3 ms·
Protons are non-perturbative, indeed, but this does not mean that there are no virtual particles exchanged inside a proton. It seems like your comment implies t
by zakk 4y ago
Protons are non-perturbative, indeed, but this does not mean that there are no virtual particles exchanged inside a proton. It seems like your comment implies that, sorry if I misunderstood.
On the contrary, this means that there are too many virtual particles (gluons) being exchanged inside a proton, so many that perturbation theory is not applicable.
- AnimalMuppet 4y agoAre gluons virtual? (Or are they virtual inside a proton?)
- frutiger 4y agoGluons are real.
- blueprint 4y agoVirtual particles are also "real", and if you don't believe me, at least you have to admit that virtual photons alone lead to real energy (e.g. Casimir effect) - and it has also been stated that gluons within protons can be interpreted as "virtual"... so I'm pretty sure your comment is wrong. I'd downvote you if I could since that seems to be what the cool kids here are doing but I used up all my karma telling the truth.
- hilbert42 4y ago"Virtual particles are also "real"." No doubt, and Casimir is probably sufficient evidence, but it seems to me a lot of confusion would be saved if we changed the name. To what I don't know - perhaps something like say quantum energy disturbance but more eloquent or descriptive.
- blueprint 4y ago100%. "Possible" particle? :)
- cwillu 4y agoYour question is can be posed as “is there a well-behaved resonance of the gluon field in a proton, that lasts long enough for it to be identified”. It's kinda like identifying a bubble in a pot of cold water vs a pot just starting to boil vs a rolling boil.
- hither_shores 4y agoVirtual particles are part of an indexing scheme for perturbation series - saying that you leave the perturbative regime when you have "too many" of them is like saying that crystalline solids melt when they have too many normal modes.
- xigency 4y agoFinally an analogy where I understand neither comparison :)