- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Axial anomaly and the three-flavor Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model with confinement: Constructing the QCD phase diagram

Philip D. Powell and Gordon Baym

  • Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1110 W. Green Street, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 85, 074003 – Published 3 April, 2012

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.85.074003

Abstract

We investigate the phase structure of massless three-flavor QCD by extending the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model to include the effects of confinement and the axial anomaly. We study the interplay between the chiral and diquark condensates induced by the axial anomaly, as well as their relationship with the Polyakov loop, which parameterizes confinement. By minimizing the thermodynamic potential we construct the QCD phase diagram and investigate the possibility of realizing a recently discovered low temperature critical point and an associated BEC-BCS crossover. We also perform a Ginzburg-Landau expansion of the thermodynamic potential, comparing our results to a prior analysis based purely on symmetry considerations, in order to assess the lowest-order effects of the condensate-confinement couplings.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (48)

  1. Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122, 345 (1961).
  2. Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 124, 246 (1961).
  3. M. K. Volkov and A. E. Radzhabov, Phys. Usp. 49, 551 (2006).
  4. R. D. Pisarski and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D 29, 338 (1984).
  5. M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys. 44, 1422 (1970).
  6. G.’t Hooft, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 8 (1976); Phys. Rev. D 14, 3432 (1976).
  7. D. J. Gross, R. D. Pisarski, and L. G. Yaffe, Rev. Mod. Phys. 53, 43 (1981).
  8. J. K. Boomsma and D. Boer, Phys. Rev. D 81, 074005 (2010).
  9. T. Hatsuda, M. Tachibana, N. Yamamoto, and G. Baym, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 122001 (2006).
  10. N. Yamamoto, M. Tachibana, T. Hatsuda, and G. Baym, Phys. Rev. D 76, 074001 (2007).
  11. H. Abuki, G. Baym, T. Hatsuda, and N. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. D 81, 125010 (2010).
  12. T. Hatsuda and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rep. 247, 221 (1994).
  13. M. Buballa, Phys. Rep. 407, 205 (2005).
  14. T. Schäfer, Proc. Hampton Univ. Grad. Stud. Prog. (to be published).
  15. Chr. V. Christov, K. Goeke, and M. Polyakov, arXiv:hep-ph/9501383.
  16. H. J. Warringa, D. Boer, and J. O. Andersen, Phys. Rev. D 72, 014015 (2005).
  17. J. K. Boomsma and D. Boer, Phys. Rev. D 80, 034019 (2009).
  18. K. Fukushima, Phys. Lett. B 591, 277 (2004).
  19. C. Ratti, M. A. Thaler, and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D 73, 014019 (2006).
  20. C. Sasaki, B. Friman, and K. Redlich, Phys. Rev. D 75, 074013 (2007).
  21. S. Rößner, C. Ratti, and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D 75, 034007 (2007).
  22. P. N. Meisinger and M. C. Ogilvie, Phys. Lett. B 379, 163 (1996).
  23. H. Abuki, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 174, 66 (2008).
  24. A. M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B 72, 477 (1978).
  25. E. Megías, E. R. Arriola, and L. L. Salcedo, Phys. Rev. D 74, 065005 (2006).
  26. T. Banks and A. Ukawa, Nucl. Phys. B225, 145 (1983).
  27. J. Kogut et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 393 (1983).
  28. T. Z. Nakano, K. Miura, and A. Ohnishi, Phys. Rev. D 83, 016014 (2011).
  29. A. Bazavov and P. Petreczky, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 230, 012014 (2010).
  30. T. Schäfer and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3956 (1999).
  31. B. Svetitsky, Phys. Rep. 132, 1 (1986).
  32. L. G. Yaffe and B. Svetitsky, Phys. Rev. D 26, 963 (1982).
  33. K. Fukushima and T. Hatsuda, Rep. Prog. Phys. 74, 014001 (2011).
  34. F. Karsch et al., Proc. Strong and Electroweak Matter Meeting (to be published)].
  35. Y. Aoki et al., Phys. Lett. B 643, 46 (2006).
  36. Y. Aoki et al., J. High Energy Phys. 6 (2009) 088.

  37. There is a slight ambiguity in this definition at low μ. As shown in Fig. 10, for μ≲288 MeV, as the system moves to higher T, Φ first undergoes a smooth, though rapid, crossover, which is followed by a slight discontinuity coincident with the chiral phase transition. Whether one chooses to identify the deconfinement transition with the maximum finite value of dΦ/dT (rapid crossover) or with the absolute maximum of dΦ/dT (discontinuity) is a matter of convention. We choose the latter definition. For large μ there is no such ambiguity, since the COE-NOR transition is second order and no discontinuity exists.

  38. F. Marhauser and J. M. Pawlowski, arXiv:0812.1144.
  39. J. I. Kapusta and C. Gale, Finite-Temperature Field Theory (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2006), p. 67, 2nd ed..
  40. T. Gjestland, Master’s thesis, Norwegian Univ. of Science and Tech., 2007.
  41. D. B. Blaschke, F. Sandin, V. V. Skokov, and S. Typel, Acta Phys. Pol. B Proc. Suppl. 3, 741 (2010).
  42. D. Gomez Dumm, D. B. Blaschke, A. G. Grunfeld, N. N. Scoccolaand , Phys. Rev. D 78, 114021 (2008).
  43. M. Alford, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 51, 131 (2001).
  44. L. McLerran and R. D. Pisarski, Nucl. Phys. A 796, 83 (2007).
  45. Y. Hidaka, L. D. McLerran, and R. D. Pisarski, Nucl. Phys. A 808, 117 (2008).
  46. K. Fukushima and T. Hatsuda, Rep. Prog. Phys. 74, 014001 (2011).
  47. S. Carignano, D. Nickel, and M. Buballa, Phys. Rev. D 82, 054009 (2010).
  48. T. Kojo et al., Nucl. Phys. A 875, 94 (2012).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 85, 074003– Published 3 April, 2012
  • Received 25 November 2011
Article part of CHORUS

© 2012 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation