Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 59 references

This paper proves that in cold, dense nucleon matter, described as a relativistic Fermi liquid, the bulk viscosity is non-negative and is suppressed relative to the shear viscosity by a factor of order (T/μ*)^4.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 19:11 UTC pith:M3EYXR6T

load-bearing objection The positivity proof via Landau matching is solid, but the printed leading-order bulk viscosity formula has a dimensional inconsistency that undercuts the headline scaling until fixed. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2512.01544 v2 pith:M3EYXR6T submitted 2025-12-01 nucl-th cond-mat.str-elhep-phhep-th

Fermi-liquid view of viscosity in cold and dense nucleon matter

Jianing Li , Weiyao Ke , Jin Hu This is my paper
classification nucl-th cond-mat.str-elhep-phhep-th
keywords bulk viscosityshear viscosityFermi liquid theoryrelativistic Boltzmann equationLandau matching conditionsrelaxation-time approximationcold dense nuclear mattermean-field equation of state
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper tries to establish a clean statement about dissipation in cold, dense nucleon matter: once the linearized Boltzmann equation for in-medium quasiparticles is solved with Landau matching conditions, the bulk viscosity is manifestly non-negative, and in the degenerate low-temperature limit it is suppressed relative to shear viscosity by a factor of order (T/μ*)^4. The result matters because it resolves a sign ambiguity in earlier kinetic calculations and tells when bulk dissipation can be neglected in nuclear matter, for instance in heavy-ion collisions at intermediate beam energies. The proof is carried out in the relaxation-time approximation, with a mean-field hadronic equation of state supplying the quasiparticle mass and chemical potential for numerical estimates. A sympathetic reader should take the core claim as 'bulk viscosity cannot be negative and is parametrically smaller than shear at low T', not as a final quantitative prediction independent of the collision model.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that in a relativistic Fermi-liquid description of quasiparticles with medium-dependent mass, imposing Landau matching conditions — the requirement that dissipative corrections do not shift the local energy or particle-number densities — makes the bulk viscosity manifestly non-negative. After solving the linearized Boltzmann equation in the relaxation-time approximation, the zero-mode ambiguity in the bulk channel is fixed by a Gram-matrix equation, and ζ reduces to (1/3α)∫_p \tilde f_eq φ_2² ≥ 0. From a low-temperature Sommerfeld expansion, the leading-order ratio is ζ/η ∝ (T/μ*)^4. This establishes that bulk dissipation is parametrically negligible next to shea

What carries the argument

The machinery is the linearized relativistic Boltzmann equation for quasiparticles with dispersion E_p^* = √(m*²+p²), solved in the relaxation-time approximation C[δf] = −δf/τ_rel. Because 1 and p_μ^* are zero modes of the true collision operator, the bulk solution is ambiguous; the paper fixes the ambiguity with Landau matching conditions, which demand δT^{00}=0 and δn=0 in the local rest frame. This yields the closed form ζ = (1/3α)∫_p \tilde f_eq φ_2² ≥ 0, where α=τ_rel/3 and φ_2 is the bulk perturbation. The low-T limit uses the Sommerfeld expansion to obtain ζ_LO, η_LO and the ratio (T/μ*)^4.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that in-medium scattering can be collapsed to a single relaxation time, with conservation laws then restored by hand; the paper flags replacing this by microscopic collision integrals as future work, and if the true collision kernel has a different energy or angular structure the numerical results would change.

What would settle it

Solve the full linearized Boltzmann equation with the actual in-medium nucleon-nucleon scattering kernel in the same mean-field background and check whether ζ/η still follows (T/μ*)^4; if ζ acquires a comparable T^2 or linear-in-T component, or turns negative for some density, the central claim fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Bulk viscosity is never negative in this framework, so the earlier sign ambiguity is resolved by choosing the Landau-matched solution.
  • At leading order in T/μ*, ζ/η ∝ (T/μ*)^4, so in the degenerate regime bulk dissipation is parametrically smaller than shear.
  • Because the relation involves the quasiparticle mass, the T^4 suppression is robust against mass corrections rather than an artifact of non-relativistic kinematics.
  • In the mean-field hadronic model, the numerical results at T=8 MeV show shear viscosity dominating the bulk channel by several orders of magnitude, and apparent mean-field pathologies do not reflect hydrodynamical instabilities.
  • As T→0+, the bulk channel becomes inactive while the shear relaxation time grows, so hydrodynamic descriptions of cold dense matter should keep shear as the dominant dissipative channel.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the positivity proof only relies on the Gram-matrix structure, it should carry to any relaxation-time kinetic theory with restoration of zero modes; the same T^4 suppression may then appear in other degenerate Fermi systems, such as ultracold atomic gases.
  • The numerical transport coefficients should be read as a consistent model benchmark rather than a definitive prediction: replacing the relaxation-time approximation with a genuine in-medium collision kernel will likely shift the curves even if the scaling survives.
  • A testable consequence for heavy-ion phenomenology is that hydrodynamic simulations in the degenerate region can initially set ζ=0 and attribute all attenuation to shear; the T^4 window tells when the bulk channel starts to matter as temperature rises.
  • The paper's positivity argument does not by itself fix the mean-field response coefficient κ*, so quantitative ζ values remain tied to the equation-of-state treatment; testing with an alternative thermodynamic response could show how stable the reported numbers are.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a relativistic Fermi-liquid transport framework for cold, dense nucleon matter. Starting from a linearized Boltzmann equation for quasiparticles with medium-dependent mass, the authors implement Landau matching conditions within the relaxation-time approximation, prove that the bulk viscosity is manifestly non-negative, and derive low-temperature leading-order expressions for shear and bulk viscosity. They then couple the kinetic framework to a Walecka-type mean-field equation of state, using a previously fitted relaxation time, and compute η and ζ for dense nucleon matter. The central claims are that ζ/η ∝ (T/μ*)^4 in the degenerate regime and that bulk dissipation is parametrically negligible compared with shear.

Significance. If correct, the paper resolves the sign ambiguity of bulk viscosity in the authors' earlier RTA treatment and gives a clean, self-contained positivity argument (Eq. (25)) that is independent of fitted constants. The claimed scaling ζ/η ∝ (T/μ*)^4 is an instructive Fermi-liquid result with direct implications for transport in cold dense matter, and the non-negativity proof is a solid algebraic contribution. However, the quantitative LO formula and the numerical results rest on Eq. (30), which as printed is dimensionally inconsistent and contradicts Eq. (31); this must be corrected before the central quantitative claim can be accepted. The framework also explicitly relies on the RTA, a limitation the authors acknowledge, and the numerical magnitude of ζ depends on a relaxation time fit from Ref. [32].

major comments (3)
  1. [§II C, Eq. (30)] Eq. (30) is dimensionally inconsistent. With [τ_rel] = E^{-1}, the RHS of ζ_LO = 8π^2 m*^4 p*_F T^4 / (405 μ*^5 τ_rel) has dimension E^5, while Eq. (12) requires viscosity to have dimension E^3. Restoring the stated T-dependence τ_rel ∝ T^{-2} (text after Eq. (31)) gives ζ_LO ∝ T^6 and hence ζ_LO/η_LO ∝ T^8, not the claimed (T/μ*)^4 of Eq. (31). The obvious fix is to put τ_rel in the numerator; this restores the dimension and the scaling. As printed, the central parametric suppression claim is not supported. Please correct the formula, re-derive the prefactor, and update the discussion.
  2. [§II C, Eq. (30) and footnote 5] The derivation of Eq. (30) is omitted, and footnote 5 explicitly states that because of the μ*/T dependence in a, b, and Δ, the truncation order in Eq. (29) does not directly match the order of the viscosity results and that higher terms must be retained. This means Eq. (30) is not justified by merely truncating Eq. (29); one must show that the claimed T^4 coefficient survives after including the required higher-order terms. Without this demonstration, the LO expression and the scaling in Eq. (31) remain unproven. Please provide the calculation or a detailed appendix.
  3. [§III, Fig. 3] The numerical bulk-viscosity curves in Fig. 3 are labeled as computed from Eq. (30), so the dimensional error in Eq. (30) directly affects the numerical values in panel (b), including the scale of ζ p*_F / h̄_W. Moreover, the dashed 'full' curves are said to come from Eqs. (12), but the retained terms in the Sommerfeld sum are not specified. In light of footnote 5, this is not a minor presentation issue: the reader cannot reproduce the quantitative claim that bulk dissipation is negligible. After correcting Eq. (30), please rerun the numerics, quote updated values, and define the truncation used for the dashed curves.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§II B, Eq. (23)] The statement 'In general, φ2 admits the expansion φ2 = α R_p + λ0 + λ1 E*_p' should be qualified: it holds for the RTA solution after the matching subtraction, not for an arbitrary solution of the full linearized Boltzmann equation. As written it makes the positivity proof in Eq. (25) look more general than it is.
  2. [§II C, Eq. (29)] The phrase 'canonical symmetry of the transport kernel' is vague. Please either define it or provide a reference that states the symmetry explicitly, so the reader can see why Eq. (29) is the relevant expansion.
  3. [§II A, footnote 3] The statement that 'the entropy contribution is negligible compared with the density effect' is asserted without derivation. Since temperature fluctuations are discarded in the matching procedure, a sentence explaining the quantitative smallness would be useful.
  4. [§III, Eq. (42)] The relaxation-time fit in Eq. (42) is taken from the authors' previous work [32]. This is appropriate, but the numerical bulk viscosities inherit the uncertainties of that fit; please state this explicitly and, if possible, indicate the fit uncertainty.
  5. [General] There are several typographical and presentation issues: 'mathcing' in §II B, 'viscosities' in the abstract, and inconsistent use of 'LL conditions' versus 'Landau matching conditions' in §II B. These should be corrected in a revision.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No construction-level circularity: the positivity proof and T^4 scaling follow from the RTA + Landau matching algebra; only the numerical magnitudes inherit a transparently cited tau_rel from the authors' prior work.

full rationale

The central claims are not equivalent to their inputs by construction. Eq. (25) is a Gram-matrix identity: with the RTA solution written as phi2 = alpha R_p + lambda0 + lambda1 E* and the Landau matching conditions enforced, the bulk viscosity becomes (1/3alpha) <phi2,phi2> >= 0. This is a mathematical consequence of the matched RTA ansatz, not a fitted or self-referential statement. The low-temperature scaling zeta/eta ~ (T/mu*)^4 follows from the Sommerfeld expansion of the same matched solution and is independent of the value or T-dependence of tau_rel, because tau_rel appears in both viscosities. The self-citations to the authors' Ref. [32] are explicit and supply two inputs: the RTA particular solution (Eq. 15) and the numerical relaxation-time parameterization (Eq. 42). These are inputs, not the quantities being predicted, so the qualitative claims do not reduce to them. The paper itself acknowledges the main limitation, namely that RTA should ultimately be replaced by microscopic collision integrals (Sec. IV), and footnote 5 notes the subtlety of Sommerfeld truncation. The printed Eq. (30) appears dimensionally inconsistent with Eq. (31) when tau_rel ~ T^-2 is restored; that is a correctness/typo concern, not circularity. On balance, there is minor self-citation that supplies numerical magnitude but not the central scaling or positivity proof.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework pulls no new entities from a hat. Its numerical output rests on RTA, a previously fitted τ_rel polynomial from the authors' own Ref. [32], and the standard Walecka parameter set. The central scaling law is independent of τ_rel.

free parameters (2)
  • τ_rel(x) polynomial coefficients = 388, −2.37, 5.44, −5.63, 1.90 (Eq. (42))
    Inverse LO 2↔2 scattering rate parameterized in the authors' previous work [32]; enters all numerical η and ζ values but cancels in ζ/η.
  • Walecka mean-field parameters gσ, gω, mσ, mω, κ3, κ4 = 8.69, 8.65, 550 MeV, 783 MeV, 7.95e−3, 6.95e−4 (Sec. III)
    Standard RMF parameters from Ref. [42], fitted to nuclear saturation; set the EoS, κ*, γ, and hence the numerical results.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Linearized collision operator has zero modes {1, p*_μ}
    Eq. (13); used to justify subtracting a + b E*_p and deriving positivity. True for conservative two-body collisions.
  • domain assumption RTA collision kernel −δf/τ_rel, with matching to restore zero modes, represents the actual collision physics
    Sec. II B; essential for Eq. (15) and all explicit results.
  • domain assumption Antiparticle contributions negligible
    Footnote 1; valid for T ≪ μ_B in dense matter.
  • domain assumption δf arises solely from μ variations; T fluctuations neglected
    Sec. II B; a simplification for cold matter, affects bulk channel.
  • domain assumption Mean-field approximation: meson fluctuations neglected in EoS; dissipation from LO scattering with parameterized τ_rel
    Sec. III; standard Walecka MFA.
  • standard math Sommerfeld expansion asymptotic (lower limit extended to −∞)
    Footnote 4; standard asymptotic expansion at low T.
  • standard math Gram matrix H of {1, E*} invertible
    Eq. (24) and Ref. [36]; needed for matching solution.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 11559 in / 20248 out tokens · 220300 ms · 2026-08-03T19:11:25.492553+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We develop a framework to calculate transport properties in cold, dense relativistic quasiparticle system within the Fermi-liquid theory at the mean-field level. Building on our previous study J. Li \emph{et al.} [Phys. Rev. C \textbf{111}, 044904 (2025)], we start from the linearized relativistic Boltzmann equation tailored to quasiparticles with medium-dependent dispersion relation and implement Landau matching conditions, proving that the bulk viscosity is manifestly nonnegative. A low-temperature expansion then yields leading-order ($T/\mu^*$) expressions for the shear ($\eta$) and bulk ($\zeta$) viscosities, where the behavior $\zeta/\eta \propto (T/\mu^*)^4$ in the degenerate regime is found to be robust against quasiparticle mass correction. We couple the kinetic framework to a Walecka-type mean-field equation of state and compute $\eta$ and $\zeta$ for cold, dense nucleon matter. The transport properties of nucleonic matter in the degenerate regime can be relevant for intermediate beam-energy nuclear experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.01544 by Jianing Li, Jin Hu, Weiyao Ke.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Separation of equilibrium relabeling induced by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Input from the mean-field solution at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Dimensionless viscosities at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 37 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    S. R. de Groot and P. Mazur,Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics (Courier Dover Publications, Mineola, New York, 2013)

    2013

  2. [2]

    SFB 1225 (ISOQUANT)

    The corresponding particular solutions for the coefficients are [32] 3 ϕ1 (p∗) = τrel 2E∗p , ϕ par 2 (p∗) = α E∗p h (u·p ∗)2γ−m ∗2i . (15) Herev s denotes the adiabatic speed of sound, and for later use we define α= τrel 3 , γ=1−3v 2 s 1− m∗ µ∗κ∗ ! , κ ∗ = dm∗ dµ∗ .(16) Note thatϕ 1 is the unique solution, whereasϕ par 2 denotes a particular solution ofϕ ...

  3. [3]

    Botermans and R

    W. Botermans and R. Malfliet, Quantum transport theory of nu- clear matter, Phys. Rept.198, 115 (1990)

    1990

  4. [4]

    S. L. Shapiro and S. A. Teukolsky,Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars: The Physics of Compact Objects(Wiley, New York, 1983)

    1983

  5. [5]

    Adcox, S

    K. Adcox, S. S. Adler, S. Afanasiev, C. Aidala, N. N. Ajitanand, Y . Akiba, A. Al-Jamel, J. Alexander, R. Amirikas, K. Aoki, et al.(PHENIX), Formation of dense partonic matter in rela- tivistic nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC: Experimental eval- uation by the PHENIX collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A757, 184 (2005), arXiv:nucl-ex/0410003

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  6. [6]

    Aamodt, B

    K. Aamodt, B. Abelev, A. Abrahantes Quintana, D. Adamov ´a, A. M. Adare, M. M. Aggarwal, G. Aglieri Rinella, A. G. Agocs, S. Aguilar Salazar, Z. Ahammed,et al.(ALICE), Elliptic flow of charged particles in Pb-Pb collisions at 2.76 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 252302 (2010), arXiv:1011.3914 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  7. [7]

    Heinz and R

    U. Heinz and R. Snellings, Collective flow and viscosity in rel- ativistic heavy-ion collisions, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.63, 123 (2013), arXiv:1301.2826 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    Kumar, V

    R. Kumar, V . Dexheimer, J. Jahan, J. Noronha, J. Noronha- Hostler, C. Ratti, N. Yunes, A. R. N. Acuna, M. Alford, M. H. Anik,et al.(MUSES), Theoretical and experimental constraints for the equation of state of dense and hot matter, Living Rev. Rel.27, 3 (2024), arXiv:2303.17021 [nucl-th]. 7

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Bottom up

    R. Baier, A. H. Mueller, D. Schiff, and D. T. Son, “Bottom up” thermalization in heavy ion collisions, Phys. Lett. B502, 51 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0009237

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  10. [10]

    P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore, and L. G. Yaffe, Effective kinetic theory for high temperature gauge theories, J. High Energy Phys.01, 030, arXiv:hep-ph/0209353

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    Romatschke and U

    P. Romatschke and U. Romatschke,Relativistic Fluid Dy- namics In and Out of Equilibrium, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2019) arXiv:1712.05815 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  12. [12]

    Berges, M

    J. Berges, M. P. Heller, A. Mazeliauskas, and R. Venu- gopalan, QCD thermalization: Ab initio approaches and inter- disciplinary connections, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 035003 (2021), arXiv:2005.12299 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    Ring and P

    P. Ring and P. Schuck,The Nuclear Many-Body Problem (Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, 2004)

    2004

  14. [14]

    J. C. Yang, J. W. Xia, G. Q. Xiao, H. S. Xu, H. W. Zhao, X. H. Zhou, X. W. Ma, Y . He, L. Ma, D. Gao,et al., High Intensity heavy ion Accelerator Facility (HIAF) in China, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. B317, 263 (2013)

    2013

  15. [15]

    Senger, Nuclear matter physics at NICA, Eur

    P. Senger, Nuclear matter physics at NICA, Eur. Phys. J. A52, 217 (2016)

    2016

  16. [16]

    Bzdak, S

    A. Bzdak, S. Esumi, V . Koch, J. Liao, M. Stephanov, and N. Xu, Mapping the Phases of Quantum Chromodynamics with Beam Energy Scan, Phys. Rept.853, 1 (2020), arXiv:1906.00936 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    Agarwal and for the CBM Collaboration (CBM), The com- pressed baryonic matter (CBM) experiment at FAIR—physics, status and prospects, Phys

    K. Agarwal and for the CBM Collaboration (CBM), The com- pressed baryonic matter (CBM) experiment at FAIR—physics, status and prospects, Phys. Scripta98, 034006 (2023)

    2023

  18. [18]

    W. Zhao, C. Shen, and B. Schenke, Collectivity in Ultraperiph- eral Pb+Pb Collisions at the Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 252302 (2022), arXiv:2203.06094 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  19. [19]

    Shen and B

    C. Shen and B. Schenke, Longitudinal dynamics and particle production in relativistic nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C105, 064905 (2022), arXiv:2203.04685 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  20. [20]

    Schenke, C

    B. Schenke, C. Shen, and W. Zhao, Collectivity in Ultra- peripheral Heavy-ion ande+ACollisions, Acta Phys. Polon. Supp.18, 1 (2025), arXiv:2411.18407 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Accardi, J

    A. Accardi, J. L. Albacete, M. Anselmino, N. Armesto, E. C. Aschenauer, A. Bacchetta, D. Boer, W. K. Brooks, T. Burton, N.-B. Chang,et al., Electron Ion Collider: The Next QCD Fron- tier: Understanding the glue that binds us all, Eur. Phys. J. A52, 268 (2016), arXiv:1212.1701 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  22. [22]

    D. P. Anderle, V . Bertone, X. Cao, L. Chang, N. Chang, G. Chen, X. Chen, Z. Chen, Z. Cui, L. Dai,et al., Electron- ion collider in China, Front. Phys. (Beijing)16, 64701 (2021), arXiv:2102.09222 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  23. [23]

    Aichelin, ‘Quantum’ molecular dynamics: A Dynamical mi- croscopic n body approach to investigate fragment formation and the nuclear equation of state in heavy ion collisions, Phys

    J. Aichelin, ‘Quantum’ molecular dynamics: A Dynamical mi- croscopic n body approach to investigate fragment formation and the nuclear equation of state in heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rept.202, 233 (1991)

    1991

  24. [24]

    M. N. Harakeh and A. van der Woude,Giant Resonances: Fun- damental High-Frequency Modes of Nuclear Excitation(Ox- ford University Press, Oxford, 2001)

    2001

  25. [25]

    Galatyuk (HADES), HADES overview, Nucl

    T. Galatyuk (HADES), HADES overview, Nucl. Phys. A931, 41 (2014)

    2014

  26. [26]

    Douchin and P

    F. Douchin and P. Haensel, A unified equation of state of dense matter and neutron star structure, Astron. Astrophys.380, 151 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0111092

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  27. [27]

    Schmitt and P

    A. Schmitt and P. Shternin, Reaction rates and transport in neutron stars, Astrophys. Space Sci. Libr.457, 455 (2018), arXiv:1711.06520 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  28. [28]

    C. Y . Tsang, M. B. Tsang, W. G. Lynch, R. Kumar, and C. J. Horowitz, Determination of the equation of state from nuclear experiments and neutron star observations, Nature Astron.8, 328 (2024), arXiv:2310.11588 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Hoyos, N

    C. Hoyos, N. Jokela, M. Jarvinen, J. G. Subils, J. Tarrio, and A. Vuorinen, Transport in strongly coupled quark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 241601 (2020), arXiv:2005.14205 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [30]

    Cruz Rojas, T

    J. Cruz Rojas, T. Gorda, C. Hoyos, N. Jokela, M. J ¨arvinen, A. Kurkela, R. Paatelainen, S. S ¨appi, and A. Vuorinen, Esti- mate for the Bulk Viscosity of Strongly Coupled Quark Matter Using Perturbative QCD and Holography, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 071901 (2024), arXiv:2402.00621 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    J. J. Sakurai, Theory of strong interactions, Annals Phys.11, 1 (1960)

    1960

  32. [32]

    L. V . Delacretaz, Y .-H. Du, U. Mehta, and D. T. Son, Nonlin- ear bosonization of Fermi surfaces: The method of coadjoint orbits, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 033131 (2022), arXiv:2203.05004 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  33. [33]

    Li and W

    J. Li and W. Ke, Transport coefficients of dense nucleon mat- ter at low temperature, Phys. Rev. C111, 044904 (2025), arXiv:2412.20454 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    J. D. Walecka, A Theory of highly condensed matter, Annals Phys.83, 491 (1974)

    1974

  35. [35]

    S. R. de Groot, W. A. van Leeuwen, and C. G. van Weert,Rel- ativistic Kinetic Theory: Principles and Applications(North- Holland, Amsterdam, 1980)

    1980

  36. [36]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Fluid Mechanics, 2nd ed., Course of Theoretical Physics, V ol. 6 (Butterworth– Heinemann, 1987)

    1987

  37. [37]

    R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson,Matrix Analysis(Cambridge University Press, 1985)

    1985

  38. [38]

    Dusling and T

    K. Dusling and T. Sch ¨afer, Bulk viscosity and conformal sym- metry breaking in the dilute Fermi gas near unitarity, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 120603 (2013), arXiv:1305.4688 [cond-mat.quant- gas]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  39. [39]

    Sommerfeld, Zur elektronentheorie der metalle auf grund der fermischen statistik, Zeitschrift f¨ur Physik47, 1 (1928)

    A. Sommerfeld, Zur elektronentheorie der metalle auf grund der fermischen statistik, Zeitschrift f¨ur Physik47, 1 (1928)

    1928

  40. [40]

    Sykes and G

    J. Sykes and G. Brooker, The transport coefficients of a fermi liquid, Annals of Physics56, 1 (1970)

    1970

  41. [41]

    E. M. Lifshitz and L. P. Pitaevskii,Physical Kinetics, Course of Theoretical Physics, V ol. 10 (Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1981)

    1981

  42. [42]

    G. A. Brooker and J. Sykes, Transport properties of a fermi liquid, Phys. Rev. Lett.21, 279 (1968)

    1968

  43. [43]

    J. I. Kapusta and C. Gale,Finite-Temperature Field Theory: Principles and Applications, 2nd ed., Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2006)

    2006

  44. [44]

    J. Li, T. Guo, J. Zhao, and L. He, Do we need dense matter equation of state in curved spacetime for neutron stars?, Phys. Rev. D106, 083021 (2022), arXiv:2206.02106 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    Nishimura, M

    H. Nishimura, M. C. Ogilvie, and K. Pangeni, Liquid-Gas Phase Transitions andCKSymmetry in Quantum Field Theo- ries, Phys. Rev. D95, 076003 (2017), arXiv:1612.09575 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  46. [46]

    Haensch, F

    M. Haensch, F. Rennecke, and L. von Smekal, Medium induced mixing, spatial modulations, and critical modes in QCD, Phys. Rev. D110, 036018 (2024), arXiv:2308.16244 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  47. [47]

    Liao and V

    J. Liao and V . Koch, On the Fluidity and Super-Criticality of the QCD matter at RHIC, Phys. Rev. C81, 014902 (2010), arXiv:0909.3105 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  48. [48]

    L. Du, A. Sorensen, and M. Stephanov, The QCD phase dia- gram and Beam Energy Scan physics: A theory overview, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E33, 2430008 (2024), arXiv:2402.10183 [nucl- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  49. [49]

    B. C. Barrois, Superconducting Quark Matter, Nucl. Phys. B 129, 390 (1977). 8

    1977

  50. [50]

    D. B. Kaplan, M. J. Savage, and M. B. Wise, Nucleon - nucleon scattering from effective field theory, Nucl. Phys. B478, 629 (1996), arXiv:nucl-th/9605002

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  51. [51]

    A. B. Larionov and L. von Smekal, Effects of chiral symme- try restoration on meson and dilepton production in relativis- tic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C105, 034914 (2022), arXiv:2109.03556 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    J. A. Fotakis, E. Moln ´ar, H. Niemi, C. Greiner, and D. H. Rischke, Multicomponent relativistic dissipative fluid dynam- ics from the Boltzmann equation, Phys. Rev. D106, 036009 (2022), arXiv:2203.11549 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  53. [53]

    Hu and S

    J. Hu and S. Shi, Multicomponent second-order dissipative rel- ativistic hydrodynamics with binary reactive collisions, Phys. Rev. D106, 014007 (2022), arXiv:2204.10100 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  54. [54]

    P. Wen, J. W. Holt, and M. Li, Generative Modeling of Nucleon- Nucleon Interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 252501 (2024), arXiv:2306.13007 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    J. Jia, G. Giacalone, B. Bally, J. D. Brandenburg, U. Heinz, S. Huang, D. Lee, Y .-J. Lee, W. Li, C. Loizides,et al., Imaging the initial condition of heavy-ion collisions and nuclear struc- ture across the nuclide chart, Nucl. Sci. Tech.35, 220 (2024), arXiv:2209.11042 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    Brandstetter, P

    S. Brandstetter, P. Lunt, C. Heintze, G. Giacalone, L. H. Heyen, M. Gałka, K. Subramanian, M. Holten, P. M. Preiss, S. Flo- erchinger, and S. Jochim, Emergent interaction-driven ellip- tic flow of few fermionic atoms, Nature Phys.21, 52 (2025), arXiv:2308.09699 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Ke and Y

    W. Ke and Y . Yin, Does a Quark-Gluon Plasma Feature an Ex- tended Hydrodynamic Regime?, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 212303 (2023), arXiv:2208.01046 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  58. [58]

    Ke and Y

    W. Ke and Y . Yin, Non-hydrodynamic response in QCD-like plasma, J. High Energy Phys.05, 171, arXiv:2312.08062 [nucl- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  59. [59]

    Berges, S

    J. Berges, S. Brandstetter, J. Brewer, G. Bruun, T. Enss, S. Floerchinger, K. Fujii, M. Gałka, G. Giacalone, Q. Guan, et al., Few is different: deciphering many-body dynamics in mesoscopic quantum gases (2025) arXiv:2509.05049 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025