Confused about virtual particles

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the distinction between virtual and real particles, particularly focusing on the Z boson and its behavior in quantum field theory (QFT). Participants explore concepts related to particle lifetimes, decay processes, and the implications for how particles are represented in Feynman diagrams.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about how unstable particles like the Z boson can be considered "real" when they always appear as propagators in diagrams due to their short lifetimes.
  • It is noted that real particles are defined as appearing in the 'in' and 'out' states and being on-shell, while virtual particles are characterized by being off-shell and having both propagator vertices within the diagram.
  • One participant argues that since the Z boson decays quickly, it cannot be treated as a real particle that travels to infinity without decaying, raising questions about the definition of real particles.
  • Another participant suggests that the distinction between free and interacting particles is somewhat artificial, proposing that all particles could be considered virtual, with "real" particles being a convenient fiction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the definitions and distinctions between real and virtual particles, with multiple competing views presented throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the definitions of real and virtual particles, particularly regarding the assumptions made about particle behavior in QFT and the implications of their lifetimes on their classification.

kelly0303
Messages
573
Reaction score
33
Hello! I am a bit confused about the distinction between virtual and real particles. For example a Z boson, which has a very short lifetime, in all experiments will decay to some other stable particles (i.e. it is detected through its decay). This means that it will always appear as a propagator, and as far as I understand, the propagators are not, usually, on shell. The mass of the Z was obtained by looking for a resonance peak, and that is the quoted mass in PDG for example. But what does it mean for a Z particle to not be virtual i.e. do we even have a real Z? So my question is, especially for unstable particle, which always appear as propagators in some Feynman diagram, when is it real and when is it virtual? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kelly0303 said:
Hello! I am a bit confused about the distinction between virtual and real particles. For example a Z boson, which has a very short lifetime, in all experiments will decay to some other stable particles (i.e. it is detected through its decay). This means that it will always appear as a propagator, and as far as I understand, the propagators are not, usually, on shell. The mass of the Z was obtained by looking for a resonance peak, and that is the quoted mass in PDG for example. But what does it mean for a Z particle to not be virtual i.e. do we even have a real Z? So my question is, especially for unstable particle, which always appear as propagators in some Feynman diagram, when is it real and when is it virtual? Thank you!
Real particles appear in the 'in' and 'out' states, with only one vertex interacting with the rest of the diagram, and are on-shell. Virtual particles have both propagator vertices appearing inside the diagram and are off-shell.
If your Z boson survives long enough to leave the interaction volume then it would be deemed "real". But in actuality all particles are virtual, since interactions can occur anywhere.
 
Last edited:
Michael Price said:
Real particles appear in the 'in' and 'out' states, with only one vertex interacting with the rest of the diagram, and are on-shell. Virtual particles have both propagator vertices appearing inside the diagram and are off-shell.
Thank you for you reply! But this is what I am confused about. You can't have for a (say) Z boson a diagram where the Z boson comes 'in' or 'out' of the diagram. The basis for QFT (if I understood it well) is that at infinity the particles are free, then they interact, then they are free again at infinity. But a Z boson (or any unstable particle) can't come and go to infinity, as it decays very fast. So the Z boson can only appear as a propagator, otherwise it would mean that it traveled for a long time without decaying. So how does one define a real particle?
 
kelly0303 said:
Thank you for you reply! But this is what I am confused about. You can't have for a (say) Z boson a diagram where the Z boson comes 'in' or 'out' of the diagram. The basis for QFT (if I understood it well) is that at infinity the particles are free, then they interact, then they are free again at infinity. But a Z boson (or any unstable particle) can't come and go to infinity, as it decays very fast. So the Z boson can only appear as a propagator, otherwise it would mean that it traveled for a long time without decaying. So how does one define a real particle?
I half answered this in an update, but let me complete it here. The interaction volume is arbitary, and the distinction between free and interacting a bit artifical. (There is no such thing as a free particle - they are just convenient fictions.). In reality all particles are virtual, and it is the so-called "real" particles that don't exist, ironically.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K