Influence of the shear viscosity of the quark-gluon plasma on elliptic
flow in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions

Show preview

Hide preview

ar X
iv :1
10 1.
24 42
v2 [
nu cl-
th] 1
7 J un
20 11
Influence of the shear viscosity of the quark-gluon plasma on elliptic flow in
ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions
H. Niemia, G.S. Denicolb, P. Huovinenb, E. Molna´ra,c, and D.H. Rischkea,b aFrankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, Ruth-Moufang-Str. 1, D-60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
bInstitut fu¨r Theoretische Physik, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universita¨t, Max-von-Laue-Str. 1, D-60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany and
cMTA-KFKI, Research Institute for Particle and Nuclear Physics, H-1525 Budapest, P.O.Box 49, Hungary
We investigate the influence of a temperature-dependent shear viscosity over entropy density ratio η/s on the transverse momentum spectra and elliptic flow of hadrons in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions. We find that the elliptic flow in
√ sNN = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at RHIC is dominated
by the viscosity in the hadronic phase and in the phase transition region, but largely insensitive to the viscosity of the quark-gluon plasma (QGP). At the highest LHC energy, the elliptic flow becomes sensitive to the QGP viscosity and insensitive to the hadronic viscosity.
PACS numbers: 25.75.-q, 25.75.Ld, 12.38.Mh, 24.10.Nz
Ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions at the Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collider (RHIC) and the Large Hadron Col- lider (LHC) produce a hot and dense system of strongly interacting matter [1]. The subsequent expansion of the created matter has been shown to exhibit a strong de- gree of collectivity which reveals itself in the transverse momentum (pT ) spectra of finally observed hadrons. In particular, the observed large azimuthal anisotropy of the spectra, quantified by the so-called elliptic flow coefficient v2, has been interpreted as a signal for the formation of a quark-gluon plasma (QGP) with very small viscosity in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC [2].
A first indication for the small viscosity of the QGP was the agreement between RHIC data and hydrodynam- ical calculations in the perfect-fluid limit, i.e., with zero viscosity [3]. An analysis of the elliptic flow at RHIC in the framework of relativistic dissipative hydrodynamics was performed in Refs. [4–6]. These works indeed indi- cate that the shear viscosity to entropy density ratio, η/s, has to be small in order to keep the agreement between the hydrodynamic simulations and experimental data.
Presently, most hydrodynamical simulations assume a constant, i.e., temperature-independent η/s. It has been claimed [6] that, in order to describe elliptic flow data, this value cannot be larger than 2.5 times the lower bound η/s = 1/4pi conjectured in the framework of the AdS/CFT correspondence [7]. A constant η/s is, how- ever, in sharp contrast to the behavior observed in com- mon liquids and gases, where η/s has a strong temper- ature dependence and, typically, a minimum near phase transitions. A similar behavior of η/s is expected for finite-temperature matter described by quantum chro- modynamics (QCD) near the transition from hadronic matter to the QGP (the QCD phase transition) [8].
A natural question then is whether the temperature dependence of η/s has an effect on the collective flow of hadrons in heavy-ion collisions. In this work, we inves- tigate this question in the framework of relativistic hy- drodynamics. We consider a temperature-dependent η/s
with a minimum near the QCD phase transition, and compare the results with those obtained for a constant η/s in either the hadronic phase, or the QGP phase, or both phases. Note that we do not attempt a detailed fit to the data in order to extract η/s. Rather, we are inter- ested in the qualitative effects of different parametriza- tions for η/s on hadron spectra and elliptic flow.
Concerning the elliptic flow in Au+Au collisions at RHIC, we find little difference whether η/s is constant in the QGP phase or strongly increasing with temperature. In contrast, the elliptic flow values are highly sensitive to whether we use a constant or temperature-dependent η/s in the hadronic phase, corroborating the findings of Refs. [9, 10]. On the other hand, we find that the sen- sitivity of the elliptic flow to the values of η/s in the high-temperature QGP increases with increasing collision energy, while the sensitivity to the hadronic viscosity de- creases. At the highest LHC energy, the above conclusion for RHIC energies is reversed: the finally observable el- liptic flow is dominated by the viscosity of the QGP and largely insensitive to that of the hadronic phase. Fluid dynamics is determined by the conservation of
energy, momentum, and charges like baryon number. Here, we are interested in the collective flow at midra- pidity in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC and LHC energies. Consequently, we may neglect baryon number and as- sume longitudinal boost invariance [11]. We also need the constitutive relations for the dissipative currents. Here, we only consider the shear stress tensor piµν , the evolu- tion of which we describe in the approach of Israel and Stewart [12], 〈Dpiµν〉 = 1
τpi (2ησµν − piµν) − 4
3 piµν∂λu
λ,
whereD = uµ∂µ, σ µν = ∇<µuν>, and the angular brack-
ets <> denote the symmetrized and traceless projection, orthogonal to the fluid four-velocity uµ. We have also taken the coefficient of the last term in the massless limit. For details, see Ref. [13]. We solve the conservation equations numerically by us-
ing the SHASTA algorithm, see e.g. Ref. [13]. The relax- ation equations for the components of piµν are solved by

2 √ sNN [GeV] τ0 [fm] ε0 [GeV/fm
3] Tmax [MeV] 200 1.0 24.0 335 2760 0.6 187.0 506 5500 0.6 240.0 594
TABLE I. Initialization parameters for different collisions.
discretizing spatial gradients using centered second-order finite differences. We found that, in contrast to SHASTA, this method produces numerically stable solutions also for low-density matter at the edges of the system. With longitudinal boost invariance, we need to specify
the values of the energy-momentum tensor in the trans- verse plane at some initial time τ0. We assume that the initial energy density profile is proportional to the density of binary nucleon-nucleon collisions as calculated from the optical Glauber model (model eBC in Ref. [14]). The initial transverse velocity and piµν are set to zero. The maximum energy densities ε0 in central collisions (impact parameter b = 0) are chosen to reproduce the observed multiplicity in the 0–5% most central
√ sNN = 200 GeV
Au+Au collisions at RHIC [15] and √ sNN = 2.76 TeV
Pb+Pb collisions at LHC [16]. For the √ sNN = 5.5
TeV Pb+Pb collisions at LHC we use the multiplicity predicted by the minijet + saturation model [17]. The initialization parameters are collected in Table I. Our equation of state (EoS) is a recent parametrization
of lattice-QCD data and a hadron resonance gas [s95p- PCE of Ref. [18]], with chemical freeze-out at a temper- ature Tchem = 150 MeV implemented as in Ref. [19]. Hadron spectra are calculated by using the Cooper-
Frye freeze-out description [20] with constant decoupling temperature Tdec = 100 MeV, which will be shown below to give reasonable agreement with both the pT -spectrum and the elliptic flow coefficient for pions at RHIC. For the sake of simplicity, we include viscous corrections to the equilibrium distribution function f0 as for Boltzmann particles, even though f0 obeys the appropriate quantum statistics [21]:
f(x, p) = f0 + δf = f0
[ 1 +
pµpνpi µν
2T 2(ε+ p)
] , (1)
where p is pressure and pµ is the hadron four-momentum. Two- and three-body decays of unstable hadrons are in- cluded as described in Ref. [22]. We include resonances up to mass 1.7 GeV. The shear viscosity to entropy density ratio is
parametrized as follows. For the hadronic phase, it re- produces the results of Ref. [23]. In the QGP phase, η/s follows the lattice QCD results of Ref. [24]. Then, η/s has to assume a minimum value at a certain tempera- ture; in our case we take η/s = 0.08 at T = 180 MeV. This is the same parametrization as used in Ref. [25]. In total we have four cases, see Fig. 1: (LH-LQ) η/s = 0.08 for all temperatures, (LH-HQ) η/s = 0.08 in the hadron gas, and above T = 180 MeV η/s increases according to lattice QCD data, (HH-LQ) below T = 180 MeV, η/s
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
η/ s
T [GeV]
LH-LQ LH-HQ HH-LQ HH-HQ
FIG. 1. (Color online) Different parametrizations of η/s as a function of temperature. The (LH-LQ) line is shifted down- wards and the (HH-HQ) line upwards for better visibility.
is that of a hadron gas, and above we set η/s = 0.08, (HH-HQ) we use a realistic parametrization for both the hadron gas and the QGP. For the relaxation time we use a result motivated by kinetic theory τpi = 5η/(ε+p) [26].
Figure 2a shows the pT -spectrum of positive pions in the 0–5 % most central
√ sNN = 200 GeV Au+Au
collisions at RHIC. Our calculations are compared to PHENIX data [15]. All the different parametrizations of η/s give similar agreement with the low-pT pion spec- tra. For pT & 1.0 GeV, the parametrizations (LH-HQ) and (HH-HQ) start to give slightly flatter spectra. While the effect of the QGP viscosity on the pT -slopes is small for our comparatively long initialization time τ0 = 1.0 fm, it becomes more pronounced for smaller values of τ0. On the other hand, the slopes of the spectra are almost independent of the hadronic viscosity and this conclusion remains true at least for τ0 = 0.2–1.0 fm.
Figures 2b and 2c show the spectra for √ sNN = 2.76
TeV and 5.5 TeV Pb+Pb collisions, respectively. Here we observe a much stronger dependence of the pT -spectra on the high-temperature values of η/s, but the main reason for this is the earlier initialization time τ0 = 0.6 fm. On the other hand, the pT -spectra are independent of the hadronic viscosity also at LHC.
In Figs. 2d, 2e, and 2f we show the elliptic flow co- efficients for charged hadrons in the 20–30% central- ity class for
√ sNN = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions and√
sNN = 2.76 TeV and √ sNN = 5.5 TeV Pb+Pb colli-
sions, respectively. In Fig. 2d the results from the hydro- dynamic simulations are compared to STAR 4-particle cumulant data [27] and in Fig. 2e to recent data from the ALICE Collaboration [28].
We immediately see that, for RHIC, the four parametrizations for η/s produce values for the elliptic flow that fall into two classes. The curves are largely insensitive to the values of η/s in the QGP phase and follow the value of the viscosity in the hadron gas: the parametrizations (LH-LQ) and (LH-HQ) with constant η/s in the hadron gas result in larger v2(pT ) than the parametrizations (HH-LQ) and (HH-HQ) with realistic

3 10-2
10-1
100
101
102
103 dN
/d yd
p T2
[1/ Ge
V2 ]
pi+ 0-5 %
RHIC 200 AGeV
(a)
LH-LQ LH-HQ HH-LQ HH-HQ
PHENIX pi +
0-5 %
LHC 2.76 ATeV
(b)
pi+ 0-5 %
LHC 5.5 ATeV
(c)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0 1 2 3
v 2 (p T
)
pT [GeV]
20-30 % charged hadrons
(d)
STAR v2[4]
0 1 2 3 pT [GeV]
20-30 % charged hadrons
(e)
ALICE v2[4]
0 1 2 3 pT [GeV]
20-30 % charged hadrons
(f)
FIG. 2. (Color online) Transverse momentum spectra of positive pions in the 0–5% most central collisions and elliptic flow coefficients in the 20–30% centrality class at RHIC and LHC. Different curves correspond to the different parametrizations of the temperature dependence of η/s. Data in panel (a) are from Ref. [15] and in panels (d) and (e) from Refs. [27, 28].
η/s in the hadron gas. We have confirmed the insensitiv- ity to the values of η/s in the high-temperature QGP phase by decoupling the system at Tdec = 170 MeV. In that case, v2(pT ) is largely independent of the η/s parametrization. The separation of curves occurs in the subsequent evolution in the hadronic phase. This shows that, within this model and at RHIC, viscous effects from the hadron gas dominate over viscous effects from the QGP, see also Refs. [9, 10]. Due to the strong longitudinal expansion, the initial shear stress enhances the transverse pressure and thus the buildup of the flow anisotropy, but this is counteracted by the viscous suppression of anisotropies. Our simulations suggest that at RHIC these two effects cancel each other in the QGP phase.
The main reason for the hadronic suppression of v2(pT ) are the viscous corrections δf to the particle distribu- tion function. Thus, the values of piµν on the decou- pling boundary are significantly larger in the case with large hadronic η/s. On the other hand, the azimuthal anisotropies of the hydrodynamic flow field are quite sim- ilar in all cases. This is demonstrated in Fig. 3, where we plot v2(pT ) of pions at RHIC without δf . All curves are much closer to each other, indicating that the space-time evolution in the hadron gas is similar in all four cases.
We have tested that these conclusions are unchanged if we use different τ0 = 0.2–1.0 fm, different EoSs, e.g. with or without chemical freeze-out, use non-equilibrium
initial conditions (the same non-zero initial piµν for all four cases), or shift the η/s parametrizations up by a constant value, such that η/s at T = 180 MeV is five times the AdS/CFT lower bound. Although v2(pT ) and the slopes of the pT -spectra change when we change the setup, the observed sensitivity of v2(pT ) on the viscosity around T ∼ 180 MeV and below, rather than on the high- temperature QGP viscosity is quite generic at RHIC. If we increase η/s above T = 200 MeV by a factor of ten in parametrization (HH-LQ), the elliptic flow is practi- cally the same as shown in Fig. 2d. This confirms that the value of η/s in the high-temperature QGP phase has no effect on the final observable v2(pT ) at RHIC, even though during the evolution the system spends approx- imately equal times above T ∼ 200 MeV and between T ∼ 170 and 200 MeV. Interestingly, the sensitivity of v2(pT ) to the QGP vis-
cosity increases with increasing collision energy, while the sensitivity to the hadronic viscosity decreases. This can be seen in Figs. 2e and 2f, which show v2(pT ) for√ sNN = 2.76 TeV and
√ sNN = 5.5 TeV Pb+Pb colli-
sions, respectively.
At the highest LHC energy, the behavior of v2(pT ) is completely opposite to that at RHIC. It is almost inde- pendent of the hadronic viscosity, but sensitive to the QGP viscosity. In contrast to the RHIC case, at LHC the differences in v2(pT ) are mostly due to the difference

4 0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0 1 2 3
v 2 (p T
)
pT [GeV]
thermal pi+ without δf
20-30 %
RHIC 200 AGeV
LH-LQ LH-HQ HH-LQ HH-HQ STAR
FIG. 3. (Color online) Same as Fig. 2d, but for elliptic flow of thermal (i.e., without decays) pions with δf = 0.
in the transverse flow profiles (caused by the different QGP viscosities) and not due to the viscous corrections to the distribution function at freeze-out. The latter are much smaller than at RHIC: the magnitude of δf is the difference between the curves (LH-LQ) and (HH-LQ) or (LH-HQ) and (HH-HQ) in Fig. 2f. We have also checked that v2(pT ) at low-pT remains insensitive to the hadronic viscosity, even if we increase the hadronic η/s in such way that it reaches η/s = 1.0 at T = 100 MeV, but keep the minimum of η/s fixed. The collisions at
√ sNN = 2.76
TeV are between these two extreme behaviors, as elliptic flow depends both on the hadronic and the QGP η/s. There are several reasons why the effect of η/s on the
elliptic flow at LHC is so different from that at RHIC: first, the longer lifetime of the QGP phase, which results in a stronger dependence of the transverse flow on the viscous properties of the QGP. Second, once the system decouples, it has much larger transverse size and velocity gradients are smaller. Subsequently, dissipative effects from the hadronic stage are smaller and have less effect on the observed v2(pT ). In conclusion, we have investigated the effects of a
temperature-dependent η/s on the hadron spectra and elliptic flow coefficients at
√ sNN = 200 GeV Au+Au col-
lisions at RHIC and √ sNN = 2.76 TeV and
√ sNN = 5.5
TeV Pb+Pb collisions at LHC. We found that in all cases the slopes of the pT spectra of pions depend mainly on the high-temperature η/s, and hardly at all on the hadronic viscosity. The effect of η/s on the differential elliptic flow v2(pT )
is more subtle. At RHIC energies, v2(pT ) is highly sensi- tive to the viscosity in hadronic matter and almost inde- pendent of the viscosity in the QGP phase. In contrast, at the highest LHC energy the opposite holds: elliptic flow is almost independent of the hadronic viscosity, but depends strongly on the QGP viscosity. Thus the extrac- tion of an η/s–value for the QGP, except for its value at the expected minimum around Tc, is basically impossible using the elliptic flow data at RHIC alone. On the other hand, a determination of the temperature dependence of η/s in the QGP phase from elliptic flow data seems to be possible at LHC. This could allow the observation of a possible transition from the strongly coupled plasma
near Tc, see e.g. Ref. [29], to the weakly coupled QGP.
This work was supported by the Helmholtz Interna- tional Center for FAIR within the framework of the LOEWE program launched by the State of Hesse. The work of P.H. and H.N. was supported by the Extreme Matter Institute (EMMI). P.H. is also supported by BMBF under contract no. 06FY9092. E.M. is supported by OTKA/NKTH 81655 and the AvH foundation.
[1] I. Arsene et al., Nucl. Phys. A757, 1 (2005); B. B. Back et al., ibid., p. 28; J. Adams et al., ibid., p. 102; K. Adcox et al., ibid., p. 184.
[2] M. Gyulassy, L. McLerran, Nucl. Phys. A 750, 30 (2005). [3] for a review see, for instance, P. Huovinen, P. V. Ruuska-
nen, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 56, 163 (2006). [4] P. Romatschke, U. Romatschke, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99,
172301 (2007); M. Luzum, P. Romatschke, Phys. Rev. C78, 034915 (2008); P. Bozek, Phys. Rev. C81, 034909 (2010).
[5] C. Shen et al., Phys. Rev. C82, 054904 (2010). [6] H. Song et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 192301 (2011). [7] P. Kovtun, D. T. Son, A. O. Starinets, Phys. Rev. Lett.
94, 111601 (2005). [8] L. P. Csernai, J. I. Kapusta, L. D. McLerran, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 97, 152303 (2006). [9] T. Hirano et al., Phys. Lett. B 636, 299 (2006). [10] H. Song, S. A. Bass, U. W. Heinz, Phys. Rev. C83,
024912 (2011). [11] J. D. Bjorken, Phys. Rev. D 27, 140 (1983). [12] W. Israel, J. M. Stewart, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 365, 43
(1979); Annals Phys. 118, 341 (1979). [13] E. Molnar, H. Niemi, D. H. Rischke, Eur. Phys. J. C65,
615 (2009). [14] P. F. Kolb et al., Nucl. Phys. A 696, 197 (2001). [15] S. S. Adler et al. [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C
69, 034909 (2004). [16] K. Aamodt et al. [ The ALICE Collaboration ], Phys.
Rev. Lett. 105, 252301 (2010). [17] K. J. Eskola et al., Phys. Rev. C 72, 044904 (2005). [18] P. Huovinen, P. Petreczky, Nucl. Phys. A837, 26 (2010). [19] P. Huovinen, Eur. Phys. J. A37, 121 (2008). [20] F. Cooper, G. Frye, Phys. Rev. D 10, 186 (1974). [21] D. Teaney, Phys. Rev. C68, 034913 (2003). [22] J. Sollfrank, P. Koch, U. W. Heinz, Z. Phys. C52, 593
(1991). [23] J. Noronha-Hostler, J. Noronha, C. Greiner, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 103, 172302 (2009). [24] A. Nakamura, S. Sakai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 072305
(2005). [25] G. S. Denicol, T. Kodama, T. Koide, J. Phys. G 37,
094040 (2010). [26] G. S. Denicol, T. Koide, D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. Lett.
105, 162501 (2010). [27] Y. Bai, Ph.D. Thesis, Nikhef and Utrecht University,
The Netherlands (2007); A. Tang [STAR Collaboration], arXiv:0808.2144 [nucl-ex].
[28] K. Aamodt et al. [The ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 252302 (2011).
[29] J. Liao, E. Shuryak, Phys. Rev. C75, 054907 (2007); Y. Hidaka, R. D. Pisarski, Phys. Rev. D81, 076002 (2010).