Some questions regarding quantum fluctuations

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of quantum fluctuations, exploring their properties, causes, and implications within quantum physics. Participants raise questions regarding whether these fluctuations represent creation from nothing, their physical causes, and their relationship to concepts like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and quantum phase transitions.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that quantum fluctuations are properties of the quantum vacuum rather than events, comparing them to bubbles in a shaken soda can.
  • Another participant argues that quantum fluctuations exemplify the irreducible randomness of quantum systems, emphasizing that outcomes are probabilistic rather than deterministic.
  • A third participant introduces the concept of quantum phase transitions, explaining how quantum fluctuations can occur at zero temperature and influence system behavior even at finite temperatures.
  • Further discussion includes the relationship between quantum fluctuations and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, with mentions of virtual particles and their implications for renormalization and vacuum polarization.
  • One participant notes that the quantum vacuum is not "nothing" and has its own properties, which may influence the creation of particles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether quantum fluctuations can be considered as creation from nothing, and there is no consensus on the physical causes of these fluctuations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the philosophical implications of particle creation and the nature of the quantum vacuum.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the dependence on interpretations of quantum mechanics, the unresolved nature of certain mathematical steps, and the varying definitions of concepts like "nothing" and "vacuum." The discussion also touches on complex theoretical frameworks that may not be universally accepted.

momo666
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
First of all, would I be correct in using the following explanation?
Quantum fluctuations are not actually events but properties of the quantum vacuum, they don't have a physical cause but they are not an example of creation ex nihilo, they are created from other things.
I think of it like a shaking of a soda can. The quantum vacuum is the soda and the fluctuations are the bubbles that appear when you shake the can.

In case I have not been clear let me line up my questions:
1) Are quantum fluctuations an example of creation out of nothing (not anything) ? I am correct in saying that there is no such a thing in physics?
2) Do quantum fluctuations have a physical cause?
3) What exactly makes the quantum vacuum fluctuate?
4) What are quantum fluctuations "made of" ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Quantum physics is a tool that describes the outcomes of experiments to the best possible precision. This is all that quantum physics is really prepared to do.

That being said:
Quantum fluctuations are examples of the irreducible randomness of quantum systems, and the fact that quantum mechanics ultimately gives probabilities for measurement outcomes rather than deterministic trajectories like in Newtonian physics. As one example of irreducible randomness, the Heisenberg principle rules out the possibility of a particle having both a well-defined position and momentum. Quantum mechanics can tell you what the position and momentum probability distributions will be for both position and momentum, but any measurement outcome is random, though with likelihoods obeying those distributions.
The uncertainty principle also sets a fundamental limit on the predictability of future behavior of a system. Since at any given time, one can't know both the position and momentum of a particle to unlimited precision, the future behavior as dictated by its present state of position and momentum is also undetermined.

In quantum theory, quantum fluctuations don't have a cause in the same sense that a planet's curved trajectory is caused by the presence of its local star. Quantum fluctuations are part of quantum theory itself. Particles simply don't have well defined trajectories, and are instead described by probability distributions where the actual measurement outcomes may "fluctuate" about the average predicted value.

As with the quantum vacuum, the quantum state of anything when not acted on by outside sources evolves over time in a predictable way (as can be calculated by the Schrödinger equation or relativistic versions of it). Even so, these quantum states only give probabilities of outcomes. The outcomes themselves are random, though obey the distributions predicted by theory. Whether or not pairs of particles are created from nothing is a point of philosophical debate depending on interpretation, and is outside of science's ability to resolve (i.e., by experiment). The potential for particle creation is determined by the state of the vacuum, and the equation describing the total energy of the field (which would be a minimum number in a vacuum). Since one can predict the likelihood of particles being created in a given scenario, there is at least some causal determination in these particles' creation.

Long story short, the quantum vacuum is not nothing. It's its own thing with its own properties.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: LunaFly, bhobba and momo666
An example of quantum fluctuations occurs in systems which undergo a quantum phase transition. This transition is quite unlike a classical phase transition in that it occurs at zero temperature because of quantums induced by varying some parameter. There may not be any phase transition at all at finite temperature.

The canonical example is the quantum Ising model. In one dimension, this is basically an Ising model with spins in the z direction but with a transverse field in the x direction. The quantum fluctuations occur because the transverse field term is proportional to the \sigma^x Pauli matrix and this does not commute with \sigma^z which is the way the system wants to order at zero field. Therefore at zero temperature you will start with an ordered phase with zero field and then reach a critical point where the order is destroyed by the quantum fluctuations and the system becomes a paramagnet.

There is no ordered state at finite temperature, but if you are within a small distance of the critical coupling compared to the temperature of the system you will see that because of the critical point the quantum fluctuations will indeed persist at finite temperature and will compete with thermal fluctuations on an equal timescale. So the system still "feels" the presence of the quantum critical point even at finite temperature, and oddly enough, below the lattice energy scale, the imprint of this critical point grows with temperature because the quantum timescale becomes shorter.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: momo666 and bhobba
So to summarize an answer to the original question, I think the main idea (in a pragmatic sense) is that quantum fluctuations are consequences of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The virtual particles come from the energy time uncertainty relation (which dictates a bound on their lifetime) and also enter the idea of renormalization, most concretely in the idea of vacuum polarization since that renormalizes the electric charge so that the coupling actually flows under RG. Quantum fluctuations also appear in quantum phase transitions which happen at T=0 but also influence behavior at higher T.

A few others things are that virtual particles can in fact go on shell which is represented in the many particle spectrum which begins at M \geq 2m and an imaginary part of matrix amplitudes.

Ghosts are just a tool to get rid of the gauge dependent parts of scattering amplitudes. They get rid of the gauge dependent prefactor in the Feynman path integral since they have fermion if statistics and give a determinant. They violate the spin statistic theorem so they are definitely not real. They will not appear in final results and you technically don't need them if you gauge fix in axial gauge for example. The problem with that gauge is that it not Lorentz invariant, and if you want Lorentz invariance then you need to add ghosts.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: momo666
A number of posts that basically amount to a massive thread hijack have been removed. All members are reminded that:
1) Popular presentations and videos are not accepted sources under the Physics Forums rules.
2) Do not hesitate to report posts that look problemtic so that we mentors can get involved sooner rather than later. Handling a report is no big deal; cleaning up a thread that has festered unreported for days can be a lot of work.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K