• Ricky
  • Nathvani

Latest Posts

  • John
  • Felde
  • University of Maryland
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • USLHC
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • James
  • Doherty
  • Open University
  • United Kingdom

Latest Posts

  • Andrea
  • Signori
  • Nikhef
  • Netherlands

Latest Posts

  • CERN
  • Geneva
  • Switzerland

Latest Posts

  • Aidan
  • Randle-Conde
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles
  • Belgium

Latest Posts

  • TRIUMF
  • Vancouver, BC
  • Canada

Latest Posts

  • Laura
  • Gladstone
  • MIT
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Steven
  • Goldfarb
  • University of Michigan

Latest Posts

  • Fermilab
  • Batavia, IL
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Seth
  • Zenz
  • Imperial College London
  • UK

Latest Posts

  • Nhan
  • Tran
  • Fermilab
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Alex
  • Millar
  • University of Melbourne
  • Australia

Latest Posts

  • Ken
  • Bloom
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

Christine Nattrass | USLHC | USA

View Blog | Read Bio

Exciting new results from CMS

I’m giddy today because CMS just came out with some very exciting results.  I don’t think we understand what they mean at all – and as a scientist, there is nothing I love better than shocking data, data that challenge what we think we understand.  (For the technical audience, the slides from the talk at CERN are here and the paper is here.)  I might be biased because this topic is very closely related to my doctoral thesis, but I think it’s safe to say this is the first surprising result from the LHC, something that changes our paradigm.

In heavy ion collisions at the relativistic heavy ion collider we observed something called the ridge (from this paper):

We more or less understand the peak – called the “jet-like correlation” – but we don’t understand the broad structure the peak is sitting on.  This broad structure is called the ridge.  What I mean when I say we don’t understand the ridge is that we haven’t settled in the field how this structure is formed, where it comes from.  We have a lot of models that can produce something similar, but they can’t describe the ridge quantitatively.

Here’s what CMS saw:

It’s a slightly different type of measurement – I’ve put a box around the part with the ridge.  We see the same peak as we saw before – again, we pretty much understand where this comes from.  But there’s a broad structure beneath this peak.  It’s smaller than what we saw in heavy ion collisions above, but it’s there – the fact that it’s there is surprising.

In the models we have from heavy ion collisions the ridge is from:

  • A high energy quark or gluon losing energy in the Quark Gluon Plasma,
  • Collective motion of particles in the Quark Gluon Plasma, or
  • Remnants of the initial state (meaning the incoming particles)

In our current understanding of what goes on in a proton-proton collision, there is no Quark Gluon Plasma – so the conservative interpretation of these data would mean that the ridge is somehow some remnant of the initial state. Even conservatively, this would severely constrain our models.  Some physicists, such as Mike Lisa at Ohio State University, have proposed that there may be collective motion of particles in proton-proton collisions, similar to what we see in heavy ion collisions.  This would imply that we also see a medium in proton-proton collisions.  That would be a huge discovery.  (Just to be clear, CMS is not making this claim, at least at this point.)  It will take a while for the community to debate the meaning of these data and come to a consensus on what they mean.  But these data are definitely very exciting – this is the most exciting day for me since the first collisions!

Share

Tags: , , ,

  • http://theeternaluniverse.blogspot.com/ Joseph Smidt

    I hope the LHC finds some extended object. Man we could use some new unexpected data to finally test these crazy theories of our.

  • http://www.facebook.com/CBS31337H Fujimia Yoneda

    Hi…

    This…information is interesting because the question we get from the data crackin’ our head ^_^ so I think its better to share some ideas a lil’bit.

    From…my opinion taking characteristic from heavy ion collisions is correct but I’ll take 2 of it from 3 and it is :-

    *A high energy quark or gluon losing energy in the Quark Gluon Plasma

    and…

    **Collective motion of particles in the Quark Gluon Plasma

    In…my point of view opinion I believe the “RIDGE” can be describe as “Correlative Amplification” to support the “PEAK”

    How ???

    In…high collision the particle create collective motion particles & the particles correliate but in this case its not losing the energy but collecting the energy to create “RIDGE” to support the “PEAK” & then losing it due to energy lost under the string theory because each existance of particles in this universe have its own frequency.

    if we can put LIGO observer center in the center of collision maybe we can see something unexplain.

    This…is only an opinion according to my mind ^_^

  • TimG

    Very exciting! I look forward to hearing an update once we know what it all means.

    I do have one basic question: What are Delta phi and Delta eta? The arXiv preprint from RHIC that you link to refers to “azimuthal pair separation” (which I assume is the difference in angle relative to the beam axis) and “pseudo-rapidity pair separation” (I have no idea what this means).

  • TimG

    Ah, never mind, I was mixing up azimuthal angle phi with the polar angle theta, and apparently pseudorapidity is a function of theta. So says Wikipedia, anyway.

  • Dilaton

    Congratulations, that`s very exciting :-)

    I look forward to see more interesting results like that one :-).

    In other science blogs, they are descussing the fragmentation of some “elongated objects” causing the anomalous correlations; some QCD stuff :-).

    And never stop the exciting research at CERN due to silly saving measures decided by ignorant people :-/ …

    Cheers

  • Christine Nattrass

    Hi Tim – sorry, the details of this get very complicated. Delta phi is the separation in the plane perpendicular to the beam pipe. If you look back at my old post
    http://blogs.uslhc.us/meet-the-alice-time-projection-chamber
    delta phi is the angle between two particles in the plane shown in the 3rd picture down – the x-y plane.

    Pseudorapidity is a measure of the angle between this plane and the particle – so how close the particle’s momentum is to the direction of the incoming beam. If you look at the wiki on pseudorapidity
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudorapidity
    the top figure shows you the angle in the x-z plane for different values of pseudorapidity.

    Most correlations we understand (for the technical audience – resonances, jets, Dalitz decays, HBT) only produce particles close in pseudorapidity. If two particles are produced by the same parent particle (all of the processes listed above), they can’t be separated too much in pseudorapidity because it takes too much time for these particles to move that far apart and the system hadronizes – forms the particles we actually observe in our detectors – too fast.

    This is the basic problem of the ridge – there isn’t a straightforward mechanism to produce particles that are correlated and separated as far in pseudorapidity as we observe them. An analogy: There’s a huge church down the road from me. Every Sunday this church causes a lot of traffic and it can take me an extra 15 minutes to go to the grocery store two miles away. This church causes a local correlation between cars on the road – two cars on the road a mile apart but within a 1/2 mile of the church are very likely to have come from the same source, the church. But this church in Knoxville can’t explain traffic in Memphis. However, if it happened to be Super Bowl Sunday, traffic in Memphis could be correlated with traffic in Knoxville. During half time, there’s a lot more cars on the road because everyone runs out to the store. So the church in Knoxville can’t explain a correlation between traffic in Knoxville and traffic in Memphis, but the Super Bowl can. So far we know about “churches” in proton-proton collisions – things that can explain correlations between particles close in space – but no “Super Bowl,” at least not in proton-proton collisions.

    Dilaton’s comment addresses some of the speculation about how these things are formed. QCD is the best theory for explaining proton-proton collisions and it does a beautiful job, but we can only do calculations in QCD for high momentum particles. The easiest explanation for the ridge is that it’s something in QCD that we didn’t realize was there already. The blogs mentioning fragmentation of “elongated objects” probably refer to string fragmentation in the Lund string model (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lund_string_model). (This is not to be confused with string theory, which is something else entirely.) At least the most common implementation of this model (PYTHIA) cannot explain the ridge, but there have been some papers relating string fragmentation to the ridge.

    One thing we know can produce correlations between particles that are far apart in pseudorapidity is the collective motion of particles in a Quark Gluon Plasma. The speculation that this is causing the ridge – implying that there is a QGP in proton-proton collisions – is causing much of the excitement because this would imply something very surprising. It is also a hypothesis which should be tested very carefully.

    I’ve seen the ridge confound our theoretical community for roughly the last four years. I am not expecting a rapid solution to this puzzle.

  • http://www.facebook.com/CBS31337H Fujimia Yoneda

    Hi…

    Its Look Like Super Bowl Soup Of Mass Collapse Without Traffic Light For Me…very – very interesting Christine ^_^

  • http://www.facebook.com/CBS31337H Fujimia Yoneda

    Hi…

    I…Remember something 10 years ago after reading carefully the information & All comment which being given above, if we are talking about Dynamic & Straightforward mechanism in pseudorapidity collective motion of particles in a Quark Gluon Plasma doesn’t it looks like exchange energy shifts under dense plasma conditions ???

    http://iopscience.iop.org/0953-4075/39/16/019

    I have written this information for invention research 10 years ago its about “The Large Helical Device” which being created by National Institute For Fusion Science – Ministry Of Education, Japan. It also bring me to density collapse events in LHD.

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ctpp.200900051/abstract

    That…start crackin’ our head to an excitement ^_^ another opinion from my mind again…;p

  • TimG

    Thanks for the answer, Christine. This is all very interesting.

    It makes sense to me (at least in a vague, qualitative way) that a collective motion in a medium like Quark Gluon Plasma could produce hits in the detector that were further apart than what you’d see from the decay of a single particle. But can you elaborate at all on the alternative you mention, that this is some remnant of the initial state?

    I googled [ridge remnant “initial state”] but the top result was this blog entry.

  • http://www.facebook.com/CBS31337H Fujimia Yoneda

    Hi…

    After TimG Mention About Remnants Of Initial State I Wonder Something If We Combine All 3 Model Under Discussion Above…

    “Hi-Energy Quark Exhange Energy Shifting In Collective Motion Of Particles Under Dense Quark Gluon Plasma Condition Which Support The Remnants of Initial State”

    Does It Show Something About The Ridge ???

  • Christine Nattrass

    Hi Fujimia – This is something very different from an electromagnetic plasma, so most ideas from plasmas don’t really translate very well. However, one of the ideas below is somewhat relevant.

    Tim – So there are two ideas I’m familiar with for how something in the initial state could cause the ridge:
    1. Large fluctuations of QCD magnetic fields when the nuclei collide
    2. A lumpy initial condition

    Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) is the theory that describes how quarks and gluons interact through the strong force. It is analogous to Quantum Electrodynamics (QED), which describes how particles interact through the electromagnetic force. In QED, objects can have an electric charge – either positive or negative. In QCD, there are three charges, usually called red, green, and blue. In QED you can get a magnetic field. In QCD you can also get color magnetic fields. In QED a moving charge produces a magnetic field. A moving color charge produces a color magnetic field.

    When we collide nuclei – whether they are lead, gold, or protons – quarks and gluons hit each other and interact. Quarks and gluons have color charge, therefore, when they move, they will produce a QCD magnetic field. When two nuclei hit, lots of color charged objects are moving, so we get strong color magnetic fields and these fields are changing very rapidly. It’s been suggested that these large, rapidly fluctuating magnetic fields could cause correlations like the ridge. (This is an idea which transfers from electromagnetic plasmas because those plasmas can get ripped apart by strong fluctuations in the magnetic field. Our QGP can get ripped apart by these large fluctuations in the color magnetic fields.)

    This is an idea that easily translates to proton-proton collisions because we also have color charged objects moving around rapidly in a proton-proton collision.

    The lumpy initial state – nuclei are not homogeneous. They are made up of quarks and gluons, each of which is actually moving inside the nucleus when the nuclei collide. This means you’ll get fluctuations in exactly where protons and neutrons collide. Here’s the best analogy I could come up with: If you throw two water balloons at each other, the water will be distributed evenly in each water balloon so you’d expect the water to spray out more or less symmetrically. But a nucleus-nucleus collision is more like if you filled two balloons with grapes and then threw them at each other. The grapes are moving inside the balloon, and if you were to repeat this experiment over and over again, you’d get a different distribution in space of grape-grape collisions each time. This is the lumpiness in the initial condition – the protons and neutrons (grapes) are not evenly distributed in the nucleus. These lumps in the initial condition produce lumps in the final state, the particles that we observe. They are even amplified by the collective motion of particles in the Quark Gluon Plasma.

    This is a harder idea to translate to proton-proton collisions because the proton isn’t really lumpy in the same way as a nucleus is. The lumps would have to come from quarks and gluons inside the proton and these are much smaller lumps than protons and neutrons.

  • TimG

    Thanks for another excellent answer. This is really fascinating.

  • http://www.facebook.com/CBS31337H Fujimia Yoneda

    Hi…

    TQ…For Answering Christine ^_^ I agree with both of the ideas & I really interested for the 2’nd ideas. From what I understand the according to my knowledge the lumps is not small but something we can’t explain but how about if we say it just like this…

    “After the proton collide its correliate & under the collective motion condition the proton energy mass collapse (break) then start to shifting energy to another mass (correliate)”

    Wait…a second ^_* doesn’t its mean that the proton being isolated or separated from QG which support the ideas of lumps ridge & its create another effects ???

    how much times it take for the appearance of the ridge from the collision ???

    I wonder what that is…

  • http://www.cosmology-particles.pl Sylwester Kornowski

    Theory starting from four phase transitions of the Newtonian spacetime (it is gas composed of structureless tachyons) leads to the Einstein spacetime (in its ground state it is gas composed of non-rotating binary systems of neutrinos) and to the atom-like structure of baryons. The first phase transition leads to the superluminal closed strings, the second to the neutrinos, the third to the cores of baryons and the fourth to the objects before big bangs suited to life. This Everlasting Theory contains only seven parameters and leads to the exact experimental data. The calculated binding energy of the core of baryons is 14.98 MeV. Since this energy follows from the weak interactions carried by the superluminal binary systems of the closed strings so in reality the binding energy is tremendous – it is equivalent to about 4•10^50 kg. It is very difficult to destroy the cores of baryons. In our Universe there are not in existence black holes having mass densities higher than the cores of baryons. When the very energetic nucleons collide, there appears the liquid-like plasma composed of the maximally packed core-anticore pairs. Within the Everlasting Theory, I described the properties of the liquid-like plasma i.e. the pseudorapidity density (it is consistent with the experimental data) and its temperature and density. There is the spin correlation of core and anticore in each core-anticore pair. When the electrically charged cores and anticores leave the liquid-like plasma, they transform into the known charged particles. It is the reason why in the LHC experiments we see the correlated electrically charged particles. Such spin correlations appear even when we do not see in the collisions the liquid-like plasma because the produced jets of the liquid-like plasma have very small thickness (about 1.4 fm). The Everlasting Theory leads also to conclusion that the Universe flared up two times i.e. about 13.2 and 5.7 billion years ago. From the second flare up follows that the acceleration of expansion of the Universe is an illusion. Just at the beginning of the big bang, the fine structure constant had varied because varied the mass density of the Einstein spacetime – there appeared the jet (it is the dipolar part) and local protuberances (it is the monopole part).