Is There a Fifth Fundamental Force in Physics?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cubey
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the existence of a potential fifth fundamental force in physics, asserting that there are only four established forces: the Electromagnetic Force, the Weak Nuclear Force, the Strong Nuclear Force, and Gravity. Participants argue that theories like electroweak unification and the GG model do not introduce a new force but rather combine existing forces into unified theories. The consensus emphasizes that any scientific principle is subject to the agreement of the scientific community, particularly in the context of established theories.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the four fundamental forces in physics: Electromagnetic Force, Weak Nuclear Force, Strong Nuclear Force, and Gravity.
  • Familiarity with concepts of force unification, particularly electroweak theory.
  • Knowledge of the GG model and its implications in theoretical physics.
  • Awareness of the scientific method and consensus in the scientific community.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of electroweak unification and its significance in particle physics.
  • Explore the GG model and its approach to combining forces in theoretical frameworks.
  • Study the implications of the four fundamental forces in modern physics.
  • Investigate the role of scientific consensus in the acceptance of new theories in physics.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the foundational principles of the universe and the debate surrounding fundamental forces.

cubey
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
There are only 4, the Electromagnetic Force, the Weak Nuclear Force,the Strong Nuclear Force and Gravity.
And if you yes or no please explain why.
I'm not sure if this is the proper place in this forum or even if this is the proper forum to ask this question,but I'll give it try.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
That's a matter of opinion, I'd call it more semantic than dogmatic... but either one could be easily argued for.
 
I think it should be taken for granted that any general scientific principle statement always carries the caveat: 'it is the consensus of the scientific community that...'
 
russ_watters said:
I think it should be taken for granted that any general scientific principle statement always carries the caveat: 'it is the consensus of the scientific community that...'
While that is certainly true (e.g. inflation, lambda CDM, double compact binaries for shGRBs, etc), its not especially apt for this case in light of electroweak or the GG model, etc.
 
zhermes said:
While that is certainly true (e.g. inflation, lambda CDM, double compact binaries for shGRBs, etc), its not especially apt for this case in light of electroweak or the GG model, etc.
Those combine two forces into one theory,they don't add a new force.

Hey! No fair delteting a post while I am reading it!
 
cubey said:
There are only 4...

HallsofIvy said:
Those combine two forces into one theory,they don't add a new force.

Yes. That is true. (Well, GG goes 3 -> 1).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
671
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K