Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Feasibility of measuring the speed of sound of the quark-gluon plasma from the multiplicity and mean pT of ultracentral heavy-ion collisions

Lorenzo Gavassino1,*, Henry Hirvonen1,2,†, Jean-Francois Paquet2,1,‡, Mayank Singh2,§, and Gabriel Soares Rocha3,2,∥

  • *Contact author: lorenzo.gavassino@vanderbilt.edu
  • †Contact author: henry.v.hirvonen@vanderbilt.edu
  • ‡Contact author: jean-francois.paquet@vanderbilt.edu
  • §Contact author: mayank.singh@vanderbilt.edu
  • ∥Contact author: gabriel.soares.rocha@vanderbilt.edu

Phys. Rev. C 112, 054903 – Published 17 November, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/2d12-jwst

Abstract

The mean transverse momentum 〈pT〉 of hadrons has been observed experimentally and in numerical simulations to have a power-law dependence on the hadronic multiplicity N in ultracentral relativistic heavy-ion collisions: 〈pT〉∝NbUC. It has been put forward that this exponent bUC is the speed of sound of quark-gluon plasma measured at a temperature determined from 〈pT〉. We study step by step the connection between (i) the energy and entropy of hydrodynamic simulations and (ii) experimentally measurable observables. We show that an argument based on energy and entropy should yield an exponent equal to the pressure over energy density P/ɛ, rather than the speed of sound cs2; however, we also observe that 〈pT〉 and N are not sufficiently accurate proxies for the energy and entropy to make this possible in practice. From simulations, we find that the exponent bUC is significantly different whether the “effective volume” is strictly constant or not, a condition that cannot be enforced experimentally. Additional tests using a modified equation of state find that the exponent bUC exhibits a variable degree of correlations with the speed of sound and with P/ɛ, but is not an accurate measurement of either quantity in general.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (31)

  1. C. Y. Wong, Introduction to High-Energy Heavy Ion Collisions (World Scientific, Singapore, 1995).
  2. K. Yagi, T. Hatsuda, and Y. Miake, Quark-Gluon Plasma: From Big Bang to Little Bang, Cambridge Monographs on Particle Physics, Nuclear Physics, and Cosmology Vol. 23 (Cambridge University Press, Cambride, 2005).
  3. R. Vogt, Ultrarelativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2007).
  4. U. Heinz and R. Snellings, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 63, 123 (2013).
  5. U. Heinz and B. Schenke, Contribution to “Quark Gluon Plasma at Fifty - A Commemorative Journey”, edited by T. Nayak, M. Van Leeuwen, S. Bass, C. Ratti, and J. Dunlop (Springer Nature, Switzerland AG), arXiv:2412.19393.
  6. S. Borsanyi, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, A. Jakovac, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti, and K. K. Szabo, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2010) 077.
  7. A. Bazavov et al., Phys. Rev. D 80, 014504 (2009).
  8. S. Borsányi, Z. Fodor, J. N. Guenther, R. Kara, S. D. Katz, P. Parotto, A. Pásztor, C. Ratti, and K. K. Szabó, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 232001 (2021).
  9. A. Bazavov et al., Phys. Rev. D 95, 054504 (2017).
  10. S. Pratt, E. Sangaline, P. Sorensen, and H. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 202301 (2015).
  11. F. G. Gardim, G. Giacalone, M. Luzum, and J.-Y. Ollitrault, Nat. Phys. 16, 615 (2020).
  12. F. G. Gardim, G. Giacalone, and J.-Y. Ollitrault, Phys. Lett. B 809, 135749 (2020).
  13. F. G. Gardim, A. V. Giannini, and J.-Y. Ollitrault, Phys. Lett. B 856, 138937 (2024).
  14. A. Hayrapetyan et al., Rep. Prog. Phys. 87, 077801 (2024).
  15. G. Aad et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 252301 (2024).
  16. I. J. Abualrob et al. (ALICE Collaboration), arXiv:2506.10394.
  17. A. Bazavov et al., Phys. Rev. D 90, 094503 (2014).
  18. G. Nijs and W. van der Schee, Phys. Lett. B 853, 138636 (2024).
  19. G. S. Rocha, L. Gavassino, M. Singh, and J.-F. Paquet, Phys. Rev. C 110, 034913 (2024).
  20. L. Van Hove, Phys. Lett. B 118, 138 (1982).
  21. F. G. Gardim, R. Krupczak, and T. N. da Silva, Phys. Rev. C 109, 014904 (2024).
  22. Y.-S. Mu, J.-A. Sun, L. Yan, and X.-G. Huang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 162301 (2025).
  23. J.-A. Sun and L. Yan, Phys. Lett. B 866, 139507 (2025).
  24. P. Huovinen and H. Petersen, Eur. Phys. J. A 48, 171 (2012).
  25. B. Schenke, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, Phys. Rev. C 82, 014903 (2010).
  26. S. Ryu, J. F. Paquet, C. Shen, G. S. Denicol, B. Schenke, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 132301 (2015).
  27. J.-F. Paquet, C. Shen, G. S. Denicol, M. Luzum, B. Schenke, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, Phys. Rev. C 93, 044906 (2016).
  28. S. Ryu, J.-F. Paquet, C. Shen, G. Denicol, B. Schenke, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, Phys. Rev. C 97, 034910 (2018).
  29. F. Cooper and G. Frye, Phys. Rev. D 10, 186 (1974).
  30. F. Cooper, G. Frye, and E. Schonberg, Phys. Rev. D 11, 192 (1975).
  31. C. Shen, Z. Qiu, H. Song, J. Bernhard, S. Bass, and U. Heinz, Comput. Phys. Commun. 199, 61 (2016).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation