Research ArticlesNo Access

Universal strangeness production in hadronic and nuclear collisions

P. Castorina

Dipartimento di Fisica ed Astronomia, Universitá di Catania, Italy

INFN, Sezione di Catania, Catania, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

S. Plumari

Dipartimento di Fisica ed Astronomia, Universitá di Catania, Italy

INFN-LNS, Catania, Italy

Search for more papers by this author

, and

H. Satz

Fakultät für Physik, Universität Bielefeld, Germany

E-mail Address: satz@physik.uni-bielefeid.de

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218301316500580Cited by:12 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

We show that strangeness suppression in hadronic and nuclear collisions is fully determined by the initial energy density of the collision. The suppression factor $γ_{s} (s)$ $γ_{s} (s)$ , with $\sqrt{s}$ $\sqrt{s}$ denoting the collision energy, can be expressed as a universal function of the initial energy density $ϵ_{0} (s)$ $ϵ_{0} (s)$ , and the resulting pattern is in excellent agreement with data from $p$ $p$ – $p$ $p$ , $p$ $p$ –Pb, Cu–Cu, Au–Au and Pb–Pb data over a wide range of energies and for different centralities.

Keywords:

PACS: 12.38.Mh, 21.65.Qr, 25.75.Dw

You currently do not have access to the full text article.
Recommend the journal to your library today!

References

1. F. Becattini and G. Passaleva, Eur. Phys. J. C 23 (2002) 551. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
2. P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich and J. Stachel, Quark-Gluon Plasma 3, (eds.) R. C. Hwa and X.-N Wang (World Scientific, Singapore 2003). Google Scholar
3. F. Becattini and R. Fries, arXiv:0907.1031 [nucl-th] and Landolt-Boernstein 1–23. Google Scholar
4. J. Letessier, J. Rafelski and A. Tounsi, Phys. Rev. C 64 (1994) 406. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
5. F. Becattini et al. Eur. Phys. J. C 66 (2010) 377; F. Becattini and J. Manninen, Phys. Rev. C 78 (2008) 054901; M. Floris et al. Nucl. Phys. A 931 (2014) 103; F. Becattini, arxivhep-ph/9701275; F. Becattini et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 082302. Google Scholar
6. R. Hagedorn and K. Redlich, Z. Phys. C 27 (1985) 541. Crossref, ADS, Google Scholar
7. J. S. Hamieh, K. Redlich and A. Tounsi, Phys. Lett. B 486 (2000) 61. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
8. I. Kraus et al., Phys. Rev. C 76 (2007) 064903. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
9. P. Castorina and H. Satz, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 23 (2014) 1450019. Link, ADS, Google Scholar
10. P. Castorina and H. Satz, arXiv:1601.01454. Google Scholar
11. J. D. Bjorken, Lect. Notes Phys. 56 (1976) 93. Crossref, ADS, Google Scholar
12. HotQCD Collab. (A. Bazazov et al.), Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 094503. Google Scholar
13. Wuppertal-Budapest Collab. (S. Borsanyi et al.), Phys. Lett. B 730 (2014) 99. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. J. D. Bjorken, Phys. Rev. D 27 (1983) 140. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
15. ALICE Collab. (K. Aamodt et al.), Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 252301. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
16. F. Becattini, J. Manninen and M. Gazdzicki, Phys. Rev. C 73 (2006) 044905. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
17. ALICE Collab. (B. Abelev et al.), Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 032301. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
18. C. Blume and C. Markert, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 66 (2011) 834. Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
19. F. Wang, J. Phys. G 28 (2001) 2109. Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar