Hadron Freeze-Out and QGP Hadronization
Hadron Freeze-Out and QGP Hadronization
Abstract
Abundances and m⊥ -spectra of strange and other hadronic particles emanating from central 158–
200 A GeV reactions between nuclei are found to originate from a thermally equilibrated, deconfined
source in chemical non-equilibrium. Physical freeze-out parameters and physical conditions (pressure,
specific energy, entropy, and strangeness) are evaluated. Five properties of the source we obtain are as
expected for direct hadron emission (hadronization) from a deconfined quark-gluon plasma phase.
1 Introduction
Quark-gluon plasma (QGP) is, by the meaning of these words, a thermally equilibrated state consisting
of mobile, color charged quarks and gluons. Thermal equilibrium is established faster than the particle
abundance (chemical) equilibrium and thus in general quark and gluon abundances in QGP can differ from
their equilibrium Stefan-Boltzmann limit. This in turn impacts the hadronic particle production yields, and
as we shall see, the chemical non-equilibrium is a key ingredient in the successful data analysis of experiments
performed at the CERN-SPS in the past decade. We address here results of 200 A GeV Sulphur (S) beam
interactions with laboratory stationary targets, such as Gold (Au), Tungsten (W) or Lead (Pb) nuclei and,
Pb–Pb collisions at 158 A GeV. In these interactions the nominal center of momentum (CM) available
energy is 8.6–9.2 GeV per participating nucleon.
Considerable refinement of data analysis has occurred since last comprehensive review of the field [1].
Our present work includes in particular the following:
1. We considered aside of strange also light quark (q = u, d) chemical non-equilibrium abundance [2]
and introduce along with the statistical strangeness non-equilibrium parameter γs , its light quark
analogue γq .
2. Coulomb distortion of the strange quark phase space has been understood [3].
1
2 J. Rafelski and J. Letessier
In Eq. (2) the subscript Rf on the spatial integral reminds us that only the classically allowed region within
the fireball is covered in the integration over the level density, gs (= 6) is the quantum degeneracy of strange
quarks. The magnitude of the charge of strange quarks (Qs /|e| = 1/3) is shown explicitly, the Coulomb
potential refers to a negative integer probe charge.
The fugacity λs of strange quarks enters particles and antiparticles with opposite power, while the
occupancy parameter γs enters both term with same power. For γs < 1 one obtains a rather precise result
for the range of parameters of interest to us (see below) considering the Boltzmann approximation:
h V V
i
d3 r λs e 3T − λ−1 d3 pd3 x −√p2 +m2 /T
R −
s e 3T
Z
Rf
hNs − Ns̄ i ≃ gs γs e . (3)
d3 r (2π)3
R
Rf
The meaning of the different factors is now evident. γs controls overall abundance of strange quark pairs,
multiplying the usual Boltzmann thermal factor while λs controls the difference between the number of
strange and non-strange quarks. Since strangeness is produced as s, s̄-pair, the value of λs fulfills the
constraint Z
V V
h i
d3 r λs e 3T − λ−1
s e− 3T
= 0, (4)
Rf
which is satisfied exactly both in the Boltzmann limit Eq. (3), and for the exact quantum distribution
Eq. (2), when:
V
3
R
Rf d re
T
1/3
λ̃s ≡ λs λQ = 1 , λQ ≡ R 3
. (5)
Rf d r
λQ is not a fugacity that can be adjusted to satisfy a chemical condition, its value is defined by the applicable
Coulomb potential V . More generally, in order to account for the Coulomb effect, the quark fugacities within
a deconfined region should be renamed as follows in order to absorb the Coulomb potential effect:
1/3 1/3
λs → λ̃s ≡ λs λQ , λd → λ̃d ≡ λd λQ ,
q
−2/3 −1/6
λu → λ̃u ≡ λu λQ , λq → λ̃q ≡ λ̃u λ̃d = λq λQ . (6)
Since Qd = Qs = −1/3, the first line is quite evident after the above strangeness discussion, the second
follows with Qu = +2/3. Note that for a negatively charged strange quark the tilded fugacity Eq. (5)
contains a factor with positive power 1/3 but the potential that enters the quantity λQ is negative, and
thus λ̃s < λs . Because Coulomb-effect acts in opposite way on u and d quarks, its net impact on λq is smaller
Hadron Freeze-out and QGP Hadronization 3
than on λs , and it also acts in the opposite way with λ̃q > λq . To see the relevance of the tilde fugacities for
light quarks, note that in order to obtain baryon density in QGP one needs to use the tilde-quark fugacity
to account for the Coulomb potential influence on the phase space.
It is somewhat unexpected that for the Pb–Pb fireball the Coulomb effect is at all relevant. Recall that
for a uniform charge distribution within a radius Rf of charge Zf :
" #
3 Zf e2 1 r 2
− 1− , for r < Rf ;
V = 2 Rf 3 Rf (7)
Z e2
− f ,
for r > Rf .
r
Choosing Rf = 8 fm, T = 140 MeV, ms = 200 MeV (value of γs is practically irrelevant) we find as solution
of Eq. (2) for hNs − Ns̄ i = 0 for Zf = 150 the value λs = 1.10 (precisely: 1.0983; λs = 1.10 corresponds
to Rf = 7.87 fm). We will see that both this values within the experimental precision arise from study of
particle abundances. For the S–W/Pb reactions this Coulomb effect is practically negligible.
In the past we (and others) have disregarded in the description of the hadronic final state abundances
the electrical charges and interactions of the produced hadrons. This is a correct way to analyze the
chemical properties since, as already mentioned, the quantity λQ is not a new fugacity: conservation of
flavor already assures charge conservation in chemical hadronic reactions, and use of λi , i = u, d, s exhausts
all available chemical balance conditions for the abundances of hadronic particles. As shown here, the
Coulomb deformation of the phase space in the QGP fireball makes it necessary to rethink the implications
that the final state particle measured fugacities have on the fireball properties.
3 Freeze-out of hadrons
The production of hadrons from a QGP fireball occurs mainly by way of quark coalescence and gluon
fragmentation, and there can be some quark fragmentation as well. We will explicitly consider the recom-
bination of quarks, but implicitly the gluon fragmentation is accounted for by our allowance for chemical
nonequilibrium. The relative number of primary particles freezing out from a source is obtained noting
that the fugacity and phase space occupancy of a composite hadronic particle can be expressed by its
constituents and that the probability to find all j-components contained within the i-th emitted particle is:
γj λj e−Ej /T ,
Y Y Y
Ni ∝ λi = λj , γi = γj . (8)
j∈i j∈i j∈i
Experimental data with full phase space coverage, or central rapidity region |y − yCM | < 0.5, for m⊥ >
1.5 GeV are considered; recall that the energy of a hadron ‘i’ is expressed by the spectral parameters m⊥
and y as follows, q q
X
Ei = Ej , Ei = m2i + p2 = m2i + p2⊥ cosh(y − yCM ) ,
where yCM is the center of momentum rapidity of the fireball formed by the colliding nuclei.
The yield of particles is controlled by the freeze-out temperature Tf . This freeze-out temperature is
different from the m⊥ -spectral temperature T⊥ , which also comprises the effect of collective matter flows
originating in the explosive disintegration driven by the internal pressure of compressed hadronic matter. In
order to model the flow and freeze-out of the fireball surface, one in general needs several new implicit and/or
explicit parameters. We therefore will make an effort to choose experimental variables (compatible particle
ratios) which are largely flow independent. This approach also diminishes the influence of heavy resonance
population — we include in Eq.(8) hadronic states up to M = 2 GeV, and also include quantum statistical
corrections, allowing for first Bose and Fermi distribution corrections in the phase space content. It is hard
to check if indeed we succeeded in eliminating the uncertainty about high mass hadron populations. As
we shall see comparing descriptions which exclude flow with those that include it, our approach is indeed
largely flow-insensitive.
4 J. Rafelski and J. Letessier
We consider here a simple radial flow model, with freeze-out in CM frame at constant laboratory time,
implying that causally disconnected domains of the dense matter fireball are synchronized at the instant
of the collision. Within this approach [5], the spectra and thus also multiplicities of particles emitted are
obtained replacing the Boltzmann exponential factor in Eq.(8),
1 γv Ej
Z
−Ej /T (1+~
vc ·~
pj /Ej )
e → dΩv γv (1 + ~vc · p~j /Ej )e− T , (9)
2π
p
where as usual γv = 1/ 1 − ~vc2 . Eq. (9) can be intuitively obtained by a Lorentz transformation between an
observer on the surface of the fireball, and one at rest in the general CM (laboratory) frame. One common
feature of all flow scenarios is that, at sufficiently high m⊥ , the spectral temperature (inverse slope) T⊥ can
be derived from the freeze-out temperature Tf with the help of the Doppler formula:
T⊥ = Tf γv (1 + vc ) . (10)
In actual numerical work, we proceed as follows to account for the Doppler effect: for a given pair of
values Tf and vc , the resulting m⊥ particle spectrum is obtained and analyzed using the spectral shape and
procedure employed for the particular collision system by the experimental groups, yielding the theoretical
inverse slope ‘temperature’ T⊥j .
Once the parameters Tf , λq , λs , γq , γs and vc have been determined studying available particle yields,
and m⊥ slopes, the entire phase space of particles produced is fully characterized within our elaborate
statistical model. Our model is in fact just an elaboration of the original Fermi model [6], in fact all
we do is to allow hadronic particles to be produced in the manner dictated by the phase space size of
valance quarks. With the full understanding of the phase space of all hadrons, we can evaluate the physical
properties of the system at freeze-out, such as, e.g., energy and entropy per baryon, strangeness content.
It is a non-trivial matter to determine the confidence level that goes with the different data analysis
approaches since some of the results considered are partially redundant, and a few data points can be
obtained from others by algebraic relations arising in terms of their theoretical definitions; there are two
types of such relations:
Ω+Ω Ω 1 + Ω/Ω Λ Λ Ξ Ξ
= · , = · · . (12)
Ξ + Ξ̄ Ξ 1 + Ξ/Ξ Λ Ξ Ξ Λ
However, due to smallness of the total error found for some of the approaches it is clear without detailed
analysis that only these are statistically significant.
In addition to the abundance data, we also explored the transverse mass m⊥ -spectra when the collective
flow velocity was allowed in the description, and the bottom line of tables 1 and 2 in columns Dv , Fv
includes in these cases the error found in the inverse slope parameter of the spectra. The procedure we
used is as follows: since within the error the high m⊥ strange (anti)baryon inverse slopes are within error,
Hadron Freeze-out and QGP Hadronization 5
Table 1: Particle ratios studied in our analysis for S–W/Pb/Au reactions: experimental results with
references and kinematic cuts are given, followed by columns showing results for the different strategies of
analysis B–F. Asterisk ∗ means a predicted result (corresponding data is not fitted). Subscript s implies
forced strangeness conservation, subscript v implies inclusion of collective flow. The experimental results
considered are from:
1 S. Abatzis et al., WA85 Collaboration, Heavy Ion Physics 4, 79 (1996).
2 S. Abatzis et al., WA85 Collaboration, Phys. Lett. B 347, 158 (1995).
3 S. Abatzis et al., WA85 Collaboration, Phys. Lett. B 376, 251 (1996).
4 I.G. Bearden et al., NA44 Collaboration, Phys. Rev. C 57, 837 (1998).
5 D. Röhrich for the NA35 Collaboration, Heavy Ion Physics 4, 71 (1996).
6 S–Ag value adopted here: T. Alber et al., NA35 Collaboration, Eur. Phys. J. C 2, 643 (1998).
7 A. Iyono et al., EMU05 Collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A 544, 455c (1992) and Y. Takahashi et al., EMU05
overlapping we decided to consider just one ‘mean’ experimental value T⊥ = 235±10 for S–induced reactions
and T⊥ = 265 ± 15 for Pb–induced reactions. Thus we add one experimental value and one parameter,
without changing the number of degrees of freedom. Once we find values of Tf and vc , we evaluate the
j
slopes of the theoretical spectra. The resulting theoretical Tth values are in remarkable agreement with
j
experimental T⊥ , well beyond what we expected, as is shown in table 3. An exception is the fully strange
Ω + Ω spectrum. We note in passing that when vc was introduced we found little additional correlation
between now 6 theoretical parameters. The collective flow velocity is a truly new degree of freedom and it
helps to attain a more consistent description of the experimental data available.
Although it is clear that one should be using a full-fledged model such as Dv , we address also cases B and
C. The reason for this arises from our desire to demonstrate the empirical need for chemical non-equilibrium:
in the approach B, complete chemical equilibrium γi = 1 is assumed. As we see in tables 1 and 2 this
approach has rather large error. Despite this the results in column B in tables 1 and 2 are often compared
favorably with experiment, indeed this result can be presented quite convincingly on a logarithmic scale. Yet
as we see the disagreement between theory and experiment is quite forbidding. With this remark we wish to
demonstrate the need for comprehensive and precisely measured hadron abundance data sample, including
abundances of multi-strange antibaryons, which were already 20 years ago identified as the hadronic signals
6 J. Rafelski and J. Letessier
Table 2: Particle ratios studied in our analysis for Pb–Pb reactions: experimental results with references
and kinematic cuts are given, followed by columns showing results for the different strategies of analysis
B–F. Asterisk ∗ means a predicted result (corresponding data is not fitted or not available). Subscript s
implies forced strangeness conservation, subscript v implies inclusion of collective flow. The experimental
results considered are from:
1 I. Králik, for the WA97 Collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A 638,115, (1998).
2 G.J. Odyniec, for the NA49 Collaboration, J. Phys. G 23, 1827 (1997).
3 P.G. Jones, for the NA49 Collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A 610, 188c (1996).
4 F. Pühlhofer, for the NA49 Collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A 638, 431,(1998).
5 C. Bormann, for the NA49 Collaboration, J. Phys. G 23, 1817 (1997).
6 G.J. Odyniec, Nucl. Phys. A 638, 135, (1998).
7 D. Röhrig, for the NA49 Collaboration, “Recent results from NA49 experiment on Pb–Pb collisions at
158 A GeV”, see Fig. 4, in proc. of EPS-HEP Conference, Jerusalem, Aug. 19-26, 1997.
8 A.K. Holme, for the WA97 Collaboration, J. Phys. G 23, 1851 (1997).
Table 3: Particle spectra inverse slopes: theoretical values Tth are obtained imitating the experimental
procedure from the Tf , vc -parameters. Top portion: S–W experimental T⊥ from experiment WA85 for
kaons, lambdas and cascades; bottom portion: experimental Pb–Pb T⊥ from experiment NA49 for kaons
and from experiment WA97 for baryons. The experimental results are from:
D. Evans, for the WA85-collaboration, APH N.S., Heavy Ion Physics 4, 79 (1996).
E. Andersen et al., WA97-collaboration, Phys. Lett. B 433, 209, (1998).
S. Margetis, for the NA49-collaboration, J. Physics G, Nucl. and Part. Phys. 25, 189 (1999).
0
TK TΛ TΛ TΞ TΞ T Ω+Ω
T⊥ [MeV] 219 ± 5 233 ± 3 232 ± 7 244 ± 12 238 ± 16 —
Tth [MeV] 215 236 236 246 246 260
T⊥ [MeV] 223 ± 13 291 ± 18 280 ± 20 289 ± 12 269 ± 22 237 ± 24
Tth [MeV] 241 280 280 298 298 335
of QGP phenomena [7]. The strange antibaryon enhancement reported by the experiment WA97 fully
confirms the role played by these particles [8].
In the approach C, we introduce strangeness chemical non-equilibrium [9], i.e., we also vary γs , keeping
Hadron Freeze-out and QGP Hadronization 7
Table 4: Statistical parameters which best describe the experimental S–Au/W/Pb results shown in table 1.
Asterisk (∗ ) means a fixed (input) value or result of a constraint. In approaches B to D, particle abundance
ratios comprising Ω are not considered. In case Ds strangeness conservation in the particle yields was
enforced. In case F the three data-points with Ω are considered. Lower index v implies that radial collective
flow velocity has been considered.
S–W Tf [MeV] λq λs γs /γq γq vc χ2T
B 144 ± 2 1.53 ± 0.02 0.97 ± 0.02 1∗ 1∗ 0∗ 264
C 147 ± 2 1.49 ± 0.02 1.01 ± 0.02 0.62 ± 0.02 1∗ 0∗ 30
D 143 ± 3 1.50 ± 0.02 1.00 ± 0.02 0.60 ± 0.02 1.22 ± 0.06 0∗ 6.5
Ds 153 ± 3 1.42 ± 0.02 1.10∗ ± 0.02 0.56 ± 0.02 1.26 ± 0.06 0∗ 38
F 144 ± 3 1.49 ± 0.02 1.00 ± 0.02 0.60 ± 0.02 1.22 ± 0.06 0∗ 12
Dv 144 ± 2 1.51 ± 0.02 1.00 ± 0.02 0.69 ± 0.03 1.41 ± 0.08 0.49 ± 0.02 6.2
Fv 145± 2 1.50 ± 0.02 0.99 ± 0.02 0.69 ± 0.03 1.43 ± 0.08 0.50 ± 0.02 11
Table 5: Statistical parameters which best describe the experimental Pb–Pb results shown in table 2 .
Asterisk (∗ ) means a fixed (input) value, or result of a constraint. In approaches B to D, particle abundance
ratios comprising Ω are not considered. In case Ds strangeness conservation in the particle yields was
enforced. In case F the four data-points with Ω are considered. Lower index v implies that radial flow
velocity has been considered.
Pb–Pb Tf [M eV ] λq λs γs /γq γq vc χ2T
B 142 ± 3 1.70 ± 0.03 1.10 ± 0.02 1∗ 1∗ 0∗ 88
C 144 ± 4 1.62 ± 0.03 1.10 ± 0.02 0.63 ± 0.04 1∗ 0∗ 24
D 134 ± 3 1.62 ± 0.03 1.10 ± 0.02 0.69 ± 0.08 1.84 ± 0.30 0∗ 1.6
Ds 133 ± 3 1.63 ± 0.03 1.09∗ ± 0.02 0.72 ± 0.12 2.75 ± 0.35 0∗ 2.7
F 334 ± 18 1.61 ± 0.03 1.12 ± 0.02 0.50 ± 0.01 0.18 ± 0.02 0∗ 19
Dv 144 ± 2 1.60 ± 0.02 1.10 ± 0.02 0.86 ± 0.03 1.72 ± 0.08 0.58 ± 0.02 1.5
Fv 328 ± 17 1.59 ± 0.03 1.13 ± 0.02 0.51 ± 0.03 0.34 ± 0.13 0.38 ± 0.31 18
γq = 1. A nearly valid experimental data description is now possible, and indeed, when the error bars were
smaller this was a satisfactory approach adapted in many studies [1]. However, only the possibility of light
quark non-equilibrium in fit D produces a statistically significant data description.
It is interesting to note that a significant degradation of χ2T occurs, especially in the Pb–Pb data, when
we require in column F that the particle ratios comprising Ω and Ω-particles are also described. We thus
conclude that a large fraction of these particles must be made in processes that are not considered in the
present model.
Another notable study case is shown in column Ds , with strangeness conservation enforced. Remarkably,
the S–W data, table 1, do not like this constraint. A possible explanation is that for S-induced reactions, the
particle abundances are obtained at relatively high p⊥ . Thus only a small fraction of all strange particles is
actually observed, and therefore the overall strangeness is hard to balance. Similar conclusion results also
when radial flow is explicitly allowed for, with a significant unbalanced strangeness fractions remaining,
as we shall discuss below. On the other hand, this constraint is relatively easily satisfied for the Pb–Pb
collision results, table 2, where a much greater proportion of all strange particles is actually experimentally
detected.
The statistical parameters associated with the particle abundances described above are shown in the
table 4 for S-W/Pb and in table 5 for Pb–Pb reactions. The errors of the statistical parameters shown are
those provided by the program MINUIT96.03 from CERN program library. When the theory describes the
8 J. Rafelski and J. Letessier
Table 6: Tf and physical properties (specific energy, entropy, anti-strangeness, net strangeness, pressure
and volume) of the full hadron phase space characterized by the statistical parameters given in table 4 for
the reactions S–Au/W/Pb. Asterisk ∗ means fixed input.
data well, this is a one standard deviation error in theoretical parameters arising from the experimental
measurement error. In tables 4 and 5 in cases in which γq 6= 1 we present the ratio γs /γq , which corresponds
approximately to the parameter γs in the data studies in which γq = 1 has been assumed. It is notable that
whenever we allow phase space occupancy to vary from the equilibrium, a significant deviation is found. In
the S–W case, table 4, there is a 25% excess in the light quark occupancy, while strange quarks are 25%
below equilibrium. In Pb–Pb case, table 5, the ratio of the nonequilibrium parameters γs /γq ≃ 0.7 also
varies little (excluding the failing cases F with Ω, Ω data), though the individual values γs , γq can change
significantly, even between the high confidence cases.
We note that in the Pb–Pb reaction, table 5, γs > 1. This is an important finding, since an explanation
of this effect involves formation prior to freeze-out in the matter at high density of near chemical equilibrium,
γs (t <√tf ) ≃ 1. The ongoing rapid expansion (note that the collective velocity at freeze-out is found to
be 1/ 3) preserves this high strangeness yield, and thus we find the result γs > 1. In other words the
strangeness production freeze-out temperature Ts > Tf . Thus the strangeness equilibration time is proven
implicitly to be of magnitude expected in earlier studies of the QGP processes [10]. It is hard, if not really
impossible, to arrive at this result without the QGP hypothesis. Moreover, inspecting figure 38 in [10] we
see that the yield of strangeness we expect from the kinetic theory in QGP is at the level of 0.75 per baryon,
the level we indeed will determine below.
Another notable results is λ̃s ≃ λs ≃ 1.0 in the S–Au/W/Pb case, see table 4, and λs ≃ 1.1 in the Pb–Pb
case, see table 5, implying here λ̃s = 1, see section 2. We see clearly for both S- and Pb-induced reactions
a value of λs , characteristic for a source of freely movable strange quarks with balancing strangeness.
Table 7: Tf and physical properties (specific energy, entropy, anti-strangeness, net strangeness, pressure
and volume) of the full hadron phase space characterized by the statistical parameters given in table 5 for
the reactions Pb–Pb. Asterisk ∗ means fixed input.
Pb–Pb Tf [MeV] Ef /B Sf /B s̄f /B (s̄f − sf )/B Pf [GeV/fm3 ]
B 142 ± 3 7.1 ± 0.5 41 ± 3 1.02 ± 0.05 0.21 ± 0.02 0.053 ± 0.005
C 144 ± 4 7.7 ± 0.5 42 ± 3 0.70 ± 0.05 0.14 ± 0.02 0.053 ± 0.005
D 134 ± 3 8.3 ± 0.5 47 ± 3 0.61 ± 0.04 0.08 ± 0.01 0.185 ± 0.012
Ds 133 ± 3 8.7 ± 0.5 48 ± 3 0.51 ± 0.04 0∗ 0.687 ± 0.030
F 334 ± 18 9.8 ± 0.5 24 ± 2 0.78 ± 0.05 0.06 ± 0.01 1.64 ± 0.06
Dv 144 ± 2 7.0 ± 0.5 38 ± 3 0.78 ± 0.04 0.01 ± 0.01 0.247 ± 0.007
Fv 328 ± 17 11.2 ± 1.5 28 ± 3 0.90 ± 0.05 0.09 ± 0.02 1.40 ± 0.06
impact of flow, as without it the specific strangeness content seemed to diminish as we moved to the larger
collision system. We have already alluded repeatedly to the fact that for S–Au/W/Pb case the balance of
strangeness is not seen in the particles observed experimentally. The asymmetry is 18%, with the excess
emission of s̄ containing hadrons at high p⊥ > 1 GeV. In the Pb–Pb data this effect disappears, perhaps
since the p⊥ lower cut-off is smaller. One could also imagine that longitudinal flow which is stronger in
S–Au/W/Pb is responsible for this effect.
The small reduction of the specific entropy in Pb–Pb compared to the lighter S–Au/W/Pb is driven
by the greater baryon stopping in the larger system, also seen in the smaller energy per baryon content.
Both systems freeze out at E/S = 0.185 GeV (energy per unit of entropy). Aside of Tf , this is a second
universality feature at hadronization of both systems. The overall high specific entropy content agrees well
with the entropy content evaluation made earlier [4] for the S–W case. This is so because the strange
particle data are indeed fully consistent within the chemical-nonequilibrium description with the 4π total
particle multiplicity results.
Even though there is still considerable uncertainty about other freeze-out flow effects, such as longi-
tudinal flow (memory of the collision axis), the level of consistency and quality of agreement between a
wide range of experimental data and our chemical non-equilibrium, thermal equilibrium statistical model
suggests that, for the observables considered, these effects do not matter.
The key results we found analyzing experimental data are:
4. S/B ≃ 40 ;
5. s̄/B ≃ 0.75 ;
are in remarkable agreement with the properties of a deconfined QGP source hadronizing without chemical
reequilibration. The only natural interpretation of our findings is thus that hadronic particles seen at 158–
200 GeV A nuclear collisions at CERN-SPS are emerging directly from a deconfined QGP state and do not
undergo a chemical re-equilibration after they have been produced.
Acknowledgments:
This work was supported in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy, DE-FG03-95ER40937 .
LPTHE, Univ. Paris 6 et 7 is: Unité mixte de Recherche du CNRS, UMR7589.
References
[1] J. Sollfrank, J. Phys. G 23, 1903 (1997); [nucl-th/9707020], and references therein.
[2] J. Letessier and J. Rafelski, Phys. Rev. C 59, 947 1999; [hep-ph/9806386] .
[3] J. Letessier and J. Rafelski, Acta Phys. Pol.; B30, 153 (1999), [hep-ph/9807346] , and J. Phys. Part. Nuc. G25,
295, (1999), [hep-ph/9810332] .
[4] J. Rafelski, J. Letessier and A. Tounsi, Dallas–ICHEP (1992) p. 983 (QCD161:H51:1992); [hep-ph/9711350];
J. Letessier, A. Tounsi, U. Heinz, J. Sollfrank and J. Rafelski Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3530 (1993); and Phys. Rev.
D 51, 3408 (1995).
[5] E. Schnedermann, J. Sollfrank and U. Heinz, pp175–206 in Particle Production in Highly Excited Matter, NATO-
ASI Series B303, H.H. Gutbrod and J. Rafelski, Eds., (Plenum, New York, 1993)
[6] E. Fermi, Progr. theor. Phys. 5 570 (1950).
[7] J. Rafelski, pp 282–324, GSI Report 81-6, Darmstadt, May 1981; Proceedings of the Workshop on Future
Relativistic Heavy Ion Experiments, held at GSI, Darmstadt, Germany, October 7–10, 1980, R. Bock and R.
Stock, Eds., (see in particular section 6, pp 316–320); see also:
J. Rafelski, pp 619–632 in New Flavor and Hadron Spectroscopy, Ed. J. Tran Thanh Van (Editions Frontiers
1981), Proceedings of XVIth Rencontre de Moriond — Second Session, Les Arcs, March 21–27, 1981;
J. Rafelski, Nucl. Physics A 374, 489c (1982) — Proceedings of ICHEPNC held 6–10 July 1981 in Versailles,
France.
[8] E. Andersen et al., WA97-collaboration, Phys. Lett. B 433, 209, (1998);
Strangeness enhancement at mid-rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at 158 A GeV/c, E. Andersen et al., WA97-
collaboration, Phys. Lett. B in press, CERN-EP preprint, January 5, 1999.
[9] J. Rafelski, Phys. Lett. B 262, 333 (1991); Nucl. Phys. A 544, 279c (1992).
[10] J. Rafelski, J. Letessier and A. Tounsi, Acta Phys. Pol. B 27, 1035 (1996), and references therein.
[11] J. Letessier, A. Tounsi and J. Rafelski, Phys. Rev. C 50, 406 (1994);
J. Rafelski, J. Letessier and A. Tounsi, Acta Phys. Pol. A 85, 699 (1994).