1 / 18

Inhomogeneous thermalization and strongly coupled thermal flow via holography

Inhomogeneous thermalization and strongly coupled thermal flow via holography. Daniel Fernández. Max Planck Institute for Physics in Munich. Iberian Strings 2016 - Madrid IFT. Quark-gluon plasma thermalization [ Chesler , Yaffe, Heller, Romatschke, Mateos, vd Schee, Bantilan ]

whitham
Télécharger la présentation

Inhomogeneous thermalization and strongly coupled thermal flow via holography

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Inhomogeneous thermalization and strongly coupled thermal flow via holography Daniel Fernández Max Planck InstituteforPhysicsin Munich Iberian Strings 2016 - Madrid IFT

  2. Quark-gluon plasma thermalization[Chesler, Yaffe, Heller, Romatschke, Mateos, vd Schee, Bantilan] • Turbulence in Gravity[Lehner, Green, Yang, Zimmerman, Chesler, Adams, Liu] • Drivensuperconductors[Rangamani, Rozali, Wong] • Quantum quenches[Balasubramanian, Buchel, Myers, van Niekerk, Das] • Revivals[Mas, Lopez, Serantes, da Silva] Time-dependent Holography 1 2 Collisions modeled as shockwaves Thermal flow modeled as dynamical horizon 1/14

  3. Part 1:Heavy Ion Collisions

  4. Conservation Law: • Slow evolution of expectation values. • Assumption: local quasi-equilibrium. Hydrodynamics approach Gradient expansion: Include viscosity term: 1st and higher order gradient terms In HICs, the kind of physics that dominates is viscous fluid dynamics. Connection to holography: • Condition to work: small gradients. • But good description of HIC data! [Luzum, Romatschke ‘09] 2/14

  5. (Picture not to scale) Out of equilibrium • Non-hydro degrees of freedom are dominant. • Gravitational model: Shock wave collisions. Evolution of a Heavy Ion Collision Hydrodynamization • Transition to the hydrodynamics approximation. Thermalization • Isotropy of the diagonal components of Tmn in local rest frame. Hadronization • Kinetic theory is applicable. 3/14

  6. Ansatz: Boundary EOM: Gravitational formulation Generalize Simplification from 3+1 to 2+1 by: Alternative: Use polar coordinates. Assuming boost invariance and breaking rotational symmetry, 4/14

  7. AH EH Gaussian shocks null geodesics • Two separated shocks with finite thickness and energy density, moving toward each other: t Initial Condition Exact analytic solution, in Fefferman-Graham coordinates. is the bdry. energy density, arbitrary if r Choice: Characteristic Formulation (Generalize for perturbations) • Ingoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates. • Foliation of null hypersurfaces. • IR cutoff → require fixed-r Apparent Horizon condition. [Winicour ’01, Chesler, Yaffe ‘08] 5/14

  8. Energy density: Stress-Energy Tensor results • The inhomogeneities are evolved on top of the dynamical background: 6/14

  9. Compare with hydro results Mid-rapidity Comparing with hydrodynamics • Dramatic rise in the pressures. • Very anisotropic and out-of-eq. • Hydro holds almost from the beginning. [Chesler, Yaffe ‘10] Isotropization time and hydrodynamization time are completely different. [Fernández ’15] 7/14

  10. Outlook: Chiral Magnetic Effect In relativistic chiral plasma, the anomaly is present: In a Heavy Ion Collision: → Anomalous electric current: • Strong magnetic fields are produced by the charged “spectators” ( ) • Anomalous electric currents → Observable effects in hadron production. Holomodel ingredients • Massive → Emulate dynamical gluons for . • Scalar field → Recover gauge invariance. • CS term → Non-dynamical part of anomaly. [Rebhan, Schmitt, Stricker'09] [Gürsoy, Kharzeev, Rajagopal ’14] [Jiménez-Alba, Landsteiner, Melgar ‘15] • Stückelberg-Chern-Simons theory: …evolution of axial charge? 8/14

  11. Part 2:Thermal Flow

  12. [Bernard, Doyon ’12] Thermal quench in 1+1 Two exact copies initially at equilibrium, independently thermalized. Universal regime of thermal transport Conservation eqs & tracelessness: NOPE Expectation for CFT: shock waves emanating from interface, converge to non-equilibrium Steady State. 9/14

  13. [Bhaseen, Doyon, Lucas, Schalm ’13] Generalization to any d • Assume ctant. homogeneous heat flow as well: Thermal transport in d>1 • Generic d prediction • Effectivedimensionreduction to 1+1. • Linear response regime: • → Hydroeqs. explicitlysolvable. Final steady state characterized by where Long time limit 10/14

  14. Heat transport dominated by diffusion instead of flow? • Shockwave velocities: II III I Hydrodynamics approach Hydrodynamical evolution of 3 regions Match solutions ↔ Asymptotics of the central region with Two configurations: - Thermodynamic branch- “second branch” [Bhaseen, Doyon, Lucas, Schalm ’13] [Chang, Karch, Yarom’13] 11/14

  15. [Amado, Yarom ’15] Energy transport: Lorentz-boosted thermal distribution → Expectation: Boosted black brane Holographic approach Gravitational problem: Full out-of-equilibrium evolution of Einstein’s equations. Ansatz: Energy flux Energy density 12/14

  16. How does information get exchanged between the systems which are isolated at t=0? • Entanglement entropy • → Holographic measure: • Regularization: Substract result at T=0: Information Flow y x z 13/14

  17. Entanglement Entropies Mutual Information What do we learn about A by looking at B? • Shockwaves transport information. • M.I. grows as shocks pass through the region. B A Ac Ac A [Erdmenger, Fernández, Flory, Megías, Straub ’15] 14/14

  18. Thank you for your attention

More Related