Quantum Physics Query

[Serendipity]

My sole remaining functioning braincell has almost died on me, so I'll try and make my query as clear as possible...

As I understand it, when a particle is generated that goes forward in time, an anti-matter particle is generated to go backward in time. Is this correct?

If so, how can we sense, monitor, detect such a backward-in-time moving particle?

(These questions derive from me coming up with a science fiction premise I was working on... it's a longish deduction process... but if I'm even a small way correct in my arguments, there are profound implications... so please, please, please help.)

 

[Biskit]

As I understand it, when a particle is generated that goes forward in time, an anti-matter particle is generated to go backward in time. Is this correct?

I'm not sure that this is true, or if is only the case in specific circumstances. What do you mean by "when a particle is generated"?

 

[Wayne Mack]

As I understand it, when a particle is generated that goes forward in time, an anti-matter particle is generated to go backward in time. Is this correct?

I don't think the backward in time part is correct. Essentially that is saying that an antimatter particle exists until it spontaneously changes into a matter particle. For balance, I believe that a matter and antimatter particle generate and both go forward in time and this maintains balance, i.e., nothing is created.

 

[msstice]

There are quantum fluctuations in the (nominal) vacuum that give rise to particles and corresponding anti-particles. These annihilate each other quickly. If I remember correctly one interesting case is when these particles arise at the event horizon of a black hole - one of the particles disappears into the black hole and the other can survive. I think this is related to hawking radiation by which black holes evaporate eventually, but I am probably mixing things up.

Quantum fluctuation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Hawking radiation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Robert Zwilling]

I was looking at this thing before but was not coming up with anything that made any sense. The time travel bit was not real time travel was all I could get. Took one more shot at it with google's almost smart and got a direct hit. "Feynman proposed that antiparticles can be mathematically considered as normal particles moving backwards in time."

 

[Serendipity]

I was looking at this thing before but was not coming up with anything that made any sense. The time travel bit was not real time travel was all I could get. Took one more shot at it with google's almost smart and got a direct hit. "Feynman proposed that antiparticles can be mathematically considered as normal particles moving backwards in time."

I had come to conclusion that the backward time travel could not be real through what I call logical / philosophical argument. But what you put here gives us a clue, with 'considered as' being the key words. In other words Feynman was suggesting it was a good working model that would produce the same results that they get from experiments.

While it has answered my immediate question, it has left me with more questions. The crucial one is, what happens in the physical world for what is being modelled by this 'mathematically considered as normal particles moving backward in time'?

Thank you everyone for your considered replies.

 

[Astro Pen]

I'm inclined to think that going back in time would not be the smartest thing to do when you have only just been created.
It would, however, explain the preponderance of matter in the universe.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Short answer - probably no

The Feynman-Stueckelberg interpretation of quantum mechanics is just that, an interpretation that reproduces the mathematical equations, but has no evidence to show that this interpretation is the 'real one', see all the other ones in contention: the Copenhagen, many-worlds, non-local hidden variables or lots of other obscure interpretations. They all explain QM equally well.

If you could detect a negative particle (not an anti-matter particle) going backwards in time then this might be the interpretation that is the one, but I struggle to see how such a position could actually be tested.

I think instead it is better to see the negative eigenstates of this interpretation as 'mathematical artefacts' that the theory requires, but are completely unphysical and should not be seen as real

 

[Astro Pen]

Sorry posted in wrong thread Now removed