Do virtual particles exhibit wave/particle duality?
Do virtual particles exhibit wave/particle duality?
Jonathan Rivera
Other urls found in this thread:
peelified.com
aapt.scitation.org
symmetrymagazine.org
arxiv.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Robert Turner
Waves are horseshit.
The universe is made up of particles, including the virtual particles which come and go.
I described how this functions here:
peelified.com
Fairly sure it's correct.
Noah Hill
...
Luis Davis
Fick off back to the psych ward, Schizo.
Andrew Wood
Lucas Evans
Your theory models nothing, it is worthless and you are worthless.
Leo Hughes
>virtual particles
>exist in reality
Pick one.
Angel Turner
They do if the pair is separated.
David Myers
nope. Can't call something virtual and have it turn into real. Either real particles pop into existence somehow, and are therefore not virtual to begin with, or they don't.
Isaiah Mitchell
A) Shows a virtual particle pair being split by a black hole's event horizon, allowing one part of the pair to become real.
B) Shows a virtual particle pair annihilating once another after popping into existence for a brief time.
Blake Cruz
>*once another = one another
Thomas Ross
>A) Shows a fantasy particle pair being split by a black hole's event horizon, which has never been observed.
What stops the other fake particle from immediately also being destroyed by the black hole.
>B) Shows a not real particle pair not existing.
okay, why even bother mentioning it?
If you're going to talk about real things, stop calling them not real.
Jacob King
Thanks for correcting the incredibly minor typo you retard
Elijah Davis
Leaving aside the trolls, virtual particles are photons, electrons, protons, etc. no different from their "real" counterparts. So they share the same duality.
The particles _are_ real. Think of them as "temporary" particles. They exist and have measureable effects upon "permanent" particles. The only difference is that their combines masses times their duration must be less than or equal to Planck's constant. A proton-antiproton pair, being more massive than an electron-positron pair, self-annihilates much more quickly.
Hawking radiation reflects this. Energy is drained from the hole to promote one of a pair to "permanent" status. The lighter the particle, the more likely this is to happen; i.e. longer-lived particles last long enough to separate appreciable. One goes "down the drain" and the other escapes. So you get mostly lower-energy photons. Heavy particles, like muons, _could_ emerge, but only rarely.
Aaron Baker
>Shows a fantasy particle pair
What are gauge bosons?
>en.wikipedia.org
>black hole's event horizon, which has never been observed
Yes they have:
>en.wikipedia.org
>Shows a not real particle pair not existing
What is a gauge boson?
>[See above]
Noah Price
I tried explaining this to him, with diagrams.
Nolan Morales
OP here, When you said gauge bosons, this means gluons also act as waves sometimes?
Kevin Brooks
Gluons have no mass, right? So they would travel at C and are analogous in their function to photon exchange in the electromagnetic force.
Jayden Russell
Are you not going to reply to my post?
Ian Harris
Stop with this dual meme. Theres only fields, particles are made up so your brainlet mind can understand
Julian Morales
Don't call things virtual if they're not.
Also, either bring a point to the table or don't, but never link off-site and expect it to count for anything.
Charles Collins
>Whoa such an argument
Fuk off luddite