Why Can't Detected Particles Be Virtual?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of virtual particles versus real particles, particularly focusing on the implications of detecting a particle and how that relates to its classification as virtual or real. Participants explore theoretical concepts, definitions, and interpretations within quantum field theory.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference a statement from Wikipedia suggesting that if a particle is detected, it cannot be considered virtual due to the prolonged consequences of its existence.
  • One participant explains that virtual particles are defined as transient entities that do not get measured, using the example of electrons exchanging a photon that is never detected.
  • Another participant discusses the subtlety in distinguishing virtual from real particles, noting that both are described by the same equations in physics, but real particles are detectable excitations of quantum fields.
  • Some participants argue about the concept of virtual particles appearing in pairs that cancel each other, with one participant challenging this perspective by citing specific interactions that do not involve pairs.
  • A participant introduces the concepts of off-shell and on-shell particles, explaining that virtual particles do not satisfy the mass-shell condition, which affects their propagation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and implications of virtual versus real particles, with no consensus reached on the best way to conceptualize these entities or the validity of the arguments presented.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions involve complex theoretical concepts that may depend on specific interpretations of quantum field theory and the definitions of particle states, which remain unresolved.

Bobhawke
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
On the wikipedia page about virtual particles it says:

"If a single particle is detected, then the consequences of its existence are prolonged to such a degree that it cannot be virtual."

Could someone explain to me why this is true, ie why is it that if we detect a particle it cannot be virtual?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bobhawke said:
On the wikipedia page about virtual particles it says:

"If a single particle is detected, then the consequences of its existence are prolonged to such a degree that it cannot be virtual."

Could someone explain to me why this is true, ie why is it that if we detect a particle it cannot be virtual?

As I understand it at least, virtual particles are, by definition, particles which pop in and back out of existence between classical states. You shoot two classical electrons at each other. They exchange a photon and their momenta are affected. We collect the electrons a short while later when they hit a detector.

But the photon never hits a detector. The photon is never measured. It was not something we "put into" the system, not was a it a by product. It's a ghost. In fact, the electrons didn't even exchange a single photon. All possible interactions between the two electrons occurred, weighted by their appropriate amplitudes.
 
Read a little further in the Wikipedia article and it also says:

There is not a definite line differentiating virtual particles from real particles — the equations of physics just describe particles (which includes both equally). The amplitude that a virtual particle exists interferes with the amplitude for its non-existence; whereas for a real particle the cases of existence and non-existence cease to be coherent with each other and do not interfere any more. In the quantum field theory view, "real particles" are viewed as being detectable excitations of underlying quantum fields. As such, virtual particles are also excitations of the underlying fields, but are detectable only as forces but not particles. They are "temporary" in the sense that they appear in calculations, but are not detected as single particles.

So your quoted statement while accurate is subtle and easy to misinterpret. In classical physics the expalantion makes no sense.

An alternative way to think about it is that virtual particles appear in pairs which cancel...if you are able to detect one of the pairs, it's already real and it's partner annihilated...an example is right outside the horizon of a black hole...one particle is absorbed and disappears and presto chango it's partner becomes real and emitted as a bit of energy...
 
Last edited:
Naty1 said:
An alternative way to think about it is that virtual particles appear in pairs which cancel...

I don't think that's a very good way to think about it. If an electron and a neutrino scatter through the exchange of a virtual W, there is no "pair".
 
You have to learn the meaning of off-shell and on-shell particles.A particle on the mass shell satisfies the relation p^2=m^2 where p and m are the momentum and the mass of the particle.The propagator of a particle is 1/(p^2-m^2) (the denominator at least).virtual particles are of-shell and that is why they don't propagate...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
6K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K