Virtual particles are also "real", and if you don't believe me, at least you have to admit that virtual photons alone lead to real energy (e.g. Casimir effect) - and it has also been stated that gluons within protons can be interpreted as "virtual"... so I'm pretty sure your comment is wrong. I'd downvote you if I could since that seems to be what the cool kids here are doing but I used up all my karma telling the truth.
Virtual particles are also "real", and if you don't believe me, at least you have to admit that virtual photons alone lead to real energy (e.g. Casimir effect) - and it has also been stated that gluons within protons can be interpreted as "virtual"... so I'm pretty sure your comment is wrong. I'd downvote you if I could since that seems to be what the cool kids here are doing but I used up all my karma telling the truth.
"Virtual particles are also "real"."
No doubt, and Casimir is probably sufficient evidence, but it seems to me a lot of confusion would be saved if we changed the name.
To what I don't know - perhaps something like say quantum energy disturbance but more eloquent or descriptive.
100%. "Possible" particle? :)