text:
# Supernova 1987A did not test the neutrino mass hierarchy

## Abstract

We dispel the misconception that data from SN 1987A favor the normal neutrino mass hierarchy over the inverted hierarchy for $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}>10^4`$. We find comparable fits for the two hierarchies. No bound can be placed on the mixing angle $`\theta _{13}`$ even at the 1$`\sigma `$ level.

preprint:   MADPH–02-1257 hep-ph/0202158

On February 23, 1987, antineutrinos from a 20$`M_{}`$ Type II supernova in the Large Magellanic Cloud were detected by the Kamiokande II (KII)  and Irvine Michigan Brookhaven (IMB)  detectors. The data on SN 1987A have been important in confirming the generic features of the core collapse model of supernovae . However, the average antineutrino energy $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ and the binding energy of the star $`E_b`$, extracted from the signals at KII and IMB, only marginally agree with each other . Moreover, even under the most optimistic conditions, the allowed values of $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ are lower than the following predictions of traditional supernova models :

$`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ $`=`$ $`1417\mathrm{MeV},`$ (1)
$`E_{\overline{\nu }_x}`$ $`=`$ $`2427\mathrm{MeV},x=\mu ,\tau ,`$ (2)
$`E_b`$ $`=`$ $`1.54.5\times 10^{53}\mathrm{ergs}.`$ (3)
Including neutrino oscillations does little to resolve these discrepancies. For the favored large-angle solution to the solar anomaly , compatibility of the two data sets is not significantly improved . Furthermore, in any oscillation scenario, $`\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$ oscillations result in a hardened initial spectrum, implying even lower $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ and increasing the discrepancy with theoretical predictions . The degree to which the data and supernova models disagree depends on the type of neutrino mass hierarchy. There are two possibilities depending upon whether $`m_3`$ is the largest or smallest mass eigenstate:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2m_3^2m_2^2`$ $`>`$ $`0,\mathrm{normal}\mathrm{hierarchy},`$ (4)
$`<`$ $`0,\mathrm{inverted}\mathrm{hierarchy},`$ (5)
where oscillations between the $`m_3`$ and $`m_2`$ ($`m_2`$ and $`m_1`$) mass eigenstates are responsible for the atmospheric (solar) neutrino deficit. The disagreement with the theoretical predictions is aggravated if the hierarchy of neutrino masses is inverted and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}>10^3`$ because the conversion of the original $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ spectrum is almost complete in this case (regardless of the solution to the solar neutrino problem). This is a hint that the inverted mass scheme is disfavored by SN 1987A . However, it is an overstatement that SN 1987A gives a strong indication that the inverted hierarchy is disfavored unless $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}<10^4`$ .

We show that the SN 1987A data do not favor one hierarchy over the other by performing a maximum likelihood analysis of the data from KII and IMB in the three neutrino framework assuming the LMA solution to the solar neutrino problem. We perform three-parameter fits to $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$, $`E_b`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$, where $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ is the temperature of the electron antineutrinos originating in the supernova, which for a Fermi-Dirac distribution is related to $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ via $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}=180\zeta (3)E_{\overline{\nu }_e}/(7\pi ^4)E_{\overline{\nu }_e}/3.15`$. We find that the data can be fit equally well by the two hierarchies with the maximum of the likelihood function in the two cases to be approximately the same. No constraint can be placed on $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$ at the 1$`\sigma `$ level.

Recent refinements in supernova codes suggest that the discrepancy with SN 1987A data may soon be resolved. The simulations of Ref.  find $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ and $`E_{\overline{\nu }_x}`$ below the ranges in Eq. (3). The lower $`T_{\overline{\nu }_x}`$ is attributed to the inclusion (for the first time) of nucleon-nucleon neutral-current bremsstrahlung which is softer than $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation (the other major $`\overline{\nu }_x`$ source). A similar conclusion is drawn in Ref.  which explains that nucleon recoils lower $`T_{\overline{\nu }_x}`$ substantially. Additional energy transfer due to neutrino-matter scattering processes not included in supernova simulations will further soften the emergent spectra.

To simulate the time averaged spectrum of antineutrinos from SN 1987A, we employ a Fermi-Dirac distribution with equipartition of energy between the neutrino flavors. As the antineutrinos travel outward from their production point in the supernova, they encounter a density profile that falls like $`1/r^3`$ . For the LMA solution, antineutrinos can experience at most one resonance (at density $`\rho 10^310^4\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and characterized by $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$), and only if the hierarchy is inverted. For the normal and inverted hierarchies, the survival probability of electron antineutrinos is given by

$$\overline{p}=\overline{P}_{1e},$$
(6)
and

$$\overline{p}=P_H\overline{P}_{1e}+(1P_H)\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13},$$
(7)
respectively. Here, $`\overline{P}_{1e}=\overline{P}_{1e}(E_\nu ,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12})`$ is the probability that an antineutrino reaching the earth in the $`\overline{\nu }_1`$ mass eigenstate will interact with the detector as a $`\overline{\nu }_e`$, and $`P_He^{\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}(|\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2|/E_\nu )^{2/3}}`$  is the hopping probability at the resonance. If $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}10^3`$, we have $`P_H1`$ and the survival probabilities for the two hierarchies are the same. Thus, the normal and inverted mass hierarchies are indistinguishable for $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}10^3`$. If $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}>10^3`$, for the inverted hierarchy $`\overline{p}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}<2.5\times 10^2`$ and the original electron antineutrinos have all been swapped for the more energetic $`\mu `$ and $`\tau `$ antineutrinos by the time they exit the supernova envelope, resulting in a harder incident spectrum. Thus, the initial $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ spectrum would have to be softer for the inverted hierarchy than for the normal hierarchy.

In performing our statistical analysis, we fix the solar neutrino oscillation parameters at $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2=3.7\times 10^5`$ eV2, $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}=0.79`$  and the atmospheric neutrino scale $`|\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2|=3\times 10^3`$ eV2  and fit the data taking $`E_b`$, $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$ as free parameters. The time structure of the SN 1987A signal (above threshold) is shown in Fig. 1, where it has been assumed that the first events at the two detectors occurred simultaneously. Most of the events are concentrated in the first 2.75 seconds. We perform two sets of analyses to illustrate how sensitive any conclusion about the mass hierarchy is to the data sample chosen for analysis. For the first set of analyses (which we label $`t_{<13}`$), we use all the data reported by the two experiments: the 11 events observed by KII and the 8 events observed by IMB. For the second set (which we call $`t_{<3}`$), we only include events within the first 2.75 seconds: 8 events at KII and 6 at IMB. All are assumed to be antineutrino events . The procedure employed for our likelihood analysis is that of Ref.  up to four minor refinements listed below. (We refer the reader to Ref.  for the definition of the likelihood function and a description of the method).

1. We use an improved $`\overline{\nu }_ep`$ cross section which includes Coulomb, weak magnetism, recoil and outer radiative corrections . It is approximately 8% larger than the cross-section used in Ref. .
2. Instead of using the constant density approximation for the earth to calculate $`\overline{P}_{1e}`$, we numerically integrate the evolution equations of neutrinos through a realistic density profile of the earth .
3. We approximate the time integrated spectra of neutrinos with a Fermi-Dirac distribution instead of a Boltzmann distribution.
4. We use the detector efficiencies given in Ref. .

To convey how these modifications (other than the different treatment of earth matter effects) affect the $`t_{<13}`$ analysis, we show the 1$`\sigma `$ and 2$`\sigma `$ allowed regions in $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ and $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ for the case of no neutrino mixing in Fig. 2. The results from separate analyses of KII and IMB data and an analysis of the combined data are shown. This facilitates a direct comparison with other analyses . The dark-shaded region is the prediction of supernova models from Eq. (3) while the light-shaded region is the result based on Ref. . The overlap with the predicted $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ is significantly greater for the $`t_{<3}`$ analysis, as can be seen in Fig. 3. Also, KII and IMB data from the first three seconds are consistent at the 1$`\sigma `$ level.

For the inverted hierarchy, we perform three-parameter $`t_{<13}`$ analyses for $`\tau T_{\overline{\nu }_x}/T_{\overline{\nu }_e}=1.7`$ (corresponding to the middle of the ranges of Eq. 3), $`\tau =1.4`$ (the lowest value of $`\tau `$ from Eq. 3) and $`\tau =1.25`$ (corresponding to a $`\overline{\nu }_x`$ spectrum that is softer  than traditionally obtained), the results of which are shown in Figs. 4-6, respectively. The results of the equivalent $`t_{<3}`$ analyses are shown in Figs. 7-9. The figures show allowed regions at the 1$`\sigma `$ and 2$`\sigma `$ C.L. in the parameter space defined by $`E_b`$, $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$. We do not consider $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}>0.1`$ since this would violate the CHOOZ bound .

The best-fit points are displayed in Table I, and as expected the $`t_{<3}`$ analysis gives higher best-fit $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ (since the same is true for no oscillations), and the best-fit values of $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$ correspond to highly non-adiabatic transitions. However, $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$ is not constrained even at the 1$`\sigma `$ level. Values of $`\tau `$ greater than 1.7 lead to $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ shifted to smaller values than for $`\tau =1.7`$, but the $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$ contour remains open at the 1$`\sigma `$ level. It can be seen qualitatively, that for $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}<10^4`$, values of $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ from supernova codes are less inconsistent with the data (see the lower panels of Fig. 4-9). But, for $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ in the range found in Ref.  and $`\tau <1.4`$, SN 1987A data are consistent with theoretical predictions even for $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$ as high as the CHOOZ bound. The results of Ref.  indicate that both the above conditions on $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ and $`\tau `$ can easily be met simultaneously. Thus, even at a qualitative level it can not be claimed that the inverted mass hierarchy is disfavored for $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}>10^4`$.

For a given value of $`\tau `$, the range of $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ that is allowed for the normal hierarchy is the same as that for the inverted hierarchy with $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}=0`$ since the survival probabilities, Eqs. (6) and (7), are the same for both hierarchies in this limit. The $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ for the normal hierarchy can be read-off from the lower panels of Figs. 4-9 at $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}=10^6`$. (This interpretation must be made with caution, since for the normal hierarchy, it is known a priori that the antineutrino spectra are independent of $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$, which would strictly mean that the confidence regions should be determined for two parameters and not three).

To make the fact that SN 1987A data did not probe the neutrino mass hierarchy even more transparent, we show the results of two-parameter fits in $`E_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ and $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ for the normal hierarchy and the inverted hierarchy (with $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}=0.01`$) in Table II ($`t_{<13}`$) and Table III ($`t_{<3}`$). We do not show figures of these allowed regions since these exist in the literature  for the $`t_{<13}`$ case. As has been pointed out by previous authors, if the hierarchy is inverted and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}`$ is large (i.e., $`P_H0`$), lower values of $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$ are required to fit the data than if the hierarchy is normal. Since in all cases the likelihoods are comparable, the data itself does not favor one neutrino mass hierarchy over the other. Any deductions about the hierarchy can only be based on the disagreement of the data with supernova model predictions, which are in a state of change.

In addition to the above arguments, one must keep in mind that SN 1987A provided us with very limited statistics with a somewhat uncertain time sequence. Moreover, even with oscillations, the marginal overlap between the KII and IMB data should suggest that any conclusions can only be suggestive at best.

In summary, we have disputed the assertion that SN 1987A provides a strong indication that the inverted mass hierarchy is disfavored for $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}>10^4`$ . The data provides no substantial evidence that this is the case. Rather than telling us anything about the nature of the neutrino mass hierarchy, SN 1987A data seem to indicate the need for more sophisticated supernova codes  which could remove the (mass-hierarchy-independent) discrepancy with model predictions. For a future galactic supernova, data from Super-Kamiokande and SNO would enable a precise determination of both $`E_b`$ and $`T_{\overline{\nu }_e}`$  (unless $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}>10^3`$ and the hierarchy is inverted ) and determine the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2`$ if $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{13}>10^4`$ , independently of supernova models.

Acknowledgements. We thank S. Reddy for numerous discussions and suggestions. This research was supported by the U.S. DOE under Grants No. DE-FG02-95ER40896 and No. DE-FG02-91ER40676 and by the WARF.


format: text

text:
# Thermal Hall Conductivity of High Temperature Superconductors: Quantization and Scaling

## Abstract

Presented is the theory of thermal Hall conductivity $`\kappa _{xy}`$ in the vortex state of high temperature cuprate superconductors in the clean limit. We show that $`lim_{T0}\kappa _{xy}/T`$ is a staircase function of $`1/B`$ with an envelope that scales as $`1/B`$. The relation to the experiments is discussed.

Fifteen years after the discovery of high temperature superconductivity in cuprates BednorzMuller , the search for the “final” theory continues unabated. Nevertheless, certain important clues about the elements that such a theory must contain appear to be established. One of the most significant results of the past few years is that, in the superconducting state, cuprates seem to be well described by the familiar BCS-type formalism with Cooper pairs binding in the d-wave channel harlingen . This is a far from trivial observation in the materials known to exhibit strong correlations. Soon after the original discovery, Anderson anderson1  identified one of the key features of the new superconductivity: the materials are basically two-dimensional with most of the action relevant for superconductivity taking place in the $`CuO_2`$ planes. The reduced dimensionality and the presence of nodal points on an otherwise gapped Fermi surface governs the low temperature properties of the high-$`T_c`$ superconductors (HTS). Corroborating evidence for the BCS character of the fermionic excitations comes from diverse spectroscopic and transport experiments walker ; ding ; taillefert1 ; millis .

Especially informative probe of the quasiparticle dynamics is the thermal Hall conductivity, $`\kappa _{xy}`$ ong , particularly since phonons, which usually contribute to the longitudinal thermal conductivity, $`\kappa _{xx}`$, do not contribute to $`\kappa _{xy}`$ by the virtue of their being electrically neutral. In addition, from the theoretical point of view, in the leading “nodal” approximation, $`\kappa _{xy}`$ vanishes simonlee ; jinwu ; ashvin  and one must consider curvature terms. For these reasons a special opportunity emerges to scrutinize, both theoretically and experimentally, the extent to which the fermionic quasiparticles in HTS exhibit the BCS-type behavior.

Our starting point is a 2-dimensional Bogoliubov-de Gennes Hamiltonian in the vortex state

$$H_{BdG}=\sigma _3\frac{\left(𝐩\sigma _3\frac{e}{c}𝐀\right)^2}{2m^{}}\sigma _3\mu +\sigma _1e^{i\sigma _3\varphi /2}\mathrm{\Delta }(𝐩)e^{i\sigma _3\varphi /2}$$
(1)
where $`𝐀(𝐱)`$ is the vector potential associated with the uniform external magnetic field $`𝐁`$, $`𝐩`$ is a momentum operator, and $`\sigma `$’s are Pauli matrices operating in the Nambu space. The vortex phase fields satisfy $`\times \varphi (𝐱)=2\pi \widehat{z}_i\delta (𝐱𝐱_i)`$ with $`𝐱_i`$ denoting the vortex positions and $`\delta (𝐱𝐱_i)`$ being a 2D Dirac delta function. For a $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-wave superconductor $`\mathrm{\Delta }(𝐩)=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{p_F^2}(p_x^2p_y^2)`$.

Following Franz and Tesanovic ft  (see also luca ; ashvin ; vmt ), we divide the vortices into two sets $`A`$ and $`B`$, positioned at $`\{𝐱_i^A\}`$ and $`\{𝐱_i^B\}`$ respectively (see Fig. 1) and define two phase fields $`\varphi ^A(𝐱)`$ and $`\varphi ^B(𝐱)`$ such that $`\times \varphi ^\alpha (𝐱)=2\pi \widehat{z}_i\delta (𝐱𝐱_i^\alpha ),`$ $`\alpha =A,B`$. The Hamiltonian (1) is then transformed into ft

$$=U^{}H_{BdG}U=\sigma _3\frac{\left(𝐩\sigma _3𝐯+𝐚\right)^2}{2m^{}}\sigma _3\mu +\sigma _1\mathrm{\Delta }(𝐩+𝐚)$$
(2)
using the unitary operator

$$U=e^{i\chi +i\sigma _3\mathrm{\Phi }}$$
(3)
where $`\chi =\frac{1}{2}(\varphi _A\varphi _B)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{1}{2}(\varphi _A+\varphi _B)=\frac{1}{2}\varphi `$. In Eq. (2), $`𝐯=\frac{1}{2}\varphi \frac{e}{c}𝐀`$ is the superfluid velocity and $`𝐚=\frac{1}{2}(\varphi _A\varphi _B)`$ is the Berry gauge field which imposes the condition that a quasiparticle wavepacket encircling an $`\frac{hc}{2e}`$ vortex must pick up an overall minus sign.

In addition to keeping the wavefunctions single-valued, the advantage of this “bipartite” singular gauge transformation is that for a periodic arrangement of vortices (Abrikosov vortex lattice) the resulting Hamiltonian (2) is itself periodic. This is not true of Hamiltonian (1). Therefore, the eigenstates of (2) can be expressed through the familiar Bloch waves $`\psi _{n𝐤}(𝐱)=e^{i𝐤𝐱}u_{n𝐤}(𝐱)`$ labeled by one discrete quantum number, the band index $`n`$, and two continuous quantum numbers, the vortex crystal momenta $`k_x`$, $`k_y`$ that range in the first Brillouin zone. Note that $`u_{n𝐤}(𝐱)`$ is not periodic with the periodicity of the vortex lattice, but with the periodicity of the vortex sublattice containing a unit of electronic flux $`\frac{hc}{e}`$ (see Fig. 1).

By extracting the plane wave part of the Bloch states we can define a Hamiltonian

$$(𝐤)=\sigma _3\frac{\left(𝐩+𝐤\sigma _3𝐯+𝐚\right)^2}{2m^{}}\sigma _3\mu +\sigma _1\mathrm{\Delta }(𝐩+𝐤+𝐚)$$
(4)
where $`(𝐤)=e^{i𝐤𝐱}e^{i𝐤𝐱}`$. We now wish to point out an important feature of $`(𝐤)`$ in the case when the vortex lattice has an inversion symmetry. As shown in Ref.vmt  an operator $`𝒫=i\sigma _2𝒞`$, where $`𝒞`$ represents charge conjugation and $``$ takes $`𝐱`$ into $`𝐱`$, with the following property

$$𝒫^1(𝐤)𝒫=(𝐤);u_{n𝐤}|𝒫|u_{n𝐤}=0.$$
(5)
This means that for every energy band $`ϵ_{n𝐤}`$ there is another $`ϵ_{m𝐤}`$ such that $`ϵ_{n𝐤}=ϵ_{m𝐤}`$, i.e. the band spectrum has reflection symmetry about the Fermi level and if a band were to cross the Fermi level ($`ϵ_{n𝐪}=0`$ for some $`𝐪`$) then there would have to be a twofold degeneracy at $`𝐪`$. However, by the von Neumann-Wigner “non-crossing” theorem noncrossing , the degeneracy unrelated to symmetry cannot happen for a time reversal breaking Hamiltonian which depends only on two continuous parameters. Thus, the quasiparticle spectrum of the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ superconductor in the vortex state is gapped by a (direct) gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ unless a third parameter is fine tuned, e.g. the band crossing at the Fermi level can be achieved by fine-tuning the chemical potential $`\mu `$.

If we rescale all coordinates by the magnetic length $`l=\sqrt{c/eB}`$ (see Fig. 1), $`𝐱l𝐱`$, then

$$(𝐤,l,\mu ,\mathrm{\Delta }_0)\frac{1}{l^2}f(l𝐤,l^2\mu ,\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{p_F^2}),$$
(6)
where $`f`$ is a universal (operator) function. Consequently, the small band gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ at the Fermi level, which is equal to the minimum of the lowest positive eigen-energy of $`(𝐤,l,\mu )`$ with respect to $`𝐤`$, is also a universal function that can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_m(B,\mu ,\mathrm{\Delta }_0)=B\times F(\frac{\mu }{B},\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{p_F^2}).$$
(7)
Thus, in order to determine the dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ on the magnetic field $`B`$, all we need to know is the dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ on $`\mu `$ for some fixed B and $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{p_F^2}`$, and then use the scaling relation (7). This dependence is determined numerically by diagonalizing a tight-binding version vmt  of the Hamiltonian (4) close to the bottom of the tight-binding band where we expect to recover the continuum theory (4). The numerical calculations confirm the scaling (7) which gives us confidence in relating the continuum results to the tight-binding approximation. As shown in Fig. 2, for a fixed value of $`\frac{t}{\mathrm{\Delta }_0}=\alpha _D=10`$, where $`t`$ is the tight-binding hopping constant, $`\frac{1}{B}\mathrm{\Delta }_m(\frac{\mu }{B})`$ is a saw-tooth function with a period of approximately $`4\pi `$.

In Ref. vmt  it was demonstrated that the gapped quasiparticle spectrum leads to the quantization of the spin Hall conductivity $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}`$ (see also Ref. ashvin ), which is in turn related to the thermal Hall conductivity, $`\kappa _{xy}`$, via the Wiedemann-Franz law

$$\underset{T0}{lim}\frac{\kappa _{xy}}{T}=\frac{4\pi ^2}{3}\left(\frac{k_B}{\mathrm{}}\right)^2\sigma _{xy}^{spin}(B).$$
(8)
Because the quantization of $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}`$ is topological in origin vmt , any continuous change in a parameter of the Hamiltonian results in the same quantized value of $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}`$ unless the quasiparticle gap collapses. Therefore, for a fixed Dirac anisotropy $`\alpha _D`$, by virtue of Eq. (6), the dependence of $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}`$ on $`B`$ and $`\mu `$ can be expressed entirely as a dependence of $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}`$ on $`\frac{1}{B}\mathrm{\Delta }_m(B,\mu )`$, i.e.

$$\sigma _{xy}^{spin}(B,\mu )=G\left(\frac{\mu }{B}\right),$$
(9)
where $`G`$ is a universal function of its argument that in addition depends on the geometry of the vortex lattice.

For a fixed (large) value of B the numerical computation of $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}`$ can be readily accomplished. The results for a square vortex lattice and $`\alpha _D=10`$ are displayed in Fig. 2 where it is seen that $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}`$ is a stair-case function of $`\frac{\mu }{B}`$ which starts at zero at empty filling and then jumps by a multiple of $`2\frac{\mathrm{}}{8\pi }`$. The band crossings, which are responsible for the changes in $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}`$, occur at symmetry points in the Brillouin zone, and by the symmetry of the square vortex lattice, the steps are bound to come in even integers notsu2 .

Thus we arrive at the main result of this Letter shown in Fig. 2: the envelope of the $`\sigma _{xy}^{spin}(B)`$ scales as $`B^1`$ and by Eq. (8)

$$\underset{T0}{lim}\left(\frac{\kappa _{xy}}{T}\right)\frac{1}{B}$$
(10)
This expression is reminiscent of the electrical Hall conductivity in the 2D electron gas.

Recently, measurements of $`\kappa _{xy}`$ were conducted by Ong’s group ong  on YBCO samples with a very long mean free path. These experiments were carried out over a wide range of magnetic fields (up to $`14T`$) and at temperatures from $`T12.5K`$ to above the superconducting transition $`T_c90K`$. Unfortunately, the experiments are resolution limited below $`12.5K`$ as signal becomes too weak. In Fig. 3 we re-analyze the data of Ref. ong . It is seen that for the magnetic fields above $`4T`$, $`\kappa _{xy}C+B^1`$ which is, apart from the finite intercept, in agreement with our theory.

At fields $`B<4T`$, $`\kappa _{xy}`$ decreases with decreasing $`B`$ and vanishes at $`B=0`$ ong . At low magnetic fields $`\frac{1}{B}`$ divergence of $`\kappa _{xy}`$ is cut-off by disorder i.e. $`\kappa _{xy}=\frac{\rho _{xy}}{\rho _{xx}^2+\rho _{xy}^2}`$ with non-vanishing longitudinal quasiparticle thermal resistivity $`\rho _{xx}`$. Even in the presence of weak disorder, we still expect $`\rho _{xy}B`$ and $`\rho _{xx}`$ to be approximately field independent. Therefore, the transverse thermal conductivity in the presence of disorder should vanish in the limit of vanishing $`B`$. We must admit that the origin of the residual thermal conductivity at $`\frac{1}{B}=0`$, evident in Fig. 3, remains mysterious to us and we can only speculate that it is not of quasiparticle origin.

In summary, based on a general analysis of the full non-linearized Bogoliubov-de Gennes equations, we argued that magnetic field $`B`$ will induce a small gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ in the quasiparticle spectrum which is a non-monotonic function of the magnetic field. Rather, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ vanishes at some special values of $`\mu /B`$ which depend on the details of the vortex lattice and the Dirac cone anisotropy (Fig. 2). The dependence of $`\kappa _{xy}`$ on $`B`$ is entirely due to this non-monotonic behavior of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$, since $`\kappa _{xy}/T`$ is a topological quantity and therefore can change only at the band crossings vmt . The topological quantization of $`\kappa _{xy}`$ was also discussed in the Ref. ashvin . However, we wish to point out a significant qualitative difference between the results presented here and those of Ref. ashvin : as we argued before $`\kappa _{xy}`$ is a quantized staircase function of $`1/B`$ with an envelope that itself scales as $`1/B`$, while Ref. ashvin  states that $`\kappa _{xy}/T`$ can take on only one of the three allowed values $`0,\pm 2`$ and is otherwise field-independent. Consequently, in a typical experimental situation, the explicit values for $`\kappa _{xy}`$ obtained from these two works will differ significantly. Still, there is an agreement on the fact that since the quasiparticle spectrum is gapped $`\kappa _{xy}`$ does not obey simple Simon-Lee scaling, at least when the temperature is comparable to the quasiparticle gap.

We thank Marcel Franz, Ashot Melikyan and Ady Stern for comments and discussions. This work was supported in part by NSF grant DMR00-94981.


text:
# References

THERMAL MODEL AT RHIC:
PARTICLE RATIOS AND $`p_{}`$ SPECTRA
Wojciech BRONIOWSKI and Wojciech FLORKOWSKI

The H. Niewodniczański Institute of Nuclear Physics
PL-31342 Cracow, POLAND

## Abstract

Predictions of the single-freeze-out model for the particle spectra at RHIC are presented. The model assumes that the chemical and thermal freeze-outs occur simultaneously, and incorporates in simple terms the longitudinal and transverse flow. All resonance decays are included. The model predictions and the data are in striking agreement in the whole available range of momenta.

Much has been said during this Workshop on the predictions for the particle ratios within the thermal approach (see the contribution by J. Stachel), hence in this talk we concentrate entirely on the $`p_{}`$ spectra . We only wish to mention that our study  of the particle ratios at RHIC confirms, within statistical errors, the results of , with the following values of the thermal parameters:

$$T=165\pm 7\text{ MeV},\mu _B=41\pm 5\text{ MeV}.$$
(1)
Strangeness conservation gives $`\mu _S=9`$ MeV, and isospin asymmetry of the gold nuclei yields $`\mu _I=1`$ MeV. For more details, review of the thermal models, and references, see .

Our model for the spectra incorporates the following assumptions:

1. Chemical and thermal freeze-outs occur simultaneously on a freeze-out hypersurface. In other words, elastic rescattering after the freeze-out is neglected. This simplification, which opposes the traditional picture with two distinct freeze-outs at noticeably different temperatures, works very well, as can be seen from our figures. Note that rapid expansion of the system inhibits the collision rate. Also, the Van der Waals corrections discussed at the end of this talk make the system more dilute at freeze-out, reducing its opacity. Arguments hinting rapid expansion have also been presented in the contributions by H. Appelshäuser and T. Hirano.
2. At freeze-out the particles are distributed according to the statistical distribution functions. The two thermodynamic parameters (1) are obtained from the analysis of the ratios of the particle multiplicities. Since these depend rather weakly on centrality, we treat the thermal parameters as universal.
3. The resonances are treated in a complete way, with all particles from the PDG tables incorporated. Their sequential decays are included exactly, in a semi-analytic fashion. The role of the resonances is very important, resulting in substantial “cooling” of the spectra .
4. The freeze-out hypersurface is a simple generalization of the Bjorken model. It is parameterized with two geometric parameters specified below: the invariant time, $`\tau `$, and the transverse radius, $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}`$. For simplicity, Hubble-like expansion is assumed, with the four-velocity proportional to the coordinate, $`u^\mu =x^\mu /\tau `$. Clearly, other parameterizations of the fire-ball expansion, e.g. those following from the hydrodynamic evolution in various models, can be implemented and tested.
5. The only parameters of the model are the two universal thermal parameters (1) and the two geometric parameters, $`\tau `$ and $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}`$ (different for each centrality).

The parameterization of the freeze-out hypersurface, taken in the spirit of the Buda-Lund model , is as follows:

$$t=\mathrm{ch}\alpha _{}\sqrt{\tau ^2+\rho ^2},z=\mathrm{sh}\alpha _{}\sqrt{\tau ^2+\rho ^2},x=\rho \mathrm{cos}\varphi ,y=\rho \mathrm{sin}\varphi ,$$

with $`\rho \rho _{\mathrm{max}}`$. The parameter $`\tau `$ fixes the overall normalization of the spectra, while the ratio $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}/\tau `$ determines their shape. The standard Cooper-Frye formalism is applied to obtain the spectra. The details of our procedure, including the technicalities of the resonance decays, are given in the Appendix of Ref. .

Fig. 1 shows our results for the PHENIX minimum-bias data at $`\sqrt{s}=130`$ GeV A . The fitted values of the geometric parameters are $`\tau =5.55`$ fm and $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}=4.50`$ fm. We note excellent agreement in the whole available data range, with the magnitude of the spectra spanned over five decades. Virtually all points are crossed by the model curves within error bars. Similar agreement, not shown, has been found for $`\pi ^0`$. Note that all the non-trivial experimental features are reproduced in Fig. 1. In particular, we find the convex shape of the pion spectra, the crossing of $`p`$ and $`\pi ^+`$ around $`p_{}=2`$ GeV, and of $`K^+`$ and

Fig. 1: Predictions of the single-freeze-out model for the particle spectra at mid-rapidity vs. the PHENIX minimum-bias data.

$`\pi ^+`$ around 1 GeV (we note in passing that a similar effect of crossing occurs for the SPS data plotted in the $`p_{}`$ variable, cf. Fig. 3). The model results at $`p_{}>2`$ GeV should be taken with a grain of salt, since hard processes are expected to be important in that region (see the talk by P. Levai).

Fig. 2 shows our results for the most central collisions at RHIC, where we find from the fit $`\tau =7.66`$ fm and $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}=6.69`$ fm . These numbers are, as expected from geometry, larger than for the minimum-bias case, which averages over centralities. The data in Fig. 2 come from . All data except for $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ are absolutely normalized. The normalization for $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, not available experimentally in , has been adjusted arbitrarily. We have found later that this norm is consistent with the newly-released normalized data of . The curves for other hyperons are predictions. Again, the agreement in Fig. 2 is remarkable, except for the $`\overline{p}`$ data from STAR, however these data have been corrected for weak decays through the use of the HIJING model , which led to about 20% decrease. Our model curves in all plots include the full feeding from the weak decays. The fact that our approach reproduces the $`\overline{p}`$ yields brings a support for the single-freeze-out idea. This is because the large annihilation cross section of $`\overline{p}`$ would decrease its abundance if it

Fig. 2: Same as Fig. 1 for the most-central data from STAR (open symbols) and PHENIX (filled symbols) .

interacted with the protons. Thus the single-freeze-out solves the anti-baryon puzzle discussed in the talk by R. Rapp. The fact that the $`\varphi `$ data are well reproduced also deserves a credit. This meson interacts rather weakly with the medium, thus it can serve as an accurate thermometer of the system at freeze-out. Fits of similar quality as in Fig. 2 can be found for non-central collisions.

The value of $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}`$ of Fig. 2 leads to the following values of the average and maximum transverse flow velocity: $`\beta _{}=0.49`$, $`\beta _{}^{\mathrm{max}}=0.66`$.

Fig. 3 shows the model fits to the most central NA49 data. For all particles very reasonable agreement is achieved, except for the $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$ (not shown), where the model slope is much too low.

Now we remark on the problem of the HBT radii. As pointed out in the talk by D. Hardtke, our transverse size $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}`$ is small, such that the expected value of $`R_s`$ would be too low, of the order of 3.5 fm. However, there are two important effect which increase $`R_s`$. The first is the decay of resonances. The resonances travel about of 1 fm before they decay, which increases the radius. Since three quarters of pions come from resonance decays, this increases $`R_s`$. The other, more pronounced, effect is the excluded volume/Van der Waals correction. The excluded volume correction brings in a factor of $`(1+vn)^1`$, where $`v5`$ fm3 is the eigenvolume of the particle (assumed, for simplicity, the same for all particles) and $`n0.5\mathrm{fm}^3`$ is the density of particles. Another factor comes from the modification of the chemical potential, and (for the Boltzmann distributions) has the form $`\mathrm{exp}(pv/T)`$, where $`p`$ is the pressure.

Fig. 3: Same as Fig. 1 for the SPS NA49 data (Nucl. Phys. A610 (1996) 188c; Phys. Lett. B444 (1998) 523; Phys. Lett. B491 (2000) 59).

The product of these factors, which we denote by $`s`$, is significantly smaller than 1. It changes the normalization of the integrals for the particle multiplicities and spectra. It can be compensated by simultaneously rescaling $`\tau `$ and $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}`$ by $`s^{1/3}`$. The procedure leaves the particle ratios and the spectra intact (!), however, it scales up the HBT radii by $`s^{1/3}`$. A detailed self-consistent inclusion of the Van der Waals corrections is necessary to obtain detailed estimates. We expect that the needed 50-60% increase will follow naturally. Hence, our approach has no fundamental problem with the size of the HBT radii, provided the resonance decays and the Van der Waals effect is incorporated. Also, with the inclusion of the Van der Waals effects the size parameters are raised comfortably above the geometric size of the gold nuclei, making room and time for the collective flow to develop. Certainly, it is important to see in detail what are the predictions of our model for all HBT radii, in particular for the ratios, where most approaches have serious problems. This research is under way.

In conclusion, the agreement with the $`p_{}`$ spectra for all species of particles, achieved with just two thermal and two geometric parameters, is surprisingly good cf. Figs. 1-2. Thus, our analysis provides a very strong support for the thermal approach to the particle production at RHIC.

We are very grateful to Marek Gaździcki for numerous clarifying discussions. This work has been supported by the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research, grant 2 P03B 09419.


text:
# What Have We Learned from RHIC?11footnote 1Invited talk presented at the International Conference on the Physics and Astrophysics of the Quark Gluon Plasma, Nov. 26-30 2001

## 1 Introduction

The goal of the heavy ion program at the RHIC at Brookhaven National Laboratory is to make and study new forms of matter at energy densities in excess of ten times that of nuclear matter. I will describe the status of this program from a theorist’s perspective. In this talk, I would like to address four simple questions:

* What are we trying to understand?

We are trying to produce new forms of matter and understand their properties.
* What have we already learned?

I will argue that we have produced matter at energy densities at least 10 and perhaps 100 times higher than that of nuclear matter. This matter is strongly interacting with itself.
* What do we expect to learn?

There are some measurements which will be carried out in the near term which will answer specific questions about the properties of matter produced in RHIC collisions.
* What do we hope to learn?

In the longer term, there are the measurements which are harder to understand or more controversial or ambiguous in their interpretation, and will require new analysis.

## 2 What Are We Trying to Understand?

There are two central issues of the RHIC experimental program.

* What is the behavior of matter at asymptotically large energy density?

Matter at very high energy density in thermal equilibrium is believed to form a Quark Gluon Plasma. This gas of almost free quarks and gluons is thought to be the proper description of matter when energy densities are larger than about $`1GeV/Fm^3`$. This is about the energy density inside a proton or neutron and is about an order of magnitude larger than that of nuclear matter. Matter of this energy density occurs naturally in the cores of neutron stars and was present during the big bang.
* What type of matter is important for high energy hadrons?

This matter is believed to be a very dense system of quarks and gluons, and is called a Color Glass Condensate. It is an incoherent superposition of quantum mechanical states of Bose condensates. It is parameterized by a surface energy density, and is presumably the correct description of matter when the energy density per unit area is greater than about $`1GeV/Fm^2`$ The Color Glass Condensate may be responsible for universal behavior of all hadronic interactions at high energy.

### 2.1 The Quark Gluon Plasma

In Fig. 1, a cartoon is shown which illustrates what we expect happens when nucleons, or for that matter any hadrons, are compressed to densities higher than is typical inside a nucleon. Eventually the constituents of the nucleon travel more or less freely around the system as a whole. This system is the Quark Gluon Plasma.

The formation of a Quark Gluon Plasma should begin to occur at about the energy density of matter inside a proton. Since a proton has a size about $`R1Fm`$, and has a rest mass energy of $`M1GeV`$, corresponding to an energy density of about $`1GeV/Fm^3`$

These observations led a number of people in the late 1970’s to suggest that there was a phase transition between ordinary matter and a Quark Gluon Plasma as is shown in Fig. 2. These conjectures were later firmed up by lattice Monte-Carlo simulations.

The early lattice Monte-Carlo simulations were unable to properly include the effects of quark masses. About the mid 1980’s arguments appeared which strongly suggested that for realistic values of quark masses, a real phase transition does not occur. Instead there is a sharp change in the properties of the system at some temperature and baryon chemical potential. Although it does not have strong implications for heavy ion collisions, this would affect strongly cosmological scenarios and has potential effect in neutron star cores.

By 2000, the story had become more complicated. It is now believed that there is a line of first order phase transitions in the baryon number chemical potential and temperature plane. There may be some region where the transition is second order or crossover. At high baryon number density and small temperature, there may be a number of color superconducting phases.

The bottom line on this historical aside is that physics is an experimental discipline. I think it is unlikely we will have a first principles understanding of the phase transition in QCD on the basis of pure thought. Much work will have to be done which combines experimental results and difficult numerical, presumably lattice, Monte-Carlo simulation, before we will have a compelling picture of high density matter.

At zero baryon number density, a lot has been learned about the properties of high temperature matter. For technical reasons, lattice Monte Carlo methods are very difficult to implement at finite baryon number density. At finite temperature, one has made remarkable progress.

In Fig. 3a, a plot of the energy density, $`ϵ`$ scaled by $`T^4`$ is shown vs temperature, $`T`$. This variable $`ϵ/T^4`$ is roughly proportional to the number of particle degrees of freedom important at the energy scale corresponding to $`T`$. A rapid cross over occurs at a temperature of $`T160190MeV`$. A first order phase transition cannot be ruled out at this time because the effects of finite quark mass are not under sufficient control. At low temperatures, the number of degrees of freedom are small and consistent with a gas of pions. At high temperatures, the degrees of freedom are roughly that of a massless gas of quarks and gluons. A sharp transition occurs between the meson system and that of the quark and gluons where $`ϵ/T^4`$ changes by an order of magnitude. By a temperature of order $`T500MeV`$, the number of important particle degrees of freedom stays approximately constant.

The origin of the proton and neutron mass is one of the mysteries of QCD. The masses of the up and down quarks inside a proton are only a few percent of the nucleon mass. Do not be fooled by those who say that the LHC Higgs boson search is designed to explain the origin of mass. The LHC probes electroweak physics and this gives masses to the up and down quark masses, which can explain only a few percent of the nucleon mass. Even in a world where the up and down quark masses had no mass and electroweak physics was entirely ignored, the nucleon would still have roughly its present mass, and this arises from QCD. It is believed that this mass is obtained by breaking of a chiral symmetry of the strong interactions.

This symmetry is broken in our low temperature world but is restored in the high temperature world. A measure of this symmetry breaking is $`<\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }>`$, the typical value of a condensate. This condensate is composed of quark-antiquark pairs. At low temperatures, this is non-zero, and rapidly goes to zero at the phase transition temperature, as is seen in Fig. 3b. The nucleon mass is proportional to this condensate, and so it goes to zero in the Quark Gluon Plasma.

Showing that the confining force between two quarks is linear was one of the first triumphs of lattice QCD. It can be measured as a function of temperature, and indeed in the Quark Gluon Plasma it goes to a constant at long distances. This is shown in Fig. 4a.

How is this transition from a gas of pions into a Quark Gluon Plasma manifest in terms of bulk properties of the system? The sound velocity is $`v_s^2=dP/dϵ`$ where $`P`$ is the pressure. At the crossover, the pressure is roughly constant while the energy density changes by an order of magnitude. The sound velocity should drop to near zero at $`T_c`$, as shown in Fig. 4b.

### 2.2 The Color Glass Condensate

To understand this new form of matter, it is convenient to imagine a hadron in a reference frame where it has very large longitudinal momentum. We will be interested in the constituents of the hadron wavefunction which have small longitudinal momentum in this frame of reference. These low momentum constituents are produced by the high momentum ones. Because the high momentum constituents appear to have time scales which are Lorentz time dilated compared to their natural scales, and since they induce the low momentum fields associated with the low momentum particles, the low momentum fields evolve very slowly compared to their natural time scale. Hence the term, Color Glass, since the fields are composed of color gluons, and glass because the time scale for evolution of these low momentum fields is much longer than their natural time scale. These fields live on a two dimensional sheet because of the Lorentz contraction of the high energy hadron. We shall argue in the following paragraphs that the phase space-density of these fields becomes large and forms a condensate.

The fields on the two dimensional sheet turn out to be similar to the Lienard-Wiechart potentials of electrodynamics. They correspond to plane waves as in the Weizsacker-Williams approximation of electrodynamics, except that they have color. They have their color electric field perpendicular to their color magnetic field and both perpendicular to their direction of motion, $`\stackrel{}{E}^a\stackrel{}{B}^a\stackrel{}{z}`$. They have a random color. This is shown in Fig. 5

The gluon structure function $`xG(x,Q^2)`$ is experimentally measured to increase at small x. In the reference frame where the hadron is very fast, $`x`$ is the ratio of a constituent energy to the projectile energy. The gluon distribution is shown in Fig. 6a. Note the rapid increase in $`xG(x,Q^2)`$ as a function of $`x`$ for small x. This is the origin of the “small x problem”. This means that the piece of the hadron wavefunction relevant for small x processes has an increasing density of gluons. In Fig. 6b, we look at a hadron headed along the beam direction. As x decreases, the density of gluons increases.

The phase space density of gluons is

$`\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi R^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{dN}{dyd^2p_T}}`$ (1)
where $`R`$ is the hadron size, $`p_T`$ is the transverse momentum of a constituent, and $`yln(1/x)`$. The high density of gluons is generated dynamically and is caused by an instability, which is proportional to the density. The instability is stabilized when the density of partons becomes large enough so that interactions of order $`\alpha _{QCD}\eta ^2`$ become of the order of the linear instability. Here $`\eta =d^2p_T\rho `$. This requires that

$`\eta Q_{sat}^2/\alpha _{QCD}`$ (2)
The factor of $`Q^2`$ arises because we consider densities per unit area, and $`Q_{sat}^2`$ carries this dimension. This $`Q_{sat}`$ is called the saturation momentum. The factor of $`\alpha _{QCD}`$ is the strong coupling strength of QCD. When $`Q_{sat}>>\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}`$, we expect that $`\alpha _{QCD}<<1`$, so that the system becomes a high density Bose Condensate.

The name Color Glass Condensate arises therefore because

* Color

The gluons are colored.
* Glass The natural time scale for the evolution of the gluon field is Lorentz time dilated. This is like a glass which is a liquid on long times scales but a solid on short ones.
* Condensate

The phase space density is as large as it can be.

### 2.3 Space Time Evolution of Heavy Ion Collisions

A collision of two sheets of Colored Glass is shown in Fig. 7.

This is the picture of nucleus-nucleus collision which arises from the Color Glass Condensate.

The time evolution of the matter produced in these collisions is divided into several stages:

* Initial Conditions

For $`t<0`$, the two sheets approach one another. The Color Glass is frozen in each nucleus.
* Melting the Color Glass

During the time $`0<t<t_{form}`$, the Color Glass melts into quarks and gluons. It is estimated that $`t_{form}1/Q_{sat}.1.3Fm/c`$ at RHIC energy. The energy density of the matter at formation is somewhere around $`ϵ_{form}Q_{sat}^4/\alpha _s20100GeV/Fm^3`$.
* Thermalization

During the time $`t_{form}<t<t_{therm}`$, the matter expands and thermalizes. Typical thermalization time is estimated to be $`t_{therm}.51Fm/c`$.
* Hydrodynamic Expansion

The system expands as a thermal system until a time of decoupling which is typically about $`t_{decoupling}10Fm/c`$ at RHIC energy. Here the matter presumably starts as a Quark Gluon Plasma, evolves through a mixed phase of hadrons and Quark Gluon Plasma and eventually becomes a gas of pions. In this stage, most of the physics interesting for studies of the phase transition or cross over between Quark Gluon Plasma and ordinary hadronic matter takes place.

As the Color Glass melts, it produces particles as is shown in Fig. 8.

The fastest particles have their natural time scale time dilated the most, so in the center of mass frame, the fastest particles are produced last. These particles have traveled the longest distance from the collision point, since their formation time is dilated the most. Therefore the matter is formed with a correlation between momentum and position. This is like Hubble flow in cosmology where if you look at stars, the stars which are farthest away move away the fastest. For heavy ions as in cosmology, this description is frame independent. Unlike in cosmology, the Hubble expansion for heavy ion collisions is 1 dimensional.

The density of particles falls as $`N/V1/t`$. If the particles expand without interaction, then the energy per particle is constant. If the particles thermalize, then $`E/NT`$, and since $`N/VT^3`$ for a massless gas, the temperature falls as $`Tt^{1/3}`$. For a gas which is not quite massless, the temperature falls somewhere in the range $`T_o>T>T_o(t_o/t)^{1/3}`$, that is the temperature is bracketed by the value corresponding to no interaction and to that of a massless relativistic gas. This 1 dimensional expansion continues until the system begins to feel the effects of finite size in the transverse direction, and then rapidly cools through three dimensional expansion. Very close to when three dimensional expansion begins, the system decouples and particle free stream without further interaction to detectors.

## 3 What Have We Learned?

### 3.1 The Energy Density is Big

The particle multiplicity as a function of energy has been measured at RHIC and is shown in Fig. 9.- On the same plot is shown lower energy data from the AGS and CERN

and data from the $`p\overline{p}`$ collider as well. One sees that the energy dependence in $`AA`$ collisions is different than that for $`p\overline{p}`$, and is more or less consistent with a $`ln(s)`$ behavior.

Combining the multiplicity data together with the measurements of transverse energy or of typical particle transverse momenta, one can determine the energy density of the matter when it decouples. One can then extrapolate backwards in time. We extrapolate backwards using 1 dimensional expansion, since decoupling occurs when the matter first begins to expands three dimensionally. We can extrapolate backwards until the matter has melted from a Color Glass. We shall take a conservative overestimate of this time to be of order $`t_{melt}.3Fm/c`$ The extrapolation backwards is bounded by $`ϵ_f(t_f/t)<ϵ(t)<ϵ_f(t_f/t)^{4/3}`$. The lower bound is that assuming that the particles do not thermalize and their typical energy is frozen. The upper bound assumes that the system thermalizes as an ideal massless gas. We argued above that the true result is somewhere in between. When the time is as small as the melting time, then the energy density begins to decrease as time is further decreased.

This bound on the energy density is shown in Fig. 10. On the left axis is the energy density and on the bottom axis is time. The system begins as a Color Glass Condensate, then melts to Quark Gluon Matter which eventually thermalizes to a Quark Gluon Plasma. At a time of a few $`Fm/c`$, the plasma becomes a mixture of quarks, gluons and hadrons which expand together.

At a time of about $`10Fm/c`$, the system falls apart and decouples. At a time of $`t1Fm/c`$, the estimate we make is identical to the Bjorken energy density estimate, and this provides a lower bound on the energy density achieved in the collision. (All estimates agree that by a time of order $`1Fm/c`$, matter has been formed.) The upper bound corresponds to assuming that the system expands as a massless thermal gas from a melting time of $`.3Fm/c`$. (If the time was reduced, the upper bound would be increased yet further.) The bounds on the energy density are therefore

$`23GeV/Fm^3<ϵ<20100GeV/Fm^3`$ (3)
where we included a greater range of uncertainty in the upper limit because of the uncertainty associated with the formation time. The energy density of nuclear matter is about $`0.15GeV/Fm^3`$, and even the lowest energy densities in these collisions is in excess of this. At late times, the energy density is about that of the cores of neutron stars, $`ϵ1GeV/Fm^3`$.

At such extremely high energy densities, it is silly to try do describe the matter in terms of anything but its quark and gluon degrees of freedom.

### 3.2 The Gross Features of Multiplicity Distributions Are Consistent with Colored Glass

As argued by Kharzeev and Nardi, the density of produced particles per nucleon which participates in the collision, $`N_{part}`$, should be proportional to $`1/\alpha _s(Q_{sat})`$, and $`Q_{sat}^2N_{part}`$. This dependence follows from the $`1/\alpha _s`$ which characterizes the density of the Color Glass Condensate. In Fig. 11, we show the data from PHENIX and PHOBOS. The Kharzeev-Nardi form fits the data well. Other attempts such as HIJING, or the so called saturation model of Eskola-Kajantie-Ruuskanen-Tuominen are also shown in the figure.

Kharzeev and Levin have recently argued that the rapidity distributions as a function of centrality can be computed from the Color Glass description. This is shown in Fig. 12.

### 3.3 Matter Has Been Produced which Interacts Strongly with Itself

In off zero impact parameter heavy ion collisions, the matter which overlaps has an asymmetry in density relative to the reaction plane. This is shown in the left hand side of Fig. 13. Here the reaction plane is along the x axis. In the region of overlap there is an $`xy`$ asymmetry in the density of matter which overlaps. This means that there will be an asymmetry in the spatial gradients which will eventually transmute itself into an asymmetry in the momentum space distribution of particles, as shown in the right hand side of Fig. 13.

This asymmetry is called elliptic flow and is quantified by the variable $`v_2`$. In all attempts to theoretically describe this effect, one needs very strong interactions among the quarks and gluons at very early times in the collision.. In Fig. 14, two different theoretical descriptions are fit to the data by STAR and PHOBOS-. On the left hand side, a hydrodynamical model is used. It is roughly of the correct order of magnitude and has roughly the correct shape to fit the data. This was not the case at lower energy. On the right hand side are preliminary fits assuming Color Glass. Again it has roughly the correct shape and magnitude to describe the data. In the Color Glass, the interactions are very strong essentially from $`t=0`$, but unlike the hydrodynamic models it is field pressure rather than particle pressure which converts the spatial anisotropy into a momentum space-anisotropy.

Probably the correct story for describing flow is complicated and will involve both the Quark Gluon Plasma and the Color Glass Condensate. Either description requires that matter be produced in the collisions and that it interacts strongly with itself. In the limit of single scatterings for the partons in the two nuclei, no flow is generated.

## 4 What Do We Expect to Learn?

### 4.1 Does the Matter Equilibrate?

One of the most interesting results from the RHIC experiments is the so called “jet quenching”.-. In Fig. 15a, the single particle hadron spectrum is scaled by the same result in $`pp`$ collisions and scaled by the number of

collisions. The number of collisions is the number of nucleon-nucleon interactions, which for central collisions should be almost all of the nucleons. One is assuming hard scattering in computing this number, so that a single nucleon can hard scatter a number of times as it penetrates the other nucleus. The striking feature of this plot is that the ratio does not approach one at large $`p_T`$. This would be the value if these particles arose from hard scattering which produced jets of quarks and gluons, and the jets subsequently decayed.

The popular explanation for this is shown in Fig. 15b. Here a pair of jets is produced in a gluon-gluon collision. The jets are immersed in a Quark Gluon Plasma, and rescatter as they poke through the plasma. This shifts the transverse momentum spectrum down, and the ratio to $`pp`$ collisions, where there is no significant surrounding media, is reduced.

The data, however suggestive, need to be improved before strong conclusions are drawn. For example, there are large systematic uncertainties in the $`pp`$ data which was measured in different detectors and extrapolated to RHIC energy. This will be resolved by measuring $`pp`$ collisions at RHIC. There is in addition some significant uncertainty in the AA data which becomes smaller in the ratio to $`pp`$ data when the data is measured in the same detector. There are nuclear modifications of the gluon distribution function, an effect which can be determined by measurements on $`pA`$ at RHIC. The maximum transverse momentum is limited by the event sample size, and the size will be greatly improved with this years run due to the higher luminosity and longer run time.

One of the reasons why jet quenching is so important for the RHIC program is that it gives a good measure of the degree of thermalization in the collisions. If jets are strongly quenched by transverse momenta of $`4GeV`$, then because cross sections go like $`1/E^2`$ for quarks and gluons, this would be strong evidence for thermalization at the lower energies typical of the emitted particles.

One can look for evidence of thermalization directly from the measured $`p_T`$ distributions. Here one can do a hydrodynamic computation and in so far as it agrees with the results, one is encouraged to believe that there is thermalization. On the other hand, these distributions may have their origin in the initial conditions for the collision, the Colored Glass. In reality, one will have to understand the tradeoff between both effects.

Let us begin with the Color Glass description. In Fig. 16a, the $`mT`$ distributions ($`m_T^2=p_T^2+m^2`$) of identified particle measured for minimum bias events in PHENIX are shown. In Fig 16b, we replot these curves by rescaling by a constant multiplicative factor for each of the particles. In thermal models, this constant factor would be associated with chemical potentials for producing different particle species. These plots fall on top of one another. The distributions therefore scale in $`m_T`$.

If the distributions scale in $`m_T`$, as they appear to do for $`m_T`$ within the range measured by PHENIX, then the Colored Glass predicts as scaling relation for the distributions:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dN}{dyd^2p_T}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi R^2}{\alpha _s}}F(m_T/Q_{sat})`$ (4)
This means that if we adjust the normalization of the distribution function and the scale of its dependence on $`m_T`$ then the distributions should fall on top of one another. The scale adjustment should be proportional to $`1/\alpha _s`$ which should in turn involve $`Q_{sat}`$ from the running of the coupling. In Fig. 17a, the data at different centralities are rescaled into one another according to the above relation. This seems to describe the data well. In Fig. 17b, the dependence of $`1/\alpha _s`$ extracted from the above equation is compared to what is determined from the running coupling constant. Again, this works quite well. The PHENIX data is consistent with the scaling relations predicted by the Color Glass Condensate.

Hydrodynamical models also successfully describe the data on $`m_T`$distributions. In Fig. 18

the results of the simulation by Shuryak and Teaney are shown compared to the STAR and PHENIX data.- The shape of the curve is a prediction of the hydrodynamic model, and is parameterized somewhat by the nature of the equation of state. Notice that the STAR data include protons near threshold, and here the $`m_T`$ scaling breaks down. The hydrodynamic fits get this dependence correctly, and this is one of the best tests of this description. The hydrodynamic models do less well on fits to the more peripheral collisions, but the Colored Glass model gets this more or less correctly. In general, a good place to test the hydrodynamic models predictions is with massive particles close to threshold, since here one deviates in a computable way from the $`m_T`$ scaling curve, which is arguably determined from parameterizing the equation of state.

If one can successfully argue that there is thermalization in the RHIC collisions, then the hydrodynamic computations become compelling. One should remember that hydrodynamics requires an equation of state plus initial conditions, and these initial conditions are determined by Colored Glass. Presumably, a correct description will require the inclusion of both types of effects.

## 5 What Do We Hope to Learn?

### 5.1 Confinement and Chiral Symmetry Restoration

We would like to know whether or not deconfinement has occurred in dense matter or whether chiral symmetry restoration has changed particle masses.

This can be studied in principle by measuring the spectrum of dileptons emitted from the heavy ion collision. These particles probe the interior of the hot matter since electromagnetically interacting particles are not significantly attenuated by the hadronic matter. For electron-positron pairs, the mass distribution has been measured in the CERES experiment at CERN, and is shown in Fig. 19. Shown in the plot is the distribution predicted from extrapolating from $`pA`$ collisions. There should be a clear $`\rho `$ and $`\varphi `$ peak, which has disappeared. This has been interpreted as a resonance mass shift,, enhanced $`\eta ^{}`$ production,  but is most probably collisional broadening of the resonances in the matter produced in the collisions. Nevertheless, if one makes a plot such as this and the energy density is very high and there are no resonances at all, then this would be strong evidence that the matter is not hadronic, i. e. the hadrons have melted.

The resolution in the CERES experiment is unpleasantly large, making it difficult to unambiguously interpret the result. Whether or not such an experiment could be successfully run at RHIC, much less whether the resolution could be improved, is the subject of much internal debate among the RHIC experimentalists.

### 5.2 Confinement and $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ Suppression

In Fig. 20, the NA(50) data for $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ production is shown. In the first figure, the ratio of $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ production cross section to that of Drell-Yan is shown as a function of $`E_T`$, the transverse energy, for the lead-lead

collisions at CERN. There is a clear suppression at large $`E_T`$ which is greater than the hadronic absorption model calculations which are plotted with the data. In the next figure, the theoretically expected $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ suppression based on hadronic absorption models is compared to that measured as a function of the Bjorken energy density for various targets and projectiles. There appears to be a sharp increase in the amount of suppression for central lead-lead collisions.

Is this suppression due to Debye screening of the confinement potential in a high density Quark Gluon Plasma?- Might it be due higher twists, enhanced rescattering, or changes in the gluon distribution function?- Might the $`J/\psi `$ suppression be changed into an enhancement at RHIC energies and result from the recombination in the produced charm particles, many more of which are produced at RHIC energy?-

These various descriptions can be tested by using the capability at RHIC to do $`pp`$ and $`pA`$ as well as $`AA`$. Issues related to multiple scattering, higher twist effects, and changes in the gluon distribution function can be explored. A direct measurement of open charm will be important if final state recombination of the produced open charm makes a significant amount of $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$’s.

### 5.3 The Lifetime and Size of the Matter Produced

The measurement of correlated pion pairs, the so called HBT pion interferometry, can measure properties of the space-time volume from which the hadronic matter emerges in heavy ion collisions. The quantities $`R_{long},R_{side}`$ and $`R_{out}`$ shown in Fig. 21 measure the transverse size of the matter at decoupling and the decoupling time.

In Fig. 22, the data from STAR and PHENIX is shown.- There is only a weak dependence on energy, and the results seem to be more or less what was observed at CERN energies. This is a surprise, since a longer time for decoupling is expected at RHIC. Perhaps the most surprising result is that $`R_{out}/R_{side}`$ is close to 1, where most theoretical expectations give a value of about $`R_{out}/R_{side}2`$.- Perhaps this is due to greater than expected opacity of the emitting matter? At this time, there is no consistent theoretical description of the HBT data at RHIC. Is there something missing in our space-time picture?

### 5.4 The Flavor Composition of the Quark Gluon Plasma

The first signal proposed for the existence of a Quark Gluon Plasma in heavy ion collisions was enhanced strangeness production. This has lead to a comprehensive program in heavy ion collisions to measure

the ratios of abundances of various flavors of particles.. In Fig. 23a, the ratios of flavor abundances is compared to a thermal model for the particle abundances. \-  The fit is quite good. In Fig. 23b, the temperature and baryon chemical potential extracted from these fits is shown for experiments at various energies and with various types of nuclei. It seems to agree reasonably well with what might be expected for a phase boundary between hadronic matter and a Quark Gluon Plasma.

This would appear to be a compelling case for the production of a Quark Gluon Plasma. The problem is that the fits done for heavy ions to particle abundances work even better in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions. One definitely expects no Quark Gluon Plasma in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions. There is a deep theoretical question to be understood here: How can thermal models work so well for non-thermal systems? Is there some simple saturation of phase space? The thermal model description can eventually be made compelling for heavy ion collisions once the degree of thermalization in these collisions is understood.

## 6 Summary

* What are we trying to understand?

We want to make and study new forms of high energy density matter. At early times in a heavy ion collisions, this might be a Color Glass Condensate, and at later times a Quark Gluon Plasma.
* What have we already learned?

Matter has been produced at energy densities so high it can only be simply described in terms of quarks and gluons. This matter is strongly interacting with itself. The multiplicity distributions of matter produced in heavy ion collisions is consistent with it being a Colored Glass. Flow and $`p_T`$ distributions are consistent with both a Quark Gluon Plasma and a Colored Glass.
* What do we expect to learn?

By measuring the $`p_T`$ distributions of heavy hadrons, we can resolve the differences between various theoretical descriptions of the evolution of the produced matter. By measuring high $`p_T`$ hadrons in AA and pA collisions, we can determine whether jet quenching occurs, and to what degree the matter has thermalized.

If thermalization has occurred, we can then perhaps measure the equation of state. This is important because the equation of state reflects the bulk properties of the matter, and determines hydrodynamic and static properties of Quark Gluon Matter.
* What do we hope to learn?

Through measurements of lepton pairs, we can determine whether or not resonances have shifted in mass, have broadened or melted. Through measurements of pion pairs, we can find the spatial size and lifetime of the matter produced in heavy ion collisions, and test space-time pictures of ultrarelativistic nuclear collisions. Flavor abundances can tell us about the macroscopic properties of hadronic matter. The $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ abundance may tell us whether the matter produced in these collisions is confining or not.

We must turn to the problem of determining the properties of matter made in heavy ion collisions. We have made matter at such a high energy density that it can only be simply described in terms of quarks and gluons. The future will be to understand the properties of this matter.

At present we are developing the theoretical and experimental tools to analyze ultra-relativistic heavy ion collisions. It is a learning time for both theorists and experimentalists. Ultimately, we will need experiments with $`pp`$, $`pA`$ and $`AA`$ to resolve the initial state effects due to a Color Glass Condensate from effects related to the evolution of the matter as a Quark Gluon Plasma. A more precise determination of the properties of Color Glass Condensate would be possible with a high energy $`eA`$ collider or in the LHC heavy ion experiments.

## 7 Acknowledgments

I thank my colleagues in the theory groups at BNL who generously helped me in the development of this presentation.

This manuscript has been authorized under Contract No. DE-AC02-98H10886 with the U. S. Department of Energy.