The fundemental forces: four or three?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Vereinsamt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forces
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the classification of fundamental forces in physics, specifically addressing whether there are four or three fundamental forces. The current consensus counts four forces: gravitational, strong, weak, and electromagnetic, despite the unification of electromagnetic and weak forces into the electroweak interaction, represented by the SU(2)xU(1) symmetry group. The distinction is made based on the number of independent coupling strengths, with the full symmetry group being SO(3,1)xSU(3)xSU(2)xU(1). This classification emphasizes that electroweak unification does not equate to a complete unification of all fundamental forces.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of fundamental forces in physics
  • Familiarity with group theory concepts
  • Knowledge of symmetry groups, specifically SO(3,1), SU(3), SU(2), and U(1)
  • Basic grasp of coupling strengths in particle interactions
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of grand unified theories (GUTs) and their symmetry groups, such as SU(5)
  • Study the electroweak model and its significance in particle physics
  • Explore the differences between abelian and non-abelian gauge theories
  • Investigate the historical development of the understanding of fundamental forces
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the unification of fundamental forces and group theory in particle physics.

Vereinsamt
Messages
27
Reaction score
1
The fundamental forces: four or three?

They still counting them as four though the the elctromagnatic and the weak have been unified.

so why not three?

thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The counting goes according to the number of independent ``coupling strengths" of the interactions. There is one coupling parameter for each ``simple or abelian" group factor in the full symmetry group representing the interactions. The symmetry group describing the four interactions, with their 4 independent couplings, is (locally) SO(3,1)xSU(3)xSU(2)xU(1), representing gravitation, and the strong and electroweak interactions, respectively. This is the clean way of defining distinct interactions. One meaning of a ``unified theory" is then when some of these symmetry group factors sit inside a larger group, such as the ``grand unified theories" obtained when the three interactions represented by SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) are a subgroup of a larger group, like SU(5), which has a single coupling parameter associated with it. So the electroweak ``unification" is not a unification in this sense.
So in what sense is it? Prior to the electroweak model, it was not known whether the weak interaction could be described with the same kind of symmetry (gauge) principle as electromagnetism; when it turned out that electromagnetism and the weak interaction were a blend of the two types of interactions collectively called the electroweak interactions, associated with the SU(2)xU(1) symmetry group, people called this a type of unification.
 
thank you Javier, but sorry, I know nothing about group theory!

did you mean they are unified under another theory that doesn't describe the other interactions?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
19K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K