Erratum: Conformal relativistic viscous hydrodynamics: Applications to RHIC results at $\sqrt{s_{\mathit{NN}}}=200$ GeV [Phys. Rev. C 78, 034915 (2008)]

Figure 6

Charged hadron elliptic flow for the Glauber model at $b=7$ fm with $T_i=0.353$ GeV, ${\tau }_0=1$ fm/$c$ and various viscosities.

Figure 7

Centrality dependence of total multiplicity $\mathit{dN}/\mathit{dY}$ and $\langle p_T\rangle$ for ${\pi }^{+}$, ${\pi }^{-}$, $K^{+}$, $K^{-}$, $p$ and $\overline{p}$ from PHENIX [2] for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=200$ GeV, compared to the viscous hydrodynamic model and various $\eta /s$, for Glauber initial conditions and CGC initial conditions. The model parameters used here are ${\tau }_0=1$ fm/$c$, ${\tau }_{\Pi }=6\eta /s$, ${\lambda }_1=0$, $T_f=140$ MeV and adjusted $T_i$ (see Table ).

Figure 8

Comparison of hydrodynamic models to experimental data on charged hadron integrated (left) and minimum bias (right) elliptic flow by PHOBOS [4] and STAR [5], respectively. STAR event plane data has been reduced by 20 percent to estimate the removal of non-flow contributions [5, 6]. The line thickness for the hydrodynamic model curves is an estimate of the accumulated numerical error (due to, e.g., finite grid spacing). The integrated $v_2$ coefficient from the hydrodynamic models (full lines) is well reproduced by $\frac{1}{2}{e}_p$ (dots); indeed, the difference between the full lines and dots gives an estimate of the systematic uncertainty of the freeze-out prescription.

Figure 9

Momentum anisotropy (a) and elliptic flow for charged hadrons (b) for $b=7$ fm, $\eta /s=0.08$ and different hydrodynamic initialization times ${\tau }_0$. Horizontal light gray lines in (a) are visual aids to compare the final value of $e_p$. As can be seen from these plots, neither the final $e_p$ nor the charged hadron $v_2$ depend sensitively on the value of ${\tau }_0$ if the same energy distribution is used as initial condition at the respective initialization times. Simulation parameters were $T_i=0.29\hspace{0.5em}\mathrm{GeV},T_f=0.14\hspace{0.5em}\mathrm{GeV}$ for ${\tau }_0=2$ fm/$c$, $T_i=0.36\hspace{0.5em}\mathrm{GeV},T_f=0.15\hspace{0.5em}\mathrm{GeV}$ for ${\tau }_0=1$ fm/$c$, and $T_i=0.43\hspace{0.5em}\mathrm{GeV}$, $T_f=0.16\hspace{0.5em}\mathrm{GeV}$ for ${\tau }_0=0.5$ fm/$c$.