Go Back   Science Forums > Help and Advice > Questions and Answers
Comment
 
LinkBack Question Tools
Published by Restless Archer 12-14-2008
Not Ranked  0 score     
Hi.

What does it mean when one says "fundamental forces are 'carried' by particles" or "certain particles 'carry' fundamental forces"?

Consider the proton and the "orbiting" electron in a Hydrogen atom. Are these two constantly emitting particles that carry electro-magnetic attraction? And since it seems impossible for either to truly continuously emit the force-carriers, is the attraction intermittent? Can either ever exhaust its supply of these force-carriers?

As you can tell, there are many aspects of this concept I find baffling! I will be truly grateful for a clear explanation

Thanks.
A, Restless.
  #1 (permalink)  
By sanctus on 12-15-2008
Re: Force-carrying particles

Quote:
Are these two constantly emitting particles that carry electro-magnetic attraction?
Yrs they are emitting photons which are the carriers of the EM-force, but if I remember right these photons can also be virtual (i.e. have a mass). In one of D.J. Griffiths' books he points out that the force-carriers are more like messengers telling that the force is there and not something hitting the other particle (since in this latter scenario it would be hard to conceive an attractive force for force-carrying particles).

Quote:
And since it seems impossible for either to truly continuously emit the force-carriers, is the attraction intermittent?
Good question, I don't really know, but I think it may be a negligible effect.

Quote:
Can either ever exhaust its supply of these force-carriers?
Not that I am aware of, the EM-force doesn't seem to me to loose "strength"over time.

Hope this helps a bit.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
By CraigD on 12-15-2008
Lightbulb The Standard Model: bosons, fermions, actual and virtual particles

The idea of force-carrying particles is from the Standard Model of quantum particle physics. Force-carrying particles belong to one of the two main classifications of particles in the Standard Model, the bosons. The other major classification of particles is the fermions. In particle physics, everything is a particle – there are no physically real entities of any other kind.

A complete answer of this question requires a thorough overview of the Standard Model and its many theoretical underpinnings, and is beyond the scope of this short post (though something you really need to acquire to gain a satisfying understanding of this question and its answer). I’ll try, however, to give as straightforward an answer to the question as I can – though please keep in mind that I’m a mere Math undergrad turned professional computer programmer, and that my academic physics is so old (early 1980s) that it only skimmed over the then very new Standard Model - in short, I’m a self-taught enthusiast, not a trained expert, so can’t explain the formal nuts and bolts of these theories the way a real physicist could.

The proton and electron (which are both fermions) in a hydrogen atom are, in a sense, constantly emitting bosons of electromagnetic attraction. This boson is the photon, exactly the same particle as that which carries visible light and other electromagnetic radiation. However, the critical difference between photons of EM radiation and those that bind the H proton to its electron is that they are virtual, while those of EM radiation are actual. Neither particle can ever run out of them, because none are ever radiated. The photons exchanged – and the exchange must, on average, be “even”, or atoms would spontaneously violate the law of conservation of momentum – are emitted and received only by the particles who’s interaction they carry. None “escape the system” of the interaction between the two particles.

Virtual particles are one of many features of quantum physics that are informally described as “quantum weirdness”, a description meaning that what it describes doesn’t have sensible analogies in the large-scale world of our everyday experience on which we base our intuition of what is and isn’t normal. So the next part of the explanation will likely – and until you’ve gained a comfortable familiarity with quantum mechanics, should - sound weird.

Unlike the actual photons emitted by, say, a hot gas, we can’t say with even approximate certainty how many or what the precise energies (frequencies) of the virtual photons involved in the interaction between the proton and electron are. There are many valid possible solutions to the how-many-and-what-energies question for the interaction for any particular duration – a pair of ones with exactly equal and opposite momenta, or many with total momentum equal to the change of momentum of the proton and the electron - and, quantum weirdly, even though only one of these solutions could have happened, all can be assumed to have, and no experiment can possible be done to determine which one actually did. That’s the definition “virtual”, and it’s offensive to the intuitive grasp of reality we’ve formed over a lifetime of observing large scale phenomena. Nonetheless, there it is, in all its weird glory.
Reply With Quote
Comment

Bookmarks

Tags
force, force-carriers, fundamental forces, physics

Currently Active Users Viewing This Question: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Question Tools


Similar Threads
Question Question Starter Category Comments Last Post
Particles and waves nutronjon Theology forum 5 08-02-2008 03:31 PM
Control of neutral particles Moontanman Alternative theories 4 04-13-2008 05:50 AM
Calculating the strength of electric force and gravitaional force geko Questions and Answers 1 10-04-2007 01:48 AM
Virtual Particles Little Bang Physics and Mathematics 4 06-04-2005 07:32 PM
particles with spin 3/2 sanctus Physics and Mathematics 1 01-30-2005 10:45 PM

» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 27.27%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 45.45%
5 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 27.27%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 11
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:27 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network
Powered by GARS © 2005-2008