STAR Flow, Chirality and Vorticity PWG

[dshen <dshen AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>]

Dear Convener,

We don't want a title that could also be applied to previous QM 
abstracts, but we can compromise with the following title
"Significant splitting of rapidity-odd directed flow slope & its 
implication on
electromagnetic effect in Au+Au and isobar collisions from STAR".

And I understand your consideration that we should be more conservative 
to announce the observation of a 'hot spot'. But, again, our measurement 
is a robust measurement, which not only show the significance that we 
have never had but also could explain all the v1-splitting measurements 
collected at RHIC and LHC. We have robust measurement and clear physics, 
therefore we don't have to worry too much as we always publish/present 
with the best/latest knowledge at current time.

Best,
Diyu

On 2021-11-24 22:31, Prithwish Tribedy wrote:
> Hi Diyu,
>  We understand that you want to make this a strong abstract so that we
> can get a talk. We agree the word "EM-field" should be there in the
> title. However, there maybe some non EM-field effects that we have not
> explored yet and can explain the data. In order to make the
> interpretation open we suggest the following:
>
> "Evidence of the electromagnetic effect obtained with STAR’s
> directed flow
> measurements in Au+Au, ^96_44Ru+^96_44Ru and ^96_40Zr+^96_40Zr
> collisions"
> -->
> Splitting of rapidity-odd directed flow slope & possible indications of
> electromagnetic effect in Au+Au and isobar collisions from STAR
>
> Line 11:
> "Our measurement cannot be..." --> "Our measurement of sign-change of
> v_1 slope with centrality cannot be.."
>
> Best,
> Jiangyong, Prithwish and ShinIchi
>
>
> On 2021-11-24 01:51, dshen via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > Dear Conveners,
> >
> > Thanks for your comments and suggestions. We have revised the abstract
> > accordingly except two of followings.
> >
> > The first one is from on the title, we prefer to use the original
> > title instead of "Splitting of rapidity-odd directed flow slope &
> > implication for electromagnetic effect in Au+Au and isobar collisions
> > from STAR".
> > The reason is that the suggested title can not properly reflect the
> > significance of our measurement. In STAR previous publications, there
> > are many measurements on the rapidity-odd directed flow, such like
> > BES-I or D(bar) mesons. Even at LHC, they also measured charge
> > dependent flow but for all charges in 10-40% centrality, and their
> > results sharply contradict to theoretical calculation both in
> > magnitude and sign. Our measurement, for the first time, connect the
> > experiment and theory.  The results are significant and can be easily
> > explained by transported quark + EM-field, therefore we prefer to use
> > more attractive title which is the original one.
> >
> > The second comment is from ShinIchi, which shows some concerns on the
> > text of "This is the the first observation.."
> > The full sentence now is "This is the first observation of a
> > significant negative \Delta dv1/dy between proton and anti-proton."
> > It is the first observation of negative \Delta dv1/dy between p-pbar,
> > I think we can safely say it.
> >
> > New abstract: https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/57368
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Diyu
> >
> >
> > On 2021-11-22 14:34, ShinIchi Esumi via Star-fcv-l wrote:
> > > Dear Diyu
> > >
> > > The followings are comments on your merged talk abstract from
> > > conveners.
> > > Best regards, Jiangyong, Prithwish and ShinIchi
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Prithwish
> > > "Evidence of the electromagnetic effect obtained with STAR’s
> > > directed flow
> > > measurements in Au+Au, ^96_44Ru+^96_44Ru and ^96_40Zr+^96_40Zr
> > > collisions"
> > > -->
> > > "Splitting of rapidity-odd directed flow slope & implication for
> > > electromagnetic effect in Au+Au and isobar collisions from STAR"
> > > "Non-central heavy-ion collisions" -->"Heavy ion collisions"
> > > "with large statistics accumulated" --> "with large statistics
> > > datasets accumulated"
> > > "while no signal has been observed in Au+Au and isobar" -->"while no
> > > significant slope-difference is observed in Au+Au and isobar
> > > collisions"
> > > Jiangyong
> > > L1 the evolution of which could de-->the evolution of which was
> > > predicted
> > > L3 isobar--> 96Ru+96Ru and 96Zr+96Zr isobar
> > > L4 The dv1/dy splitting--> the charge dependent dv1/dy splitting,
> > > \Delta(dv1/dy)
> > > L5  centrality changes from central to peripheral-->as a function of
> > > centrality from central to peripheral collisions
> > > L6 significantly negative..--> significant negative \Delta(dv1/dy)
> > > between proton and anti-proton
> > > L9 while no signal-->while no difference
> > > L11 but meets the --> but qualitatively agree with theoretical
> > > expectation in the presence
> > > ShinIchi
> > > I wonder if we really need/like to say “This is the first
> > > observation…”
> > > L:9 “no signal “ -> “no difference”
> > > L:12 add “at peripheral collisions”
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------
> > >
> > > > On Nov 21, 2021, at 12:18, webmaster--- via Star-fcv-l
> > > > <star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dear star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov members,
> > > >
> > > > Diyu Shen (shendiyu AT sinap.ac.cn) has submitted a material for a
> > > > review,
> > > > please have a look:
> > > > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/57316
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > If you have any problems with the review process, please contact
> > > > webmaster AT www.star.bnl.gov
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Star-fcv-l mailing list
> > > > Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Star-fcv-l mailing list
> > > Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l
> > _______________________________________________
> > Star-fcv-l mailing list
> > Star-fcv-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fcv-l