SciPost Submission Page
The QCD Equation of State in Small Systems
by W. A. Horowitz, Alexander Rothkopf
This is not the latest submitted version.
|As Contributors:||William Horowitz|
|Arxiv Link:||https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.01422v1 (pdf)|
|Date submitted:||2021-09-14 08:37|
|Submitted by:||Horowitz, William|
|Submitted to:||SciPost Physics Proceedings|
|Proceedings issue:||50th International Symposium on Multiparticle Dynamics (ISMD2021)|
We present first results on just such finite system size corrections to the equation of state, trace anomaly, and speed of sound for two model systems: 1) free, massless scalar theory and 2) quenched QCD with periodic boundary conditions (PBC). We further present work-in-progress results for quenched QCD with Dirichlet boundary conditions.
Submission & Refereeing History
You are currently on this page
Reports on this Submission
Anonymous Report 1 on 2022-2-16 (Invited Report)
The structure in terms of a mix of analytic toy model and results from more realistic lattice calculations, with physical comparisons of the two is very nice, and mostly accessible.
The abstract seems to start mid-paragraph! Some initial context appears to have been accidentally trimmed.
In section 2, should the "phenomenologically relevant T ∼ 400 MeV" be phenomenologically *irrelevant*, since the volume is large and the finite-size effects small? This seems to be the case for the "plates" picture, but not the others, which fit the ~10% effect in the text. This part could do with some expansion to explain the relevance of the plates/tube/box labels, and the logic being used to argue T and TxL values in A+A and p+p systems: to a non-specialist like myself, this bit is interesting but opaque.
It would be good to give more physics context to the trace-anomaly discussion and conclusion: what effect can this reduced coupling / increased speed of sound be expected to have on e.g. flow observables?
A well-written contribution. I would just request a few improvements to the text (cf. the "weaknesses" field) to make it more comprehensible by non-specialists who can't follow the implicit logic or significance in some of the arguments made.
See three issues raised in "weaknesses"