text:
# On new gravitational instantons describing creation of brane-worlds

## 1 Introduction

Although higher dimensional cosmological models can be traced back to the first years of gravitation theory, the idea has received a renewed great attention in the last few years, due to the publication of pioneering papers on brane and extra-dimension models which shed light for the solution of fundamental physical problems including the extra-dimension compactification and the hierarchy problem. Extra-dimensions can be compactified, as in the standard Kaluza-Klein theory , or not, as was firstly suggested by Akama , Rubakov and Shaposhnikov  and others . While Akama  considered the universe as a four vortex-like object embedded in a 6–dimensional flat space-time, Rubakov and Shaposhnikov proposed a model in (1+N)–dimensional Minkowski space-time ($`N4`$) where particles were confined in a potential well, flat on the usual three spatial dimensions and narrow along the extra-dimensions. Gravity was later on included in 5–dimensional manifolds  in order to trap particles near a 4–dimensional Lorentzian submanifolds.

More recently, a model was proposed  on (4+N)–dimensions with $`N2`$, where the extra-dimensions are compact and their size, $`R`$, is deduced by imposing that the usual Planck scale, $`M_{Pl}`$, is no longer a fundamental scale and Planck scale in (4+N)–dimensions, $`M_{Pl_{4+N}}`$, is of the order of the weak scale $`M_{EW}`$, $`M_{Pl}^2=M_{Pl_{4+N}}^{2+N}R^N`$. This model can solve the hierarchy problem. In this framework the gravitons can propagate in the extra–dimensions while the standard model fields are confined to a 4–dimensional submanifolds of thickness $`M_{EW}^1`$ in the extra–dimensions.

Randall and Sundrum suggested a new approach to solve the hierarchy problem  by including just one extra compact dimension. In their first model , inspired by string theory , they considered 5–dimensional anti de Sitter (AdS) bulk with two branes with opposite tension; our universe is then placed on the brane with negative tension where standard model particles are localized. In a second model , these authors placed the universe in the brane with positive tension, in a non-compact background. In this framework, it is possible to reproduce 4–dimensional general relativity even if the extra–dimension is non-compact , due to the existence of a massless gravitational bound state of Kaluza-Klein (KK) modes which is the graviton of 4–dimensional world. While for the non-compact case, KK spectrum is continuous without a gap, for the compact case the KK excitations are quantized.

Branes in the Randall-Sundrum models are 4–dimensional flat space-time and consequently, at least in principle, they can not describe any inflationary universe. Nevertheless, as it was pointing out by Garriga and Sasaki (GS)  it is still possible to construct an inflating brane, whose geometry corresponds to a 4–dimensional de Sitter space, surrounded by a 5-dimensional AdS. The Euclidean version of this solution can be used for the description of the creation of the universe from nothing. The GS model has a single normalized gravitational bound state which corresponds to the massless graviton and separates by a gap from the massive KK modes.

Multi-brane-world models also exhibit 4–dimensional gravity localization at the branes. In particular, a compact brane-world model consisting of three flat branes, two with positive tensions and an intermediate one with negative tension, embedded in 5-dimensional AdS space-time has been also considered . In this case, the universe is placed in one of the positive tension branes. In addition, intersecting brane configurations , crystal brane-world  and brane periodic configuration  have been investigated as well. The massless gravitational bound state exists in all these models.

However, most of the above mentioned brane-world models have the shortcoming of either not including creation of inflating branes or having a singular character for brane instantons. The main aim of the present paper is to propose a set of singularity free 5–dimensional models which are able to produce inflating brane-worlds. This can be achieved by considering matter in the bulk which we model by a scalar field. As we shall see, such models should also induce localization of 4–dimensional gravity at the branes.

The paper is organized as follows. In the next section we derive a master equation (2.8) which describes the behaviour of the scale factor of D–dimensional instantonic (after an analytic continuation to the Euclidean region) solutions for a bulk filled with a scalar field, which is subjected to a perfect fluid state equation, and a cosmological constant, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_D`$. For $`D=5`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_D<0`$ and spherical 4-dimensional sections, we obtain asymptotically AdS wormhole when the bulk is filled with dust. Using this wormhole solution, in section 3, we construct compact and non-compact brane-world instantons. In section 4, we describe the brane-world birth from nothing (the Euclidean solution) performing an analytical continuation of the instantonic solution. In section 5, we analyze the behaviour of the massless gravitational KK mode for the models constructed in the previous section. Finally, in section 6, we summarize our results and discuss other dust brane-world models with arbitrary dimensions ($`D5`$) as well as other spatial topologies.

## 2 Multidimensional perfect fluid cosmology

Let us start our investigation of a multidimensional model with a cosmological constant, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_D`$, and minimal scalar field, $`\phi `$, by writing down the action444Although the constant minimal scalar field is really equivalent to a cosmological term, it is convenient to single out an explicit cosmological constant in the action. :

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa _D^2}}{\displaystyle d^DX\sqrt{|g^{(D)}|}\left\{R[g^{(D)}]2\mathrm{\Lambda }_D\right\}}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle d^DX\sqrt{|g^{(D)}|}\left\{\frac{1}{2}g^{(D)MN}_M\phi _N\phi V(\phi )\right\}}+S_{YGH},`$
where $`\kappa _D^2`$ is D–dimensional gravitational constant and $`S_{YGH}`$ the standard York-Gibbons-Hawking boundary term . The $`(D=1+d)`$–dimensional metric $`g^{(D)}`$ is taken to have the form

$$g^{(D)}=g_{MN}^{(D)}dX^MdX^N=e^{2\gamma (\tau )}d\tau d\tau +e^{2\beta (\tau )}g_{\mu \nu }^{(d)}dx^\mu dx^\nu ,$$
(2.2)
with $`g^{(d)}`$ the metric of d-dimensional Einstein space: $`R[g^{(d)}]=\lambda dR_d`$, and in the case of constant curvature space parameter $`\lambda `$ is normalized as $`\lambda =k(d1)`$, with $`k=\pm 1,0`$.

Consistent with the metric ansatz (2.2), we suppose that the scalar field is also homogeneous: $`\phi =\phi (\tau )`$. For such a scalar field energy density and pressure are defined as:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill T_0^0& =& \frac{1}{2}e^{2\gamma }\dot{\phi }^2V(\phi )\rho ,\hfill \\ \hfill T_\mu ^\mu & =& \frac{1}{2}e^{2\gamma }\dot{\phi }^2V(\phi )P,\mu =1,\mathrm{},d,\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.3)
and supposed to satisfy the state equation:

$$P=(\alpha 1)\rho .$$
(2.4)
The conservation equation $`T_{N;M}^M=0`$ implies $`\rho =Aa^{4\alpha }`$ where $`A`$ is an arbitrary constant and $`a(\tau ):=\mathrm{exp}[\beta (\tau )]`$ is a scale factor. This results in a inverse power-law for the scalar field potencial $`V`$ in term of the scale factor $`a=\mathrm{exp}[\beta (\tau )]`$; i.e. $`V=(1\frac{\alpha }{2})Aa^{d\alpha }`$, whenever $`\alpha >0`$. Obviously, $`a^d`$ gives the volume of the Universe at any hypersurface $`\tau =\text{const}`$ up to a spatial prefactor $`V_d=d^dx\sqrt{|g^{(d)}|}`$.

From the energodominant condition it is usually supposed that $`\rho 0`$ and $`\rho P\rho `$, where the latter condition (which results in $`0\alpha 2`$) means that the speed of sound is less than the speed of light. For the aim of generality we will not restrict ourselves to satisfy these conditions because at least the first of them can be violated on the case of a scalar field . For example, $`\alpha =0`$ with $`\rho <0`$ describes the case of a negative cosmological constant. Depending on the values acquired by the parameter $`\alpha `$, the scalar field can mimic different kinds of matter. However, the state equation Eq. (2.4) constrains strongly the form of the potential. Below, we shall get, as an example, the potential $`V(\phi )`$ corresponding to a dust-like state equation ($`\alpha =1`$). Additionally, it can be shown  that Einstein equations for such scalar fields are equivalent to the Einstein equations for a perfect fluid with action:

$$S=\frac{V_d}{\kappa _D^2}𝑑\tau \left[\frac{1}{2}e^{\gamma +\gamma _0}d(1d)\dot{\beta }^2e^{\gamma \gamma _0}U\right]\frac{V_d}{\kappa _D^2}𝑑\tau L,$$
(2.5)
in which we performed integration over spatial coordinates $`x`$, $`\gamma _0:=d\beta `$, overdot denotes differentiation with respect to $`\tau `$ and we have introduced a ”potential energy”

$$U=e^{2\gamma _0}\left(\frac{1}{2}R_de^{2\beta }+\mathrm{\Lambda }_D+\kappa _D^2\rho \right).$$
(2.6)
The constraint equation corresponding to the Lagrangian in Eq.(2.5) results in the following master equation:

$$\frac{L}{\gamma }=0\frac{1}{2}e^{\gamma +\gamma _0}d(1d)\dot{\beta }^2+e^{\gamma \gamma _0}U=0,$$
(2.7)
which is exactly the 00–component of the Einstein equation. The function $`\gamma `$ reflects the freedom for the choice of different time gauges: $`\gamma =0`$ is the proper time gauge, $`\gamma =\gamma _0`$ is the harmonic time gauge  and $`\gamma =\beta `$ is the conformal time gauge. Thus, in the proper time gauge, Eq.(2.7) reads

$$\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2+\frac{R_d}{d(d1)}\frac{1}{a^2}+\frac{2}{d(1d)}\mathrm{\Lambda }_D+\frac{2}{d(1d)}\kappa _D^2Aa^{\alpha d}=0.$$
(2.8)
We will concentrate mainly on 5–dimensional brane-world models with AdS bulk: $`D=5,\mathrm{\Lambda }_D=\mathrm{\Lambda }_5|\mathrm{\Lambda }_5|<0`$. The scalar curvature $`R_d`$ can be an arbitrary constant but we shall consider the particular case of constant curvature 4-D space $`R_d=12k`$, restricting mainly to the positive curvature with $`k=+1`$. For these parameters Eq.(2.8) becomes

$$(\dot{a})^2+k+\mathrm{\Lambda }a^2\overline{A}^2a^{4\alpha +2}=0,$$
(2.9)
where for simplicity we have introduced the following notation: $`|\mathrm{\Lambda }_5|/6\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`(1/6)\kappa _5^2A\overline{A}^2`$. Some of the particular values $`\alpha `$ are of special interest because they correspond to important types of matter. For example, in 5–D space-time555See e.g.  and references therein for the discussion of the equations of state for different kinds of cosmic defects in usual 4–D universe. In these references a regime where the number of defects per co-moving volume is a constant is considered.  $`\alpha =5/4`$ describes radiation, $`\alpha =1`$ corresponds to dust (0–D objects), $`\alpha =3/4`$ represents cosmic strings (1–D objects), $`\alpha =1/2`$ describes domain walls (2–D objects), $`\alpha =1/4`$ corresponds to hyperdomain walls (3–D objects) and $`\alpha =0`$ represents vacuum (which can be in some sense considered as a 4–D object).

Now, as we want to construct 5–D brane-world models, we perform the Wick rotation to Euclidean ”time” $`r:\tau ir`$. Where $`r`$ is to be considered as an extra spatial coordinate orthogonal to 4–D branes, i.e., now hypersurfaces at $`r=const`$. Then, in proper ”time” gauge, metric (2.2) is

$$g^{(5)}=drdr+a^2(r)g^{(4)}$$
(2.10)
and the Euclidean version of Eq.(2.9) reads

$$(\dot{a})^2k\mathrm{\Lambda }a^2+\overline{A}^2a^{4\alpha +2}=0.$$
(2.11)
Solutions of this equation describe 5–D instantons which can be used to construct brane-world models. Obviously, the precise form of the resulting instantons depends on the type of perfect fluid we use, i.e., on the choice of the parameter $`\alpha `$. The vacuum case $`\alpha =0`$ (which here corresponds to a simple redefinition of the cosmological constant: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_D+\kappa _D^2A\mathrm{\Lambda }_D`$) was considered in paper  for positive curvature $`k=+1`$ with solution

$$a(r)=l\mathrm{sinh}(r/l),$$
(2.12)
where $`l:=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }^1}`$ is the AdS radius.

In the present paper we investigate the case of a pressureless scalar field, i.e. with a dust-like state equation ($`\alpha =1`$), and $`k=+1`$. For this particular case the solution of Eq.(2.11) reads:

$$a(r)=\frac{l}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\sqrt{b}\mathrm{cosh}\frac{2r}{l}1\right)^{1/2},\mathrm{}<r<+\mathrm{},$$
(2.13)
where $`b:=1+4\mathrm{\Lambda }\overline{A}^2`$. It can be easily seen that this solution is reduced to (2.12) in the limit: $`\overline{A}^20b1`$. Metric (2.10) with solution (2.13) is non-singular and describes a wormhole (the integration constant being taken in such a way that $`r=0`$ corresponds to the wormhole throat). Having the solution (2.13), we can restore the dust-like scalar field potential following the procedure described in . It yields (in the Euclidean region):

$$V(\phi )=\frac{2A}{l^4}\frac{(\sqrt{b}1)\mathrm{tanh}^2\left(\overline{\phi }\right)\sqrt{b}1}{(\sqrt{b}1)^2\mathrm{tanh}^2\left(\overline{\phi }\right)+(\sqrt{b}+1)^2},$$
(2.14)
where $`\overline{\phi }(l/2)\sqrt{b1/A}\phi `$ and runs from $`\text{arctanh}\left[\sqrt{b1}/(\sqrt{b}1)\right]`$ to $`\text{arctanh}\left[\sqrt{b1}/(\sqrt{b}1)\right]`$.

It is useful to present solution (2.13) in the conformal ”time” gauge: $`dr=\pm ad\eta `$. It can be easily seen that

$$a(\eta )=lb^{1/4}\text{ds}(b^{1/4}|\eta |),0b^{1/4}|\eta |\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}K(m),$$
(2.15)
satisfies the corresponding equation

$$\left(\frac{da}{d\eta }\right)^2a^2\mathrm{\Lambda }a^4+\overline{A}^2=0.$$
(2.16)
Function $`\text{ds}u\text{ds}(u|m)`$ (with $`m=(b^{1/2}+1)/2b^{1/2}`$ ) is a Jacobian elliptic function and $`K(m)`$ is the complete elliptic integral of the first kind . For each of the sign of $`\eta `$, there is an one–one correspondence between solution (2.15) and wormhole (2.13). Indeed, coordinates $`r`$ and $`\eta `$ are connected with each other by :

$$b^{1/4}|\eta |=F\left(\varphi |m\right)=u\text{sn}b^{1/4}|\eta |=\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}r/l},$$
(2.17)
where $`\varphi :=\mathrm{arcsin}(1/\mathrm{cosh}(r/l))`$, $`\text{sn}u\text{sn}(u|m)`$ is a Jacobian Elliptic function and $`F\left(\varphi |m\right)`$ is the incomplete elliptic integral of the first kind. In the limit $`\overline{A}^20m1`$, solution (2.15) tends to $`a(\eta )l/\mathrm{sinh}|\eta |`$, which, in fact, is solution (2.12) expressed in the conformal ”time” gauge.

## 3 Brane-world instantons

In this section, we use solutions (2.13) and (2.15) to construct brane-world instantons. This can be performed by excising regions with $`r>L`$ for two identical wormholes (2.13) and gluing the remaining two copies along the two 4-spheres at $`r=L`$. The obtained instanton can be described by the following piecewise continuous function:

$$a(r)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \frac{l}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\sqrt{b}\mathrm{cosh}\left(\frac{2r}{l}\right)1\right]^{1/2}& ,& \mathrm{}<rL\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{l}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\sqrt{b}\mathrm{cosh}\left(\frac{2(2Lr)}{l}\right)1\right]^{1/2}& ,& Lr<+\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.1)
This function is continuous but not smooth at the gluing ”point” $`r=L`$. Due to the Lanczos-Israel junction condition, this results in the appearance of a 4–D spherical brane at $`r=L`$, with a tension:

$$T(r=L)=\frac{1}{\kappa _5^2}\frac{3}{4}\widehat{K}(L)=\frac{6}{\kappa _5^2l}\frac{\mathrm{sinh}(L/l)\mathrm{cosh}(L/l)}{\mathrm{sinh}^2(L/l)+m_1}>\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},$$
(3.2)
where $`m_1=1m,\widehat{K}(L)K(L^+)K(L^{})`$, and $`K(L)=4a^1(da/dr)_{r=L}`$ is the trace of the extrinsic curvature for the case of 5–D metric (2.10).

Instantonic solution (3.1) is non-compact: the scale factor $`a(r)`$ goes to $`\mathrm{}`$ when $`r\pm \mathrm{}`$, and cannot be used for the description of the brane-world birth from ”nothing” (from the Euclidean region) because the probability of it in this case is equal to zero. On the other hand, as we shall see below, the bound state of the spin–2 gravitational perturbations (corresponding to the Newtonian gravity on the brane) is proportional to $`a^{3/2}`$ and is divergent when $`a\mathrm{}`$. However, we can compactify this instanton identifying points corresponding to the throats at $`r=0r=2L`$. It changes the topology along the extra dimension from $``$ to $`S^1`$. Now, the range of the variation of $`r`$ is the interval $`[0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}L]`$. Since the geometry is smoothly glued at these points, such procedure does not lead to the appearance of new branes666Instanton (3.1) can also be compactified by additional cutting at distances $`\mathrm{}r=L_1<L`$ from the two sides of the brane, gluing then along these two cuts. Geometry is not smoothly matched at this surface which results in a new negative tension brane. However, in our paper we will not consider such a compact instanton because the first one, with the wormhole throat identification, seems to us more elegant and it leaves a possibility for 5–D baby-universe nucleation at the throat. .

This procedure for the construction of the brane-world instanton can be easily generalized to the case of an arbitrary number of parallel branes by gluing one-brane manifolds at throats and identifying the two final opposite throats. For example, in the case of $`n`$ branes, located at the distances $`r=L_i,i=1,\mathrm{},n`$ from throats, this instanton can be described by the following piecewise continuous function:

$`a(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n+1}{}}}a_i(r)\theta _i(r),0r\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}L_i,`$ (3.3)
$`a_i(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{l}{\sqrt{2}}}\left[\sqrt{b}\mathrm{cosh}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2(2_{k=1}^{i1}L_kr)}{l}}\right)1\right]^{1/2},L_{i1}+2{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{i2}{}}}L_krL_i+2{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{i1}{}}}L_k,`$
where $`L_0L_{n+1}0`$ and

$$\theta _i(r)=\stackrel{~}{\eta }(rr_{i1})\stackrel{~}{\eta }(rr_i)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}& 0& ,r<r_{i1}\hfill \\ & 1& ,r_{i1}r<r_i\hfill \\ & 0& ,rr_i\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.4)
are piecewise discontinuous functions, with $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }(rr_i)`$ being the usual step function777 We put a tilde above it to distinguish from the conformal time $`\eta `$. Obviously, $`\theta _i^p=\theta _i,p>0;\theta _i\theta _j=0,ija^p=_{i=1}^na_i^p\theta _i,p`$ and $`\theta _i^{^{}}=\delta (rr_{i1})\delta (rr_i)`$.  equal to zero for $`r<r_i`$ and becoming unity for $`rr_i`$. We have redefined the coordinate $`r`$ in such a way to cover the range of variable for our solution by one coordinate chart. In this case the i-th brane has coordinate $`r=r_i=L_i+2_{k=1}^{i1}L_k,i=1,\mathrm{},n`$ and the i-th throat is located at $`r=r_{(th)i}=2_{k=1}^{i1}L_k,i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$. ”Points” $`r=r_0r_{(th)1}=0`$ and $`r=r_{n+1}r_{(th)n+1}=2_{i=1}^nL_i`$ are identified with each other due to $`S^1`$-symmetry. Thus, metric (2.10) with scale factor (3.3) describes a 5–D compact instanton with $`n`$ parallel branes transversal to coordinate $`r`$ (see figure 1). Each of these branes has a tension given by Eq.(3.2) with the evident substitution $`LL_i`$ for the i-th (i=1,…,n) brane.

The similar procedure for construction of brane-world instanton can be performed in the conformal gauge. For example, one-brane instanton can be obtained from the solution (2.15) if we take two wormholes with $`\eta 0`$ and $`n=0`$, cut them at $`|\eta |=\eta _0<b^{1/4}K(m)`$, excise regions $`|\eta |<\eta _0`$ and glue them along this cut. The obtained brane-world instanton is:

$$a(\eta )=lb^{1/4}\text{ds}\left[b^{1/4}(|\eta |+\eta _0)\right],$$
(3.5)
where we redefined the coordinate $`\eta `$ in such a way ( $`|\eta |_{old}|\eta |_{new}+\eta _0`$ ) to cover this instanton by one coordinate chart. Here, $`0b^{1/4}|\eta |2K(m)b^{1/4}\eta _0`$ and $`0b^{1/4}|\eta |K(m)b^{1/4}\eta _0`$ (with the identification $`b^{1/4}K(m)+\eta _0b^{1/4}K(m)\eta _0`$) correspond respectively to non-compact and compact instantons with brane at $`\eta =0`$ and tension

$$T(\eta =0)=\frac{6}{\kappa _5^2l}\frac{\sqrt{1\text{sn}^2(b^{1/4}\eta _0})}{1m\text{sn}^2(b^{1/4}\eta _0)}>\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},$$
(3.6)
which coincides with Eq.(3.2) if $`\eta =\eta _0`$ and $`r=L`$ are connected by formula (2.17).

## 4 Brane-world birth from ”nothing”

In this section we investigate the possibility for the creation of brane worlds from ”nothing”. To be more precise, we interpret the brane-world instantons described in section 3 as a semiclassical paths for the quantum tunneling from the Euclidean region (”nothing”).

Euclidean metric (2.10) was obtained from the Lorentzian one by the Wick rotation $`\tau ir`$. For the compact solutions of section 3 this Euclidean metric describes the compact 5–D brane-world instantons. It is clear that back Wick rotation $`ri\tau `$ will destroy these branes leaving, instead of the brane, a solution corresponding to 5–D baby universe branching off from the wormhole throats at $`r=0`$. This baby universe represents 5–D FRW-like universe filled with dust and a negative cosmological constant. It has a maximum at time corresponding to the wormhole throat and bounces from a minimum occurring when the scale factor equals to zero (usual FRW-type singularity). However, there is a possibility for the analytical continuation to the Lorentzian space-time which preserves branes. As it was pointed out in paper , it can be done for the case when 4–D positive curvature metric $`g^{(4)}`$ in Eq.(2.10) is the metric of a 4–sphere:

$$ds_E^2=dr^2+a^2(r)(d\chi ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\chi d\mathrm{\Omega }_{(3)}^2).$$
(4.1)
Then, the analytic continuation of the azimuthal coordinate $`\chi `$:

$$\chi iHt+\frac{\pi }{2},$$
(4.2)
results in a Lorentzian metric with evolving branes:

$$ds_L^2=dr^2+H^2a^2(r)(dt^2+\frac{1}{H^2}\mathrm{cosh}^2Htd\mathrm{\Omega }_{(3)}^2).$$
(4.3)
Here, parameter $`H`$ is chosen in such a way that $`t`$ describes the proper time on the brane. For example, in the one-brane-case (3.1):

$$Ha(r)|_{r=L}=1H=\frac{1}{a(L)}=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{l}\left(\sqrt{b}\mathrm{cosh}\frac{2L}{l}1\right)^{1/2}.$$
(4.4)
The compact version of solution (3.1) describes a 4–D spherical brane of radius $`a(L)=H^1`$ enclosing 5–D space with frozen dust ( equivalently, frozen pressureless scalar field) and negative cosmological constant (AdS bulk). The south pole of the 4–D sphere with the azimuth coordinate $`\chi =0`$ can be treated as ”nothing”. The birth of the brane-world takes place at the time $`t=0`$ which corresponds in the Euclidean region to $`\chi =\pi /2`$ (the equator of the 4–D sphere) where the sections $`\chi =\text{const}`$ of the 4–D sphere reach their maximum with radius $`H^1`$. After birth, the brane represents an evolving 3–D sphere with initial radius $`H^1`$. More precisely, it is an inflating de Sitter space with the Hubble constant $`H`$ (see figure 2).

In the case of $`n`$ branes described by expression (3.3), we can introduce for each of the coordinate patches between the throats $`r_{(th)i}rr_{(th)i+1}`$ the following transformation:

$$\chi iH_it_i+\frac{\pi }{2},$$
(4.5)
where

$$H_i=\frac{1}{a(r_i)}$$
(4.6)
and $`r_i[r_{(th)i},r_{(th)i+1}]`$ is the position of the i-th brane ($`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$). After this continuation, the Lorentzian metric is:

$$ds_L^2=dr^2+H_i^2a^2(r)(dt_i^2+\frac{1}{H_i^2}\mathrm{cosh}^2H_it_id\mathrm{\Omega }_{(3)}^2),$$
(4.7)
where coordinates $`t_i`$ are glued to each other at the throats:

$$t_i=\frac{a_i}{a_j}t_j.$$
(4.8)
Thus, each of $`n`$ branes at $`r=r_i`$ represents a de Sitter space with its own proper time $`t_i`$ and own Hubble constant $`H_i`$.

To conclude this section, we would like shortly comment some alternative possibilities of the analytic continuation. As we have noted before, the analytical continuation $`ri\tau `$ leads to the creation of a 5–D baby universe with scale factor,

$$a(\tau )=\frac{l}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\sqrt{b}\mathrm{cos}\frac{2\tau }{l}1\right)^{1/2},0\tau \frac{l}{2}\mathrm{arccos}\frac{1}{\sqrt{b}}.$$
(4.9)
From this model we can actually construct a spherical 3–D brane by using a similar procedure to that we have described in section 3; that is excising regions with $`\chi >L<\pi `$ for two identical 4-sphere and gluing the remaining two copies along 3–spheres $`\chi =L`$. The brane-world model in this case is described by the metric:

$$ds_L^2=d\tau ^2+a^2(\tau )(d\chi ^2+a^2(\chi )d\mathrm{\Omega }_{(3)}^2),$$
(4.10)
where the scale factor $`a(\tau )`$ is defined by Eq.(4.9) and the scale factor $`a(\chi )`$ reads

$$a(\chi )=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{sin}\chi & ,& 0\chi L<\pi \hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{sin}(2L\chi )& ,& L\chi 2L\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.11)
In this model, both the additional space as well as 3–D brane have the same dynamical behaviour which is described by Eq.(4.9).

We turn finally to another interesting possibility consisting in the simultaneous analytic continuation in two directions: $`\chi it+\pi /2`$ and $`ri\tau `$. It results in a metric:

$$ds_L^2=d\tau ^2+a^2(\tau )(dt^2+\mathrm{cosh}^2td\mathrm{\Omega }_{(3)}^2),$$
(4.12)
which describes a multidimensional/multitemporal solution of the Einstein equations. Relative to time $`\tau `$ we have the FRW-type universe (4.9) and with respect to time $`t`$ we obtain the de Sitter universe with the Hubble constant $`H=1`$. The number of spatial coordinates here is equal to usual three. In the present paper we shall not investigate in detail solutions (4.10) and (4.12) postponing their study for future work.

## 5 Volcano and multi-Volcano potentials

In this section we will discuss briefly the localization of gravity at the branes described above. It is well known for metrics of the form (2.2) and (2.10), rewritten in the conformal time gauge, that if tensor metric perturbations $`\delta g_{MN}(X)=h_{MN}(\eta ,x)`$ is taken in the gauge: $`h_{\eta \eta }=h_{\eta \mu }=h_\mu ^\mu =h_{}^{\mu \nu }{}_{;\nu }{}^{}=0`$ (where the semicolon denotes a covariant derivative with respect to d–dimensional metric $`g_{\mu \nu }^{(d)}(x)`$) and is normalized and factorized as $`h_{\mu \nu }(\eta ,x)=a^{(d5)/2}(\eta )\psi (\eta )\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }(x)`$, then the radial profile of the perturbations satisfies a Schr$`\ddot{o}`$dinger-like equation

$$\left(\frac{d^2}{d\eta ^2}+V(\eta )\right)\psi (\eta )=M^2\psi (\eta ),$$
(5.1)
in which $`V(\eta )`$ is the so-called ”volcano” potential

$$V(\eta )=\left(\frac{d^2}{d\eta ^2}a^{\frac{d1}{2}}\right)/a^{\frac{d1}{2}},$$
(5.2)
and $`M`$ defines a mass spectrum of spin–2 perturbations $`\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ moving in the d–dimensional background metric $`g_{\mu \nu }^{(d)}(x)`$. If the spectrum of mass starts from $`M=0`$, then a state corresponding to this value of $`M`$ describes usual 4–dimensional (for $`d=4`$) massless gravitons responsible for the standard Newtonian gravity.

It can be seen that for $`M=0`$ the trivial solution of Eq.(5.1) is

$$\psi a^{\frac{d1}{2}}.$$
(5.3)
Thus, if the scale factor $`a`$ has maxima at branes, this zero-mode state is localized at the branes. On the other hand, if the shape of the volcano potential is such that it suppresses the Kaluza–Klein modes with $`M>0`$ at the branes by the wings of the potential, then the massless graviton gives the main contribution to gravity on the brane and effectively we have the Newtonian gravitation here. Moreover, to have a well defined effective gravitation on branes, it is desirable to have a mass spectrum where the massless graviton is well separated by a mass gap from other massive Kaluza–Klein modes . This is precisely the general situation that we have in the present paper for compact models. Indeed, in the case of the compact n-brane model described by (3.3) the radial profile reads:

$$\psi a^{3/2}(r)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n+1}{}}a_i^{3/2}(r)\theta _i(r),$$
(5.4)
where we used the properties of the $`\theta `$–function (see footnote 7). This formula shows that the massless graviton (zero-mode) is localized on each of the branes as they approaches their local maximum at the branes.

The volcano potential (5.2) for this model can be written as follows

$`V`$ $`=`$ $`a^{3/2}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{d\eta ^2}}a^{3/2}=a^{3/2}\left(a{\displaystyle \frac{da}{dr}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}a^{3/2}+a^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{dr^2}}a^{3/2}\right)`$ (5.5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n+1}{}}}\overline{V}_i(r)\theta _i(r){\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}\kappa _5^2{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}a_i^2T(r)\delta (rr_i),`$
where

$$\overline{V}_i(r)=\frac{15}{4}\sqrt{b}\mathrm{cosh}^2(r2\underset{k=1}{\overset{i1}{}}L_k)/l\frac{\mathrm{sinh}^2(r2_{k=1}^{i1}L_k)/l+(4/5)m_1}{\mathrm{sinh}^2(r2_{k=1}^{i1}L_k)/l+m_1}\frac{3}{2}\sqrt{b}.$$
(5.6)
Here, we used the expressions (3.3) and (3.4) for the functions $`a_i`$ and $`\theta _i`$ and the tension $`T(r_i)`$ has the form of Eq.(3.2) with the replacement $`LL_i,i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. It can be seen that, at the throats, the potential (5.5) reaches its minima $`V(r)|_{r_{(th)i}},i=1,\mathrm{},n`$:

$$V(r)|_{r_{(th)i}}V_{th}=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill (3/2)\sqrt{b}& ,& b1\hfill \\ \hfill 9/4& ,& b=1\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.7)
and, at the branes, achieves its local maxima:

$$V_{(br)i}=\frac{15}{4}\sqrt{b}\mathrm{cosh}^2(L_i/l)\frac{\mathrm{sinh}^2(L_i/l)+(4/5)m_1}{\mathrm{sinh}^2(L_i/l)+m_1}\frac{3}{2}\sqrt{b},i=1,\mathrm{},n,$$
(5.8)
which tend to $`(15/4)\mathrm{cosh}^2(L_i/l)3/2`$ in the limit $`b1`$, corresponding to the vacuum case (2.12). Two different values of the minimum expressed in Eq. (5.7) result from the two different asymptotic behaviours of the function $`\text{cd}(u|m)0/\sqrt{1m}`$ when $`uK(m)`$. Hence, this fraction equals to 0 if $`m1`$ and goes to $`1`$ when $`m1`$. The second value of Eq. (5.7) $`V_1=9/4`$ was obtained in  for model (2.12). Thus, Kaluza–Klein modes starts at

$$M=\sqrt{V_{th}},$$
(5.9)
and this mass gap separates the zero-mode from other massive Kaluza–Klein modes888It is clear, that to an observer on a i-th brane at $`r=r_i`$, the physical metric is the induced metric on this brane: $`g_{(ph)\mu \nu }^{(4)}=a_i^2(r_i)g_{\mu \nu }^{(4)}`$. It results in an appropriate rescaling of effective physical values of, for example, effective 4–D cosmological and gravitation constants on the brane (see ). Obviously, physical Kaluza–Klein masses for this observer are similarly rescaled, $`Mm_{(ph)}=M/a_i(r_i)`$. . It is obvious that the spectrum of the Kaluza–Klein modes is discrete for the compact models.

Thus, in the n-brane case, potential (5.5) has the form of a string (closed string for compact models) of volcano potentials (see figure 3) and can be named as ”multi-Volcano potential”. Obviously, this form of the potential entails suppression of the massive Kaluza-Klein modes at the branes.

To conclude this section, we would like to remark an interesting possibility arising from the special form of the multi-Volcano potential with periodic structure. In this case we obtain a band structure for the mass spectrum of the Kaluza-Klein modes and only masses from these bands are allowed to exist (see e.g. ). This would give rise to separation between the zero-mode and the massive Kaluza–Klein modes even larger than those induced by the mass gap (5.9).

## 6 Conclusions

In this paper we have considered in some detail 5–dimensional cosmological models corresponding to the case of a bulk filled with a pressureless scalar field, or equivalently by dust, and a cosmological constant. Special attention has been given to the case of a negative cosmological constant in a bulk with the spatial geometry of a four-sphere. For this model, we have found an asymptotically AdS wormhole instantonic solution. Brane-world instantons with a single 4–D spherical brane as well as with a string of such concentric branes can then be built up by using a cutting and gluing procedure. We have been able to obtain regular solutions which are free from any singularities at the origin of extra coordinates, and can be compactified so that the asymptotic divergences of the scale factor are prevented. Zero-mode massless gravitons are shown to be localized on these 4–D branes, so allowing such branes to nest Newtonian gravity. Analytical continuation from the brane instantonic metric to the Lorentzian regime leads to de Sitter 4–dimensional inflating branes. After birth of the inflating brane world from ”nothing”, the perfect fluid (dust) remains frozen: it is contained in the bulk but not on the brane. Here, inflation has pure geometrical origin: the Hubble constant of the inflating brane world is defined by the inverse radius of the Euclidean 4–D spherical brane.

Other brane-world models with similar proprieties, as the ones discussed in the sections 3 and 4, can be obtained following the procedure explained in the present paper. For example, inflating branes can be constructed when the 5–D space has positive or zero cosmological constant, whenever the topology of the instanton is $`\times S^4`$. Moreover, using these instantons, we can get a class of brane-world models characterized by a common dynamical behaviour for the extra-dimension and brane. On the other hand, brane-world models with static flat brane or with a number of such parallel branes can be described considering an instanton with negative cosmological constant and flat 4–D spatial topology ($`k=0`$).

Additionally, our model can be generalized for an arbitrary number of dimensions. This can be performed by considering the model (2.2) with topology $`\times M^d`$. Here, the d-dimensional manifold $`M^d`$ undergoes a topological splitting into $`n`$ Einstein spaces: $`M^d=_{i=1}^nM_i^{d_i},g^{(d)}=_{i=1}^ng_{(i)}^{(d_i)},R_{\mu \nu }[g_{(i)}^{(d_i)}]=\lambda _ig_{(i)\mu \nu }^{(d_i)},d=_{i=1}^nd_i`$, with $`\lambda _i>0`$. Now, using the conformal transformation $`g_{(i)}^{(d_i)}(\lambda _i/\lambda )g_{(i)}^{(d_i)}`$, it can be easily shown  that the constituent manifold $`M^d`$ is also the Einstein space: $`R_{\mu \nu }[g^{(d)}]=\lambda g_{\mu \nu }^{(d)}`$ and the scale factor $`a(\tau )`$ satisfies Eq. (2.8). Thus, the brane-world instantons, as well as the birth of the brane-worlds from them, can be constructed for this $`(d+1)`$-dimensional model in complete analogy to the sections 3 and 4. For example, in the particular case $`M^d=S^4\times _{i=1}^nS^{d_i}`$, the analytic continuation (4.2) with respect to the coordinate $`\chi `$ of 4–sphere $`S^4`$ results in the following Lorentzian metric:

$$ds_L^2=dr^2+H^2a^2(r)(dt^2+\frac{1}{H^2}\mathrm{cosh}^2Htd\mathrm{\Omega }_{(3)}^2+\frac{r_1^2}{H^2}d\mathrm{\Omega }_{(d_1)}^2+\mathrm{}+\frac{r_n^2}{H^2}d\mathrm{\Omega }_{(d_n)}^2),$$
(6.1)
where $`r_i,i=1,\mathrm{},n`$ are the radii of $`d_i`$-spheres. We arrive at the brane-world model with inflating 4–D part of the brane, plus frozen, compactified and unobservable (for $`r_i\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}10^{17}cm`$) $`(d4)`$ dimensions on it. This scenario, with a brane of codimension one, is of interest because:
1. it demonstrates the very interesting possibility for the unification of new brane-world scenarios with the standard Kaluza–Klein approach.
2. it gives a possibility for the localization of the gauge fields on the brane , .

Of course, some important aspects of this research need further investigations including the study of the transition from inflationary branes into a matter-dominated brane universe, the physical consequences from the above mentioned brane-world model with dynamical equivalence between extra dimension and branes, as well as the meaning of the 5-dimensional space-times described by a metric with two timelike dimensions.

Acknowledgments

A.Z. thanks Instituto de Matemáticas y Física Fundamental, CSIC, for kind hospitality during preparation of this paper. A.Z. acknowledges support by Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport (the programme for Sabbatical Stay in Spain) and the programme SCOPES (Scientific co-operation between Eastern Europe and Switzerland) of the Swiss National Science Foundation, project No. 7SUPJ062239. M.B.L. is supported by a grant of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology. This investigation was supported by the GICYT under Research Project No. PB97-1218.

Figure 1: Compact n-brane-world instanton (3.3) in the case $`n=3`$. Each point in the figure represents a 3–D sphere. Lines with fixed coordinates $`r=\text{const}r_0`$ correspond to 4–D spheres with radii $`a(r_0)`$. The branes are 4–D concentric spheres surrounding the 5–D bulk.

Figure 2: Birth of the one-brane-world $`(n=1)`$ from “nothing”. The creation takes place at the time $`t=0`$ and the 5–D Lorentzian metric is described by Eq.(4.3). The brane after birth represents an inflating 3–D sphere with initial radius $`H^1`$ that is de Sitter space-time with Hubble constant $`H`$.

Figure 3: Multi-Volcano potential (5.5) for the compact 5–brane-world instanton when $`n=5`$. Each of the ”volcanoes” has a local maximum $`V_{(br)i}`$ localized on the branes. Identical local minima $`V_{th}`$ correspond to the wormhole throat positions $`r_{(th)i}`$.


format: text

text:
# The QCD equation of state at nonzero densities: lattice result

## Abstract

In this letter we give the equation of state of QCD at finite temperatures and densities. The recently proposed overlap improving multi-parameter reweighting technique is used to determine observables at nonvanishing chemical potentials. Our results are obtained by studying $`n_f`$=2+1 dynamical staggered quarks with semi-realistic masses on $`N_t=4`$ lattices.

According to the standard picture of QCD, at high temperatures and/or high densities there is a change from a state dominated by hadrons to a state dominated by partons. This transition happened in the early Universe (at essentially vanishing density) and probably happens in heavy ion collisions (at moderate but non-vanishing density) and in neutron stars (at large density, for which a rich phase structure is conjectured ). There are well established nonperturbative lattice techniques to study this transition at vanishing density, at which the equation of state were determined as a function of the temperature. Due to the sign problem (oscillating signs lead to cancellation in results, a phenomena which appears in many fields of physics) nothing could have been said about the experimentally/observationally relevant case at non-vanishing densities. By using our recently proposed lattice technique  we calculate the equation of state at non-vanishing temperatures and densities. In this letter we present the technique and show the results. A detailed version of the present work will be published elsewhere .

QCD at nonzero density can be studied by introducing the chemical potential ($`\mu `$). Such a theory is easily formulated on space-time lattice . However; standard, importance sampling based Monte-Carlo techniques can not be used at $`\mu `$0. Up to now, no technique was suggested capable of giving the equation of state (EOS) at non-vanishing $`\mu `$, which would be essential to describe the quark gluon plasma (QGP) formation at heavy ion collider experiments. Results are only available for $`\mu `$=0  at non-vanishing temperatures (T) (a recent review is Ref. ).

The overlap improving multi-parameter reweighting  opened the possibility to study lattice QCD at nonzero $`T`$ and $`\mu `$. First one produces an ensemble of QCD configurations at $`\mu `$=0 and at T$``$0. Then the Ferrenberg-Swendsen type reweighting factors  of these configurations are determined at $`\mu 0`$ and at a lowered T. The idea can be easily expressed in terms of the partition function

$`Z(\mu ,\beta )={\displaystyle 𝒟U\mathrm{exp}[S_g(\beta ,U)]detM(\mu ,m,U)}=`$
$`{\displaystyle 𝒟U\mathrm{exp}[S_g(\beta _0,U)]detM(\mu =0,m,U)}`$
$`\left\{\mathrm{exp}[S_g(\beta ,U)+S_g(\beta _0,U)]{\displaystyle \frac{detM(\mu ,m,U)}{detM(\mu =0,m,U)}}\right\},`$ (1)
where $`S_g`$ is the action of the gluonic field ($`U`$), $`\beta =6/g^2`$ fixes the coupling of the strong interactions ($`g`$). Note that for a given lattice $`T`$ is an increasing function of $`\beta `$. The quark mass parameter is $`m`$ and $`detM`$ comes from the integration over the quark fields. At nonzero $`\mu `$ one gets a complex $`detM`$ which has no probability interpretation, thus it spoils any importance sampling. Therefore, the first expression of eq. (The QCD equation of state at nonzero densities: lattice result), $`\mu `$0, is rewritten in a way that the second line of eq. (The QCD equation of state at nonzero densities: lattice result) is used as an integration measure (at $`\mu `$=0, for which importance sampling works) and the remaining part in the curly bracket is measured on each independent configuration and interpreted as a weight factor $`\{w(\beta ,\mu ,m,U)\}`$. In order to maximise the accuracy of $`Z`$ the reweighting is performed along the best weight lines on the $`\mu `$$`\beta `$ plane (or equivalently on the $`\mu `$$`T`$ plane). These best weight lines are defined by minimising the spread of $`\mathrm{log}w`$.

Similar reweighting can be done in the mass parameter, too. Using the above technique, transition (or hadronic/QGP) configurations are reweighted to transition (or hadronic/QGP) configurations as illustrated by Fig. 1; thus, a much better overlap can be obtained than by reweighting pure hadronic configurations to transition ones as done by single $`\mu `$-reweighting . As we emphasised, the technique works for temperatures at, below and above the transition temperature ($`T_c`$). By using the reweighting technique, the phase diagram  and the location of the critical endpoint  was given (for other approaches see e.g. ). Using a Taylor expansion around $`\mu `$=0, T$``$0 for small $`\mu `$ is a variant of our multi-parameter reweighting method, which can be used to determine thermal properties . A completely different method, analytic continuation from imaginary $`\mu `$, confirmed the result of the reweighting technique on the phase diagram .

In the present analysis we use $`N_tN_s^3`$ finite $`T`$ lattices with $`N_t`$=4 and $`N_s`$=8,10,12 for reweighting and we extrapolate to the thermodynamical limit using the available volumes ($`V`$). At $`T`$=0 lattices of $`2414^3`$ are taken for vacuum subtraction and to connect lattice parameters to physical quantities. 16 different $`\beta `$ values are used, which correspond to $`T/T_c=0.8,\mathrm{},3`$ and at $`T_c`$ to a lattice spacing ($`a`$) of $``$0.28 fm. We use 2+1 flavours of dynamical staggered quarks. Only $`\mu `$ values of the light quarks are studied. While varying $`\beta `$ (thus the temperature) we keep the physical quark masses constant at $`m_{ud}65`$ MeV and $`m_s135`$ MeV (the pion to rho mass ratio is $`m_\pi /m_\rho `$0.66). From now on we usually omit the different quark mass indices.

The determination of the equation of state at $`\mu `$0 needs several observables $`𝒪`$ at non-vanishing $`\mu `$ values. This can be calculated by using the weights of eq. (The QCD equation of state at nonzero densities: lattice result)

$$\overline{𝒪}(\beta ,\mu ,m)=\frac{\{w(\beta ,\mu ,m,U)\}𝒪(\beta ,\mu ,m,U)}{\{w(\beta ,\mu ,m,U)\}}.$$
(2)
We use the following notation for subtracting the vacuum term: $`𝒪(\beta ,\mu ,m)`$= $`\overline{𝒪}(\beta ,\mu ,m)_{T0}\overline{𝒪}(\beta ,\mu =0,m)_{T=0}`$.

The pressure ($`p`$) can be obtained from the partition function as $`p`$=$`T\mathrm{log}Z/V`$ which can be written as $`p`$=$`(T/V)\mathrm{log}Z`$ for large homogeneous systems. On the lattice we can only determine the derivatives of $`\mathrm{log}Z`$ with respect to the parameters of the action ($`\beta ,m,\mu `$), so $`p`$ can be written as an integral:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{p}{T^4}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T^3V}}{\displaystyle d(\beta ,m,\mu )(\frac{(\mathrm{log}Z)}{\beta },\frac{(\mathrm{log}Z)}{m},\frac{(\mathrm{log}Z)}{\mu })}.`$ (3)
The integral is by definition independent of the integration path. The chosen integration paths are shown on Fig 1.

The energy density can be written as $`ϵ=(T^2/V)(\mathrm{log}Z)/T+(\mu T/V)(\mathrm{log}Z)/\mu `$. By changing the lattice spacing $`T`$ and $`V`$ are simultaneously varied. The special combination $`ϵ3p`$ contains only derivatives with respect to $`a`$ and $`\mu `$:

$$\frac{ϵ3p}{T^4}=\frac{a}{T^3V}\frac{\mathrm{log}(Z)}{a}|_\mu +\frac{\mu }{T^3V}\frac{(\mathrm{log}Z)}{\mu }|_a.$$
(4)
The quark number density is $`n=(T/V)\mathrm{log}(Z)/\mu `$ which can be measured either directly or obtained from the pressure (note, that the baryon density is $`n_B`$=$`n`$/3 and the baryonic chemical potential is $`\mu _B`$=3$`\mu `$).

We present lattice results on $`p(\mu =0,T)`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }p(\mu ,T)=p(\mu 0,T)p(\mu =0,T)`$, $`ϵ(\mu ,T)`$-3$`p(\mu ,T)`$ and $`n_B(\mu ,T)`$. Our statistical errorbars are also shown. They are rather small, in many cases they are even smaller than the thickness of the lines. On the figures we multiply the lattice results with the dominant correction factors between $`N_t`$=4 and the continuum in the $`T\mathrm{}`$ case: $`c_p=p(\mu =0,T\mathrm{},\mathrm{continuum})/\mathrm{p}(\mu =0,\mathrm{T}\mathrm{},\mathrm{N}_\mathrm{t}=4)`$=0.518 and $`c_\mu =\mathrm{\Delta }p(\mu ,T\mathrm{},\mathrm{continuum})/\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{p}(\mu ,\mathrm{T}\mathrm{},\mathrm{N}_\mathrm{t}=4)`$=0.446. The well-known continuum expressions in the $`T\mathrm{}`$ Stefan-Boltzmann (SB) case are $`p(\mu =0,T\mathrm{},\mathrm{continuum})=(16+21\mathrm{n}_\mathrm{f}/2)\pi ^2\mathrm{T}^4/90`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }p(\mu ,T\mathrm{},\mathrm{continuum})=\mathrm{n}_\mathrm{f}\mu ^2\mathrm{T}^2/2+𝒪(\mu ^4)`$. This way the results presented on the figures might be interpreted as continuum estimates and could be directly used in phenomenological applications. Direct $`N_t`$=4 lattice results can be obtained by dividing the presented values with these $`c_p,c_\mu `$ correction factors.

Fig. 2 shows the pressure at $`\mu `$=0. On Fig. 3 we present $`\mathrm{\Delta }p/T^4`$ for five different $`\mu `$ values. Fig. 4 gives $`\mathrm{\Delta }p(\mu ,T/T_c)`$ normalised by $`\mathrm{\Delta }p^{SB}=\mathrm{\Delta }p(\mu ,T\mathrm{})`$. Notice the interesting scaling behaviour. $`\mathrm{\Delta }p/\mathrm{\Delta }p^{SB}`$ depends only on T and it is practically independent of $`\mu `$ in the analysed region. Fig. 5 shows $`ϵ`$-3$`p`$ normalised by $`T^4`$, which tends to zero for large $`T`$. Fig. 6 gives the baryonic density as a function of $`T/T_c`$ for different $`\mu `$-s. As it can be seen the densities exceed the nuclear density by up to an order of magnitude.

As an important finding we mention that in the present analysis the applicability of our reweighting method, the maximal $`\mu `$ value scales with the volume as $`\mu _{\mathrm{max}}a(N_tN_s^3)^{0.25}`$. If this behaviour persists, one could –in principle– approach the true continuum limit (note, that for $`N_t\mathrm{}`$ $`a1/N_t(N_tN_s^3)^{0.25}`$, thus $`\mu _{\mathrm{max}}`$ is constant).

In this paper we studied the thermodynamical properties of QCD at nonzero $`\mu `$. We used staggered QCD with 2+1 quarks on $`N_t`$=4 lattices. We determined for the first time the equation of state at nonzero temperature and chemical potentials. Future analyses should be performed at smaller lattice spacings and quark masses. A detailed version of the present work will be published elsewhere .

Acknowledgements:
We thank F. Csikor, G. Egri, I. Montvay and A.A. Tóth for their help and suggestions. This work was partially supported by Hungarian Scientific grants, OTKA-T34980/T29803/M37071/OMFB1548/OMMU-708. For the simulations a modified version of the MILC public code was used (see http://physics.indiana.edu/~sg/milc.html). The simulations were carried out on the Eötvös Univ., Inst. Theor. Phys. 163 node parallel PC cluster.


text:
# CHARGED PARTICLE MULTIPLICITY AND LIMITING FRAGMENTATION IN Au+Au COLLISIONS AT RHIC ENERGIES USING THE PHOBOS DETECTOR

## 1 Introduction

Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) is believed to be the fundamental theory for strong interactions. According to this theory, hadronic matter under extreme dense and hot conditions must go through a phase transition $`^\mathrm{?}`$ to form a Quark Gluon Plasma (QGP) in which quarks and gluons are no longer confined to the size of a hadron. Lattice gauge studies of QCD at finite temperatures have indeed found such a phase transition, though the exact nature of the transition has not yet been determined $`^\mathrm{?}`$. The study of the QGP and of the phase transition is important for understanding the early evolution of our universe. It has been proposed that collisions between highly relativistic nuclei can be used to recreate conditions of the early universe in the laboratory. During the past decade, such experiments have been performed at the BNL AGS and the CERN SPS at maximum energies $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=`$4.8 GeV ($`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$) and 17.3 GeV ($`\mathrm{Pb}+\mathrm{Pb}`$), respectively. The results from those experiments $`^\mathrm{?}`$ have demonstrated rich physics which cannot be explained by a trivial extrapolation of $`\mathrm{p}+\mathrm{p}`$ results. At the present time there is, however, no unambiguous evidence for the existence of a quark-gluon plasma over a significantly large space-time region. While the analysis of AGS and SPS data continues, the new Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at BNL delivered the first collisions of gold nuclei in June 2000 at center of mass energies several times larger than those previously available. The goal of the RHIC heavy ion program is to study the behavior of strongly interacting matter under conditions of extreme temperatures and energy densities which are the prerequisites predicted for the creation of the QGP. To study this behavior, the PHOBOS experiment is designed to combine measurements of global properties, such as the charged particle multiplicity, with detailed studies aimed at characterizing the microscopic aspects of the collisions. In this paper we present an overview of recent results from the PHOBOS experiment which provide a coherent picture of the initial state parton density, which will be reflected by the charged particle multiplicities for Au+Au collisions at different energies. Away from the mid-rapidity region, PHOBOS measurements confirm the hypothesis of limiting fragmentation in $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ collisions as function of centrality. In combination with results from lower energies and from $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}+\mathrm{p}`$ collisions, these data permit a systematic analysis of particle production mechanisms in nucleus-nucleus collisions.

## 2 Experimental Setup

The PHOBOS experiment consists of five detector subsystems. These include a large solid-angle multiplicity array, vertex finding detectors, two multiparticle tracking spectrometers, a set of plastic scintillator time-of-flight (TOF) walls, and trigger detectors. The multiplicity arrays are divided into an octagonal barrel of silicon pad detectors surrounding the beam pipe in the central rapidity region, and six ring counters of silicon pad detectors. Together, these arrays cover $`\eta `$5.4. The vertex detectors consist of two sets of silicon pad detectors above and below the beam line around the interaction region covering near mid-rapidity. The spectrometers are positioned on either side of the beam partially within a 2T magnet field which provides momentum measurement and particle identification near mid-rapidity. The technical details of the silicon detectors are described in Ref $`^\mathrm{?}`$. Finally, trigger counters consisting of two rings of 16 $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\mathrm{C}}`$erenkov radiators and two sets of plastic scintillator counters, are arranged around the beam pipe. They serve as the primary event trigger, and detect charged particles in the range 4.4 $`<\eta <`$5.2 and 3 $`<\eta <`$ 4.5, respectively. The scintillator counters are also used for offline event selection and determination of the collision centrality. Details of this procedure can be found in Ref $`^\mathrm{?}`$.

## 3 Initial State Parton Density

One of the important observables in heavy-ion interactions is the number of charged particles produced in a collision and the pseudorapidity density $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta `$. This number ($`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta `$) is believed to be proportional to the entropy density at freeze-out and, since entropy cannot be destroyed (even in non-equilibrium systems) the pseudorapidity density provides a constraint on the initial state parton density and any further entropy produced during the subsequent evolution. The charged particle multiplicity at mid-rapidity $`\eta <1`$ was obtained by three different analysis procedures : 1) Counting of “tracklets”, i.e. hits in two consecutive Si-detector planes of the vertex or spectrometer detectors in the field-free region close to the vertex position. 2) Counting of hit pads in the single layer octagon detector, correcting for multiple hits by assuming Poisson counting statistics. 3) Relating the energy deposition in the single-layer octagon detector to the charged-particle multiplicity. Results from these methods were corrected for non-vertex background and weak-decay feed-down using a Geant/HIJING based simulation. The measured scaled pseudorapidity densities at mid-rapidity for central $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ collisions are shown in Fig. 1(a) as function of $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}`$. In order to compare to $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}+\mathrm{p}`$ data, $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta `$ is divided by the number of participant pairs $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$. A comparison to $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}+\mathrm{p}`$ collisions $`^\mathrm{?}`$ $`^\mathrm{?}`$ in the overlapping energy region shows a $``$ 55 $`\%`$ higher production rate in central $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ collisions, indicating that the $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ is not a simple superposition of $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}+\mathrm{p}`$. When compared with results from lower energies for $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$, we observe that $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta /\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ for the most central events increases logarithmically with energy up to the maximum RHIC energy, $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200`$ GeV, as indicated by the solid line fit $`\mathrm{f}_{\mathrm{AA}}=0.287+0.757\mathrm{ln}(\sqrt{\mathrm{s}})`$.

To put these results in context, we also show the prediction of the parton saturation model (PSM) $`^\mathrm{?}`$ as a function of energy, indicated by the dashed line in Fig. 1(a). The good agreement of the PSM with the data suggest that the initial conditions of the model may be correct for particle production at the RHIC energies and that these may already be appropriate at the highest SPS energy. It is also interesting to extrapolate the prediction of the PSM and the fit ($`\mathrm{f}_{\mathrm{AA}}`$) to the LHC energy $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=5500`$ GeV for the most central collision of $`\mathrm{Pb}+\mathrm{Pb}`$. Assuming that the $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}=208`$, the pseudorapidity density will be $`(\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta )_{\mathrm{LHC}}^{\mathrm{PSM}}=2200`$ and $`(\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta )_{\mathrm{LHC}}^{\mathrm{f}_{\mathrm{AA}}}=1300`$. These correspond to factors of 2.8 (PSM) and 1.7 ($`\mathrm{f}_{\mathrm{AA}}`$) increases in multiplicity normalized to the number of participants relative to the RHIC energy of $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200`$ GeV. In Fig. 1(b), we analyze the particle density as a function of centrality, expressed as the number of participating nucleons $`^\mathrm{?}`$ ($`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$). Such an analysis may shed light on the relative importance of soft versus hard processes of particle production and test the assumption of gluon saturation expected at RHIC $`^\mathrm{?}`$ $`^\mathrm{?}`$.

We present the results for $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta /\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ vs $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ for $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}`$ = 200 and 130 GeV. For both energies, we observe a continuous rise of particle density with increasing centrality. The errors for 200 GeV data are shown as a gray band and they include both statistical and systematic errors (90$`\%`$ C.L.). In order to put these results in context, we compare the predictions of PSM, indicated by solid lines and calculations involving fits to the data using the two-component parametrization proposed in Ref $`^\mathrm{?}`$ (dashed line), $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta =\left[1\mathrm{x}(\mathrm{s})\right]\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{pp}}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}/2+\mathrm{x}(\mathrm{s})\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{pp}}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{coll}}`$, where $`\mathrm{x}(\mathrm{s})`$ is the fraction of production of charged particles from hard scattering processes. The energy dependence of $`\mathrm{x}(\mathrm{s})`$ has been derived from deep-inelastic $`\mathrm{ep}`$ scattering data. The HERA data have been found to scale as $`\mathrm{x}(\mathrm{s})\mathrm{s}^\lambda `$ with $`\lambda `$ 0.25 and the $`\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{pp}}`$ is the number of particles produced in single $`\mathrm{p}+\mathrm{p}`$ collisions where $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}=2`$ and $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{coll}}=1`$. The number of hard scattering collisions is found to be $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{coll}}=0.352\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}^{1.37}`$ based on Ref $`^\mathrm{?}`$. We have performed fits using the measured values for $`\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{pp}}`$ and find that $`\mathrm{x}(130)=0.09\pm 0.02`$ and $`\mathrm{x}(200)=0.11\pm 0.02`$. According to the assumptions of this parametrization, the increase in the multiplicity of charged particles produced from 130 to 200 GeV in $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ at mid-rapidity region from hard processes can be obtained by using the values of $`\mathrm{x}(130)`$ and $`\mathrm{x}(200)`$ which leads to :

$$\left(\frac{\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}}{\mathrm{d}\eta }\right)_{\mathrm{hard}}^{200\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}}/\left(\frac{\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}}{\mathrm{d}\eta }\right)_{\mathrm{hard}}^{130\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}}=\frac{\mathrm{x}(200)\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{pp}}(200)<\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{coll}}(200)>}{\mathrm{x}(130)\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{pp}}(130)<\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{coll}}(130)>}=1.34$$
(1)
If this description is correct, the increase of 34$`\%`$ indicates that the hard processes start to play an significant role at RHIC energies. We have also measured $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta `$ over the range $`\eta `$ 5.4 for $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ collisions at $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=130`$ and 200 GeV, which are shown for six centrality bins in Fig. 2. The gray bands represent the systematic errors (90$`\%`$ C.L.). The errors at 130 GeV are not shown, but are a similar in magnitude to those at 200 GeV. A general feature of these distributions at both energies and all centrality bins is a flat region extending over about $`\pm 2`$ units of pseudorapidity around mid-rapidity. Outside this region we observe a fall-off towards large $`\eta 5.4`$. In Table 1, we present the total charged particle multiplicity for each centrality bin obtained from the integration of the data points ($`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{ch}}^{\mathrm{data}}`$) and also using a fit (continuous line in Fig. 2) ($`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{ch}}^{\mathrm{Fit}}`$) which is based on the stochastic approach $`^\mathrm{?}`$. The contribution to the total from the tails of the distributions outside the measured region is estimated from the fit to be 2$`\%`$ for the most central and 4$`\%`$ for the most peripheral collisions. The comparison of $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta `$ at 130 and 200 GeV for all centrality bins shows that additional particle production occurs dominantly in the mid-rapidity plateau region and also that the width of the distributions is increased at higher energy.

## 4 Limiting Fragmentation

In order to understand the relation between particle production and collision mechanisms, we consider particle production away from mid-rapidity in the target (or projectile) rest frame. The distribution of charged particles from $`\overline{\mathrm{p}}+\mathrm{p}`$ collisions shown in Fig. 3(a) follows a simple scaling relation as predicted by “limiting fragmentation” when plotted versus $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}`$, where $`\mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ is the beam rapidity. In Fig. 3(b), we observe that the $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta /\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ distribution for $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ collisions at 130 and 200 GeV agree for $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}2.5`$. This indicates that $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ at 130 GeV also follows limiting fragmentation scaling down to $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}2.5`$. The comparison between $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ at $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=`$ 130 and 200 GeV and $`\mathrm{Pb}+\mathrm{Pb}`$ at $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=`$ 17.3 GeV shows that the extent of the limiting fragmentation increases by about 1.5 units of pseudorapidity from the maximum SPS energy to 130 GeV at RHIC. In Figs. 4(a) and (b) we show $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta /\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ vs. $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ for $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ at 130 and 200 GeV for the most central (6$`\%`$) and for peripheral ($`3545\%`$) collisions. This analysis has also been performed for all other centralities between $`045\%`$. We observe that the extent of the limiting fragmentation region ($`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}2.5`$) is independent of centrality. In Figs. 4(c) and (d) we show $`\mathrm{dN}_{\mathrm{ch}}/\mathrm{d}\eta /\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ vs. $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ indicating that the particle production per participant in the limiting fragmentation region ($`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}1.5`$) increases from the most central to the most peripheral at the same energy. This increase in particle production near $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}1.5`$ due to the target remnants has been previously observed in $`\mathrm{p}+\mathrm{A}`$ physics $`^\mathrm{?}`$ and for lower energy $`\mathrm{Pb}+\mathrm{Pb}`$ collisions $`^\mathrm{?}`$. The distribution may also narrow in central collisions due to dynamical effects, such as baryon stopping, or kinematic effects, such as a shift in $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ due to the particle mix ($`\mathrm{p}/\pi `$ ratio) changing with centrality.

In summary, the first measurements of the pseudorapidity distributions from $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ collisions at maximum RHIC energy $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}`$ = 200 GeV have been presented and compared to the results from the new analysis of $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ data at $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=`$ 130 GeV. The pseudorapidity distributions have been measured as a function of collision centrality and energy over an extended range of pseudorapidity $`\eta 5.4`$, which allows for an accurate estimate of the total charged particle yield. For the most central collisions ($`6\%`$) at 130 GeV about 4160 charged particles are produced reaching about 5050 at the maximum RHIC energy of 200 GeV. The pseudorapidity distributions at 130 and 200 GeV, for all centrality bins, show evidence that additional particle production occurs in the mid-rapidity plateau region and that the width of the distribution increases with energy. Away from mid-rapidity, a detailed study of the distribution as a function of collision centrality and energy has been made in order to study limiting fragmentation behavior in $`\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}`$ collisions at RHIC energies. A comparison between Au $`+`$ Au data at $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=`$ 130 GeV and $`\mathrm{Pb}+\mathrm{Pb}`$ at SPS energy $`\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=`$ 17.3 GeV indicates that the extent of the limiting fragmentation region grows with energy by about 1.5 units of $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}`$. We observe also that the extent of limiting fragmentation is independent of centrality at the same energy but the particle production per participant in the limiting fragmentation region increases at high $`\eta \mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ for more peripheral collisions. This indicates that the number of charged particles produced grows faster than the number of participating target nucleons, suggesting that the “spectator” matter also contributes to particle production in the target fragmentation region.

## Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by U.S. DOE grants DE-AC02-98CH10886, DE-FG02-93ER40802, DE-FC02-94ER40818, DE-FG02-94ER40865, DE-FG02-99ER41099, and W-31-109-ENG-38, NSF grants 9603486, 9722606 and 0072204, (Poland) KBN grant 2 PO3B 04916, (Taiwan) NSC 89-2112-M-008-024.

## References


text:
# Differential Flow of Protons in 𝐴𝑢+𝐴𝑢 Collisions at AGS Energies

## 1 Introduction

According to lattice calculations of QCD a phase transition from an interacting hadronic matter to partonic matter (interacting quarks and gluons) is expected at temperatures $`T_c150180`$ MeV for vanishing quark chemical potential . Recent extrapolations to finite quark chemical potentials $`\mu _q`$ 0 suggest a decrease of the critical temperature $`T_c`$ with increasing $`\mu _q`$ . Whereas rather low chemical potentials ($``$ 30 MeV) can be probed in central $`Au+Au`$ collisions at the full RHIC energy ($`\sqrt{s}`$ = 200 GeV) , sizeable chemical potentials or baryon densities are encountered in nucleus-nucleus collisions at AGS energies of 2–11 A$``$GeV. Currently one expects the phase transition at low $`\mu _q`$ to be of second order  and a tricritical point for $`\mu _q`$ 230 MeV, $`T_c(\mu _q)160`$ MeV . Such conditions might be encountered in $`Au+Au`$ collisions at AGS energies leading eventually to a softening of the hadronic equation of state (EoS) since the pressure in the partonic phase is expected to be lower than in the hadronic regime. A decrease of the pressure, furthermore, should go along with a decrease of the collective flow of hadrons once the phase boundary is met . Thus a systematic study of flow variables in energetic nucleus-nucleus collisions might indicate the appearance of a new phase of hadronic matter . We recall, that the collective flow observable has been exploited for more than a decade to obtain information on the EoS  \- .

In the last years both, the directed transverse flow (sideward flow) and the flow tensor (elliptic flow), have been measured  for heavy-ion ($`Au+Au`$) collisions at AGS energies in the incident energy range of 2 A$``$GeV $`E_{inc}11`$ A$``$GeV. More recently, also differential flow data have become available from the E985 Collaboration  which allow for more severe constraints on the E0S.

The sideward flow is produced at the early stage of nucleus-nucleus collisions and hence reflects the early pressure gradients in the collisions. Thus the strength of the momentum per particle $`<p_x>(y)`$ in the reaction plane versus rapidity $`y`$ sheds some light on the initial pressure since the gradients are dominated by the collision geometry. The elliptic flow emerges from the early squeeze-out of compressed matter that - depending on bombarding energy - is shadowed by the spectator nucleons. At low energies this squeeze-out of nuclear matter leads to a negative elliptic flow since projectile and target spectators distort the collective expansion of the ’fireball’ in the reaction plane. At high energies the projectile and target spectators do not hinder anymore the in-plane expansion of the ’fireball’ due to their high velocity ($`c`$); the elliptic flow then becomes positive. The competition between squeeze-out and in-plane elliptic flow at AGS energies depends on the nature of the nuclear force as pointed out by Danielewicz et al. . Furthermore, it has been suggested in Ref.  that the elliptic flow is sensitive to the stiffness of the EoS and possibly to quark-gluon plasma (QGP) formation.

In Refs.  both the sideward and elliptic flow of nucleons has been studied for various nucleus-nucleus collisions as a function of beam energy from 0.05 A$``$GeV  to 11 A$``$GeV  employing a relativistic transport model with hadronic and string degrees of freedom. In the AGS energy regime, however, our calculations have been performed only with a ’stiff’ EoS based on momentum-dependent scalar and vector self energies for the nucleons. Here we continue our studies within the same transport approach using, furthermore, different equations of state with incompressibilities of 210 MeV (soft), 300 MeV (medium), and 380 MeV (hard). Moreover, we will confront our calculations with the recent differential flow data from the E985 Collaboration  as a function of impact parameter, rapidity and transverse momentum.

We organize our work as follows: In Section 2 we briefly describe the relativistic transport approach and fix the parameter sets for the scalar and vector self energies in comparison to the ’experimental’ optical potential from Ref. . In Section 3 we will systematically study the transverse in-plane flow for $`Au+Au`$ collisions from 2–8 A$``$GeV while Section 4 concentrates on elliptic flow as a function of impact parameter or momentum, respectively. Section 5 concludes this study with a summary and discussion of open questions.

## 2 Description of the transport approach

Our studies are based on the relativistic hadron-string model used in Ref.  for the investigation of transverse and elliptic baryon flow at AGS energies. The approach is based on a coupled set of covariant transport equations for the phase-space distributions of hadrons which involve the propagation in momentum-dependent scalar and vector mean fields as well as transition rates for elastic and inelastic scattering processes. In the collision terms we employ the in-medium cross sections as given in Ref. , that are parameterized in line with the corresponding experimental data (in vacuum) for $`\sqrt{s}`$ 3.5 GeV, while for higher invariant energies $`\sqrt{s}`$ the Lund string formation and fragmentation model  is employed as in the Hadron-String-Dynamics (HSD) approach , which has been used extensively for the description of particle production in nucleus-nucleus collisions from SIS to SPS energies . We note, that the ’string threshold’ of 3.5 GeV has been determined by a fit to the transverse mass spectra of protons in central $`Au+Au`$ collisions at AGS energies (cf. Ref. ).

The mean-field part of the relativistic transport model is fully specified by the scalar and vector potentials, which determine the mean-field propagation of the hadrons. Once these potentials are specified, the energy per particle $`E/A`$ as a function of density $`\rho `$ (EoS) can be calculated for nuclear matter ground-state configurations in a straight forward manner . We recall that in a simple relativistic mean-field theory one assumes the scalar and vector fields to be represented by point-like meson-baryon (i.e. momentum independent) couplings. Such models explain the Schrödinger-equivalent potential (nucleon optical potential) at low kinetic energies ($`E_{kin}200`$ MeV) in nuclear matter also in accordance with data  and more sophisticated Dirac-Brueckner calculations . However, at higher kinetic energies (200 MeV $`E_{kin}`$ 1 GeV), this local relativistic mean-field theory does no longer describe the nucleon optical potential - as extracted from elastic $`p+A`$ scattering  \- due to its linear function in $`E_{kin}`$. Since the energy dependence of sideward flow and elliptic flow are controlled in part by the nucleon optical potential, a local relativistic mean-field model cannot be applied anymore to high-energy heavy-ion collisions . In order to take care of this aspect we invoke an explicit momentum-dependence of the coupling constants, i.e. a form factor for the meson-baryon couplings  as also used in .

In the present calculations we consider Lagrangian densities with nucleon, $`\sigma `$ (scalar) and $`\omega `$ (vector) fields and nonlinear self-interactions of the scalar field as in , however, with different parameter sets. These parameter sets are denoted by NL2 (incompressibility K=210 MeV, soft), NL23 (K=300 MeV, medium) and NL3 (K=380 MeV, hard) according to the stiffness of the EoS, respectively. For all these parameter sets scalar and vector form factors at the vertices are introduced in the form

$$f_s(𝐩)=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_s^2a𝐩^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_s^2+𝐩^2}\text{and}f_v(𝐩)=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_v^2b𝐩^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_v^2+𝐩^2}.$$
(1)
In (1) the cut-off parameters $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_s`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_v`$ and constants $`a`$ and $`b`$ are obtained by fitting the Schrödinger equivalent potential,

$$U_{sep}(E_{kin})=U_s+U_0+\frac{1}{2M}(U_s^2U_0^2)+\frac{U_0}{M}E_{kin},$$
(2)
to Dirac phenomenology for intermediate energy proton-nucleus scattering . These parameters $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_s`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_v`$, $`a`$ and $`b`$ are 1.05 GeV, 1.52 GeV, 1/3 and 1/4 for NL2, 1.0 GeV, 1.35 GeV, 1/3 and 1/4 for NL23 and 1.0 GeV, 0.9 GeV, 1/2 and 1/6 for NL3, respectively. The above momentum dependence is computed self-consistently on the mean-field level as in Ref. .

Fig. 1 displays the resulting Schrödinger equivalent potential (2) at density $`\rho _0`$ = 0.168 fm<sup>-3</sup> as a function of the nucleon kinetic energy $`E_{kin}`$ with respect to the nuclear matter at rest for all three models NL2 (solid line), NL23 (dotted line) and NL3 (dot-dashed line). These models are compared with the data from Hama et al.  (full squares) which are well described due to the explicit fit. Since the data are only available up to 1 GeV our extrapolations via (1) to higher kinetic energies have to be taken with care. However, as shown in Refs.  a decrease of $`U_{sep}`$ with energy is necessary to properly describe the transverse flow of nucleons in heavy-ion reactions at AGS energies. We mention, that the form factors (1) lead to negative optical potentials for high energies which we consider as unphysical; for simplicity we have set the potentials to zero above 3.2 GeV, 2.8 GeV and 3.5 GeV for NL2 (solid line), NL23 (dashed line) and NL3 (dot-dashed line), respectively, as illustrated in Fig. 1.

It is interesting to note that in order to match the Schrödinger equivalent potentials up to 1 GeV kinetic energy, the strength of the vector potential (with a momentum-dependent form factor) for the soft equation of state (NL2) is higher than for the stiffer equations of state (NL23 and NL3). Since the vector potentials must be partly compensated by the attractive scalar potentials according to (2) this also holds true for the strength of the scalar potentials.

The energy per nucleon $`E/A`$ \- as resulting from the 3 parameter sets - is shown in the upper left part of Fig. 2 as a function of the density $`\rho `$, where the free nucleon mass has been subtracted. The shorthand notations ’soft’, ’medium’ and ’stiff’ become obvious from this figure. It is of further importance, how the optical potentials look like as a function of the baryon momentum $`p`$ with respect to the nuclear matter at rest e.g. for densities of 2 $`\rho _0`$, 3 $`\rho _0`$, and 5 $`\rho _0`$ which are encountered in nucleus-nucleus collisions at AGS energies. This information is also displayed in Fig. 2 for NL2 (solid lines), NL23 (dotted lines) and NL3 (dot-dashed lines). Whereas for low momentum $`p`$ the optical potential $`U_{sep}`$ becomes more repulsive with increasing stiffness $`K`$ (and density $`\rho `$), it is of roughly the same size at all densities for $`p`$ 1 GeV/c and even most repulsive for the ’soft’ parameter set NL2 above $``$1.5 GeV/c. Thus the energy per particle $`E/A`$ in the upper left part of Fig. 2 is somewhat misleading since it only reflects the momentum dependence of the potentials up to the Fermi momentum

$$p_F=(\frac{3}{2}\pi ^2\rho )^{1/3},$$
(3)
which is less than 0.5 GeV/c even at 6 $`\rho _0`$.

Some further note of caution has to be added here concerning the interpretation of ’baryons per volume’, i.e. the density $`\rho `$, since in the transport model the initial high density phase is described not by ’formed’ baryons but by ’strings’, that correspond to continuum excitations of the hadrons. Thus, when addressing the baryon density, we actually consider the constituent quark number per volume - as contained in the strings \- and divide by 3 in order to define the baryon density $`\rho `$. As shown explicitly in Fig. 11 of Ref.  for central $`Au+Au`$ reactions at 11.6 GeV/c, the initial high density phase of the reaction is fully dominated by quarks and diquarks that form the endpoints of the strings. In this respect we compute the quark current $`j_\mu (t,𝐫)`$ and define the ’baryon’ density as

$$\rho (t,𝐫)=\rho (x)=\frac{1}{3}\sqrt{j_\mu (x)j^\mu (x)}.$$
(4)
## 3 Transverse flow

In this Section we restrict ourselves to the transverse in-plane flow $`<p_x>(y)`$ for mid-peripheral $`Au+Au`$ collisions from 2–8 A$``$GeV. Since the ’input’ of the transport approach has been presented in the previous Section we can directly step on with the numerical results in comparison to the experimental data available.

In Fig. 3 we display the average proton in-plane momentum $`<p_x>(y^{})`$ as a function of the normalized rapidity

$$y^{}=\frac{y_{cm}}{y_{proj}}$$
(5)
for $`Au+Au`$ systems at 2–8 A$``$GeV for the impact parameter $`b=6`$ fm. Since experimentally the sideward flow is observed for mid-peripheral collisions with an average impact parameter of $`b=6`$ fm, we restrict to a single impact parameter here. Note, that the flow only marginally changes with $`b`$ for mid-peripheral reactions. The solid lines in Fig. 3 correspond to the parameter set NL2 (soft), the dashed lines represent the set NL23 (medium) and the dot-dashed lines the set NL3 (hard). The full squares are the experimental data from the E895 Collaboration . The direct measurements have been performed for 0 $`y^{}`$ 1 and the data for -1 $`y^{}`$ 0 have been generated by reflection around $`y^{}`$ = 0. We observe that the overall description of the data is reasonably good for all parameter sets. To quantify the ’agreement’ we have performed a $`\chi ^2`$ analysis (for -0.6 $`y^{}`$ 0.6) and find that the best description is given by the NL3 model at 2 A$``$GeV, while from 4-8 A$``$GeV the ’medium’ NL23 parameter set performs best. One might interpret this as an indication for a ’softening’ of the EoS at $``$ 4 A$``$GeV, however, the differences in the $`\chi ^2`$ values are only small such that this trend has to be interpreted with care.

The shape of $`<p_x(y^{})>`$ is, furthermore, fitted by a polynomial function

$$<p_x(y^{})>Fy^{}+Ky^3$$
(6)
over a finite interval centered around midrapidity. The linear coefficient $`F`$ in (6) is denoted as sideward flow $`F`$. This quantity is shown in Fig. 4 for the parameter sets NL2 (solid line), NL23 (dotted line) and NL3 (dot-dashed line) in comparison to the data from Ref.  (full squares). We find that all parameter sets are roughly compatible with the data such that the transverse flow observable $`F`$ does not qualify very much for a determination of the stiffness of the EoS as pointed out in Ref.  more than a decade ago. Only at 2 A$``$GeV the data more clearly favor a ’stiff’ EoS as provided by NL3. The reasonable description of the transverse flow $`F`$ at 4-8 A$``$GeV by all parameter sets is attributed to the fact that the momentum and density dependence of the scalar and vector mean fields is roughly the same for momenta $`p`$ 0.5 GeV/c (cf. Figs. 1 and 2), which is enforced by the fit to the experimental data from Hama et al. .

The significant decrease in $`F`$ for bombarding energies above 2 A$``$GeV is due to the reduction of the vector potentials with momentum as pointed out before in Ref. . According to our understanding the reduction of the vector coupling with density and momentum is a genuine phenomenon of nuclear many-body physics and points towards a restoration of chiral symmetry with increasing density as advocated by Brown and Rho ; it not necessarily has to be interpreted as a signature for a phase transition to a QGP.

## 4 Elliptic flow

We now turn to the results of our calculations for the elliptic flow $`v_2(b,p_t)`$. The elliptic flow can be measured by the second Fourier coefficient of the azimuthal distribution of particles with respect to the reaction plane and is characterized by the expectation value ,

$$v_2=<(p_{x}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}p_{y}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})/((p_{x}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+p_{y}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})>.$$
(7)
In Fig. 5 we show the impact parameter $`b`$ dependence of the elliptic flow (7) for $`Au+Au`$ collisions at energies of 2, 4 and 6 A$``$GeV without any cut on the transverse momentum $`p_t`$ of the protons. As before, the solid lines display the results from the set NL2, the dotted lines those from NL23 and the dot-dashed lines those from NL3. The experimental data (full squares) have been taken from Ref. . We note that the impact parameter determination from experiment only holds within $`\pm `$ 1 fm. At 2 A$``$GeV we observe a clear sensitivity to the stiffness of the EoS; only the set NL3 (stiff) describes the large negative elliptic flow as a function of $`b`$ correctly, whereas the other parameter sets turn out too low in $`v_2`$. This finding agrees with that from Danielewicz  that the 2 A$``$GeV data for $`Au+Au`$ ’need’ a stiff EoS. However, contrary to Ref.  we do not find convincing indications for a softening of the EoS at higher bombarding energy. The $`\chi ^2`$ fits to the data in Fig. 5 give only a tiny preference to the results from NL23 (medium) at 6 A$``$GeV, whereas NL3 (stiff) and NL23 (medium) practically have the same $`\chi ^2`$ at 4 A$``$GeV.

The situation might change when looking at the elliptic flow at high transverse momentum $`p_t`$. We thus compare in Fig. 6 our calculations on the elliptic flow as a function of impact parameter $`b`$ with the respective data from Ref.  for a cut in $`p_t`$ 0.7 GeV/c for $`Au+Au`$ at 2 and 4 A$``$GeV. Again clearly the best description at 2 A$``$GeV is given by NL3 (stiff) now even slightly underestimating the magnitude of $`v_2`$. On the other hand, our results for the soft EoS (given by NL2) give the wrong sign of $`v_2`$ at 4 A$``$GeV which in the experiment is small, but negative at high $`p_t`$. At 4 A$``$GeV the best $`\chi ^2`$ is provided by NL23 (medium), but the sign of $`v_2`$ comes out wrong for 6 fm $`b`$ 8 fm, where the elliptic flow is described best by NL3 (stiff). We thus do not find a convincing indication for a softening of the EoS at 4A$``$GeV.

We continue with a comparison of our calculations to the data from  for the elliptic flow at 6 A$``$GeV imposing a high $`p_t`$ cut of 1 GeV/c in Fig. 7. Within experimental error bars now all parameter sets show results that are compatible with the data. A $`\chi ^2`$ analysis gives a slight preference for NL23 (medium) followed by NL2 (soft), whereas the $`\chi ^2`$ is higher for NL3 (stiff). However, these differences are still within the statistical accuracy of the transport calculations which becomes poor for high transverse momentum protons. We attribute this approximate insensitivity to the stiffness of the EoS to the fact, that the optical potentials at high density and momenta $`p`$ 0.5 GeV are roughly the same (cf. Fig. 2) and that multi-meson production channels from string decays start to dominate the reaction dynamics above 4 A$``$GeV as pointed out before in Ref. .

## 5 Summary and Discussion

In summary, we have analyzed the sideward and elliptic flow from $`Au+Au`$ collisions at beam energies from 2 A$``$GeV to 8 A$``$GeV at AGS energies using different nuclear forces that involve ’soft’, ’medium’ and ’stiff’ equation of states in the microscopic relativistic transport model.

The measured sideward flow or the average in-plane momentum as a function of rapidity can be described in the dynamical transport model by practically all parameter sets thus demonstrating that the transverse flow is rather insensitive to the stiffness of the EoS, but crucially depends on the momentum dependence of the mean fields . The rather good description of the transverse flow $`F`$ by all parameter sets in turn is attributed to the fact that the momentum dependence of the scalar and vector mean fields is roughly the same (cf. Figs. 1 and 2), which is enforced by the fit to the experimental data from Hama et al. . A $`\chi ^2`$ analysis here favors a ’stiff’ EoS at 2 A$``$GeV while the 4-8 A$``$GeV data are best reproduced by the ’medium’ parameter set NL23. However, the significance for this trend is very low.

Our calculations for the elliptic flow $`v_2`$ (7) show a clear sensitivity to the stiffness of the EoS at 2 A$``$GeV; only the set NL3 (stiff) describes the large negative elliptic flow seen by E895  as a function of $`b`$ correctly, whereas the other parameter sets turn out too low. This finding agrees with that from Danielewicz  that the 2 A$``$GeV data for $`Au+Au`$ call for a stiff EoS. However, contrary to Ref.  we do not find convincing indications for a softening of the EoS at higher bombarding energy even when gating on high transverse momenta ($`p_t`$ 0.7 GeV/c or 1 GeV/c, respectively). A $`\chi ^2`$ analysis favors again the ’medium’ EoS (given by the set NL23) at 4-6 A$``$GeV in line with the analysis of the transverse flow, but with rather low significance. For bombarding energies $``$ 6 A$``$GeV our calculations turn out to be almost insensitive to the stiffness of the EoS, which is likely due to the fact that the optical potentials at high density and momenta $`p`$ 0.5 GeV (in the transport approach) are roughly the same (cf. Fig. 2) and that multi-meson production channels from string decays start to dominate the reaction dynamics above 4 A$``$GeV .

The open questions – and uncertainties in the transport approach – are related to the explicit momentum dependence of the optical potential $`U_{sep}`$ (2) in the kinematical range above 1 GeV of relative kinetic energy. Here data from elastic proton-nucleus scattering at AGS would be of significant help to pin down the present uncertainties. Furthermore, the question of the ’effective degrees of freedom’ encountered in the early phase of nucleus-nucleus collisions at AGS energies is open, too. The fact, that our transport calculations – involving all hadrons up to a mass of 2 GeV and strings for the hadronic continuum – give a good description of the differential sideward and elliptic flow data, does not imply that the proper degrees of freedom are employed. On the other hand, we can turn the argument around and conclude, that the differential flow data do not necessarily indicate the presence of a new state of matter such as the QGP. Electromagnetic signals (hard photons, dileptons or ’penetrating’ probes) should provide complementary information to the collective observables studied here. Unfortunately, such information is not available from the AGS; related studies are foreseen at the future GSI upgrade .