks and assosiated mesons. The
350: resulting number $N_{coll}(b)$ of these 'hard' collisions is
351: shown for $Au + Au$ at 160 A$\cdot$GeV in Fig. 8 (full squares) as
352: a function of impact parameter. The inclusive number of inelastic
353: $NN$ collisions is given by the integral of $N_{coll}$ over impact
354: parameter
355: \begin{equation}
356: I = \frac{2 \pi \int b \ N_{coll}(b) \
357: db}{\sigma_{inel.}(\sqrt{s})} \approx A^2, \label{int1}
358: \end{equation}
359: which gives approximately $A^2$, i.e. the experimental scaling for
360: 'hard' processes. In (\ref{int1}) the mass number $A = 197$ for
361: $Au$, while $\sigma_{inel.}(\sqrt{s}) (\approx 34$ mb) denotes the
362: inelastic nucleon-nucleon cross section. The calculated
363: $N_{coll}(b)$ compares well with the result from Glauber theory
364: (solid line in Fig. 8), where the number of inelastic interactions
365: in nucleus-nucleus collision $A{+}B$ at impact parameter ${\bf b}
366: = (b,0,0)$ is given as~\cite{Formanek,Czyz}
367: \begin{equation}
368: N_{AB}(b) = A\, B\int \sigma_{inel}\, T_A({\bf s}) \, T_B({\bf
369: s}-{\bf b }) \, d^2s, \label{Glauber}
370: \end{equation}
371: where ${\bf s} = (s_x,s_y,0)$ is orthogonal to the
372: $z$-(beam-)direction. In the integral (\ref{Glauber})
373: \begin{equation}
374: T_A (b)=\intop_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\rho (\sqrt{b^2+z^2}) \, dz
375: \end{equation}
376: is the profile function normalized to unity, while $\rho ({r})$
377: is the nuclear density taken of Woods-Saxon shape.
378:
379:
380: Thus the scaling for initial hard processes is adequately realized
381: in the transport approach. We mention that this scaling
382: prescription might no longer be valid at low and high energy due
383: to modifications of the gluon structure functions during the
384: heavy-ion reaction or related shadowing phenomena \cite{Strikman}.
385: For our initial study, however, we discard such effects.
386:
387: Apart from primary hard $NN$ collisions the open charm mesons or
388: charmonia may also be generated by secondary 'meson'-'baryon'
389: reactions. Here we include all secondary collisions of mesons with
390: 'baryons' by assuming that the open charm cross section (from
391: Section 2) only depends on the invariant energy $\sqrt{s}$ and not
392: on the explicit meson or baryon state. Furthermore, we take into
393: account all interactions of 'formed' mesons -- after a formation
394: time of $\tau_F$ = 0.8 fm/c (in their rest frame) \cite{Geiss} --
395: with baryons or diquarks, respectively.
396:
397: In the transport calculation we follow the motion of the
398: charmonium pairs or produced $D, \bar{D}$-mesons within the full
399: background of strings/hadrons by propagating them as free
400: particles, i.e. neglecting in-medium potentials\footnote{Except
401: for the case of in-medium mass shifts in Section 3.2}, but follow
402: their collisional history with baryons and mesons or quarks and
403: diquarks. For reactions with diquarks we use the corresponding
404: reaction cross section with baryons multiplied by a factor of 2/3.
405: For collisions with quarks (antiquarks) we adopt half of the cross
406: section for collisions with mesons. Whereas the latter concept is
407: oriented at the additive quark model, this assumption still does
408: not solve the problem since the cross sections of $D$-mesons or
409: charmonia with baryons and various mesons (essentially $\pi$,
410: $\rho$ and $\omega$ mesons) are not well known. Thus we will
411: provide results with and without rescattering of open charm
412: mesons.
413:
414: In order to study the effect of rescattering we tentatively adopt
415: the following dissociation cross sections of charmonia with
416: baryons independent on the energy:
417: \begin{equation}
418: \sigma_{c\bar{c}B} = 6 \ {\rm mb}; \ \sigma_{J/\Psi B} = 4 \ {\rm mb}; \
419: \sigma_{\chi_c B} = 5 \ {\rm mb}; \ \sigma_{\Psi^\prime B} = 10 \ {\rm mb},
420: \label{sigmacB}
421: \end{equation}
422: while a lifetime (in it's rest frame) of 0.4 fm/c is
423: assumed for the pre-resonance $c\bar{c}$ pair \cite{Kharz}. The
424: energy-dependent $J/\Psi$-meson cross sections for dissociation to
425: $D\bar{D}$ are taken from the calculations of Haglin \cite{Haglin}
426: which on average lead to a similar $J/\Psi$ comover suppression
427: than the overall cross section of 3 mb adopted in Ref.
428: \cite{Cass97}.
429:
430: On the other hand, the $D/\bar{D}$ mesons are expected to have
431: large cross sections with mesons or baryons due to the light
432: flavor content such that light meson ($\pi, \rho, \omega, \eta$)
433: exchanges should describe the dominantly elastic cross sections at
434: low relative momenta. We here adopt the calculations from Ref.
435: \cite{Ko} which predict elastic cross sections in the range of
436: 10--20 mb for $D, D^*$ scattering with mesons dependent on the
437: size of the formfactor employed. As a guideline we use a constant
438: cross section of 10 mb for elastic scattering with mesons and also
439: baryons, although the latter might be even higher for very low
440: relative momenta. We neglect charm exchange reactions such as $D^+
441: N \rightarrow \pi \Lambda_c, \Sigma_c$ or $\pi \Lambda_c
442: \rightarrow \bar{D} N$ in the present study, which will
443: essentially modify the charm quark content of mesons relative to
444: baryons. Furthermore, we discard a recreation of charmonia by
445: channels such as $D+ \bar{D} \rightarrow J/\Psi + \pi$, since at
446: AGS and SPS energies these reactions are negligible \cite{Peter};
447: on the other hand, at RHIC energies this charmonium formation
448: might become essential \cite{Rafelski}. However, the formation
449: cross sections are not well known and the significance of these
450: channels is discussed controversely in the present literature
451: \cite{Johanna,Rafelski,Redlich}.
452:
453: In the transport calculations to be discussed below we will focus
454: on the relative yield of pions, kaons, $\phi$-, $D+\bar{D}$-mesons
455: and charmonia, that will be analyzed in terms of global
456: $m_T$-spectra which are integrated over the whole rapidity range.
457: In order to allow for a more direct comparison with the
458: $m_T$-spectra from $pN$ collisions in Figs. 5--7 we will first
459: discuss a more transparent situation and 'switch off' a couple of
460: reaction channels; the results from the 'full' calculations will
461: be presented in Section 3.4. To disentangle various dynamical
462: effects we thus first suppress the decay $\phi \rightarrow
463: K\bar{K}, \pi \rho$ to allow for a direct evaluation of the
464: $\phi$-meson $m_T$-spectra at the end of the calculation.
465: Furthermore, it is well known experimentally \cite{QM96,QM97,QM99}
466: that the apparent slope of $m_T$-spectra for different hadrons
467: varies almost linearly with the hadron rest mass due to a common
468: collective flow velocity $\beta$. In the transport calculations
469: this collective flow results from elastic collisions between the
470: hadrons in the expansion phase of the reaction
471: \cite{lena00,Heinz95} ('pion wind'). For our exploratory study we
472: switch off the elastic collisions of kaons and $\phi$-mesons in
473: the expansion phase with pions. This then leads to $m_T$-spectra
474: with roughly the same slope for all hadrons and their relative
475: abundance can be extracted in a simple way (see below). As mentioned before, the
476: related changes of the $m_T$ spectra due to elastic collisions
477: will be addressed in Section 3.4.
478:
479:
480: \subsection{SPS energies}
481:
482: We now turn to the results of the HSD transport calculations. In
483: Fig. 9 we show the time evolution of $c, \bar{c}$ production
484: (solid line) for a central (b = 1 fm) collision of $Au + Au$ at
485: 160 A$\cdot$GeV in comparison to $s, \bar{s}$ production (dashed
486: line), where the $c, \bar{c}$ number is scaled in height to the
487: $s, \bar{s}$ line for the initial 'hard' production by a factor of
488: $1.5 \times 10^3$. Both functions rise steeply within about 1
489: fm/c; whereas the solid line ($c,\bar{c}$) stays practically
490: constant the dashed line ($s, \bar{s}$) increases smoothly due to
491: secondary and ternary $s\bar{s}$ production by meson-baryon or
492: meson-meson collisions \cite{Geiss}. This 'cooking' of strangeness
493: in the expanding 'fireball' leads to a moderate ($\sim 46$ \%)
494: enhancement of strangeness whereas the secondary production of
495: $c\bar{c}$ pairs (by meson-baryon collisions) proceeds early
496: and is only $\sim 9\%$
497: (for the cross sections specified in Section 2), which might be
498: neglected at SPS energies. In this respect charm quark pairs
499: dominantly are created in the initial high density phase of the
500: collision with energy densities even above 3 GeV/fm$^3$
501: \cite{CassKo}. The multiplicity of open charm mesons here is about
502: 0.2, whereas the multiplicity of $J/\Psi$'s (including the decay
503: of $\chi_c$) is only about $10^{-3}$. The fraction of charmonia
504: dissociated by baryons and mesons is 70\% for $J/\Psi$, 80 \% for
505: $\chi_c$ and 90 \% for $\Psi^\prime$, which is comparable to the
506: suppression calculated earlier in Ref. \cite{Cass97}.
507:
508: The effect of rescattering of $D$-mesons on baryons and mesons as
509: well as charmonium interactions with hadrons is shown in Fig. 10
510: for a central collision of $Au + Au$ with respect to the
511: transverse mass spectra. Here the $D, D^*$ spectrum is flattened
512: out in transverse mass while the charmonium spectrum is roughly
513: reduced by a factor 3-4 due to dissociation reactions; the
514: kink from $\Psi^\prime$ at $\sim$ 3.7 GeV disappears due to the
515: large $\Psi^\prime$ dissociation. We point
516: out that a drastic enhancement of the slope of the $D$-meson
517: $m_T$-spectra as advocated in Refs. \cite{Wang,Lin00} is not
518: seen from our dynamical calculations for the cross sections adopted.
519: Quite remarkably, the open charm spectra and charmonium spectra
520: appear to scale well in transverse mass after including the
521: secondary interactions with hadrons.
522:
523: The effect of final state
524: interactions on the rapidity distribution of $D$-mesons is
525: displayed in Fig. 11 which shows a slight broadening of the
526: distribution due to the elastic scattering processes with baryons
527: and mesons, respectively.
528:
529: It is interesting to have a look at the $m_T$-spectra for all
530: mesons in analogy to Fig. 6 (for $pp$ reactions) to explore the
531: effects of open charm and charmonium rescatterings. The calculated
532: $m_T$-spectrum for pions, kaons, $\phi$-mesons, all $D + \bar{D}$
533: mesons and charmonia is given in Fig. 12 which can be
534: characterized well by an exponential slope parameter of 176 MeV
535: (dashed line) for all mesons. This result comes about as follows
536: when compared to Fig. 6: The $D$-mesons are created more
537: abundantly than pions (relative to $pp$) in central collisions of
538: $Au + Au$ because the $D$-meson (and charmonium) yield scales with
539: the number of hard collisions (cf. Fig. 8) while the pions roughly
540: scale with the number of participants and may be reabsorped to
541: some extent. The kaon (and $\phi$) yield increases due to
542: rescattering (cf. Fig. 9), however, the $\phi$ $(s\bar{s})$ mesons
543: do not match the $m_T$-scaling in the HSD transport approach and
544: stay down by a factor of about 3-4. The charmonium spectrum
545: (relative to $pp$) is decreased by a factor $\approx$ 3-4 due to
546: dissociation processes as noted before. All these effects lead to
547: the approximate $m_T$-scaling without employing the assumption of
548: a Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP) formation and a common hadronization at
549: some temperature of 160 -- 180 MeV.
550:
551: We mention that a roughly constant $\pi$ to $J/\Psi$ ratio from
552: $pp$ to central $Pb + Pb$ collisions has been also pointed out in
553: Refs. \cite{Marek1,Marek2} proposing a statistical hadronization
554: scheme in all reactions. Furthermore, Gallmeister {\it et al.}
555: have suggested in Ref. \cite{Gall} that the open charm degrees of
556: freedom might be described in a simple thermodynamical model for
557: central collisions of $Pb + Pb$ at the SPS using the same
558: temperature for all mesons. The findings of these authors are
559: supported here by the nonequilibrium transport calculations, that
560: provide rather simple arguments for the phenomena pointed out
561: before.
562:
563:
564:
565: \subsection{$Au + Au$ reactions at 25 A$\cdot$GeV}
566:
567: In this Section we explore the perspectives of open charm
568: measurements in nucleus-nucleus collisions at 25 A$\cdot$GeV,
569: which might be accessable at a possible future GSI facility
570: \cite{GSI}. In this initial study we restrict to central
571: collisions of $Au + Au$ at 25 A$\cdot$GeV, which are expected to
572: provide the optimal conditions for open charm experiments and
573: studies on the in-medium properties of $D$-mesons in analogy to
574: the $K^+, K^-$ experiments at the SIS. We step ahead as in Section
575: 3.1.
576:
577: Fig. 13 shows the time evolution of $c, \bar{c}$ production (solid
578: line) for a central (b = 1 fm) collision in comparison to $s,
579: \bar{s}$ production (dashed line) where the number of $c, \bar{c}$
580: is scaled again in height to the $s, \bar{s}$ line for the initial
581: 'hard' production (by a factor 1.5$\times 10^5$). Both functions
582: rise within a few fm/c which corresponds to the passage time of
583: the (Lorentz contracted) nuclei. As in Fig. 9 the solid line
584: ($c,\bar{c}$) stays constant for later times while the dashed
585: line ($s, \bar{s}$) increases again due to secondary and ternary
586: $s\bar{s}$ production channels. The relative enhancement of
587: $s\bar{s}$ 'cooking' here amounts to roughly 65\% whereas the
588: relative contribution of $c\bar{c}$ pairs from secondary channels
589: is $\sim 7 \%$ for the cross sections specified in Section 2. We
590: note, however, that the 65\% enhancement of strangeness is
591: insufficient to explain the $K^+$ abundancies at the AGS
592: \cite{AGSK} from 4 - 11 A$\cdot$GeV or the $K/\pi$ ratio at 40 A
593: GeV (at the SPS) without assuming any in-medium modifications of
594: the kaons. For a detailed discussion we refer the reader to Refs.
595: \cite{Cass00,Geiss}.
596:
597: It is apparent from Fig. 13 that the charm quark pairs are created
598: in the initial high density phase of the collision, here with
599: energy densities up to 2 GeV/fm$^3$, which is above the critical
600: energy density from lattice calculations for the formation of a
601: QGP \cite{lattice}. However, the energy densities from the
602: transport calculation correspond to nonequilibrium phase-space
603: configurations at high baryon density, that should not be
604: identified with the energy density extracted from lattice
605: calculations (in equilibrium and for quark chemical potential $\mu_q = 0$).
606:
607: For a quantitative orientation we display in Fig. 14 the volume
608: (in the nucleus-nucleus center-of-mass) with an energy density
609: above 1 GeV/fm$^3$ and 2 GeV/fm$^3$ as a function of time for a
610: central $Au + Au$ collision at 25 A$\cdot$GeV, where only
611: interacting and produced hadrons have been counted as in Ref.
612: \cite{CassKo}. It is
613: important to note that the high energy density is essentially
614: build up from 'strings', i.e. 'unformed' hadrons. This phase may
615: be addressed as {\it string matter} (cf. Refs.
616: \cite{Pradip,Weber}) and expresses the notion that most of the
617: hadrons appear in some form of 'continuum excitation'. The energy
618: density including only 'formed' hadrons (during the expansion of
619: the system) stays below 1 GeV/fm$^3$, i.e. below the energy
620: density expected for a transition to the QGP. The absolute numbers
621: in Fig. 14 have to be compared to the volume of a $Au$-nucleus in
622: the moving frame which, for a Lorentz $\gamma$-factor of 3.78,
623: gives $\approx $ 330 fm$^3$. Thus also at 25 A$\cdot$GeV the phase
624: boundary to a QGP might be probed in a sizeable volume for time
625: scales of a few fm/c. Contrary to central collisions at the SPS
626: these volumes are characterized by a high net quark density; for
627: such configurations we presently have no reliable guide from QCD
628: lattice calculations.
629:
630: The multiplicity of open charm mesons at 25 A$\cdot$GeV is about
631: $6\cdot 10^{-4}$, whereas the multiplicity of $J/\Psi$'s
632: (including the decay of $\chi_c$) is about $1.5 \cdot 10^{-5}$. We
633: mention that the fraction of charmonia dissociated by baryons and
634: mesons is $\sim$ 60\% for $J/\Psi$ \cite{Cass00}.
635:
636: The effect of rescattering of $D$-mesons on baryons and mesons is
637: displayed in Fig. 15 (for a central collision of $Au + Au$) for the
638: $D$-meson rapidity distribution, which shows now a substantial
639: broadening due to scattering processes with baryons and mesons. The
640: decrease of the $D$-meson rapidity distribution at midrapidity is
641: almost a factor of 2.
642:
643: The $m_T$-spectra for all mesons in analogy to Fig. 5 (for $pp$
644: reactions) are presented in Fig. 16. The calculated $m_T$-spectrum
645: for pions, kaons and $\phi$-mesons can be characterized by an
646: exponential slope parameter of 143 MeV (dashed line). Again the
647: kaon (and $\phi$) yield is increased (relative to $pp$ times the
648: number of hard collisions $N_{coll}$) due to rescattering (cf.
649: Fig. 13), but the $\phi$ $(s\bar{s})$ mesons stay down by a factor
650: of 3-4. The charmonium spectrum (relative to $pp$) is decreased
651: by a factor $\approx$ 2.5 due to dissociation as noted before and
652: approximately fulfills the global $m_T$-scaling. The latter does
653: not hold for $D$-mesons (open squares) which are suppressed
654: dynamically in the threshold region by roughly one order of
655: magnitude.
656:
657: We recall that a similar observation has been made for the
658: $m_T$-scaling of $K^+$ and $K^-$ mesons close to threshold
659: energies at the SIS \cite{Elena}, where the strange mesons have
660: been suppressed relative to pions and $\eta$'s. However, when
661: adding to the $K^+$ mass the $\Lambda-N$ mass difference of 177
662: MeV (due to the associated production mechanism in $pp$ and $\pi
663: N$ collisions), a remarkable $m_T$-scaling could be recovered
664: again \cite{Elena}. It should be noted that the latter scaling is
665: not due to a grand-canonical (or canonical) chemical equilibration, but simply
666: due to a shift of the spectra induced by the kaon production
667: mechanism. We have to stress, however, that all these observations
668: on the charm sector are based on our extrapolations (Section 2)
669: and might not hold experimentally.
670:
671: We now address the question, to what extent in-medium
672: modifications of the $D$-mesons might be seen in the
673: $m_T$-spectra for central $Au+Au$ collisions at 25 A GeV. Contrary
674: to open charm production and propagation in antiproton induced
675: reactions on nuclei \cite{Alex99}, where the $D$-mesons show up
676: with momenta of a couple of GeV/c relative to the nuclear matter
677: rest frame, the $D$-mesons produced in central nucleus-nucleus
678: collisions have only small momenta in the rest frame of the
679: hadronic fireball. This is of particular relevance for
680: experimental studies of hadron self energies, since the latter are
681: generally momentum dependent and most pronounced for low momenta.
682:
683: The modifications of the $D$-meson spectral functions in the
684: medium at present cannot be reliably calculated nor extracted (in
685: the low density limit) from experimental scattering data via a
686: dispersion analysis (cf. Ref. \cite{Sib98} for the $K,\bar{K}$
687: problem). For our initial study we thus discard all momentum
688: dependence of the $D$-meson self energies and also neglect a
689: broadening of their spectral functions due to interactions in the
690: medium \cite{offshell}. As a guide we employ the QCD sum rule
691: calculations from Ref. \cite{Weise} and implement a mass shift of
692: the form
693: \begin{equation}
694: \Delta m_D (\rho) = \alpha_D \frac{\rho}{\rho_0}
695: \label{drop}
696: \end{equation}
697: with $\alpha_D \approx - 50$ MeV, where $\rho_0$ denotes the
698: nuclear matter density and $\rho$ the actual baryon density at the
699: $D$-meson creation point. In principle one might expect different
700: mass shifts of $D$ and $\bar{D}$ mesons in the medium due to an
701: opposite sign of the vector interaction \cite{Alex99}. However,
702: since the $c, \bar{c}$ pairs are created in the early high density
703: phase of the collision (cf. Fig. 13) the vector interaction is
704: expected to vanish here (cf. Refs. \cite{Pradip,Gerry}) and only
705: the scalar attraction to survive. This will lead to similar mass
706: shifts for $D$ and $\bar{D}$ mesons as anticipated in Eq.
707: (\ref{drop}). Since densities up to $8 \rho_0$ can be achieved in
708: central $Au+Au$ collisions at 25 A GeV, the $D$-meson mass shifts
709: may reach up to -400 MeV. Such mass shifts have a dramatic effect
710: on the production cross sections in $pN$ collisions and secondary
711: meson-baryon reactions when incorporating them in the production
712: thresholds (cf. Tables 1 and 2).
713:
714: Our calculations with the mass shift (\ref{drop}) (crosses in Fig. 16) give an
715: enhancement of the $D$-meson yield by about a factor of 7 relative
716: to the bare-mass case (open squares). The slope of the spectra is
717: modified only slightly relative to the bare mass case as can
718: be seen from Fig. 16 for the resulting $m_T$ spectrum.
719: Somewhat surprisingly, an approximate $m_T$-scaling with all other
720: mesons is regained in this case. We have to point out again that
721: the results on open charm and charmonia in Fig. 16 essentially
722: depend on our extrapolations in Section 2 and the assumed self
723: energies (\ref{drop}), which are not controlled by data. On the
724: other hand, Fig. 16 should be helpful in guiding the experimental
725: analysis.
726:
727: \subsection{Central collisions of $Au + Au$ at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200
728: GeV} Apart from the low energy (threshold) regime, explored in
729: Section 3.2, we also present predictions for central $Au + Au$
730: collisions at RHIC energies of $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV or 21.3
731: A$\cdot$TeV, which will be investigated in the near future. For an
732: overview of the predictions performed within the HSD approach we
733: refer the reader to Ref. \cite{Cass00}. Here we extend our
734: calculations to open charm mesons and provide transverse mass
735: spectra for all mesons in analogy to Figs. 12 and 16.
736:
737: The multiplicity of open charm pairs for $Au + Au$ at $b$=1 fm and
738: 21.3 A$\cdot$TeV from the HSD approach is about
739: $16$, whereas the multiplicity of final $J/\Psi$'s (including the
740: decay of $\chi_c$) is only $\sim 8 \cdot 10^{-2}$ since in this
741: case the dissociation by baryons and mesons is $\sim$ 90\% for
742: $J/\Psi$ \cite{Cass00}. We mention that the production of charm
743: pairs proceeds within less than 0.8 fm/c (in the nucleus-nucleus
744: cms) and that the amount of $c\bar{c}$-pairs from secondary
745: meson-baryon reactions is approximately 11 \% for the cross
746: sections specified in Section 2.
747:
748: The $m_T$-spectra for all pions, kaons and antikaons,
749: $\phi$-mesons, $D$ and $\bar{D}$ mesons as well as charmonium
750: states are presented in Fig. 17 in analogy to Fig. 7 (for $pp$
751: reactions). The calculated $m_T$ spectrum for pions, kaons,
752: $\phi$-mesons can be characterized by an exponential slope
753: parameter of 225 MeV (dashed line). Similar to the lower
754: bombarding energies in Sections 3.1 and 3.2 the kaon (and $\phi$)
755: yield is increased due to rescattering in the hot and initially
756: high density mesonic fireball. The charmonium spectrum (relative
757: to $pp$) is decreased by a factor $\approx$ 10 due to dissociation
758: as noted before and no longer fulfills the global $m_T$-scaling.
759: The $D$-mesons (open squares) are somewhat enhanced relative to
760: the $m_T$-scaling which, however, might be an artefact of the
761: parametrizations in Section 2. On the other hand, the relative
762: suppression of charmonia could be compensated by $D\bar{D}$ flavor
763: exchange reactions to $J/\Psi + \pi$ etc., i.e. the inverse
764: channels responsible for charmonium dissociation in interactions
765: with mesons \cite{Rafelski}. However, as mentioned before, these
766: cross sections are presently not sufficiently known such that a
767: final answer on the relative importance of
768: these subsequent charmonium production channels has to wait for
769: future.
770:
771:
772: \subsection{Collective acceleration of mesons in the expansion
773: phase}
774: As mentioned above, the $m_T$-spectra from Figs. 12, 16 and 17 provide a
775: global view on the effect of chemical (inelastic) reactions, but should
776: not be compared with experiment directly since the rescattering of
777: kaons and $\phi$ mesons with pions has been switched off. In order
778: to demonstrate the effect of the elastic scatterings, that have
779: been discarded in Sections 3.1 - 3.3, we present in Fig. 18 the
780: results for all $m_T$ spectra from the transport calculations for
781: $Au + Au$ at 25 A$\cdot$GeV, 160 A$\cdot$GeV and 21.3 A$\cdot$TeV
782: now including the elastic rescatterings. Here the slopes of the
783: pions are slightly decreased whereas the slopes for kaons and
784: $\phi$-mesons increase at all bombarding energies. The spectra for
785: the open charm mesons as well as charmonia do not change within
786: the numerical accuracy since their rescattering with baryons and
787: mesons had already been taken into account in the previous
788: calculations in Sections 3.1 -- 3.3. We note explicitly, that the
789: high slope parameter for $\phi$-mesons of $\sim$ 300 MeV seen
790: experimentally at midrapidity in central collisions of $Pb+Pb$ at
791: the SPS by NA49 \cite{Stock} is not reproduced within the HSD
792: calculations due to the weak coupling of $\phi$-mesons to
793: non-strange hadrons. If this phenomenon is related to an early
794: acceleration of strange quarks and antiquarks in a QGP phase or
795: due to unexpected large rescattering cross sections is presently
796: unclear.
797:
798: For comparison we discuss a scenario where the $D,\bar{D}$ mesons
799: and charmonia emerge from a hadronizing QGP at rather low hadron
800: density as advocated in \cite{Johanna}. In the latter scenario the
801: collective expansion with velocity $v_{\perp}$ results from the
802: pressure in the QGP phase and all hadrons freeze out at the same
803: quark chemical potentials $\mu_q, \mu_s, \mu_c$ and temperature
804: $T_{therm}$. The slopes of open charm mesons and charmonia then
805: are expected to change as $T_X \approx T_{therm} + m_X/2
806: v_{\perp}^2$ for low momenta and as $T_X \approx T_{therm}
807: \sqrt{(1+v_{\perp})/(1-v_{\perp})}$ for momenta $p_{\perp} \gg
808: m_X$, where $v_{\perp} = \beta$ is a collective velocity in the
809: range 0.4 $\le v_{\perp} \le$ 0.6. Thus $D,\bar{D}$ mesons and
810: charmonia ($J/\Psi, \Psi^\prime$) should show effective slopes
811: larger than 0.35 GeV at SPS
812: and RHIC energies. This conjecture might be tested soon
813: experimentally and prove or disprove the moderate slopes of open
814: charm mesons as predicted within the hadron-string-dynamics (HSD)
815: approach.
816:
817:
818: \subsection{Excitation functions of mesons in central collisions}
819:
820: In order to provide a more complete overview on meson production
821: we show in Fig. 19 the excitation function of open charm mesons in
822: central $Au + Au$ collisions from AGS to RHIC energies without
823: employing any self energies for these mesons. The $\bar{D}$-mesons
824: with a $\bar{c}$ are produced more frequently at low energies due
825: to the associated production with $\Lambda_c, \Sigma_c,
826: \Sigma_C^*$ similar to the kaon case (cf. lower part). At roughly
827: 15 A$\cdot$GeV the cross sections for open charm and charmonia are
828: similar, while the ratio of open charm to charmonium bound states
829: increases rapidly with energy. This behaviour is quite similar to
830: the excitation functions in the strangeness sector when comparing
831: $K^+,K^-$ and $\phi$-mesons. Since the excitation function for
832: open charm drops very fast with decreasing bombarding energy,
833: experiments around 20 A$\cdot$GeV will be a challenging task since
834: the multiplicity of the other mesons is higher by orders of
835: magnitude. On the other hand, the perspectives for open charm
836: measurements at RHIC appear promising since about 16 $c\bar{c}$
837: (or $ D\bar{D})$ pairs should be created in central $Au + Au$
838: collisions according to our calculations.
839:
840: We mention that the excitation functions for the pions, kaons,
841: eta's and $\phi$-mesons have been taken from Ref. \cite{Cass00},
842: while the multiplicities for $J/\Psi$ have been recalculated using
843: the novel comover absorption cross sections from Section 2 and
844: Ref. \cite{Haglin} as well the parametrization (\ref{fitj}) instead
845: of the Schuler fit \cite{schuler}. Since the numbers up to 500 A$\cdot$GeV
846: are compatible within 30\%
847: we do not discuss these differences in more detail. The higher
848: $J/\Psi$ multiplicity at RHIC energies is a direct consequence of
849: the cross section (\ref{fitj}).
850:
851: \section{Summary}
852:
853: In this work we have calculated excitation functions for open
854: charm mesons in central $Au+Au$ reactions from AGS to RHIC
855: energies within the HSD transport approach. The 'input' open charm
856: cross sections from $pp$ and $\pi N$ reactions have been fitted to
857: results from PYTHIA and scaled in magnitude to the available
858: experimental data. In order to study the relative changes from
859: central $Au + Au$ to $pp$ collisions, we have first switched off
860: elastic final state interactions of kaons and $\phi$-mesons with
861: pions in order to suppress their common acceleration in the 'pion
862: wind' during the expansion phase. Within the parametrizations and
863: results from the LUND string model \cite{LUND} -- which is
864: incorporated in the HSD approach -- we find an $m_T$-scaling for
865: pions, kaons, $D$-mesons and $J/\Psi$ in central collisions of $Au
866: + Au$ at the SPS (with an apparent slope of 176 MeV) without
867: employing the assumption of a Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP) and common
868: freeze-out properties. We have shown that this result is
869: essentially due to an approximate $m_T$-scaling in $pp$ collisions
870: at $\sqrt{s}$ = 17.3 GeV and $D, \bar{D}$ and $J/\Psi$ final state
871: interactions. Furthermore, final state elastic scatterings change
872: this conclusion to a moderate extent since the relative meson
873: abundancies are not altered anymore and their spectra only get
874: modified due to a common collective acceleration.
875:
876: At bombarding energies of 25 A$\cdot$GeV a suppression of
877: $D$-mesons by a factor of $\sim$ 10 relative to a global
878: $m_T$-scaling with a slope of 143 MeV is expected if no $D$-meson
879: self energies are accounted for. On the other hand, attractive
880: mass shifts of -50 MeV at $\rho_0$ -- when extrapolated linearly
881: in the baryon density -- lead to an enhancement of open charm
882: mesons by about a factor of 7 such that an approximate
883: $m_T$-scaling for all mesons (cf. Fig. 16) is regained.
884:
885: At RHIC energies of $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV or 21.3 A$\cdot$TeV the
886: global $m_T$-scaling is expected to hold also within a factor of
887: 2-3 except for the charmonium states which -- within the HSD
888: transport approach -- are dissociated by baryons and 'late
889: comovers' to $\sim 90 \%$. On the other hand, the inverse reaction
890: channels $D+\bar{D} \rightarrow J/\Psi +$ meson etc. might lead
891: again to charmonium enhancement as suggested in Ref.
892: \cite{Rafelski}. Here we leave this question open for future
893: analysis.
894:
895: However, as pointed out throughout this work, the elementary cross
896: sections for open charm and charmonia in $pp$ and $\pi N$
897: reactions have to be measured in the relevant kinematical regimes
898: before reliable conclusions can be drawn in the nucleus-nucleus
899: case. Experimental data in the 20 - 30 A$\cdot$GeV with light and
900: heavy systems will have to clarify, furthermore, if the
901: quasi-particle picture of open charm mesons at high baryon density
902: is applicable at all.
903:
904:
905:
906: \acknowledgements
907: The authors are grateful to C. Greiner and R. Vogt for helpful
908: discussions and to P. Senger for valuable suggestions.
909:
910:
911: %--------------------------------------------------------------------
912: \begin{references}
913: \bibitem{QM96}
914: {\it Quark Matter '96},
915: {Nucl. Phys.} { A 610} (1996) 1.
916: \bibitem{QM97}
917: {\it Quark Matter '97},
918: { Nucl. Phys.} { A 638} (1998) 1.
919: \bibitem{QM99}
920: {\it Quark Matter '99},
921: { Nucl. Phys.} { A 661} (1999) 1.
922: \bibitem{SQM99}
923: {\it Strangeness in Quark Matter 1998},
924: { J. Phys.} { G 25} (1999) 143.
925: \bibitem{Heinz}
926: U. Heinz, Nucl. Phys. A 661 (1999) 140c.
927: \bibitem{Satz}
928: T. Matsui, H. Satz, { Phys. Lett.} { B 178} (1986) 416.
929: \bibitem{Satznew}
930: H. Satz, Rep. Progr. Phys. 63 (2000) 1511.
931: \bibitem{NA50b}
932: M. C. Abreu et al., NA50 collaboration, Phys. Lett. B 477 (2000) 28.
933: \bibitem{NA50a}
934: M. C. Abreu et al., NA50 collaboration, Phys. Lett. B 450 (1999) 456.
935: \bibitem{Cass99}
936: W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya,
937: Phys. Rep. 308 (1999) 65.
938: \bibitem{Vogt99}
939: R. Vogt, { Phys. Rep.} { 310} (1999) 197.
940: \bibitem{Gersch}
941: C. Gerschel, J. H\"ufner, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 49 (1999) 255.
942: \bibitem{Seattle98}
943: X.N. Wang, B. Jacak, eds.,
944: {\em Quarkonium Production in High-Energy Nuclear Collisions},
945: World Scientific 1998.
946: \bibitem{Cass00}
947: W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya, S. Juchem,
948: Nucl. Phys. A 674 (2000) 249.
949: \bibitem{Capella}
950: A. Capella, E. G. Ferreiro, A. B. Kaidalov,
951: Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 2080.
952: \bibitem{Haglin}
953: K. L. Haglin, Phys. Rev. C 61 (2000) 031903.
954: \bibitem{Haglin2}
955: K. L. Haglin, C. Gale, nucl-th/0010017.
956: \bibitem{Konew}
957: Z. Lin, C. M. Ko, Phys. Rev. C 62 (2000) 034903.
958: \bibitem{Ko}
959: Z. Lin, C. M. Ko, nucl-th/0008050.
960: \bibitem{Sascha}
961: A. Sibirtsev, K. Tsushima, A. W. Thomas, nucl-th/0005041.
962: \bibitem{Sascha2}
963: A. Sibirtsev, K. Tsushima, K. Saito, A. W. Thomas,
964: Phys. Lett. B 484 (2000) 23.
965: \bibitem{Bernd}
966: B. M\"uller, Nucl. Phys. A 661 (1999) 272c.
967: \bibitem{NA50d}
968: M. C. Abreu et al., NA50 collaboration, Eur. Phys. J. C 14 (2000) 443.
969: \bibitem{PDG}
970: Review of Particle Physics, Eur. Phys. J. C 15 (2000) 1.
971: \bibitem{Brown}
972: G. Q. Li, G. E. Brown, Nucl. Phys. A 636 (1998) 487; Phys.
973: Rev. C 58 (1998) 1698.
974: \bibitem{Alex99}
975: A. Sibirtsev, K. Tsushima, A. W. Thomas,
976: Eur. Phys. J. A 6 (1999) 351.
977: \bibitem{Weise}
978: A. Hayashigaki, Phys. Lett. B 487 (2000) 96.
979: \bibitem{Weise2}
980: F. Klingl, S. Kim, S. H. Lee, P. Morath, W. Weise,
981: Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 3396.
982: \bibitem{Johanna}
983: P. Braun-Munzinger, J. Stachel, Phys. Lett. B 490 (2000) 196.
984: \bibitem{Peter}
985: P. Braun-Munzinger, D. Miskowiec, A. Dress, C. Lourenco,
986: Eur. Phys. J. C 1 (1998) 123.
987: \bibitem{Rafelski}
988: R. L. Thews, M. Schroedter, J. Rafelski, hep-ph/0007323.
989: \bibitem{Wang}
990: Z. Lin, X.-N. Wang, Phys. Lett. B444 (1998) 245.
991: \bibitem{Lin00}
992: Z. Lin, C. M. Ko, B. Zhang, Phys. Rev. C 61 (2000) 024904.
993: \bibitem{NA50new}
994: Proposal CERN/SPSC 2000-010.
995: \bibitem{NA49new}
996: M. Gazdzicki, C. Markert, Acta Phys. Polon. B 31 (2000) 965.
997: \bibitem{PYTHIA}
998: H.-U. Bengtsson, T. Sj\"ostrand, Comp. Phys. Commun. 46 (1987) 43.
999: % charm data
1000: \bibitem{NA16}
1001: M. Aguilar-Benitez et al., Phys. Lett. B 135 (1984) 237.
1002: \bibitem{NA27}
1003: M. Aguilar-Benitez et al., Z. Phys. C 40 (1988) 321.
1004: \bibitem{E743}
1005: R. Ammar et al., Phys. Rev. Lett 61 (1988) 2185.
1006: \bibitem{E653}
1007: K. Kodama et al., Phys. Lett. B 284 (1992) 461.
1008: \bibitem{E789}
1009: M. J. Leitch et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 2542.
1010: \bibitem{NA32}
1011: S. Barlag et al., Z. Phys. C 49 (1991) 555;
1012: Phys. Lett. B 247 (1990) 113.
1013: \bibitem{E653b}
1014: K. Kodama et al., Phys. Lett. B 263 (1991) 573.
1015: \bibitem{NA32b}
1016: S. Barlag et al., Z. Phys. C 39 (1988) 451.
1017: \bibitem{E769}
1018: G. A. Alves et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996)
1019: 2388; {\it ibid.} 2392.
1020: \bibitem{WA92}
1021: M. Adamovich et al., Nucl. Phys. B 495 (1997) 3.
1022: \bibitem{E791}
1023: E. M. Aitala et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 4 (1999) 1.
1024: % charm data - end
1025: \bibitem{MRS}
1026: H. Plothow-Besch, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 10 (1995) 2901.
1027: \bibitem{Frixione}
1028: S. Frixione, M. L. Mangano, P. Nason, G. Ridolfi, hep-ph/9702287.
1029: \bibitem{schuler} G. A. Schuler, CERN preprint, CERN-TH 7170/94.
1030: \bibitem{Rvogt}
1031: R. Vogt, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 50 (1992) 343.
1032: \bibitem{LUND}
1033: B. Anderson, G. Gustafson, Hong Pi, Z. Phys. C 57 (1993) 485.
1034: \bibitem{Becattini}
1035: F. Becattini, Z. Phys. C 69 (1996) 485.
1036: \bibitem{GSI}
1037: W. F. Henning, P. Senger, priv. communication.
1038: \bibitem{Ko95} W. Cassing, W. Ehehalt, C. M. Ko, Phys. Lett. B 363
1039: (1995) 35.
1040: \bibitem{Geiss}
1041: J. Geiss, W. Cassing, C. Greiner, Nucl. Phys. A 644 (1998) 107.
1042: \bibitem{Cass97}
1043: W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya, Nucl. Phys. A 623 (1997) 570.
1044: \bibitem{Geiss99}
1045: J. Geiss, C. Greiner, E. L. Bratkovskaya, W. Cassing, U. Mosel,
1046: Phys. Lett. B 447 (1999) 31.
1047: \bibitem{Formanek}
1048: J. Formanek, Nucl. Phys. B12 (1969) 59.
1049: \bibitem{Czyz}
1050: W. Szyz, L.C. Maximon, Ann. Phys. 52 (1969) 59.
1051: \bibitem{Strikman}
1052: J. O. Schmitt, G. C. Nayak, H. St\"ocker, W. Greiner, hep-ph/0009258.
1053: \bibitem{Kharz}
1054: D. Kharzeev, R. L. Thews, Phys. Rev. C 60 (1999) 041901.
1055: \bibitem{Redlich}
1056: P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich, Eur. Phys. J. C 16 (2000) 519.
1057: \bibitem{lena00} E. L. Bratkovskaya et al., Nucl. Phys. A 675
1058: (2000) 661.
1059: \bibitem{Heinz95} H. van Hecke, H. Sorge, N. Xu, Nucl. Phys. A 661
1060: (1999) 493c; H. Sorge, Phys. Lett. B 373 (1996) 16.
1061: \bibitem{CassKo}
1062: W. Cassing, C. M. Ko, Phys. Lett. B 396 (1997) 39.
1063: \bibitem{Marek1}
1064: M. Gazdzicki, M. Gorenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 4009.
1065: \bibitem{Marek2}
1066: M. Gazdzicki, Phys. Rev. C 60 (1999) 054903.
1067: \bibitem{Gall} K. Gallmeister, B. K\"ampfer, O. P. Pavlenko, Phys.
1068: Lett. B 473 (2000) 20.
1069: \bibitem{AGSK}
1070: C. A. Ogilvie for the E866 and E819 Collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A 638
1071: (1998) 57c; J. Phys. G 25 (1999) 159.
1072: \bibitem{lattice}
1073: F. Karsch, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 83-84 (2000) 14.
1074: \bibitem{Pradip}
1075: P. K. Sahu, W. Cassing, U. Mosel, A. Ohnishi,
1076: Nucl. Phys. A 672 (2000) 376.
1077: \bibitem{Weber} H. Weber, M. Bleicher, L. Bravina, H. St\"ocker,
1078: W. Greiner, Phys. Lett. B 442 (1998) 443; S. A. Bass et al., Prog.
1079: Part. Nucl. Phys. 42 (1999) 313.
1080: \bibitem{Elena}
1081: E. L. Bratkovskaya, W. Cassing, U. Mosel,
1082: Phys. Lett. B 424 (1998) 244 .
1083: \bibitem{Sib98} A. Sibirtsev, W. Cassing, Nucl. Phys. A 641
1084: (1998) 476.
1085: \bibitem{offshell} W. Cassing, S. Juchem, Nucl. Phys. A 665 (2000) 377;
1086: Nucl. Phys. A 672 (2000) 417.
1087: \bibitem{Gerry} G. E. Brown, M. Rho, C. Song,
1088: nucl-th/0010008.
1089: \bibitem{Stock} R. Stock, Nucl. Phys. A 661 (1999) 282c.
1090: \end{references}
1091:
1092: %--------------------------------------------------------------------
1093: \begin{table}[t]
1094: \begin{center}
1095: \caption{The parameters $a_x, \alpha$ and $\beta$ for $pN$
1096: reactions
1097: \label{tabl1} }
1098: \vspace{0.5cm}
1099: \begin{tabular}{ |lllll| }
1100: \hline
1101: \multicolumn{5}{|c|}{$pN$} \\ \hline
1102: Meson & $\sqrt{s_0}$ [GeV] & $a_x$ [mb] & $\alpha$ & $\beta$
1103: \\ \hline
1104: $D^0$ & 5.605 & 0.523 & 4.92 & 1.36 \\
1105: $\bar D^0$ & 5.069 & 0.496 & 4.96 & 1.36 \\
1106: $D^+$ & 5.609 & 0.469 & 4.76 & 1.40 \\
1107: $D^-$ & 5.073 & 0.363 & 4.94 & 1.44 \\ \hline
1108: $D^{0*}$ & 5.889 & 1.775 & 4.90 & 1.34 \\
1109: $\bar D^{0*}$ & 5.230 & 1.275 & 4.56 & 1.42 \\
1110: $D^{+*}$ & 5.896 & 1.514 & 4.64 & 1.40 \\
1111: $D^{-*}$ & 5.233 & 1.384 & 5.20 & 1.36 \\ \hline
1112: $D^+_s$ & 5.813 & 0.171 & 5.12 & 1.34 \\
1113: $D^-_s$ & 5.373 & 0.102 & 5.58 & 1.42 \\
1114: $D^{+*}_s$ & 6.101 & 0.496 & 4.88 & 1.38 \\
1115: $D^{-*}_s$ & 5.516 & 0.283 & 5.50 & 1.46 \\ \hline
1116: \end{tabular}
1117: \end{center}
1118: \end{table}
1119:
1120: \begin{table}[h]
1121: \begin{center}
1122: \caption{ The parameters $a_x, \alpha$ and $\beta$ for $\pi N$
1123: reactions
1124: \label{tabl2} }
1125: \vspace{0.5cm}
1126: \begin{tabular}{ |lllll| }
1127: \hline
1128: \multicolumn{5}{|c|}{$\pi N$} \\ \hline
1129: Meson & $\sqrt{s_0}$ [GeV] & $a_x$ [mb] & $\alpha$ & $\beta$
1130: \\ \hline
1131: $D^0$ & 4.667 & 0.273 & 2.86 & 1.28 \\
1132: $\bar D^0$ & 4.150 & 0.247 & 3.80 & 1.26 \\
1133: $D^+$ & 4.671 & 0.255 & 3.22 & 1.28 \\
1134: $D^-$ & 4.154 & 0.286 & 3.50 & 1.22 \\ \hline
1135: $D^{0*}$ & 4.951 & 1.076 & 3.14 & 1.22 \\
1136: $\bar D^{0*}$ & 4.292 & 0.774 & 3.80 & 1.26 \\
1137: $D^{+*}$ & 4.955 & 0.719 & 2.86 & 1.32 \\
1138: $D^{-*}$ & 4.296 & 0.839 & 3.40 & 1.24 \\ \hline
1139: $D^+_s$ & 4.875 & 0.0932& 3.62 & 1.22 \\
1140: $D^-_s$ & 4.435 & 0.0545& 3.70 & 1.34 \\
1141: $D^{+*}_s$ & 5.162 & 0.284 & 3.42 & 1.24 \\
1142: $D^{-*}_s$ & 4.578 & 0.163 & 3.64 & 1.34 \\ \hline
1143: \end{tabular}
1144: \end{center}
1145: \end{table}
1146: %--------------------------------------------------------------------
1147:
1148: \begin{figure}[h]
1149: \centerline{\psfig{file=s-pythia.eps,width=14cm}}
1150: \vspace*{5mm}
1151: \caption{The cross section for open charm mesons from PYTHIA
1152: \protect\cite{PYTHIA} for $pp$ (upper part) and $\pi N$ reactions
1153: (lower part) using MRS G structure functions, $m_c$ = 1.5 GeV and $k_T$ =
1154: 1 GeV, respectively. The upper solid lines denote the sum over all
1155: $D+\bar{D}$ mesons. }
1156: \label{bild1}
1157: \end{figure}
1158:
1159: \begin{figure}[h]
1160: \centerline{\psfig{file=s-dd.eps,width=14cm}}
1161: \vspace*{5mm}
1162: \caption{The cross section for open charm mesons in the parametrization
1163: (1) using the parameters from Tables 1 and 2 in comparison to the
1164: experimental data from Refs. \protect\cite{NA16}-\protect\cite{E791} for $pp$ (upper part)
1165: and $\pi N$ reactions (lower part). The upper solid lines denote the sum over
1166: all $D+\bar{D}$ mesons.}
1167: \label{bild2}
1168: \end{figure}
1169:
1170: \begin{figure}[h]
1171: \centerline{\psfig{file=s-cc.eps,width=13cm}}
1172: \vspace*{5mm}
1173: \caption{The cross section for $J/\Psi$ and $\Psi^\prime$ mesons in
1174: the parametrizations from Ref. \protect\cite{schuler} (solid lines) in
1175: comparison to the experimental data for $pN$ (upper part) and $\pi N$
1176: reactions (lower part). The $J/\Psi$ cross sections include the
1177: decay from $\chi_c$ mesons. The dashed line in the upper part shows
1178: the $J/\Psi$ cross section
1179: for the parametrization (\protect\ref{fitj}). }
1180: \label{bild3}
1181: \end{figure}
1182:
1183: \newpage
1184: \begin{figure}[h]
1185: \centerline{\psfig{file=pt_pp250.eps,width=15cm}}
1186: \vspace*{5mm}
1187: \caption{The differential cross section for $D/\bar{D}$ mesons in
1188: transverse momentum (squared) for $pp$ reactions at 250 GeV within the
1189: parametrisation (\protect\ref{fit2}) (solid line) in comparison to the
1190: data from Ref. \protect\cite{E769}.}
1191: \label{bild4}
1192: \end{figure}
1193:
1194: \newpage
1195: \begin{figure}[h]
1196: \centerline{\psfig{file=mt_pp25.eps,width=15 cm}}
1197: \vspace*{5mm}
1198: \caption{The transverse mass specta from $pp$ collisions at $T_{lab}$ =
1199: 25 GeV for pions (full squares), kaons (open triangles), and
1200: $\phi$-mesons (full rhombes) from the LUND string model \protect\cite{LUND}
1201: as implemented in HSD. The $D+\bar{D}$ meson (open squares) and charmonium
1202: (full dots) spectra -- including the decay $\chi_c \rightarrow J/\Psi +
1203: \gamma$ -- result from the parametrizations specified in Section 2. The
1204: dashed line shows an exponential with slope parameter $E_0$ = 0.143
1205: GeV.}
1206: \label{bild5}
1207: \end{figure}
1208:
1209: \newpage
1210: \begin{figure}[h]
1211: \centerline{\psfig{file=mt_pp160.eps,width=15 cm}}
1212: \vspace*{5mm}
1213: \caption{Same as Fig. 5 for $pp$ reactions at
1214: $T_{lab}$ = 160 GeV. The dashed line shows an
1215: exponential with slope parameter $E_0$ = 0.176 GeV.}
1216: \label{bild6}
1217: \end{figure}
1218:
1219: \begin{figure}[h]
1220: \centerline{\psfig{file=mt_pp200.eps,width=15 cm}}
1221: \vspace*{5mm}
1222: \caption{Same as Fig. 5 for $pp$ reactions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV. The
1223: dashed line shows an exponential with slope parameter $E_0$ = 0.225
1224: GeV.}
1225: \label{bild7}
1226: \end{figure}
1227:
1228:
1229: \begin{figure}[h]
1230: \centerline{\psfig{file=b_au160.eps,width=15 cm}}
1231: \vspace*{5mm}
1232: \caption{The number of hard collisions $N_{coll}$ as a function of
1233: impact parameter $b$ in the HSD approach (full squares) for $Au + Au$
1234: at 160 A$\cdot$GeV (see text) in comparison to the number of collisions in
1235: the Glauber approach (solid line).}
1236: \label{bild8}
1237: \end{figure}
1238:
1239:
1240: \begin{figure}[h]
1241: \centerline{\psfig{file=t_au160.eps,width=15 cm}}
1242: \vspace*{5mm}
1243: \caption{Time evolution for the production of $s, \bar{s}$ (dashed
1244: line) and $c \bar{c}$ quarks (solid line, multiplied by a factor of $1.5 \times 10^3$)
1245: in the HSD approach for a
1246: central $Au+Au$ reaction at 160 A$\cdot$GeV. The $c, \bar{c}$ numbers have been
1247: scaled to the initial hard scattering processes.}
1248: \label{bild9}
1249: \end{figure}
1250:
1251:
1252: \begin{figure}[h]
1253: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig10.eps,width=15cm}}
1254: \vspace*{5mm}
1255: \caption{The transverse mass spectra of $D+\bar{D}$ mesons and $J/\Psi,
1256: \Psi^\prime$ mesons in the HSD approach for a central $Au+Au$ collision
1257: at 160 A$\cdot$GeV. The open symbols denote the spectra without rescattering
1258: and reabsorption while the full symbols include the final state
1259: interactions. The thin dashed line shows an exponential with slope
1260: parameter $E_0$ = 0.176 GeV.}
1261: \label{bild10}
1262: \end{figure}
1263:
1264:
1265: \begin{figure}[h]
1266: \centerline{\psfig{file=y_au160.eps,width=15cm}}
1267: \vspace*{5mm}
1268: \caption{The rapidity distribution of $D+\bar{D}$ mesons in the HSD
1269: approach for a central $Au+Au$ collision at 160 A$\cdot$GeV. The dashed line
1270: denotes the spectrum without rescattering and reabsorption while the
1271: solid line includes the final state interactions of $D$-mesons with
1272: hadrons.}
1273: \label{bild11}
1274: \end{figure}
1275:
1276:
1277: \begin{figure}[h]
1278: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig12.eps,width=15cm}}
1279: \vspace*{5mm}
1280: \caption{The transverse mass spectra of pions (full squares), kaons
1281: (open triangles), $\phi$-mesons (full rhombes), $D+\bar{D}$ mesons
1282: (open squares) and $J/\Psi, \Psi^\prime$ mesons (full dots) in the HSD
1283: approach for a central $Au+Au$ collision at 160 A$\cdot$GeV. The thin
1284: dashed line shows an exponential with slope parameter $E_0$ = 0.176
1285: GeV. Note that final state elastic scattering of kaons and
1286: $\phi$-mesons with pions has been discarded in the calculations. }
1287: \label{bild12} \end{figure}
1288:
1289:
1290: \begin{figure}[h]
1291: \centerline{\psfig{file=t_au25.eps,width=15cm}}
1292: \vspace*{5mm}
1293: \caption{Time evolution for the production of $s, \bar{s}$ (dashed
1294: line) and $c \bar{c}$ quarks (solid line) in the HSD approach for a
1295: central $Au+Au$ reaction at 25 A$\cdot$GeV. The $c, \bar{c}$ numbers have been
1296: scaled to the initial hard scattering processes by a factor of $1.5 \times 10^5$.}
1297: \label{bild13}
1298: \end{figure}
1299:
1300: \begin{figure}[h]
1301: \centerline{\psfig{file=v_t.eps,width=15cm}}
1302: \vspace*{5mm}
1303: \caption{Time evolution for the volume with energy density $\varepsilon
1304: \geq$ 1 GeV/fm$^3$ (dashed line) and $\geq$ 2 GeV/fm$^3$ (solid line) in the
1305: HSD approach for a central $Au+Au$ reaction at 25 A$\cdot$GeV. }
1306: \label{bild14}
1307: \end{figure}
1308:
1309:
1310:
1311: \begin{figure}[h]
1312: \centerline{\psfig{file=y_au25.eps,width=15cm}}
1313: \vspace*{5mm}
1314: \caption{The rapidity distribution of $D+\bar{D}$ mesons in the HSD
1315: approach for a central $Au+Au$ collision at 25 A$\cdot$GeV. The dashed line
1316: denotes the spectrum without rescattering while the
1317: solid line includes the final state interactions of $D$-mesons with
1318: hadrons.}
1319: \label{bild15}
1320: \end{figure}
1321:
1322:
1323: \begin{figure}[h]
1324: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig16.eps,width=15cm}}
1325: \vspace*{5mm}
1326: \caption{The transverse mass spectra of pions (full squares), kaons
1327: (open triangles), $\phi$-mesons (full rhombes),$D+\bar{D}$ mesons (open
1328: squares) and $J/\Psi, \Psi^\prime$ mesons (full dots) in the HSD
1329: approach for a central $Au+Au$ collision at 25 A$\cdot$GeV without
1330: including self energies for the mesons. The crosses stand for the
1331: $D$-meson $m_T$ spectra when including an attractive mass shift
1332: according to (\protect\ref{drop}). The thin dashed line shows an
1333: exponential with slope parameter $E_0$ = 0.143 GeV. Note that final
1334: state elastic scattering of kaons and $\phi$-mesons with pions has been
1335: discarded in the calculations.}
1336: \label{bild16}
1337: \end{figure}
1338:
1339: \begin{figure}[h]
1340: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig17.eps,width=15cm}}
1341: \vspace*{5mm}
1342: \caption{The transverse mass spectra of pions (full squares), kaons
1343: (open triangles), $\phi$-mesons (full rhombes),$D+\bar{D}$ mesons (open
1344: squares) and $J/\Psi, \Psi^\prime$ mesons (full dots) in the HSD
1345: approach for a central $Au+Au$ collision at 21.3 A$\cdot$TeV. The thin
1346: dashed line shows an exponential with slope parameter $E_0$ = 0.225
1347: GeV. Note that final state elastic scattering of kaons and
1348: $\phi$-mesons with pions has been discarded in the calculations.}
1349: \label{bild16b}
1350: \end{figure}
1351:
1352: \begin{figure}[h]
1353: \centerline{\psfig{file=fig18.eps,width=15cm}}
1354: \vspace*{5mm}
1355: \caption{The transverse mass spectra of pions (full squares), kaons
1356: (open triangles), $\phi$-mesons (full rhombes),$D+\bar{D}$ mesons (open
1357: squares) and $J/\Psi, \Psi^\prime$ mesons (full dots) in the HSD
1358: approach for central $Au+Au$ collisions at 25 A$\cdot$GeV, 160
1359: A$\cdot$GeV and 21.3 A$\cdot$TeV. The spectra at 160 A$\cdot$GeV and
1360: 21.3 A$\cdot$TeV have been multiplied by a factor of 10. The thin
1361: dashed lines show exponentials with slope parameters $E_0$ = 0.143,
1362: 0.176 and 0.225 GeV, respectively. The deviations from the thin lines
1363: essentially are due to final state elastic scattering of kaons and
1364: $\phi$-mesons with pions, which accelerate the heavier mesons (see
1365: text). }
1366: \label{bild16c}
1367: \end{figure}
1368:
1369: \begin{figure}[h]
1370: \centerline{\psfig{file=multipl.eps,width=13.5cm}}
1371: \vspace*{5mm}
1372: \caption{The multiplicity of $D,\bar{D}$ and $J/\Psi$-mesons (upper
1373: part) for central collisions of $Au+Au$ in the HSD approach including
1374: elastic and inelastic reactions, but no in-medium modifications of
1375: their spectral functions. The multiplicities for $\pi^+, \eta, K^+,
1376: K^-$ and $\phi$ (in the lower part) have been taken from Ref.
1377: \protect\cite{Cass00} while the lines for $D(c), D(\bar{c})$ and
1378: $J/\Psi$ are the same as in the upper part.}
1379: \label{bild17}
1380: \end{figure}
1381:
1382: \end{document}
1383: #!/bin/csh -f
1384: # this uuencoded Z-compressed .tar file created by csh script uufiles
1385: # for more information, see e.g. http://xxx.lanl.gov/faq/uufaq.html
1386: # if you are on a unix machine this file will unpack itself:
1387: # strip off any mail header and call resulting file, e.g., figures.uu
1388: # (uudecode ignores these header lines and starts at begin line below)
1389: # then say csh figures.uu
1390: # or explicitly execute the commands (generally more secure):
1391: # uudecode figures.uu ; uncompress figures.tar.Z ;
1392: # tar -xvf figures.tar
1393: # on some non-unix (e.g. VAX/VMS), first use an editor to change the
1394: # filename in "begin" line below to figures.tar_Z , then execute
1395: # uudecode figures.uu
1396: # compress -d figures.tar_Z
1397: # tar -xvf figures.tar
1398: #
1399: uudecode $0
1400: chmod 644 figures.tar.Z
1401: zcat figures.tar.Z | tar -xvf -
1402: rm $0 figures.tar.Z
1403: exit
1404:
1405: