Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Color screening in cold quark matter

Toru Kojo and Gordon Baym

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

Phys. Rev. D 89, 125008 – Published 10 June, 2014

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.125008

Abstract

We compute—at finite quark chemical potentials—the color screening of cold quark matter at the one-loop level, comparing the normal, BCS-paired U(1)em (or Higgs) phase and a singlet phase with color-singlet condensate near the Fermi surface. The latter phase is computed using the example of two-color QCD with a color-singlet diquark condensate. In contrast to the normal and Higgs phases, neither electric nor magnetic screening masses appear in the singlet phase. The absence of a magnetic mass, within a perturbative framework, is a consequence of the proper treatment of gauge invariance. While at large momenta the gluon self-energies approach those in the normal phase, the medium contributions to the infrared region below a scale of the mass gap are substantially suppressed. Infrared gluons at low quark density in the singlet phase appear protected from medium effects, unless the quark-gluon vertices are significantly enhanced in the infrared.

Article Text

References (31)

  1. J. C. Collins and M. J. Perry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 34, 1353 (1975).
  2. B. A. Freedman and L. D. McLerran, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1130 (1977); 16, 1147 (1977); 16, 1169 (1977); V. Baluni, Phys. Lett. B 72, 381 (1978); Phys. Rev. D 17, 2092 (1978); A. Kurkela, P. Romatschke, and A. Vuorinen, 81, 105021 (2010).
  3. M. G. Alford, A. Schmitt, K. Rajagopal, and T. Schäfer, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1455 (2008).
  4. D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D 62, 034007 (2000); 62, 054017 (2000); 64, 094003 (2001).
  5. K. Iida and G. Baym, Phys. Rev. D 65, 014022 (2001); M. Huang and I. A. Shovkovy, 70, 051501 (2004); 70, 094030 (2004); K. Fukushima, 72, 074002 (2005).
  6. D. T. Son, Phys. Rev. D 59, 094019 (1999).
  7. Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. 117, 648 (1960).
  8. G. Baym and L. P. Kadanoff, Phys. Rev. 124, 287 (1961); G. Baym, 127, 1391 (1962).
  9. A. Nakamura, Phys. Lett. B 149, 391 (1984).
  10. J. B. Kogut, D. K. Sinclair, S. J. Hands, and S. E. Morrison, Phys. Rev. D 64, 094505 (2001); J. B. Kogut, D. Toublan, and D. K. Sinclair, Phys. Lett. B 514, 77 (2001); S. Hands, J. B. Kogut, M.-P. Lombardo, and S. E. Morrison, Nucl. Phys. B558, 327 (1999); J. B. Kogut, D. K. Sinclair, S. J. Hands, and S. E. Morrison, Phys. Rev. D 64, 094505 (2001).
  11. T. Boz, S. Cotter, L. Fister, D. Mehta, and J.-I. Skullerud, Eur. Phys. J. A 49, 87 (2013); S. Cotter, P. Giudice, S. Hands, and J.-I. Skullerud, Phys. Rev. D 87, 034507 (2013); S. Hands, P. Kenny, S. Kim, and J.-I. Skullerud, Eur. Phys. J. A 47, 60 (2011); S. Hands, S. Kim, and J.-I. Skullerud, Phys. Rev. D 81, 091502 (2010); Eur. Phys. J. C 48, 193 (2006).
  12. G. Baym, H. Monien, C. J. Pethick, and D. G. Ravenhall, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1867 (1990).
  13. L. McLerran and R. D. Pisarski, Nucl. Phys. A796, 83 (2007).
  14. A. B. Migdal, Rev. Mod. Phys. 50, 107 (1978); R. F. Sawyer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 29, 382 (1972); R. F. Sawyer and D. J. Scalapino, Phys. Rev. D 7, 953 (1973); G. Baym, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 1340 (1973).
  15. D. V. Deryagin, D. Y. Grigoriev, and V. A. Rubakov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 07, 659 (1992); E. Shuster and D. T. Son, Nucl. Phys. B573, 434 (2000); B.-Y. Park, M. Rho, A. Wirzba, and I. Zahed, Phys. Rev. D 62, 034015 (2000); R. Rapp, E. V. Shuryak, and I. Zahed, 63, 034008 (2001); E. Nakano and T. Tatsumi, 71, 114006 (2005).
  16. D. Nickel, Phys. Rev. D 80, 074025 (2009); S. Carignano, D. Nickel, and M. Buballa, 82, 054009 (2010); D. Müller, M. Buballa, and J. Wambach, Phys. Lett. B 727, 240 (2013).
  17. T. Kojo, Y. Hidaka, L. McLerran, and R. D. Pisarski, Nucl. Phys. A843, 37 (2010); T. Kojo, R. D. Pisarski, and A. M. Tsvelik, Phys. Rev. D 82, 074015 (2010); T. Kojo, Y. Hidaka, K. Fukushima, L. D. McLerran, and R. D. Pisarski, Nucl. Phys. A875, 94 (2012).
  18. D. H. Rischke, D. T. Son, and M. A. Stephanov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 062001 (2001).
  19. R. D. Pisarski and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D 60, 094013 (1999).
  20. In Euclidean space C=γ2γ0 satisfies the usual relations: C=C1=CT=C and CγμTC1=γμ.

  21. In the non-Abelian case (Dμjμ)a=0 instead of μjμa=0. On the other hand, the conserved color current associated with global color symmetry is given by Jμa=jμa+(jg,gh)μa, where jg,gh contains gluons and ghosts.

  22. The point here is that the regularized expression has divergent and finite terms. Gauge-variant artifacts, which are hidden in the finite terms, must be eliminated by counterterms, which however contain divergent and finite pieces as well as gauge-variant pieces if the regularization is gauge variant.

  23. To avoid confusion, we emphasize that trD,G[SDγν]=trD[(S11D+S22D)γν] is not the quark number current, which in the Nambu-Gor’kov bases is instead trD[(S11DS22D)γν], and is nonzero for ν=0.

  24. Even in normal quark matter, this contribution should be taken into account because the mass in the QCD vacuum, the effective mass Mχ, differs from the current mass in chirally restored normal quark matter. Usual hard-dense-loop calculations tacitly avoid this gauge-variant artifact by using the current quark mass m in the chirally symmetric vacuum.

  25. The remaining part does not contain the interaction so that it can yield only a cut instead of poles.

  26. If we wish to find the vertex correction, δvΠμν, one can—instead of calculating it explicitly—compute Cgaps and Πμν for the bare vertex, and then use them to read off δvΠμν. In particular, when we consider the damping of gap functions in the UV, we can set Cgaps=0 and directly relate ΠμνL to δvΠμν because ΠμνL+δvΠμν=0.

  27. The behavior of the quark-gluon vertex in vacuum can be quite different for different choices of gauge-fixing conditions. This discussion is beyond our scope in this work.

  28. P. D. Powell and G. Baym, Phys. Rev. D 88, 014012 (2013).
  29. This description may be misleading because a number of studies have indicated that the confined and Higgs phases can be smoothly connected [30, 31]. Indications are based on gauge-invariant correlation functions in which quarks and gluons are not separately discussed and all excitations are composite, with no color charges. Such a connection between the two phases is obscured in gauge-fixed computations using quark and gluon propagators, such as that performed here.

  30. E. H. Fradkin and S. H. Shenker, Phys. Rev. D 19, 3682 (1979).
  31. J. Greensite, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 51, 1 (2003).

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation