Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site oddjob.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!oddjob!matt
From: matt@oddjob.UUCP (Matt Crawford)
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: \"Randomness\" query
Message-ID: <872@oddjob.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Jul-85 16:11:22 EDT
Article-I.D.: oddjob.872
Posted: Wed Jul 24 16:11:22 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Jul-85 08:24:43 EDT
References: <3228@decwrl.UUCP>
Reply-To: matt@oddjob.UUCP (Matt Crawford)
Organization: U. Chicago, Astronomy & Astrophysics
Lines: 26

In article <3228@decwrl.UUCP> koch@chopin.DEC (Kevin Koch DTN229-6274) writes:
>
>     It has always bothered me that unstable particles and nuclei don't
>have a fixed lifetime.  We are taught to believe that everything has a
>cause, yet this seems to be ignored when saying that a particle or 
>nucleus has a *halflife*.  How can something exist for a random amount
>of time and then decay? It seems to me that something must trigger
>that decay.  What is it? 
>
>Kevin Koch  (Koch is it!)
>...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-handel!koch // koch%handel.dec@decwrl.ARPA

Consider the opposite situation:  If every particle of a certain
type lived for a certain amount of time and then decayed, there
would have to be some internal state of the particle which kept
track of the passage of time.  If all neutrons, for example, are
to be absolutely identical (as we know they are) then it must be
impossible to distinguish a brand-new neutron from an old neutron.

If you can accept the fact that the interaction between two particles
which pass near each other can only be described with probabilities,
then just consider the decay of a particle to be an interaction between
it and a swarm of virtual particles.
_____________________________________________________
Matt		University	crawford@anl-mcs.arpa
Crawford	of Chicago	ihnp4!oddjob!matt