Scientists at Fermilab close in on fifth force of nature

www.bbc.com...

Scientists near Chicago say they may be getting closer to discovering the existence of a new force of nature.

They have found more evidence that sub-atomic particles, called muons, are not behaving in the way predicted by the current theory of sub-atomic physics.

Scientists believe that an unknown force could be acting on the muons.

More data will be needed to confirm these results, but if they are verified, it could mark the beginning of a revolution in physics.

All of the forces we experience every day can be reduced to just four categories: gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force and the weak force. These four fundamental forces govern how all the objects and particles in the Universe interact with each other.

The findings have been made at a US particle accelerator facility called Fermilab. They build on results announced in 2021 in which the Fermilab team first suggested the possibility of a fifth force of nature

So far we know of the four fundamental forces of nature

1) Gravity
2) Electromagnetism
3) Weak nuclear force
4) Strong nuclear force

There is good possibility we have come across a fifth unknown force that has just been observed, it has been proposed sometime ago and the first results announced back in 2021.

www.bbc.co.uk...


If you haven't heard what muons are, there are several online sources with good information and explanations.

en.wikipedia.org...

Briefly, muons are second generation elementary charged particles (particles that are not made up of any smaller particles) belonging to the group of leptons (lighter particles). By elementary or fundamental particles we mean the 6 quarks and the 6 leptons. You can consider muon to be a second generation 'electron' or a heavier 'electron'. The mass of the muon is about 207 times that of the electron.

Quarks: Up, down, charm, strange, top, bottom
Leptons: Electron, muon, tau, electron neutrino muon neutrino, tau neutrino.

Muons are produced when cosmic rays collide with molecules in the Earth's upper atmosphere. Cosmic rays are high energy atomic nuclei (mainly protons and alpha particles).

About 10,000 muons reach every square meter of the earth's surface a minute; these charged particles form as by-products of cosmic rays colliding with molecules in the upper atmosphere. Traveling at relativistic speeds, muons can penetrate tens of meters into rocks and other matter before attenuating as a result of absorption or deflection by other atoms.

When cosmic rays collide with molecules in the upper atmosphere they produce pi mesons that quickly decay to produce muons which in turn decay after 2.2 microseconds to produce electrons/positrons and two types of neutrinos.


Briefly the experiment called the muon g-2 experiment is as follows

The Muon g-2 experiment involves sending the particles around a 14-metre ring and then applying a magnetic field. Under the current laws of physics, encoded in the Standard Model, this should make the muons wobble at a certain rate.

Instead, the scientists found that muons wobbled at a faster rate than expected. This might be caused by a force of nature that's completely new to science

www.outlookindia.com...

news.fnal.gov...

phys.org...

a reply to: AlienBorg

Particle physics makes my head hurt but hopefully if the findings are confirmed the discovery will move us forward in our search for new more exotic propulsion systems.

Our future is in the Stars we just need to find a way to get there.

The science seems to go hand in hand with the search to define dark matter.

I am wondering if maybe instead of going forward and postulating a new force, if they should not go back and redefine the ones we currently, clearly do not fully understand.

While current physics has been scientifically reliable for decades, it seems to me that it is based on a lot of assumptions.
I have to wonder, what if the current forces of gravity and electromagnetism were considered the same force, Or possibly that one is the result of the other, along the theory of the Electric Universe.

a reply to: AlienBorg

Briefly, muons are second generation elementary charged particles (particles that are not made up of any smaller particles)

muons which in turn decay after 2.2 microseconds to produce electrons/positrons and two types of neutrinos.

If Muons aren’t made up of smaller particles why are they decaying to produce the above?

As for the 5th force just because the Muons wobbled at a faster rate than expected, saying it could be down to an unknown 5th force seems a bit of a leap. How long has CERN been in operation and what great knowledge has it revealed in all that time?

a reply to: AlienBorg

Nice post.

a reply to: surfer_soul

How long has CERN been in operation and what great knowledge has it revealed in all that time?

They discovered the Higgs boson in 2012.

here is a good video that explains what cern has or hasnt accomplished.
They point out that gravity isnt a known force and is fairly well unexplained
They also talk about this new Z Prime force towards the end



And the PDF below is just ODD, while i cannot say i read it fully, browsing some of the sections they talk about experiment results from tests in 2025, 2026, 2030 ect...
Is this Doc brown working here?
Stanford PDF

originally posted by: Baablacksheep


a reply to: AlienBorg

Nice post.

Thanks

a reply to: gortex

Ahh yes the so call “god particle” such a massive undertaking for that. I would have thought they might have been able to achieve something more substantial with all the time and money plowed into it.

Perhaps there is something they aren’t telling us about though?

originally posted by: datguy
The science seems to go hand in hand with the search to define dark matter.

I am wondering if maybe instead of going forward and postulating a new force, if they should not go back and redefine the ones we currently, clearly do not fully understand.

While current physics has been scientifically reliable for decades, it seems to me that it is based on a lot of assumptions.
I have to wonder, what if the current forces of gravity and electromagnetism were considered the same force, Or possibly that one is the result of the other, along the theory of the Electric Universe.

Dark matter has been given this name because it doesn't interact with light and other parts of electromagnetic radiation. So we're not able to see this type of matter at all. But the existence of dark matter isn't a given, there is no conclusive evidence it exists, at least yet. If it does there should be another type of 'Higgs' mechanism that generates the mass of these dark matter particles, whatever they are.

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AlienBorg

Briefly, muons are second generation elementary charged particles (particles that are not made up of any smaller particles)

muons which in turn decay after 2.2 microseconds to produce electrons/positrons and two types of neutrinos.

If Muons aren’t made up of smaller particles why are they decaying to produce the above?

As for the 5th force just because the Muons wobbled at a faster rate than expected, saying it could be down to an unknown 5th force seems a bit of a leap. How long has CERN been in operation and what great knowledge has it revealed in all that time?

By fundamental particles we mean particles that aren't made up of smaller particles. Decaying of unstable fundamental particles doesn't imply these particles are made up of smaller particles. For example the negatively charged muon will decay to an electron, an electron antineutrino, and a muon neutrino.

originally posted by: gortex
hopefully if the findings are confirmed the discovery will move us forward

And just as hopefully, politics and egos don't push this into the extremes of either:

A. "The knowledge here is established so no need for further research. Or questions."

B. "We need another CERN-scale project and many decades of funding to investigate this!"

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: gortex

Ahh yes the so call “god particle” such a massive undertaking for that. I would have thought they might have been able to achieve something more substantial with all the time and money plowed into it.

Perhaps there is something they aren’t telling us about though?

The 'God particle' is just another attempt to attract attention to the media and the bulk of people who may not be familiar or interested in these subjects. It's nothing more than the Higgs boson btw.

But what is it you think they're hiding?

a reply to: AlienBorg

Sounds like a contradiction, if the negatively charged muon will decay to an electron, an electron antineutrino, and a muon neutrino. The. Surely it is in fact made up of these particles?

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AlienBorg

Sounds like a contradiction, if the negatively charged muon will decay to an electron, an electron antineutrino, and a muon neutrino. The. Surely it is in fact made up of these particles?

No, it isn't like that.

It can sound like it is made up of these particles but muons are fundamental particles, they just don't last for long. I think on average they only last for 2.2 microseconds.

www.livescience.com...

In contrast, electrons are stable matter and don't decay.

a reply to: AlienBorg

The unknown is what makes science fun and exciting, but tell those mofos to put us back in the right time line

a reply to: gortex

I wonder if such a force would make the likes of the Albercurrie drive concept more viable?

a reply to: AlienBorg

so, within the confines of the collider experiments we are able to recreate phenomenon which occurs when high energy photons collide with elements within our atmosphere. This creates a muon, so if this impact of two particles creates another how can that result be considered fundamental?

There seems to be a step in the observation which is missing, either that or the resulting observation is incorrectly interpreted.

For example, which elements are they using in the collider experiments? Are they using carbon nuclei or berylium as would be found in the atmosphere?
I have read that in most collision experiments they fire protons a metal target, mostly titanium, how does this effect the results as I'm fairly sure there aren't any titanium nuclei in the atmosphere.
I would think that the results of a high energy proton colliding into different elements would create different results. How can one be used to make assumptions of another.
Also how do we know that the charge of these protons is also not a factor, are the protons used in the collider experiments identical to what one would find bombarding our atmosphere?

originally posted by: datguy
a reply to: AlienBorg

so, within the confines of the collider experiments we are able to recreate phenomenon which occurs when high energy photons collide with elements within our atmosphere. This creates a muon, so if this impact of two particles creates another how can that result be considered fundamental?

There seems to be a step in the observation which is missing, either that or the resulting observation is incorrectly interpreted.

For example, which elements are they using in the collider experiments? Are they using carbon nuclei or berylium as would be found in the atmosphere?
I have read that in most collision experiments they fire protons a metal target, mostly titanium, how does this effect the results as I'm fairly sure there aren't any titanium nuclei in the atmosphere.
I would think that the results of a high energy proton colliding into different elements would create different results. How can one be used to make assumptions of another.
Also how do we know that the charge of these protons is also not a factor, are the protons used in the collider experiments identical to what one would find bombarding our atmosphere?

Just a small correction

High energy protons collide with molecules in the upper atmosphere producing mesons that live for a short period of time and in turn they decay to produce muons.

Cosmic rays are mainly high energy protons or alpha particles.

Fundamental particles are defined as not having any constituent particles, such as electrons, quarks, neutrinos.

A muon is like a second generation 'electron' which is much heavier than the electron by 207 times.

a reply to: gortex

Yep, me too, it's way above my pay grade.

However, it's fascinating science. Things like...

From July 2006 to December 2012, the CNGS project sent muon neutrinos from CERN to the Gran Sasso National Laboratory (LNGS), 732 kilometres away in Italy. Neutrinos interact so weakly with other particles that they pass easily through the intervening rock. At Gran Sasso, two experiments, OPERA and ICARUS, wait to find out if any of the muon neutrinos have transformed into tau neutrinos.

home.cern...

The LNGS is often forgotten, I know about it because it's very close to home...

Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso (LNGS) is the largest underground research center in the world. Situated below Gran Sasso mountain in Italy, it is well known for particle physics research by the INFN.

en.m.wikipedia.org...