Particle or Virtual Particle: What's the Difference?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the distinction between particles and virtual particles, emphasizing that virtual particles are not directly observed in experiments but influence outcomes. They are depicted in Feynman diagrams as transient entities created and annihilated during interactions, serving as mathematical tools in quantum field theory (QFT) calculations. The conversation also touches on the concept of retrocausality, noting that while virtual particles can be described as such, they do not correspond to physically well-defined entities and do not violate causality in QFT.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Feynman diagrams
  • Familiarity with quantum field theory (QFT)
  • Knowledge of perturbation theory
  • Basic grasp of particle physics concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the role of Feynman diagrams in particle interactions
  • Study quantum field theory (QFT) in detail
  • Explore perturbation theory applications in QFT
  • Investigate the implications of retrocausality in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the nuances of particle physics and quantum field theory.

Trip2
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
what is the differace between a particle and a virtual particle?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A virtual particle is a particle which is not observed in an experiment, but influences the outcome.

In a Feynman diagram, these are particles that are created during an event, but are destroyed again before a measurement is taken. They are called "virtual", then, because they are never actually seen directly. They only serve to influence the final result, and to say they actually ever existed during the experiment is a question you can't answer.
 
A virtual particle is just a useful mathematical step in calculating QFT in perturbation theory. A VP never exists as a physical particle, which is why SP is a suitable candidate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's not true, because there are then also processes in which SP would be the real particle. The properties of SP as a real particle are not so good. That's why the squared matrix element

|<JMC|WH>|^2

has been declining lately.
 
Last edited:
To the OP: the last two contributions are jokes where the smiley was forgotten :cool:
 
:blushing:I am so conservative, I did not know how to make smileys, but now see its simple.:smile: Anyway the part of my previous post up to SP was serious.:cool:
 
so virtual particles are retrocausal?
 
Trip2 said:
so virtual particles are retrocausal?

They can formally be "retrocausal", but as they don't correspond to anything physically well-defined, it's a bit strange to say that. They are part of a quantum field calculation. In that sense, you could almost ask whether the square root of two is retrocausal.
On the other hand, the line between "almost real virtual particles" and real particles is also thin. But these are not retrocausal.
 
  • #10
so why is it said that they are causality violaters?
 
  • #11
Who says they violate causality?
 
  • #12
Virtual particles are not bound by the relation

E^2 = p^2 + m^2.

This is not a problem however, as spacelike separated field operators have a commutator of zero, and therefore causality is not violated in quantum field theory.
 
  • #13
virtual particles are just another of the many ways in which physicists indicate that they do not know what is actually happening.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K