Blackforest
Jul11-04, 03:25 PM
Trying to understand how far I can go with my representation of the vacuum (spontaneous random polarization forces -see my webpage- (srpf) acting on the space time, alias geometric structure), I consider:
1°) each point immerged in it as if it was a system with two possible states: a stabile one (state 2) with energy 0 and a set of instable (state 1) one with energy 0 too (because we stay in vacuum);
2°) that a “couplage” exists between these two states because of the energetic perturbation due to the srpf i.e. W where Delta t = (1/T) is the duration of the perturbation,
and try to apply a way of thinking made by Lamb and Retherford giving the probability to find this system (each point in vacuum) in a given state depending of the energy W21.
Each instable state is associated to an energy given by a complex number:
E’1 = - i. (h/4pi). T (i˛ + 1 = 0)
And the « couplage » gives two new possible values. So that the answer depends of the sign of W - (h/8pi). T. But not only, it depends of the relation of uncertainty of Heisenberg:
W. Delta t > (h/4pi)
That is here:
W > (h/4pi). T > (h/8pi). T
Leading to the case:
W - (h/8pi). T > 0
And we get two different values with the same imaginary part (= same duration) and the same real part but once with a positive and once with a negative energy.
E’1 = ± [|W|˛ - (h/8pi)˛. (T)˛] ^1/2 - i. (h/4pi). T
Question 01: Is this way of thinking correctly describing the birth (creation) of a real particle with its associated real anti-particle in vacuum? Or of a virtual particle with its associated virtual anti-particle in vacuum?
Question 02: If yes (it describes a creation) which kind of particles (photon, graviton,…)
Question 03: What is the actual official opinion about this question? I mean can we really observe such spontaneous creation in vacuum during nuclear collisions and reactions?
Thanks for illuminating my obscurity.
1°) each point immerged in it as if it was a system with two possible states: a stabile one (state 2) with energy 0 and a set of instable (state 1) one with energy 0 too (because we stay in vacuum);
2°) that a “couplage” exists between these two states because of the energetic perturbation due to the srpf i.e. W where Delta t = (1/T) is the duration of the perturbation,
and try to apply a way of thinking made by Lamb and Retherford giving the probability to find this system (each point in vacuum) in a given state depending of the energy W21.
Each instable state is associated to an energy given by a complex number:
E’1 = - i. (h/4pi). T (i˛ + 1 = 0)
And the « couplage » gives two new possible values. So that the answer depends of the sign of W - (h/8pi). T. But not only, it depends of the relation of uncertainty of Heisenberg:
W. Delta t > (h/4pi)
That is here:
W > (h/4pi). T > (h/8pi). T
Leading to the case:
W - (h/8pi). T > 0
And we get two different values with the same imaginary part (= same duration) and the same real part but once with a positive and once with a negative energy.
E’1 = ± [|W|˛ - (h/8pi)˛. (T)˛] ^1/2 - i. (h/4pi). T
Question 01: Is this way of thinking correctly describing the birth (creation) of a real particle with its associated real anti-particle in vacuum? Or of a virtual particle with its associated virtual anti-particle in vacuum?
Question 02: If yes (it describes a creation) which kind of particles (photon, graviton,…)
Question 03: What is the actual official opinion about this question? I mean can we really observe such spontaneous creation in vacuum during nuclear collisions and reactions?
Thanks for illuminating my obscurity.