We present spectra of charged hadrons from Au+Au and d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV measured with the BRAHMS experiment at RHIC. The spectra for different collision centralities are compared to spectra from ${\rm p}+\bar{{\rm p}}$ collisions at the same energy scaled by the number of binary collisions. The resulting ratios (nuclear modification factors) for central Au+Au collisions at $\eta=0$ and $\eta=2.2$ evidence a strong suppression in the high $p_{T}$ region ($>$2 GeV/c). In contrast, the d+Au nuclear modification factor (at $\eta=0$) exhibits an enhancement of the high $p_T$ yields. These measurements indicate a high energy loss of the high $p_T$ particles in the medium created in the central Au+Au collisions. The lack of suppression in d+Au collisions makes it unlikely that initial state effects can explain the suppression in the central Au+Au collisions.
Measurements of the midrapidity transverse energy distribution, $d\Et/d\eta$, are presented for $p$$+$$p$, $d$$+$Au, and Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}=200$ GeV and additionally for Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}=62.4$ and 130 GeV. The $d\Et/d\eta$ distributions are first compared with the number of nucleon participants $N_{\rm part}$, number of binary collisions $N_{\rm coll}$, and number of constituent-quark participants $N_{qp}$ calculated from a Glauber model based on the nuclear geometry. For Au$+$Au, $\mean{d\Et/d\eta}/N_{\rm part}$ increases with $N_{\rm part}$, while $\mean{d\Et/d\eta}/N_{qp}$ is approximately constant for all three energies. This indicates that the two component ansatz, $dE_{T}/d\eta \propto (1-x) N_{\rm part}/2 + x N_{\rm coll}$, which has been used to represent $E_T$ distributions, is simply a proxy for $N_{qp}$, and that the $N_{\rm coll}$ term does not represent a hard-scattering component in $E_T$ distributions. The $dE_{T}/d\eta$ distributions of Au$+$Au and $d$$+$Au are then calculated from the measured $p$$+$$p$ $E_T$ distribution using two models that both reproduce the Au$+$Au data. However, while the number-of-constituent-quark-participant model agrees well with the $d$$+$Au data, the additive-quark model does not.
Forum