On the subject of Virtual Particles, I found this:
In physics, a virtual particle is an explanatory conceptual entity that is found in mathematical calculations about quantum field theory. It refers to mathematical terms that have some appearance of representing particles inside a subatomic process such as a collision.
Virtual particles, however, do not appear directly amongst the observable and detectable input and output quantities of those calculations, which refer only to actual, as distinct from virtual, particles. Virtual particle terms represent "particles" that are said to be 'off mass shell'. For example, they progress backwards in time, do not conserve energy, and travel faster than light. That is to say, looked at one by one, they appear to virtually violate basic laws of physics.
Actual particles of course never do so. Virtual particles occur in combinations that mutually more or less nearly cancel from the actual output quantities, so that no actual violation of the laws of physics occurs. Often the virtual-particle virtual "events" appear to occur close to one another in time, for example within the time scale of a collision, so that they are virtually and apparently "short-lived".
Quantum theory is different from classical theory. The difference is in accounting for the inner workings of subatomic processes. Classical physics cannot account for such. It was pointed out by Heisenberg that what "actually" or "really" occurs inside such subatomic processes as collisions is not directly observable and no unique and physically definite visualization is available for it. Quantum mechanics has the specific merit of by-passing speculation about such inner workings. It restricts itself to what is actually observable and detectable. Virtual particles are conceptual devices that in a sense try to by-pass Heisenberg's insight, by offering putative or virtual explanatory visualizations for the inner workings of subatomic processes.
A virtual particle does not necessarily appear to carry the same mass as the corresponding real particle. This is because it appears as "short-lived" and "transient", so that the uncertainty principle allows it to appear not to conserve energy and momentum. The longer a virtual particle appears to "live", the closer its characteristics come to those of an actual particle.
Since Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle was mentioned:
In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle, also known as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, is any of a variety of mathematical inequalities asserting a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle known as complementary variables, such as position x and momentum p, can be known simultaneously. Introduced first in 1927, by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg, it states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa.
Historically, the uncertainty principle has been confused with a somewhat similar effect in physics, called the observer effect, which notes that measurements of certain systems cannot be made without affecting the systems. Heisenberg offered such an observer effect at the quantum level as a physical "explanation" of quantum uncertainty. It has since become clear, however, that the uncertainty principle is inherent in the properties of all wave-like systems, and that it arises in quantum mechanics simply due to the matter wave nature of all quantum objects. Thus, the uncertainty principle actually states a fundamental property of quantum systems, and is not a statement about the observational success of current technology. It must be emphasized that measurement does not mean only a process in which a physicist-observer takes part, but rather any interaction between classical and quantum objects regardless of any observer.
While you said every intellectual honest atheist must admit they cannot prove no God exists, neither can we.
You are mistaken as to who the source is, I am not the source of the text. I have simply provided it in the text of my post for those who do not wish to visit the site, or may be on mobile.
In addition, a proof of God does not mean a Christian God.
While proof of a god alone does not reference a specific god, We have some parameters to meet. This was covered later in the text.