Why forces are modeled as virtual particles in quantum mechanics?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Forces in quantum mechanics are modeled as virtual particles that facilitate interactions between real particles. This concept is rooted in quantum field theory, where path integrals are utilized to calculate amplitudes by summing over intermediate states, represented by virtual particles. The interaction Hamiltonian, such as H_i = q \bar\psi \gamma^\mu A_\mu \psi, illustrates the electromagnetic coupling between electrons and photons. The transition amplitude calculation involves the time evolution operator U(t, 0) and results in Feynman diagrams that depict propagators and interactions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Quantum field theory fundamentals
  • Path integral formulation of quantum mechanics
  • Understanding of Hamiltonians and time evolution operators
  • Feynman diagrams and perturbation theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the path integral formulation in detail
  • Learn about Feynman diagrams and their applications in quantum field theory
  • Explore the interaction picture in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the role of propagators in particle interactions
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics students, and researchers interested in quantum field theory and the mathematical modeling of particle interactions.

aachenmann
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Why forces are modeled as virtual particles in quantum mechanics and how virtual particles can transmit force between two real particles?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Amplitudes in quantum field theory / quantum mechanics are usually calculated via path integrals, which is a sum over possible "paths" a system might take through configuration space. In ordinary quantum mechanics, the path integral is a sum over trajectories the particle can have, hence the name, but these trajectories need not look physical, i.e, they need not conserve energy/momentum/whatever and they look more like random walks. But this is ok because they are intermediate states, and aren't actually observed.

So in quantum field theory, the path integral can similarly be written as a sum over intermediate states, and this is where virtual particles come in.

While the above answer is more insightful, I'll whet your appetite with something less rigorous. Let's say you have a Hamiltonian [tex]H_0[/tex] of which free particles are eigenstates, and you turn on an interaction of the form [tex]H_i = q \bar\psi \gamma^\mu A_\mu \psi[/tex], which is an electromagnetic coupling between say, an electron and a photon. Now, originally your time evolution operator was [tex]U(t, 0) = e^{-i H t}[/tex], but now there is an interaction term, so we get [tex]U(t,0) \approx T \exp\left[ - i \int\!dt\, ( H_0 + q \bar \psi \gamma^\mu A_\mu \psi ) \right][/tex] (I write it in this way because operators at different times no longer commute, so you have to put time ordering [tex]T[/tex] in.)

For arguments sake, then, let's compute the transition amplitude for a state of two electrons to a state with two electrons. You'll essentially want to calculate [tex]\left\langle e,e | U(t, 0) | e,e \right\rangle[/tex]. Now when you expand that exponential, you'll get terms with one or more interaction terms in it, and the terms in your expansion can be represented as Feynman diagrams. To finish the calculation, you "contract" each term which means that you evaluate the expectation value perturbatively, and pairwise contractions of operators give you "propagators" which are represented by internal particles propagating, and "vertices" which are represented by interactions between particles.

I've waved my hands a bit here, and what I've written down isn't entirely correct (Hell, I don't even think my interaction term is correct... where did covariance go? heh heh), but I hope you'll get the idea. I normally deal with path integrals and not in the "interaction picture" as this is called, so things are done more cleanly and more efficiently.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K