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

Influence of the residual magnetic field on the azimuthal distribution of final-state particles in photonuclear processes

Zhan Zhang, Xin Wu*,†, Xinbai Li, Wangmei Zha†,‡, and Zebo Tang

  • *Contact author: wuxinust@mail.ustc.edu.cn
  • †Present address: No. 96 Jinzhai Road, Hefei city, China.
  • ‡Contact author: first@ustc.edu.cn

Phys. Rev. C 112, 014903 – Published 16 July, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/dgm3-qqcl

Abstract

In relativistic heavy-ion collisions, charged particles are accelerated to nearly the speed of light, and their external electromagnetic fields can be effectively approximated as quasireal photons. These photons interact with another nucleus via photon-nuclear interactions, producing vector mesons. These vector mesons possess extremely low transverse momentum (pT∼0.1GeV/c), distinguishing them from particles produced via hadronic interactions. STAR and ALICE have observed J/ψ, ρ0 and other vector mesons with very low pT, which are well described by photoproduction models. This unique characteristic of having extremely low transverse momentum allows them to serve as a novel experimental probe. Recent STAR results show that the equivalent photons in photoproduction processes are fully linearly polarized, affecting the azimuthal distribution of final-state particles like ρ0→π+π−. Since the polarization links to the initial collision geometry, the ρ0 azimuthal modulation can probe nuclear structure. However, the post-collision magnetic field may deflect these particles, distorting the azimuthal distribution and complicating structure measurements. We simulated the distribution of residual magnetic fields over time under different collision conditions using ultrarelativistic quantum molecular dynamics for Au+Au collisions at sNN=200 GeV and calculated their effects on the azimuthal modulation (〈cos2ϕ〉) of photoproduced ρ0. Our results show that in peripheral collisions, the field significantly alters the 〈cos2ϕ〉 for photoproduced ρ0 with pT≈0.1 GeV/c. This provides key insights for future nuclear structure studies via photoproduction in peripheral collisions.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (44)

  1. Y. Ma and S. Zhang, Handbook of Nuclear Physics (Springer, Berlin, 2023), pp. 1485–1514.
  2. M. S. Abdallah, B. Aboona, J. Adam, L. Adamczyk, J. Adams, J. K. Adkins, G. Agakishiev, I. Aggarwal, M. M. Aggarwal, Z. Ahammed et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 092501 (2022).
  3. H.-J. Xu, X. Wang, H. Li, J. Zhao, Z.-W. Lin, C. Shen, and F. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 022301 (2018).
  4. S. Lin, J. Y. Hu, H. J. Xu, S. Pu, and Q. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 111, 074020 (2025).
  5. STAR Collaboration, Sci. Adv. 9, eabq3903 (2023).
  6. F. Krauss, M. Greiner, and G. Soff, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 39, 503 (1997).
  7. C. A. Bertulani and G. Baur, Phys. Rep. 163, 299 (1988).
  8. L. Criegee, M. H. Garrell, C. Gottfried, A. Krolzig, G. Loeffler, A. Saulys, K. P. Schüler, U. Timm, W. Zimmermann, H. Werner et al., Phys. Lett. B 28, 282 (1968).
  9. J. Ballam, G. B. Chadwick, R. Gearhart, Z. G. T. Guiragossián, M. Menke, J. J. Murray, P. Seyboth, A. Shapira, C. K. Sinclair, I. O. Skillicorn, G. Wolf, R. H. Milburn, H. H. Bingham, W. B. Fretter, K. C. Moffeit, W. J. Podolsky, M. S. Rabin, A. H. Rosenfeld, and R. Windmolders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 24, 1364 (1970).
  10. Y. Eisenberg, B. Haber, E. Kogan, U. Karshon, E. E. Ronat, A. Shapira, and G. Yekutieli, Nucl. Phys. B 104, 61 (1976).
  11. M. Derrick et al., Phys. Lett. B 377, 259 (1996) .
  12. B. I. Abelev et al., Phys. Rev. C 77, 034910 (2008).
  13. T. Hiraiwa et al., Phys. Rev. C 97, 035208 (2018).
  14. W. Zha, J. D. Brandenburg, L. Ruan, and Z. Tang, Phys. Rev. D 103, 033007 (2021).
  15. H. Xing, C. Zhang, J. Zhou, and Y.-J. Zhou, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2020) 064.
  16. S. Acharya et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 858, 139017 (2024).
  17. X. Wu, X. Li, Z. Tang, P. Wang, and W. Zha, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, L042048 (2022).
  18. D. E. Kharzeev, L. D. McLerran, and H. J. Warringa, Nucl. Phys. A 803, 227 (2008).
  19. W.-T. Deng and X.-G. Huang, Phys. Rev. C 85, 044907 (2012).
  20. V. D. Toneev, V. P. Konchakovski, V. Voronyuk, E. L. Bratkovskaya, and W. Cassing, Phys. Rev. C 86, 064907 (2012).
  21. J. Chen et al., Nucl. Sci. Tech. 35, 214 (2024).
  22. S. A. Bass, M. Belkacem, M. Bleicher, M. Brandstetter, L. Bravina, C. Ernst, L. Gerland, M. Hofmann, S. Hofmann, J. Konopka et al., Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 41, 255 (1998).
  23. M. Bleicher, E. Zabrodin, C. Spieles, S. A. Bass, C. Ernst, S. Soff, L. Bravina, M. Belkacem, H. Weber, H. Stöcker et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 25, 1859 (1999).
  24. C. Li, J. Zhou, and Y.-J. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 101, 034015 (2020).
  25. S. Klein, A. H. Mueller, B.-W. Xiao, and F. Yuan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 132301 (2019).
  26. C. F. v. Weizsäcker, Z. Phys. 88, 612 (1934).
  27. E. Williams, Phys. Rev. 45, 729 (1934).
  28. R. C. Barrett and D. F. Jackson, Nuclear Sizes and Structure (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1977).
  29. M. L. Miller, K. Reygers, S. J. Sanders, and P. Steinberg, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 57, 205 (2007).
  30. T. H. Bauer, R. D. Spital, D. R. Yennie, and F. M. Pipkin, Rev. Mod. Phys. 50, 261 (1978).
  31. S. R. Klein and J. Nystrand, Phys. Rev. C 60, 014903 (1999) .
  32. J. Hüfner and B. Z. Kopeliovich, Phys. Lett. B 426, 154 (1998) .
  33. W. Zha, S. R. Klein, R. Ma, L. Ruan, T. Todoroki, Z. Tang, Z. Xu, C. Yang, Q. Yang, and S. Yang, Phys. Rev. C 97, 044910 (2018).
  34. A. Veyssiere, H. Beil, R. Bergère, P. Carlos, and A. Lepretre, Nucl. Phys. A 159, 561 (1970).
  35. A. Leprêtre, H. Beil, R. Bergère, P. Carlos, J. Fagot, A. D. Miniac, and A. Veyssiere, Nucl. Phys. A 367, 237 (1981).
  36. P. Carlos, H. Beil, R. Bergère, J. Fagot, A. Lepretre, and A. Veyssière, Nucl. Phys. A 431, 573 (1984).
  37. T. A. Armstrong, W. R. Hogg, G. M. Lewis, A. W. Robertson, G. R. Brookes, A. S. Clough, J. H. Freeland, W. Galbraith, A. F. King, and W. R. Rawlinson, Phys. Rev. D 5, 1640 (1972).
  38. D. O. Caldwell, V. B. Elings, W. P. Hesse, R. J. Morrison, F. V. Murphy, and D. E. Yount, Phys. Rev. D 7, 1362 (1973).
  39. S. Michalowski, D. Andrews, J. Eickmeyer, T. Gentile, N. Mistry, R. Talman, and K. Ueno, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39, 737 (1977).
  40. T. A. Armstrong, W. R. Hogg, G. M. Lewis, A. W. Robertson, G. R. Brookes, A. S. Clough, J. H. Freeland, W. Galbraith, A. F. King, and W. R. Rawlinson, Nucl. Phys. B 41, 445 (1972).
  41. V. Skokov, A. Y. Illarionov, and V. Toneev, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 24, 5925 (2009).
  42. M. Bleicher and E. Bratkovskaya, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 122, 103920 (2022).
  43. V. Voronyuk, V. D. Toneev, W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya, V. P. Konchakovski, and S. A. Voloshin, Phys. Rev. C 83, 054911 (2011).
  44. Z. Zhang, 10.5281/zenodo.15734437(2025).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation