(Pic not related) http://m.phys.org/news/2016-08-physicists-discovery-nature.html#jCp [quote]Recent findings indicating the possible discovery of a previously unknown subatomic particle may be evidence of a fifth fundamental force of nature, according to a paper published in the journal Physical Review Letters by theoretical physicists at the University of California, Irvine. --- The UCI researchers came upon a mid-2015 study by experimental nuclear physicists at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences who were searching for "dark photons," particles that would signify unseen dark matter, which physicists say makes up about 85 percent of the universe's mass. The Hungarians' work uncovered a radioactive decay anomaly that points to the existence of a light particle just 30 times heavier than an electron. "The experimentalists weren't able to claim that it was a new force," Feng said. "They simply saw an excess of events that indicated a new particle, but it was not clear to them whether it was a matter particle or a force-carrying particle." The UCI group studied the Hungarian researchers' data as well as all other previous experiments in this area and showed that the evidence strongly disfavors both matter particles and dark photons. They proposed a new theory, however, that synthesizes all existing data and determined that the discovery could indicate a fifth fundamental force. Their initial analysis was published in late April on the public arXiv online server, and a follow-up paper amplifying the conclusions of the first work was released Friday on the same website. The UCI work demonstrates that instead of being a dark photon, the particle may be a "protophobic X boson." While the normal electric force acts on electrons and protons, this newfound boson interacts only with electrons and neutrons - and at an extremely limited range. Analysis co-author Timothy Tait, professor of physics & astronomy, said, "There's no other boson that we've observed that has this same characteristic. Sometimes we also just call it the 'X boson,' where 'X' means unknown."[/quote] I found this pretty interesting, figured I'd share it with you guys, as I know many of you like hearing about the wacky shit that goes on in modern physics. Mind you, [i]they are hyping this up[/i], as in, there is still a good chance that this isn't evidence of a 5th fundamental force, however they've ruled out most other possibilities. So what does this mean for physics if there is a 5th fundamental force? It means a couple of things. Firstly, it means our standard model is wrong, and so are our attempts to mathematically unify the different interactions in nature. This is a good thing, because we've known that it was wrong, now we just might have evidence that it is. To enlighten those who don't know, we know our model is fundamentally wrong, because A) We haven't/can't/probably won't find the particle for Gravity and B) The difference between the weak force and Gravity is so large, that it requires fine tuning of the universe in order to make sense with our current understanding of things, this is called the hierarchy problem. Now this new particle will not solve this problem, however what it can do is help lead us to that solution. As more data flows in about it, theoretical physicists will essentially attempt to stitch it into the mathematical framework of our model, and see where this lands us. In doing so, we refine our search for things like dark matter and a solution to the hierarchy problem. On another note, this also brings up the inquiry of whether or not there are an infinite amount of fundamental forces. Now, this is baseless speculation, so take it as a grain of salt, but if there were an infinite amount of forces, quantum mechanics would be completely wrong, even though we've established accurate, testable data proving it, and can accurately predict nature with it. But this opens up the idea that there is more to our standard model than what we currently have. As brought up in the article, perhaps there is a "dark" section of strictly dark matter and "dark" particles. For anyone who wishes to review the actual study: http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.03591