g torrieri
play

G.Torrieri Ongoing work with Francesco Becattini This is an - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 04, 2023 •485 likes •1.1k views

A non-perturbative definition of fluctuating hydrodynamics, based on Zubarev hydrodynamics and Crooks theorem G.Torrieri Ongoing work with Francesco Becattini This is an unpublished stuff me and Francesco are still discussing. Dont take any of

  1. A non-perturbative definition of fluctuating hydrodynamics, based on Zubarev hydrodynamics and Crooks theorem G.Torrieri Ongoing work with Francesco Becattini

  2. This is an unpublished stuff me and Francesco are still discussing. Dont take any of my answers too seriously, for they could be wrong. But think about the issues I am rasing, for they are important! • The necessity to redefine hydro • A possible answer: Zubarev and Crooks! • Discussion

  3. Some experimental data warmup (2004) Matter in heavy ion collisions seems to behave as a perfect fluid, characterized by a very rapid thermalization

  4. The technical details A "dust" A "fluid" Particles ignore each �� �� �� �� �� �� Particles continuously �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� other, their path �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� interact. Expansion �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � � � � is independent of �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� � � �� �� �� �� determined by density � �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� initial shape �� �� �� �� �� �� gradient (shape) P.Romatschke,PRL99:172301,2007 P.Kolb and U.Heinz,Nucl.Phys.A702:269,2002. Angular dependance of average momentum Calculations ideal 0.08 η /s=0.03 using ideal η /s=0.08 hydrodynamics η /s=0.16 0.06 PHOBOS v 2 0.04 0.02 0 0 100 200 300 400 Number of particles in total N Part

  5. The conventional widsom Hydrodynamics is an ”effective theory”, built around coarse-graining and ”fast thermalization”. Fast w.r.t. Gradients of coarse-grained variables If thermalization instantaneus, then isotropy,EoS enough to close evolution T µν = ( e + P ( e )) u µ u ν + P ( e ) g µν In rest-frame at rest w.r.t. u µ T µν = Diag ( e ( p ) , p, p, p ) (NB: For simplicity we assume no conserved charges, µ B = 0 )

  6. If thermalization not instantaneus, u µ Π µν = 0 T µν = T eq µν + Π µν , � � ( ∂u ) 2 � τ n Π ∂ n τ Π µν = − Π µν + O ( ∂u ) + O + ... n A series whose ”small parameter” (Barring phase transitions/critical points/... all of these these same order): K ∼ l micro ∼ η sT ∇ u ∼ DetΠ µν ∼ ... l macro Det T µν and the transport coefficients calculable from asymptotic correlators of microscopic theory Navier-Stokes ∼ K , Israel-Stewart ∼ K 2 etc.

  7. So hydrodynamics is an EFT in terms of K and correlators � � � � 1 e ikx � TTT � , ... T xy ( x ) ˆ ˆ η = lim dx T xy ( y ) exp [ ik ( x − y )] , τ π ∼ k k → 0 ˆ This is a classical theory , T µν → � T µν � Higher order correlators � T µν ( x ) ...T µν � play role in transport coefficients, not in EoM (if you know equation and initial conditions, you know the whole evolution!) As is the case with 99 % of physics we know how to calculate rigorously mostly in perturbative limit. But 2nd law of thermodynamics tells us that A Knudsen number of some sort can be defined in any limit as a thermalization timescale can always be defined Strong coupling → lots of interaction → ”fast” thermalization → ”low” K

  8. e.g. “Lower limits” on viscosity Danielewicz and Gyulassy used the uncertainity principle and Boltzmann equation η ∼ 1 l mfp ∼ � p � − 1 → η s = 1 5 � p � nl mfp , 15 KSS and extensions from AdS/CFT (actually any Gauge/gravity): Viscosity ≡ Black hole graviton scattering → η 1 s = 4 π

  9. but both theories not realistic Danielewitz+Gyulassy In strongly coupled system the Boltzmann equation is inappropriate KSS UV-completion is conformal,planar, strong Is there a general and intuitive way of thinking about these things? e.g. minimal viscosity calculable just from hydrodynamics and, e.g., Lorentz symmetry and Quantum mechanics? after all, � � � � � � c 2 Re [ χ T xy ( x ) ˆ ˆ w → 0 w − 1 s χ ( w ) = dx T xy ( y ) exp [ ik ( x − y )] , ∼ lim η Im [ χ � Re � � Im � � dw ′ χ = 1 and Kramers-Konig χ w − w ′ Im π − Re

  10. 2011-2013 FLuid-like behavior has been observed down to very small sizes, p − p collisions of 50 particles

  11. H.W.Lin 1106.1608 CMS 1606.06198 BSchenke 1603.04349 1606.06198 (CMS) : When you consider geometry differences, hydro with O (20) particles ”just as collective” as for 1000.

  12. Hydrodynamics in small systems: “hydrodynamization”/”fake equilibrium” A lot more work in both AdS/CFT and transport theory about ”hydrodynamization”/”Hydrodynamic attractors” Kurkela et al 1907.08101. Fluid-like systems far from equilibrium (large gradients )! Usually from 1D solution of Boltzmann AdS/CFT equations! But I have a basic question: ensemble averaging!

  13. • What is hydrodynamics if N ∼ 50 ... – Ensemble averaging , � F ( { x i } , t ) � � = F ( {� x i �} , t ) suspect for any non-linear theory. molecular chaos in Boltzmann, Large N c in AdS/CFT, all assumed . But for O (50) particles?!?! � 10 9 � – For water, a cube of length η/ ( sT ) has O molecules, � − � N � − 1 ( N − � N � ) 2 � P ( N � = � N � ) ∼ exp ≪ 1 . • How do microscopic, macroscopic and quantum corrections talk to eac other? EoS is given by p = T ln Z but ∂ 2 ln Z/∂T 2 , dP/dV ?? NB: nothing to do with equilibration timescale . Even ”things born in equilibrium” locally via Eigenstate thermalization have fluctuations!

  14. And there is more... How does dissipation work in such a “semi-microscopic system”? • What does local and global equilibrium mean there? • If T µν → ˆ T µν what is ˆ Π µν Second law fluctuations? Sometimes because of a fluctuation entropy decreases!

  15. Bottom line: Either hydrodynamics is not the right explanation for these observables (possible! ) or we are not understanding something basic about what fluctuations do!

  16. Landau and Lifshitz (also D.Rishke,B Betz et al): Hydrodynamics has three length scales l micro ≪ l mfp ≪ L macro � �� � ���� ∼ s − 1 / 3 ,n − 1 / 3 ∼ η/ ( sT ) Weakly coupled: Ensemble averaging in Boltzmann equation good up to � � (1 /ρ ) 1 / 3 ∂ µ f ( ... ) O classical supergravity requires λ ≫ 1 but λN − 1 Strongly coupled: = c g Y M ≪ 1 so � � 1 ≪ η 1 or √ ≪ L macro TN 2 / 3 sT λT c sT . Cold atoms: l micro ∼ n − 1 / 3 > η η QGP: N c = 3 ≪ ∞ ,so l micro ∼ sT ?

  17. Why is l micro ≪ l mfp necessary? Without it, microscopic fluctuations (which come from the finite number of DoFs and have nothing to do with viscosity ) will drive fluid evolution. ∆ ρ/ρ ∼ C − 1 ∼ N − 2 , thermal fluctuations “too small” to be important! c V Kovtun, Moore, Romatschke, 1104.1586 As η → 0 “infinite propagation of soundwaves” inpacts “IR limit of Kubo formula” � d 3 xe ikx � T xyxy ( x ) T xyxy (0) � ≃ − iω 7 Tp max 7 T 3 lim + ( i + 1) ω 2 3 60 π 2 γ η η,k → 0 240 πγ 2 η where p max is the maximum momentum scale and γ η = η/ ( e + p )

  18. Kovtun,Moore and Romatschke plug in p max into viscosity bare + p max T T η − 1 ∼ η − 1 ≥ ≥ s 1 / 3 T p max G.Moore,P.Romatschke arXiv:1104.1586 Phys.Rev.D84:025006,2011 η/ s=KSS Nc=3, This however, “assumes what you are trying to prove”: If there is a “microscopic length”, you will eventually get a viscosity. What happens when macro and micro talk to each other in a strongly coupled/turbulent regime?

  19. Kolmogorov cascade System II regime "micro" Λ k> System I "macro" Λ k< A classical low-viscosity fluid is turbulent. Typically, low-k modes cascade into higher and higher k modes via sound and vortex emission (phase space looks more ”fractal”). Classically � dE � 2 / 3 k − 5 / 3 η/ ( sT ) ≪ L eddy ≪ L boundary , E ( k ) ∼ dt For a classical ideal fluid, no limit! since lim δρ → 0 ,k →∞ δE ( k ) ∼ δρkc s → 0 but for quantum perturbations, E ≥ k so conservation of energy has to cap cascade. A quantum viscosity!

  20. My previous attempt Continuus mechanics (fluids, solids, jellies,...) is written in terms of 3-coordinates φ I ( x µ ) , I = 1 ... 3 of the position of a fluid cell originally at φ I ( t = 0 , x i ) , I = 1 ... 3 . φ φ 2 3 φ 1 φ φ 2 φ 2 φ 3 3 φ φ 1 1 The system is a Fluid if it’s Lagrangian obeys some symmetries (Ideal hydrodynamics ↔ Isotropy in comoving frame) � � � � , �O� ∼ ∂ ln Z − T 4 F ( B ( φ I )) d 4 x L → ln Z Z = D φ i exp 0 ∂...

  21. A lot of work on this 1903.08729 Some accomplishments EFT techniques, insights from Ostrogradski’s theorem Some limitations no clear way to incorporate microscopic fluctuations, functional integral hard , lattice regularization possible but limited to hydrostatic case (1502.05421 ) Using a volume cell as a DoF makes it hard to understand fluctuations within it!

More recommend