The Four Fundamental Force Equations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the equations for the four fundamental forces: gravitation, weak interaction, electromagnetism, and strong interaction. The user seeks clarity on the equations for weak and strong interactions, noting the existing equations for gravitation and electromagnetism. There is confusion regarding the negative sign in the force equations, particularly in relation to attraction and repulsion among masses and charges. Additionally, the user expresses interest in understanding why quantum mechanics struggles to explain gravity and seeks resources on attempts to unify these forces. The conversation highlights a fascination with the fundamental interactions and the complexities involved in their equations.
Rahmuss
Messages
222
Reaction score
0
So, here is what I have:

Gravitation
<br /> F = -G\frac{m_{1}m_{2}}{r^{2}}<br />

Weak Interaction
<br /> ?<br />

Electromagnetism
<br /> F = -\frac{q_{1}q_{2}}{4\pi \epsilon_{o}r^{2}}<br />

Strong Interaction
<br /> ?<br />


I'm thinking of all of these things as actual calculable forces; but I cannot find the equation I would use to calculate the force for each of the nuclear forces. It seems like searching online I'm seeing a few different equations that people might be trying to use. What am I missing? I'm just looking for the four fundamental force equations.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rahmuss said:
So, here is what I have:

Gravitation
<br /> F = -G\frac{m_{1}m_{2}}{r^{2}}<br />

Weak Interaction
<br /> ?<br />

Electromagnetism
<br /> F = -\frac{q_{1}q_{2}}{4\pi \epsilon_{o}r^{2}}<br />

why is there a negative sign here? like-signed masses attact, but like-signed electric charges repel.

Strong Interaction
<br /> ?<br />


I'm thinking of all of these things as actual calculable forces; but I cannot find the equation I would use to calculate the force for each of the nuclear forces. It seems like searching online I'm seeing a few different equations that people might be trying to use. What am I missing? I'm just looking for the four fundamental force equations.

check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction and you'll see something for Weak interaction (i confess i do not know the physics of it myself).
 
You have the static electrical force, but left out the magnetic force:

F=qv x B
 
rbj - I'm not sure why the negative sign is there. I got those equations from the wikipedia page for "Force", and they both have negative signs. I also already checked the "Weak Interaction" wikipedia page and it shows a "Long-Distance Behavior"; but it also shows simply \frac{1}{r^{2}} as the equations for Electromagnetic and Gravitation. I also had a question on how they say that Quantum Mechanics can explain the three stongest forces; but not gravity, though it has made an attempt to, which fails. What exactly is the proof that it fails to explain gravity? Their theories and attempts are including the theoretical graviton particle I'm assuming; but I can't quite seem to catch why they can't prove it. I guess on that point I'm looking for a page which shows a kind of attempt at using Quantum Mechanics to explain gravity (but obviously fails). And maybe this is a topic for the Advanced Physics section. If anyone feels they should move it, that's ok.

This is a topic that fascinates me. I would like to see the work that has been done in attempting to unify these forces.
 
Loren Booda - Ok, thanks. I guess that makes sense. Would I combine that as a simple sum of forces? Also, is there a different form for that equation that is easier to plug and play various quantities?
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?
Back
Top