Talk:Fifth force

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Would forces such as the Casimir effect fall under this heading? Btyner 21:08, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. Traditionally only forces that "couples to" (are proportional tp) mass-energy are considered are counted as "difth force". The Casimir effect is an important difficuly in the short range experiments looking for a fifth force. --Pjacobi 22:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
@Btyner: The Casimir effect is a side effect of the electromagnetic force, caused by the creation of virtual particle pairs (vacuum fluctuations) in empty space due to the Uncertainty principle. It is not a new fundamental force. 2601:601:447E:1720:C086:C003:3E7D:98DF (talk) 20:15, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh[edit]

I dunno which is worse - how much space has been devoted here to a shaky theory, or insane amount of jargon used to describe it. This article is borderline unreadable for a layman. 24.29.9.211 (talk) 09:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)Ubiquitousnewt[reply]

Experimental evidence?[edit]

Randell Mills has published a paper that purportedly describes experimental confirmation of his theory regarding the fifth force anti-gravitational effect of so-called hyperbolic electrons. The experimental setup seems fairly straight forward - create hyperbolic electrons by shooting a beam of free electrons of the correct energy through a perpendicular beam of neutral atoms (e.g. He, Ne, Ar, etc.). He then measures the upward (anti-gravitational) deflection of the electrons by the ratio of current densities at two grounded electrode plates, one above and one below the electron beam, both positioned about 100mm behind the atomic beam. He varies the electron energy and sees deflectional peaks that correspond, roughly, to quantum modes predicted by his theory. This seems like a pretty interesting phenomena - particularly because it should be easy to replicate. Anyone else think this is worth mentioning on this page? GenMan2000 01:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Martin Nieto (of the Greenland experiment) suggested such an experiment as a means of testing the Fifth Force over metre length scales. I know he was trying to get an experiment together; unfortunately I did not hear what became of it (I am not a physicist; my interest was in measuring ice thickness). --APRCooper (talk) 16:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greenland experiment[edit]

I have added information about the Greenland experiment to determine Big G. I also reformatted the references to the conventional standard. I may not have correctly located the references in the text.

An aside, that would violate NPOV and so isn't for the main article, but the Greenland experiment, although it COULD be explained by geological bodies, requires such an extreme geology that it seems unlikely! --APRCooper (talk) 16:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lede change[edit]

rm "and physicists now believe that there is no evidence for a fifth force" since SFAIK this is actually the opposite of the current situation. Which of the following does the editor that placed that deny: the observed accelerating expansion of the universe or that a force is required to explain this acceleration? Lycurgus (talk) 18:30, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Malware Link Removal[edit]

--Gary Dee 18:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New article[edit]

Nature magazine May 25, 2016, Has a Hungarian Physics Lab Found a Fifth Force of Nature? Some theorists say a radioactive decay anomaly could imply a fundamental new force – Tomruen (talk) 18:20, May 25, 2016

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fifth force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:25, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extra dimensions[edit]

What is the point of bringing up the submarine experiments, if we don't get informed of the results? Are we supposed to assume "similar experiments" necessarily produced similar results? – 24.213.20.170 (talk) 01:12, July 26, 2019 (UTC)

Issues with this page: incorrect citations and WP:fringe citations[edit]

In the physics literature -- scientific literature -- the discussion about "fifth force" primarily refer to Ephraim Fischbach's work summarized in

  • The Rise and Fall of the Fifth Force Discovery, Pursuit, and Justification in Modern Physics By Allan Franklin, Ephraim Fischbach

However the weight of the article here is towards speculations. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fifth_force&oldid=1194900847"