On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 7:55:15 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 8:34:00 AM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 1:12:09 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:32:23 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Phil, how about your considered opinion of his analysis of virtual >>>> particles? As Bruce indicated, some scientists are able to put aside their >>>> religious beliefs in analyzing physical theories. TIA, AG >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I suppose if particles aren't real in one's scheme of things, then any >>> kind of temporary particles aren't either. >>> >>> https://www.mat.univie.ac.at/~neum/physfaq/therm/ >>> >>> For microscopic experiments, the thermal interpretation claims that >>> particles (photons, electrons, alpha particles, etc.) are fiction, >>> simplifications appropriate under special circumstances only. *In >>> reality one has instead beams (states of the electron field, an effective >>> alpha particle field, etc., concentrated along a small neighborhood of a >>> mathematical curve) with approximately known properties (charge densities, >>> spin densities, energy densities, etc.) *If one places a detector into >>> the path of a beam one measures some of these densities - accurately if the >>> densities are high, erratically and inaccurately when they are very low. >>> >>> It is a historical accident that one continues to use the name particle >>> in the many microscopic situations where it is grossly inappropriate to >>> think of it in terms of a tiny bullet moving through space. If one >>> restricts the use of the particle concept to situations where it is >>> appropriate, or if one does not think of particles as ''objects'' - in both >>> cases all mystery is gone, and the foundations become fully rational and >>> intelligible. >>> >>> >>> >>> I doubt anyone is going to find his "physics" useful for anything. >>> >>> *He should just stick to doing numerical analysis and scientific >>> computing, an important area in applied mathematics and computer science.* >>> >>> @philipthrift >>> >> >> Generally, if we want to be absolutely strict, particles are >> idealizations which don't exist, since one cannot contain finite mass or >> energy in zero volume. However, the point you seem to be missing is that >> virtual particles are not like the idealizations we're familiar with. They >> are off-shell, which I think means they don't obey the total energy formula >> of SR. AG >> > > > > One can adopt any catechism/denomination of physics one wants to. It's a > free country. > > But this seems to be the mainstream view: > > from Particle Data Group / Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory > > https://particleadventure.org/virtual.html > > *Virtual particles* > > Particles decay via force carrier particles. But in some cases a particle > may decay via a force-carrier particle with more mass then the initial > particle. The intermediate particle is immediately transformed into > lower-mass particles. These short-lived high-mass force-carrier particles > seem to violate the laws of conservation of energy and mass -- their mass > just can't come out of nowhere! > > > A result of the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle is that these high-mass > particles may come into being if they are incredibly short-lived. In a > sense, they escape reality's notice. Such particles are called virtual > particles. > > Virtual particles do not violate the conservation of energy. The kinetic > energy plus mass of the initial decaying particle and the final decay > products is equal. The virtual particles exist for such a short time that > they can never be observed. > > Most particle processes are mediated by virtual-carrier particles. > Examples include neutron beta decay, the production of charm particles, and > the decay of an eta-c particle, all of which we will explore in depth soon. > > @philipthrift >
What the mainstream is affirming is that if you can't observe a violation of conservation of energy, it's OK to assume it's being violated; another bedrock principle! Where did this principle come from? The UP? Really? AG -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e76b9af9-bc34-44f8-be80-130b2f685e7f%40googlegroups.com.
