![]() ![]() Analogy time (and a very close one mathematically) think about a child’s swing. In the end, quantum field theory is not the place to explain what actually happens in the very centre of an individual particle interaction. A virtual particle, generally, is a disturbance in a field that will never be found on its own, but instead is something that is caused by the presence of other particles, often of other fields. This description, while helpful, is not necessary to understand particle interactions. ![]() The secondary aim of this paper is to argue that even the philosophical considerations of virtual particles overestimate their role in that these entities are merely pictorial descriptions of a mathematical approximation method. Furthermore, to ensure robust conclusions could be drawn, the data analysis included a re-analysis of existing DEM data. These considerations motivated the repeat scans noted in Table 1. In this article, I will attempt to systematise the major arguments and argue that no pro-argument is ultimately satisfactory, and that only one contra-argument-that of superposition-is sufficient to deny the realistic interpretation of virtual particles. Using DEM, Shire (2014) showed that repeatable CSD data require 800 particles for a Cu of 1♵. In the last 20 years, philosophers of physics have put forth several arguments for and against an interpretation of virtual particles as being like ordinary objects in space and time. A virtual particle is an elementary particle in a quantum field theory that serves to symbolise the interaction of its counterparts, the so called real particles. It means that using the calculational tool of virtual particles in the vacuum allows us to make quantitative predictions about how matter and energy behave as they pass through empty space, and. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |