12 Corr  (DEG) Correlation p$_{t}$ greater 1.1 GeV/c and less 4.0 GeV/c Au Au 200 GeV Centrality B 0.0 to 2.9 One particle greater than 3.0 GeV/c  The other particle greater than 1.1 GeV/c  Correlated parton p$_{t}$ in bubble  Random parton p$_{t}$ in bubble 0.0   | |   0.3 0.3   | |   0.6 0.6   | |   0.9 0.9   | |   1.2 1.2   | |   1.5 FIG. 8: The Δ φ CI correlation for the 0-5% centrality bin requiring one trigger particle p t above 3 GeV/c and another particle p t above 1.1 GeV/c. We compare the two correlations generated by the correlated and the random cases. We compare the Δ φ correlation for the two cases (solid is correlated and open is random) for each of the five Δ η bins which cover the entire Δ η range (0.0 to 1.5). The vertical correlation scale is not offset and is correct for the largest Δ η bin, 1.2 < Δ η < 1.5, which is the lowest bin on the figure. As one proceeds upwards to the next Δ η bin the correlation is offset by +0.05. This is added to the correlation of each subsequent Δ η bin. The smallest Δ η bin on top of Fig. 8 has a +0.2 offset. A solid straight horizontal line shows the offset for each Δ η bin. Each solid straight horizontal line is at 1.0 in correlation strength. We see that the away side correlation for Δ φ greater than about 120 ◦ is larger for the random case. The correlation formed by the ridge particles is generated almost entirely by particles emitted by the same bubble. We have shown in all our pub- lications that the same side correlation signals are almost entirely formed by particles coming from the same bubble. Thus we can predict the shape and the yield of the ridge for the above p t trigger selec- tion and lower cut, by plotting only the correlation coming from pairs of particles that are emitted by the same bubble (see Fig. 13). In Ref.[31] it was assumed that the ridge yield was flat across the acceptance while in Fig. 13 we see that this is not the case. Therefore our ridge yield is approximately 35% larger than estimated in Ref.[31]. Finally we can plot the jet yield that we had put into our Monte Carlo. We used HIJING[8] to determine the number of expected jets, and then reduced the number of jets by 80%. This assumes that only the parton interactions on or near the surface that form hadrons at kinetic freezeout are not quenched away and thus enter the detector. This 80% reduction is consistent with single π 0 suppression observed in Ref.[16]. This jet yield is plotted in Fig. 14 where we subtracted contributions from the bubbles and the background particles from Fig. 11.