Could very low energy virtual particles last a very long time?

Click For Summary
Virtual particle-antiparticle pairs emerge from the vacuum due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which relates their existence time, Δt, to their energy, ΔE. The discussion raises questions about the lower limit of ΔE, suggesting that if the energy is extremely low, such as with neutrinos or photons, the pairs could potentially exist for extended periods. It is proposed that if the particles closely resemble "real" particles, they could have longer lifespans. However, pairs with significant rest mass tend to have shorter lifetimes due to their higher energy requirements. The implications of these concepts could lead to a deeper understanding of particle physics and vacuum fluctuations.
johne1618
Messages
368
Reaction score
0
By looking at layman's books on physics I have picked up the idea that "virtual" particle-antiparticle pairs continually pop out of the vacuum and then back into it again.

Apparently according to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle the time that the particle pair can exist, \Delta t, is given by

\Delta t \approx h / \Delta E

where \Delta E is the energy of the particle pair.

Is there any lower limit to \Delta E like the neutrino mass? Or could the particle pair be a pair of photons with any energy?

Could \Delta t be billions of years if the particle-pair has a very very low energy ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
\Delta E can be interpreted as the deviation from a proper particle energy&momentum. Particles which are very close to the properties of "real" particles can last a very long time. For pairs of particle+antiparticle with a rest mass, this quantity has to be quite large, which makes these pairs short-living.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K