B Can virtual particles have an imaginary mass?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of virtual particles potentially having imaginary mass, as suggested by a physicist. It raises questions about their movement and whether they can exceed the speed of light, given that they are not real entities. The Casimir effect is mentioned as a phenomenon associated with virtual particles, but it is argued that this effect can be explained without invoking virtual particles. Participants emphasize that "virtual particles" are merely mathematical constructs in quantum field theory and do not exist outside this framework. The thread concludes with a consensus that further exploration of the topic may not yield new insights.
Lunct
Messages
133
Reaction score
16
I was talking to a physicist who said to me that virtual particles can have a mass of a constant times by i ,as in the root of -1. I have been thinking about this more and it intrigues me. I have done some research into this and can't find further details.
If they have an imaginary mass does this mean their Lorentz factor can't be calculated? And if so, can they move faster than light?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Lunct said:
I have read that the casimir effect happens due to virtual particles, so then surely they must interact with something.

Casimir effect can be perfectly described without virtual particles. This has been discussed here multiple times, use "search" function. And also, again, I suggest reading links that I gave you. "Virtual particles" is just a name for a certain mathematical formulas that appear in perturbative quantum field theory. They don't exist outside the formalism.
 
  • Like
Likes Lunct
Lunct said:
I was talking to a physicist who said to me

You've been here long enough to know this is not an acceptable reference.

Lunct said:
I have read that

Nor is this.

We can spend a lifetime dealing with misheard and misunderstood comments from "I know a guy who knows a guy". But that doesn't mean we should.
 
  • Like
Likes Lunct
Vanadium 50 said:
You've been here long enough to know this is not an acceptable reference.
Nor is this.

We can spend a lifetime dealing with misheard and misunderstood comments from "I know a guy who knows a guy". But that doesn't mean we should.
weirdoguy said:
Casimir effect can be perfectly described without virtual particles. This has been discussed here multiple times, use "search" function. And also, again, I suggest reading links that I gave you. "Virtual particles" is just a name for a certain mathematical formulas that appear in perturbative quantum field theory. They don't exist outside the formalism.
fair enough
 
Especially post #2 includes all that can be said to this subject, so I close this thread now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
5K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K