STAR HardProbes PWG

[Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>]

Hello Rongrong,

Thank you for addressing my comments. Your slides look good in shape now 
from my side.
I sign off.

However, just want to clarify myself on this point from you.

> > - "Charm quark gain v2 at T close to Tc" -> what is "Tc" here ? And
> > What is the value of Tc? Why it is important?
>  Tc is the pseudo-critical temperature around 165 MeV. Here the point
> is that the medium temperature created at 54.4 GeV is expected to be
Then it would be good to mention "T_pc" (instead of T_c) as in 
literature people use this notation.

> lower than that at 200 GeV. Yet, we see similar HFE v2, which
> indicates that HFEs obtain their v2 mainly at T close to Tc.
> Otherwise, one would see a larger v2 at 200 GeV than 54.4 GeV.
It sounds like T_pc is close(/around) to 200 and 54 GeV collision 
energy. Is this what you mean?

Thank you
Nihar



On 2023-10-25 23:55, Ma, Rongrong wrote:
> Hello Nihar
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> I thought a bit more on this. Since my talk is now really a STAR
> overview talk (the organizer wanted me to give a RHIC physics overview
> at the beginning), I think it is more appropriate to go through the
> official approval procedure. So I have submitted the latest version on
> Drupal (https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/node/65722) after addressing
> your comments.
>
> Please see my replies inline:
>
> > On Oct 25, 2023, at 2:43 AM, Nihar Sahoo <nihar AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hello Rongrong,
> >
> > Thank you for sharing your nice presentation slides on heavy-flavor.
> > Overall your slides look nice and capture all physics measurements
> > of STAR.
> >
> > Here are my additions comments for your consideration.
> >
> > Slide5:
> > - "Charm quark gain v2 at T close to Tc" -> what is "Tc" here ? And
> > What is the value of Tc? Why it is important?
>  Tc is the pseudo-critical temperature around 165 MeV. Here the point
> is that the medium temperature created at 54.4 GeV is expected to be
> lower than that at 200 GeV. Yet, we see similar HFE v2, which
> indicates that HFEs obtain their v2 mainly at T close to Tc.
> Otherwise, one would see a larger v2 at 200 GeV than 54.4 GeV.
>
> > Slide7:
> > - "About a factor of 2 suppression…" -> Not clear, with respect to
> > what
>
> This is just another way of saying R_AA ~ 0.5. I added "compared to
> p+p"
>
> > Slide9:
> > - Do you need to refer "QM2023" for this D^0+jet results? Same for
> > next slide
>
> Since I now treat this talk as a STAR talk, I do not think a reference
> to QM2023 is needed.
>
> > SLide13:
> > - Better to motivate this result with QGP effect can smear
> > D^0-D^0bar correlation. But uncertainty limits to pin down
>  I will mention this motivation verbally during my talk.
>
> > Slide14:
> > - "Coalescence is important" -> Do we need to mention also "at low
> > pT"?
>  That's mostly true, but I do not feel this needs to be stated
> explicitly on the slide since the two figures show results starting
> from 1.5 GeV/c and 3 GeV/c.
>
> > After Slide16, It would be good to summarize the key physics that we
> > observed from open heavy flavor measurements at STAR. Otherwise
> > people may be lost.
>
> I added half of the original summary slide here.
>
> > Slide18:
> > -"Hint of rising trend toward low energy" -> Is that correct to
> > comment within these uncertainties?
>  I removed that sub-bullet, but I will probably mention this verbally
> as a question rather than a conclusion.
>
> > _ You could hint to the "primodial" and "Regeneration" effects at
> > high and low energies.
>  Added a sub-bullet.
>
> > Slide19:
> > -Could you comment on QGP thermal temp based on sequential
> > suppression of quarkonia? That is important take away from these
> > results at RHIC.
>
> I added a half sentence on this. I intentionally kept it vague since
> the connection is less straightforward as originally envisioned.
>
> > SLide20-22:
> > Physics motivation is missed here. Better to say a few words.
>  Added a bullet.
>
> > Slide21-23:  better to motivate with other pesudoscalar meson
> > results from FCV.
>  Added a figure from the Nature paper
>
> > After Slide23: You could summarize the key physics learnt from QGP
> > point of view.
> > And then you can go to UPC J/psi results discussion to study other
> > Physics not related to QGP.
>  Since I only have two slides on UPC J/psi, I kept the summary slide
> at the end.
>
> Best
> Rongrong
>
> > Best
> > Nihar
> >
> > On 2023-10-24 20:33, Ma, Rongrong via Star-hp-l wrote:
> >
> > > Dear All
> > > I was invited by the CFNS-npQCD workshop
> > > (https://indico.cfnssbu.physics.sunysb.edu/event/110/) organizers
> > > to
> > > present an overview of the STAR heavy flavor results. Even though
> > > it
> > > is not a STAR talk, I will exclusively present STAR results. So I
> > > would like to seek your comments and suggestions on my talk, a
> > > first
> > > draft of which can be found here:
> > https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/RMa_CFNS_npQCD_v1.pdf.
> > > Your feedback is more than welcome. Thanks.
> > > Best
> > > Rongrong
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Star-hp-l mailing list
> > > Star-hp-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-hp-l