that's funny, I just thought about virtual particles. The 'Ask the Experts' site of the March SciAm issue has the question 'Do the virtual particles in quantum mechanics really exist?' with an answer by Gordon Kane, who says 'Virtual particles are indeed real'. It makes me think. I mean, in quantum mechanics, we don't even 'really' have particles to begin with. His following explanation makes quite clear what he means with his answer (that virtual contributions like self-energy corrections have been experimentally confirmed), but still. I wouldn't even say the lines in Feynman diagrams are 'really' particles. Anyway. What's your opinion?
here is the reference to SciAm. Interestingly it seems they have altered the original question for the print version. In the online version, the question is
If the QM wave function represents information we have about the system then virtual particles represent information as well, and that is not necessarily the same as "what is real".
"The LHC Game"
10 Comments -
Cute!
2:31 AM, February 21, 2007
now who said particle physics was difficult ?
a piece of pizza really !
at least now we know our public funds are well spent :)
3:30 AM, February 21, 2007
That was really fun. I'll have to show it to my 11 year old. Thanks for finding it!
Have a good day!
8:31 AM, February 21, 2007
DON'T! I REPEAT, DON'T PRESS THE RED BUTTON!
http://www.changar.com/archives/redbutton.html
8:31 AM, February 21, 2007
More flash from CERN
11:48 AM, February 21, 2007
Wow awesome!
Bee, got all the calibrations right, hit the button, and I think I may have just seen a new virtual particle
3:03 PM, February 21, 2007
Hi Anonymous,
now who said particle physics was difficult ?
Yeah, who said that?
Hey Quasar,
that's funny, I just thought about virtual particles. The 'Ask the Experts' site of the March SciAm issue has the question 'Do the virtual particles in quantum mechanics really exist?' with an answer by Gordon Kane, who says 'Virtual particles are indeed real'. It makes me think. I mean, in quantum mechanics, we don't even 'really' have particles to begin with. His following explanation makes quite clear what he means with his answer (that virtual contributions like self-energy corrections have been experimentally confirmed), but still. I wouldn't even say the lines in Feynman diagrams are 'really' particles. Anyway. What's your opinion?
Best,
B.
9:47 PM, February 21, 2007
here is the reference to SciAm. Interestingly it seems they have altered the original question for the print version. In the online version, the question is
Are virtual particles really constantly popping in and out of existence? Or are they merely a mathematical bookkeeping device for quantum mechanics?
10:16 PM, February 21, 2007
If the QM wave function represents information we have about the system then virtual particles represent information as well, and that is not necessarily the same as "what is real".
11:13 PM, February 21, 2007
Loved the party afterwards.
2:34 AM, February 22, 2007