Do Virtual Photons Exist?

The Aether was original conceived as a means of explaining "forces acting
at a distance" (i.e.- electric, magnetic, gravitation, et al). When the idea of
the classical Aether was abandoned early in the century, there was a need to
find another means of explaining these forces because, if it were not possible
to explain them by some other means then it would be necessary to retain the
Aether and the absolute reference frame it represented. The elimination of that
reference frame was an absolute imperative of the political agenda of the
academic community. Fortunately, the advent of quantum theory allowed Dr.
Feynmann to generate the idea that these forces were produced by the exchange
of "virtual particles". These particles were so named because they popped into
and out of existence for periods of time that were so short that the rules of
quantum physics insured that their temporary existence did not violate the Law
of Conservation of Energy.

It is easy to understand how these particles could provide a force over a
distance. A "virtual particle" emitted from one point would absorb momentum and
travel ballistically to another where it would release that momentum. The net
result would be force acting between the points. The situation is analogous to
the effect observed when two athletes throw a medicine ball back and forth to
each other. Difficulty with the analogy is that the throwing of the medicine
ball can only produce a repulsive force; it cannot produce an attractive force!
The mathematics associated with the force production by "virtual particles"
particles, however, does allow for the production of attractive forces, but,
since no explanation as to how this is possible is provided, one is left with
the suspicion that this is another example of a solution where an effect that
is allowed by the mathematics involved is being used outside of the constraints
imposed by the physical realities of the problem. These realities require a
rather unusual exchange of momentum to be involved. In order to produce the
attractive force, the "virtual photon" would have to be launched with a
momentum represented by a propagation direction away from its target, reverse
its momentum (direction of travel), go past its target and repeat the process
so as to acquire a momentum in the required direction as it struck the target
from behind. (If anyone can provide a different explanation I would like to
hear it.) Of course, if the "virtual photon" were propagating through a medium,
such as the Aether, there would be no conceptual problem, the "virtual particle
could make the necessary exchange of momentum with the medium. (A boomerang
returns to the thrower because it exchanges momentum with a medium, air. But
then, if the Aether were present we would have no need to consider the
existence of "virtual photons".

There is no need to resort to theoretical arguments, however. If virtual
photons produce electric and magnetic forces, they should be observable.
Consider a large electromagnet, such as is used in an MIR machine. A recent
news report described an unfortunate incident where a steel oxygen bottle was
not properly mounted to its wall bracket. The magnetic field of the MIR pulled
the bottle to the machine and killed a boy who was being scanned. It is obvious
that the room was filled with a large and extremely powerful magnetic field. If
"virtual photons" were present in that room, they would have produced a level
of electromagnetic interference that would scream their presence. If electric
and magnetic forces were produced by "virtual photons", they would have to also
effect any electromagnetic detectors in their vicinity and one would expect
that both natural and man-made electric and magnetic fields would render
electromagnetic communication impossible.

An experiment is described in Chapter 4 of "The Einstein Hoax" in which a
strong electric field is produced inside of an evacuated chamber and an antenna
is located between the electrodes. Using a radiation detector that covers the
entire spectrum would allow the detection of any spurious photons that acted to
produce the attractive force. Its a simple experiment and is one which should
be performed it science is to accept "virtual photons" as meaningful.

The concept of "virtual particles" is perhaps best understood by
considering the stability of a moving bicycle. A moving bicycle remains upright
because of the effect of "virtual displacements" of its front wheel. In a
bicycle, the point of intersection of the axis of steering intersects the road
well ahead of the point of contact of the tire with the road. As a result, if
the bicycle develops a "lean", a torque exists which acts to turn the front
wheel in the direction of the lean. This, in turn causes the bicycle to turn
towards the lean and results in a centrifugal force which returns the bicycle
to vertical. Similarly if the front wheel is turned without an accompanying
tilt of the bicycle, the caster action of the front wheel geometry produces a
strong torque to return the wheel to the straight ahead position. As any
experienced bike rider knows, this latter effect is strong, the handlebars of a
speeding bicycle are surprising difficult to turn to the point where steering
is accomplished by leaning.

In steady state riding, observable disturbances are not needed to maintain
stability. The fact that the forces would occur if an error occurred is enough
to prevent the occurrence of the error. (Obviously for the corrections to be
made, minute errors must be occurring. These errors would legitimately be
termed "virtual displacements".) While these "virtual displacements" account
for the bicycles stability, the forces they involve are much too small to
account for the bicycles resistance to falling. Those forces can only be
provides by the forces of gravity and of turning. One might expect "virtual
photons" to act in the same way. They cannot produce the electric, magnetic,
and/or electromagnetic forces we experience, but they can cause these forces,
where they are in balance, to remain in balance. To produce the forces
themselves, a much more powerful effect is required. The same should be true of
gravitic forces, gravitons cannot produce the attractive gravity forces we
observe, but they can act to moderate their action. It would seem that the only
means by which these forces could act is through a medium (i.e.- the classical
Aether).

Unfortunately, Modern Physics seems to have been taken over by
mathematical idiot savants who lack an appreciation for the implications of
mechanism and strive to suppress contributions from those who would dare to say
"Hey, wait a minute"

The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999) located at http://www.members.aol.com/einsteinhoax/site.htm .
EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE
HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST
BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

Please include any response via E-mail since the Newsgroups are not
monitored on a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same
courtesy as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our
parts, please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

For a response send E-Mail to

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5 years.
In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE MATERIAL
PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by individuals who have
mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without questioning it. If anyone
provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the
material at the Website will be withdrawn.

(Elbaxat) wrote in message ...
Do Virtual Photons Exist?
There is no need to resort to theoretical arguments, however. If virtual
photons produce electric and magnetic forces, they should be observable.
Consider a large electromagnet, such as is used in an MIR machine. A recent
news report described an unfortunate incident where a steel oxygen bottle was
not properly mounted to its wall bracket. The magnetic field of the MIR pulled
the bottle to the machine and killed a boy who was being scanned. It is obvious
that the room was filled with a large and extremely powerful magnetic field. If
"virtual photons" were present in that room, they would have produced a level
of electromagnetic interference that would scream their presence. If electric
and magnetic forces were produced by "virtual photons", they would have to also
effect any electromagnetic detectors in their vicinity and one would expect
that both natural and man-made electric and magnetic fields would render
electromagnetic communication impossible.


COMMENT:

Not really. Communication is at the wrong frequency. If you tried to
build a radio that worked at 60 Hz, you'd find your channels swamped
by virtual photons from powerlines, fluorescent lamps, and so on.

Virtual photons transfer power from one winding of a transformer to
the the other. They are what leave metal detectors, penetrate the
ground, and find coins. Pass through the metal detector of an airport
with earphones of your radio on, and you'll hear disruption from the
virtual particles emitted by the detector.

The radio term for all this is the "near field" of antennas. The near
field is not composed of real photons, but rather virtual ones. That
dosen't mean it can't be used to transmit information, energy and all
the other stuff across space that real photons do. It's just that real
photons poop out over distance by a different law, as opposed to real
photons. If they go out and don't find anything to interact with, they
don't take any energy away from the transmitter (if they do, they do).
So they are sort of like a bank emitting checks. If nobody cashes
them, the bank isn't out any money. Real photons, by contrast, are
rather like currency-- if a bank loses those, the money is gone.

SBH

Elbaxat wrote:

Do Virtual Photons Exist?


Some Frequently Asked Questions About Virtual Particles
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...particles.html

Virtual Particle
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...lParticle.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...orces/qed.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../expar.html#c5

Crank Information
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=gr...hor%3Areticher
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=gr...or%3Areticher1

In article , (Steve Harris ) writes:
(Elbaxat) wrote in message ...
Do Virtual Photons Exist?
There is no need to resort to theoretical arguments, however. If virtual
photons produce electric and magnetic forces, they should be observable.
Consider a large electromagnet, such as is used in an MIR machine. A recent
news report described an unfortunate incident where a steel oxygen bottle was
not properly mounted to its wall bracket. The magnetic field of the MIR pulled
the bottle to the machine and killed a boy who was being scanned. It is obvious
that the room was filled with a large and extremely powerful magnetic field. If
"virtual photons" were present in that room, they would have produced a level
of electromagnetic interference that would scream their presence. If electric
and magnetic forces were produced by "virtual photons", they would have to also
effect any electromagnetic detectors in their vicinity and one would expect
that both natural and man-made electric and magnetic fields would render
electromagnetic communication impossible.


COMMENT:

Not really. Communication is at the wrong frequency. If you tried to
build a radio that worked at 60 Hz, you'd find your channels swamped
by virtual photons from powerlines, fluorescent lamps, and so on.

Virtual photons transfer power from one winding of a transformer to
the the other. They are what leave metal detectors, penetrate the
ground, and find coins. Pass through the metal detector of an airport
with earphones of your radio on, and you'll hear disruption from the
virtual particles emitted by the detector.

The radio term for all this is the "near field" of antennas. The near
field is not composed of real photons, but rather virtual ones. That
dosen't mean it can't be used to transmit information, energy and all
the other stuff across space that real photons do. It's just that real
photons poop out over distance by a different law, as opposed to real
photons. If they go out and don't find anything to interact with, they
don't take any energy away from the transmitter (if they do, they do).
So they are sort of like a bank emitting checks. If nobody cashes
them, the bank isn't out any money. Real photons, by contrast, are
rather like currency-- if a bank loses those, the money is gone.

Love this analogy.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

wrote:

In article , (Steve Harris ) writes:
(Elbaxat) wrote in message ...
Do Virtual Photons Exist?
There is no need to resort to theoretical arguments, however. If virtual
photons produce electric and magnetic forces, they should be observable.
Consider a large electromagnet, such as is used in an MIR machine. A recent
news report described an unfortunate incident where a steel oxygen bottle was
not properly mounted to its wall bracket. The magnetic field of the MIR pulled
the bottle to the machine and killed a boy who was being scanned. It is obvious
that the room was filled with a large and extremely powerful magnetic field. If
"virtual photons" were present in that room, they would have produced a level
of electromagnetic interference that would scream their presence. If electric
and magnetic forces were produced by "virtual photons", they would have to also
effect any electromagnetic detectors in their vicinity and one would expect
that both natural and man-made electric and magnetic fields would render
electromagnetic communication impossible.


COMMENT:

Not really. Communication is at the wrong frequency. If you tried to
build a radio that worked at 60 Hz, you'd find your channels swamped
by virtual photons from powerlines, fluorescent lamps, and so on.

Virtual photons transfer power from one winding of a transformer to
the the other. They are what leave metal detectors, penetrate the
ground, and find coins. Pass through the metal detector of an airport
with earphones of your radio on, and you'll hear disruption from the
virtual particles emitted by the detector.

The radio term for all this is the "near field" of antennas. The near
field is not composed of real photons, but rather virtual ones. That
dosen't mean it can't be used to transmit information, energy and all
the other stuff across space that real photons do. It's just that real
photons poop out over distance by a different law, as opposed to real
photons. If they go out and don't find anything to interact with, they
don't take any energy away from the transmitter (if they do, they do).
So they are sort of like a bank emitting checks. If nobody cashes
them, the bank isn't out any money. Real photons, by contrast, are
rather like currency-- if a bank loses those, the money is gone.

Love this analogy.

I like it too, but that doesn't change the fact that it's wrong. The
money isn't gone until it is actually converted into goods. Until then
it has the possibility of being canceled. Thus all photon currency goes
out in the form of credit, no exceptions. See the FAQ:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...particles.html




Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

Richard wrote in message ...
wrote:


The radio term for all this is the "near field" of antennas. The near
field is not composed of real photons, but rather virtual ones. That
dosen't mean it can't be used to transmit information, energy and all
the other stuff across space that real photons do. It's just that real
photons poop out over distance by a different law, as opposed to real
photons. If they go out and don't find anything to interact with, they
don't take any energy away from the transmitter (if they do, they do).
So they are sort of like a bank emitting checks. If nobody cashes
them, the bank isn't out any money. Real photons, by contrast, are
rather like currency-- if a bank loses those, the money is gone.

Love this analogy.

I like it too, but that doesn't change the fact that it's wrong. The
money isn't gone until it is actually converted into goods. Until then
it has the possibility of being canceled. Thus all photon currency goes
out in the form of credit, no exceptions. See the FAQ:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...particles.html


COMMENT:

Well, I haven't seen the FAQ, but either it's wrong or you are. There
are plenty of systems in which the emission of the photon is
detectable by looking at the emitter, and you don't have to catch the
photon. Thus, when the nucleus recoils after the gamma emmission,
observing the recoiled nucleus causes the system to decohere and thus
the photon to become real. It can be traveling between galaxies, and
still gets its energy and becomes an objective thing, not to be
destroyed by further observation as though it never was. To push my
analogy, that's sort of like somebody at the bank looking in the safe
and saying "Oh, $#!%, there's a lot of cash missing!" That's looking
in Shroedinger's box and finding the cat dead. The bank is objectively
out of luck and money at that point, even if the thieves still have
the bills in their mattress and have NOT turned it into goods. Same is
not true of a bank draft/cashier's check (say), which continues to be
virtual money in the sense that it CAN be cancelled, right up to the
point that is converted into something else.

SBH

(Steve Harris )
wrote in in Shroedinger's box and finding the cat dead. The bank is
objectively
out of luck and money at that point, even if the thieves still have
the bills in their mattress and have NOT turned it into goods. Same is
not true of a bank draft/cashier's check (say), which continues to be
virtual money in the sense that it CAN be cancelled, right up to the
point that is converted into something else.

SBH
-----------------------
at the beginnng of the pesponse posibility Google writes the
folowing Note : quote:

Compose your message

Use this form to post your messages. Remember that it can be
viewed by millions of people
worldwide. For questions about posting, check our FAQ or our
Posting Style Guide.
-------------------
it seems that the above does not belong to Mat Maclrvin
or to John Baez (from the olimpus of sci.physics research
they ddint heare untill not the old commandment:
'thou shell not cheat' !!
-------
had they been honest scintists they would say it lous and clear :
'WE HAVE NOT A GREEN IDEA HOW 'VIRTUAL PHOTONS WORK-
IS IS JUST A MATHEMATICAL ARTIFACT THAT SOMEHOW AND BY JUST CHANCE-
WORKS PARTIALLY'
but they dont do it do you know why ? just guess-
they make their good living out of it !!.
little y.porat says:
no photon that moves in a straight line can ever cause attraction!
their crookish explanations are besed on temporary violations of
energy condervations
and while they get stuck and entangles they recrute the
uncertainly principle to make it short:
not much has been changes since a few thosands of years
while croock ;prophets or crookish priests were cheting the
naive mob with 'magics'
as i saies there are some partial sucesses to those theories
but only partial
yet the 'explanations' for those successes .... Ghosh, give us some
salvations from those crooks.
they should say :
we have not the faintest idea how those Fynmans formulas and diagrams
work in reality!!
and yet they go on selling their croolish stupid explanations
without blinking an eye!
its time to stop it , for the sake of new real advance of scince.
all the best
Y.porat
-----------------

"Steve Harris " wrote:

Richard wrote in message ...
wrote:


The radio term for all this is the "near field" of antennas. The near
field is not composed of real photons, but rather virtual ones. That
dosen't mean it can't be used to transmit information, energy and all
the other stuff across space that real photons do. It's just that real
photons poop out over distance by a different law, as opposed to real
photons. If they go out and don't find anything to interact with, they
don't take any energy away from the transmitter (if they do, they do).
So they are sort of like a bank emitting checks. If nobody cashes
them, the bank isn't out any money. Real photons, by contrast, are
rather like currency-- if a bank loses those, the money is gone.

Love this analogy.

I like it too, but that doesn't change the fact that it's wrong. The
money isn't gone until it is actually converted into goods. Until then
it has the possibility of being canceled. Thus all photon currency goes
out in the form of credit, no exceptions. See the FAQ:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...particles.html

COMMENT:

Well, I haven't seen the FAQ, but either it's wrong or you are. There
are plenty of systems in which the emission of the photon is
detectable by looking at the emitter, and you don't have to catch the
photon. Thus, when the nucleus recoils after the gamma emmission,
observing the recoiled nucleus causes the system to decohere and thus
the photon to become real. It can be traveling between galaxies, and
still gets its energy and becomes an objective thing, not to be
destroyed by further observation as though it never was. To push my
analogy, that's sort of like somebody at the bank looking in the safe
and saying "Oh, $#!%, there's a lot of cash missing!" That's looking
in Shroedinger's box and finding the cat dead. The bank is objectively
out of luck and money at that point, even if the thieves still have
the bills in their mattress and have NOT turned it into goods. Same is
not true of a bank draft/cashier's check (say), which continues to be
virtual money in the sense that it CAN be cancelled, right up to the
point that is converted into something else.

SBH

Send a coherent beam through an MM-like interferometer. If the mirrors
are properly oriented, and their distance is properly set so that the
recombined beams are 180 out of phase throughout a given cross section,
then a destructive interference will occur that reduces the light
intensity to virtually zero in the recombined beam. Where did the
photons go? When and where were they absorbed?

You can whine all you want to, but photons just aren't real. The
momentum exchange occurs between the source and the surrounding matter,
not between the source and some fictitious particle.

I do agree that the FAQ explains nothing in a coherent manner, but I was
just presenting it to show that it disagreed with your stance, and I
quote "[]...all particles are virtual, to some extent."

If you or anyone else would like a break down of what is actually taking
place, then I can provide one, but it will not agree on all points with
the accepted version. I draw from experiment, from Bohm, and from my own
electromagnetic derivations, to paint a coherent picture of em
propagation and em interactions in general.

Richard Perry

Richard wrote in message ...
Send a coherent beam through an MM-like interferometer. If the mirrors
are properly oriented, and their distance is properly set so that the
recombined beams are 180 out of phase throughout a given cross section,
then a destructive interference will occur that reduces the light
intensity to virtually zero in the recombined beam. Where did the
photons go? When and where were they absorbed?


COMMENT:

ROFL!!! If you make up a thought experiment in which impossible things
happen, it's pretty hard to explain how they do. Your thought
experiment violates the conservation of energy. Sorry, not allowed.
That is the reason why all interference between EM beams produces a
PATTERN of dark and (double bright) bands, not just one big dark spot.
If a "big dark" was all the came out, you'd have a situation in which
lasers or masers or whatever were taking up power from the powerplant
to produce beams which went out, hit each other, and just disappeared,
with their energy wiped right out of the universe. So where did the
the power to run the transmitter go? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
Even if you think it does, it doesn't.

Now, you can do almost this with two out of phase sound beams, but
there, the sound energy disappears into air heating. Light in vacuum
doesn't have such a luxury.


You can whine all you want to, but photons just aren't real. The
momentum exchange occurs between the source and the surrounding matter,
not between the source and some fictitious particle.

You're wrong. It occurs both places. Nuclei DO recoil when emiting
photons.


SBH

"Steve Harris " wrote:

Richard wrote in message ...
Send a coherent beam through an MM-like interferometer. If the mirrors
are properly oriented, and their distance is properly set so that the
recombined beams are 180 out of phase throughout a given cross section,
then a destructive interference will occur that reduces the light
intensity to virtually zero in the recombined beam. Where did the
photons go? When and where were they absorbed?

COMMENT:

ROFL!!! If you make up a thought experiment in which impossible things
happen, it's pretty hard to explain how they do. Your thought
experiment violates the conservation of energy. Sorry, not allowed.
That is the reason why all interference between EM beams produces a
PATTERN of dark and (double bright) bands, not just one big dark spot.
If a "big dark" was all the came out, you'd have a situation in which
lasers or masers or whatever were taking up power from the powerplant
to produce beams which went out, hit each other, and just disappeared,
with their energy wiped right out of the universe. So where did the
the power to run the transmitter go? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
Even if you think it does, it doesn't.

Now, you can do almost this with two out of phase sound beams, but
there, the sound energy disappears into air heating. Light in vacuum
doesn't have such a luxury.

You can whine all you want to, but photons just aren't real. The
momentum exchange occurs between the source and the surrounding matter,
not between the source and some fictitious particle.

You're wrong. It occurs both places. Nuclei DO recoil when emiting
photons.

SBH

No, I'm not wrong, the beam can be nulled. What you haven't considered
is that the beam is partly reflected directly back toward the source, it
is there that the photons went. This is no different than a
multi-element yagi setup. The virtual photons emitted by the antenna
elements are canceled in one direction, but amplified in the other, thus
energy is conserved, even if we choose to model the event as the
emission of 'real' photons in both directions. In the case of the
interferometer, however, I've shown that the photons are in fact virtual
well after leaving the source, i.e. well beyond a wavelength from the
source. QED

Richard Perry