Help with vacuums and particles

  • Thread starter Thread starter jhe1984
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particles
jhe1984
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
Can ya'll help me with this one:

"

Vacuums (in space) are regions of space absent of [this is where I am uncertain] elements(?) but which contain subatomic particles like leptons, baryons, etc(?){how can this be right?} as well as photons and anti-photons(?).

"

Please help clarify what exists in a vacuum and what doesn't. I know that photons and anti-photons must exist because light can travel through a vacuum, but beyond that, I am lost.

Grazie
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, we have debated this many times here and i suggest you do a search for "vacuum fluctuations" on this forum or consult my journal or the "elementary particles presented" thread.

Meanwhile i suggest you look at following NASA-site and scroll down to the text on http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/possible.html#vac . It gives a good introduction on what is going on. feel free to ask more questions if something is not clear

Enjoy

regards
marlon

ps : there is no anti-photon, a photon is its own anti-particle. QM is strange, isn't it :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
...tangent question while reading bout vacuums...

Are these unrelated statements correct?

Leptons and neutrinos both exert gravitational force.

Photons do not exert gravitational force.

Photons cannot become neutrinos, leptons, baryons, or fermions.

Thanks!.
 
jhe1984 said:
...tangent question while reading bout vacuums...
Are these unrelated statements correct?
Leptons and neutrinos both exert gravitational force.
YES they do

Photons do not exert gravitational force.
yes they do exert gravitational force. energy is mass remember ?

Photons cannot become neutrinos, leptons, baryons, or fermions.
Thanks!.
photons when coupled to the appropriate massive object (to obey to momentum conservation) will be able to take part in interactions (weak interaction, hadronization, excitations,...) that emit hadrons and leptons. Fermions are particles with odd spin that can either be a member of the hadron (quarks, neutron,...) or the lepton (eg electron) family. Neutrino's are member of the lepton family.

marlon
 
Last edited:
Oh!

So would this statement be correct then:

"

A photon has all its energy in the form of light and none in mass. However, photons may take part in interactions (as mentioned above) which may result in a larger particle, which must have some of its energy in the form of mass.

"

Beyond that, what branch of science is looking into how these "fundamental particles" were created, or came to be?
 
jhe1984 said:
Oh!
So would this statement be correct then:
"
A photon has all its energy in the form of light and none in mass. However, photons may take part in interactions (as mentioned above) which may result in a larger particle, which must have some of its energy in the form of mass.
A photon indeed has no restmass and for that reason, it always moves at the speed of light.

Photons indeed take part into interactions between MATTER particles.

Beyond that, what branch of science is looking into how these "fundamental particles" were created, or came to be?
high energy physics, Quantum Field Theory (ie the theoretical formalism). Look at the "elementary particles presented" thread here



err dare i say string theory ?


regards
marlon
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top