Searching for the Voice of God ~ Gluons

An interesting interaction between words and concepts: Gluons (that which keeps things together) are the exchange particles for the color force (chromodynamics) between quarks (elementary particle matter - having gluons that which keeps them together), which is analogous to the exchange of photons in the electromagnetic force between two charged particles.
Hence, the gluon can be considered to be the fundamental exchange particle underlying the strong interaction between protons and neutrons in a nucleus - that which keeps things together. That short-range interaction can be considered to be a residual color force extending outside the boundary of the proton or neutron. Gluon interactions generate a color change for the quarks.
The gluons are in fact considered to be bi-colored, carrying a unit of color and a unit of anti-color (talking about light change). More incredible than that is that the range of the strong force is limited by the gluons interact with each other as well as with quarks, in the context of quark confinement. These properties contrast with photons which are massless and of infinite range. The photon does not carry electric charge with it, while the gluons do carry the 'color charge'.
As fascinating and compelling as the evidence is for the existence and purpose of such exchange particles (gluons), the discussion today is whether or not a gluon as a 'fundamental exchange particle' is a 'virtual particle'. Why is there such discussion? Some argue that it is difficult to say if there are such a thing as gluons since there is no sharp dividing line between a virtual particle and a real particle (a real particle is that which is agreed upon as being observed); yet, it's not true that every particle is clearly one or the other. Confusing isn't it?
In the realm of quantum physics we are told that most of what we observe and discuss as real matter concerns a lot of what is unknown. Since, observations take place at the atomic level (the fundamental level of matter which is light) it would be difficult to say whether or not a super computer is making the correct observation, as it is humanly programmed and humanly understood. Therefore, we may not ever be able to tell if virtual particles exist but saying that they don't exist can't be proven either. Worse, if they don't exist that means normal particles (aka field quanta) don't exist either.
Firstly, because we as mere humans may be mistaking what is real and what isn't as it is with anything virtual, it is not easy or possible to tell what is virtual and what is not virtual... as they are the same. Gluons are short lived. These short-lived high mass force-carrier particles (virtual particles) seem to violate the laws of conservation of energy and mass; hence, their mass just can't come out of nowhere!
Considering the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, these high-mass particles may come into being if they are incredibly short-lived. In a sense, they escape reality's notice. Such particles are called virtual particles. These so called virtual particles 'gluons' do not violate the conservation of energy. The kinetic energy plus mass of the initial decaying particle and the final decay products is equal. The virtual particles exist for such a short time that they can never be observed.
Most particle processes are mediated by virtual carrier particles or gluons. Again, remember that the gluon is the so-called messenger particle of the strong nuclear force which binds subatomic particles known as quarks within the protons and neutrons of stable matter as well as with heavier, short-lived particles created at high energies. Quarks interact by emitting and absorbing gluons, just as electrically charged particles interact through the emission and absorption of photons. In quantum chromodynamics, the theory of the strong force, the interactions of quarks are described in terms of eight types of massless gluon which, like the photon, all carry one unit of intrinsic angular momentum, or spin. Like quarks, the gluons carry a 'strong charge' known as 'color'.  This means that gluons can interact between themselves through the strong force.

Fascinating, isn't it? How could that really be 'real' and what would be its purpose? Searching for the voice of God... as it was in the beginning, He said "Let there be Light" ~ Genesis 1:3. Perhaps, the 'strong charge' is His command! In visualizing the interaction of particles, we can imagine what amazing application it has for our social well being. It could only be the Creator's will that in every aspect of His creation, there we are. 

*sources used:

http://www.britannica.com/science/gluon

http://www.particleadventure.org/virtual.html

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/expar.html

 

The Creator's Potential ~ Quanta State

"As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts" ~ Isaiah 55:9.  "For the world is mine, and everything in it" ~ Psalm 50:12. "He stretches out the heavens like a tent ~ Psalm 104:2 and Zechariah 12:1. "The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of His being, sustaining all things by His powerful word" ~ Hebrews 1:3. 

He stretches out the heavens like a tent... 



We have come to know that at the quantum level, there is a lack of reality and specific location disappears.







One can read that in physics, a quantum (plural: quanta) which is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. Behind this, one finds the fundamental notion that a physical property may be "quantized," referred to as "the hypothesis of quantization.  This means that the magnitude can take on only certain discrete values. It’s because a photon as a single quantum of (visible) light as well as all other forms of electromagnetic radiation and can be referred to as a "light quantum". The energy of an electron bound to an atom is quantized, which results in the stability of atoms, and hence of matter in general.

The first to use "quanta" to mean "quanta of matter and electricity", gas and heat was Max Planck.  In 1900, Planck discovered the concept of quantization of radiation and later supported by Albert Einstein’s work which suggested that radiation existed in spatially localized packets which he called “quanta of light”.

That is why, at the quantum level, there is a kind of electromagnetic fuzz and what has been referred to as fuzzy logic - an idea largely grounded in Einstein’s theory of relativity and Werner Heisenberg’s theory of uncertainty. Physicists in the science world and including Albert Einstein were essentially looking at something not fully real. Quanta the plural of quantum thus is whatever it needs to be, actualized into something.

I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics (Albert Einstein, 1954).

Albert Einstein's suspicions were well justified, for he had spent a lifetime trying (and failing) to create a unified field theory of matter that explained both Quantum Theory / Light and Relativity / Gravity. In fact Matter, as a Spherical Standing Wave which causes the 'Field' effect, interacts with other matter in discrete standing wave patterns, not with continuous force fields as he had imagined, thus his task was ultimately impossible, as he sadly came to realize towards the end of his life.




However, his work on the photoelectric effect confirmed that light energy was only emitted and absorbed by electrons in discrete amounts or quanta. This quanta of light energy soon became known as the 'photon' (i.e. discrete like a particle) and led to the paradox that light behaved both as a continuous e-m wave (Maxwell, Albert Einstein) as well as a discrete particle/photon (Planck, Albert Einstein). So we see that Albert Einstein was partly responsible for the discovery of the particle (photon) concept of light, though he completely rejected the notion of discrete particles.

Since the theory of general relativity implies the representation of physical reality by a continuous field, the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundamental part, nor can the concept of motion (Albert Einstein).

Albert Einstein is correct that there are no discrete particles, and that the particle can only appear as a limited region in space in which the field strength or the energy density are particularly high. But it is the high Wave-Amplitude of the Wave-Center of a Spherical Standing Wave in Space (not of a continuous spherical force field) that causes the particle effect. Thus of three concepts, particles, force fields, and motion, it finally turns out that Motion, as the spherical wave motion of space, is the correct concept, as it then explains both particles and fields.

I wished to show that space time is not necessarily something to which one can ascribe to a separate existence, independently of the actual objects of physical reality. Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept empty space loses its meaning (Albert Einstein ).

He stretches out the heavens like a tent...

~ Sources - various online and including http://www.spaceandmotion.com/quantum-theory-albert-einstein-quotes.htm

*What is science? Man's way of trying to understand his creator.