all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 7 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Please someone tell science journalists not to call neutrinos 'ghost particles'. Ghost particles are something else entirely and they resolutely cannot be observed. Contrary to neutrinos which simply require lots of efforts to observe.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    It's quite common to call neutrinos ghost particles. Quantum ghosts are something else entirely, basically anomalies in the math.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago*

    Mirage particles are also quite interesting. If you analyze a quantum circuit under the Two-State Vector Formalism, which is mathematically equivalent to the standard formalism, it seems to describe particles that suddenly appear sometimes on certain paths in the experiment and then later disappear. Avshalom Elitzur has defended taking them seriously because they have real effects on things.

    One example he provides is a circuit whereby, in the traditional formalism, a free-floating mirror seems to experience a sudden pull for seemingly no reason. But, under TSVF, you get a mirage particle that appears on that path of the mirror with negative mass, and that particle reflects off of the mirror, and it gives an inverted momentum kick, so it pulls the mirror rather than pushes it.

    Interesting stuff.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    I've never heard it anywhere else than in the press and I find it very confusing. I think physicists don't really feel the need to romanticize neutrinos between themselves, so they just say neutrinos.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago*

    Good job Ghost Particles, you deserve the win.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Oh shit dust is real?? Thats crazy.

  • source