How fast do subatomic particles move?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sainu@madearth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particles Speed
AI Thread Summary
Subatomic particles exhibit a range of speeds, from zero to nearly the speed of light, depending on their interactions. Massless particles, like photons, travel at the speed of light, while other particles, such as W and Z bosons, have mass and propagate at slower speeds due to the Higgs mechanism. The strong and electromagnetic forces, mediated by gluons and photons respectively, operate at light speed, while the weak interaction is slower due to the mass of its mediators. Gravity, theorized to be mediated by massless gravitons, is described by General Relativity, which states that gravitational effects propagate at light speed. Understanding these dynamics highlights the complexity and speed of subatomic interactions in the universe.
sainu@madearth
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
what might be the speed of subatomic particles ?
The problem arises from all the interactions of subatomic particles are known to be super fast . thus wish to know how fast they are .
Does time have anything to do with subatomic particles ? ( Relativity )
" am a science enthusiast just out of curiosity "
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Same as for anything else - any speed from zero all the way up to very close to the speed of light.
(The so-called "massless" particles such as the photon move at the speed of light).
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
It needs to also be said in QM speed only has an actual value for free particles.

Thanks
Bill
 
sainu@madearth said:
interactions of subatomic particles are known to be super fast
Just substantiating this (in a non-technical manner)- three out of the 4 fundamental interactions (4 most elementary forces in nature) are mediated by gauge bosons in the Standard Model whose existence has been confirmed (think of gauge bosons as elementary particles which "carry" forces around). The strong interaction (which binds the nucleus) and the electromagnetic interaction (which keeps the electrons and protons together in the atom [warning, this classical interpretation breaks down in quantum mechanics]) is mediated by the gluon and photon respectively, and both of these bosons are massless, which means that these forces propagate through space (vacuum, really) at the speed of light. The weak interaction is mediated by the W ± and Z bosons, and these particles were initially theorized to be massless as well, but are now considered to be massive after the discovery of the Higgs boson, which confirms the Higgs mechanism. Basically, the Higgs mechanism says that there is a Higgs field throughout the universe, and 3 of its components interact with the W and Z bosons, thereby giving them mass (if I remember correctly, the fourth real component of the field produces the Higgs boson). Hence, the weak nuclear interaction propagates through space at speeds less than the speed of light.

The fourth fundamental force, gravity, is mediated by the hypothetical "graviton" in the Standard Model (the graviton is theorized to be massless), but the existence of the graviton has so far not been confirmed. So we rely on General Relativity instead, which says that gravitational effects (waves) propagate through spacetime at the speed of light (the graviton's mass is predicted to be 0 [so it always moves at light speed] because it must match this result).

So now you know what super fast exactly means :wink:
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...

Similar threads

Back
Top