Understanding Exchange of Particles as a Force

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter NanakiXIII
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forces Particles
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on understanding how the exchange of particles can be conceptualized as a force within the framework of quantum field theory. Participants explore theoretical implications, mathematical representations, and analogies related to this concept, with references to specific literature, such as Zee's "Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell." The conversation includes technical reasoning and conceptual clarifications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how a time-independent disturbance can lead to a propagating particle, citing Zee's analogy of jumping on a mattress as unclear.
  • Another participant suggests that the virtual particles may be considered as Fourier components of the deformation caused by the coupled particles, raising concerns about the implications of this view.
  • There is a discussion on the nature of virtual particles and their propagation, with one participant noting that the propagator describes the interaction between perturbations at different points in spacetime.
  • One participant expresses confusion about the concept of "mass shell" and how resonance at k = m arises from the sources being considered.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the propagator is a solution to an inhomogeneous differential equation, which relates to the behavior of fields under various conditions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of virtual particles and the mechanics of force generation through particle exchange. There is no consensus on the clarity of the analogies used or the implications of the mathematical descriptions provided.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the propagation of disturbances and the nature of virtual particles, as well as the mathematical complexities involved in the discussion of propagators and resonance.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum field theory, particularly in relation to particle interactions and the conceptual underpinnings of forces in a quantum context.

NanakiXIII
Messages
391
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to understand how exchange of particles can constitute a force. I read a chapter on this in Zee's Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell, which covers it very briefly, presumably only to make it plausible to the reader, but there is something I'm not content with.

To illustrate, he places two time-independent delta functions (J(x) = \delta(\vec{x} - \vec{x}_a) + \delta(\vec{x} - \vec{x}_b)) on a scalar field to represent two massive particles that couple to the field. Then he claims that these particles generate disturbances in the field, propagating from one particle to the other to constitute a force. But how can a time-independent disturbance create a propagating (i.e. time-dependent) particle? In his jumping-on-a-mattress analogy, this doesn't make sense.

He illustrates that placement of two delta functions causes a decrease in energy and that the energy is lowered even further if you put them closer together, but that doesn't clarify to me how any exchanged particles are generated or involved in the mechanism.

Another thing I don't understand is why any disturbance caused by one massive particle would propagate only towards the other particle. Shouldn't it propagate in all directions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your idea does restore the analogy, but I still don't quite understand. You speak of these virtual particles as simply being the Fourier components of the deformation in the mattress caused by the particles that are coupled to it. But it seems that would mean that the distribution in k is dictated by the coupled particles, while Zee speaks of a resonance at k = m, i.e. there is a prescription for at least one property of the distribution which comes from the field itself.

Also, if these virtual particles are in fact the Fourier components of this deformation, then they apparently "propagate" only in the spatial dimensions. Also, you're describing flat, monochromatic waves, which isn't exactly what came to mind when I read of an exchange of particles (i.e. localized things).
 
Well, I think this speak of "exchange of virtual particles" is often somewhat misleading.
Mathematically, the interaction is described by a propagator of the field. The propagator describes the reaction at some space time point to a perturbation at another point (creation and destruction of a "particle" due to coupling to a source). As it is a forced reaction, there is usually no restriction on the allowed frequency and wave vectors. That's what is meant with "virtual". Especially it describes also the static interaction where omega=0 and the superposition of k values gives rise to a Coulombic potential.

I was mainly interested in working out when and how this leads to attraction an when it leads to repulsion in the link I gave you. That's why I restricted to considering static (time independent) sources. However, it should be clear that the vibration of a matress will lead to a retarded interaction due to their finite speed of propagation as, e.g. the lattice vibrations do in a superconductor.
 
I think I understand then, I'm only a little disappointed. I was expecting something more ground-breaking.

One thing still remains unclear, though, which is the "mass shell" story. Since these particles aren't really localized particles, I guess I shouldn't actually think of it as mass. But I still don't see how the resonance at k = m would arise from just considering the two sources.
 
I don't have Zee here at the moment.
But it should be clear that a propagator or Greensfunction is a solution of an inhomogeneous differential equation. "On the mass shell", the differential equation also has a solution in the homogeneous case, that is in the limit of vanishing sources, namely the free field.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K