# Are nuclear forces leaking into other dimensions? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 15, 2002, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266 "2002-06-15T22:34:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Victory\_Candescence](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Victory\_Candescence](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Victory_Candescence)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2002, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/1 "2002-06-15T22:34:03Z")
Gravity and Electromagnetism obey the inverse-square law because the surface area of a 3-dimensional sphere is proportional to 1/r-squared, correct? (The energy is propagating away from its source along the surface of an imaginary sphere.) If there were any forces that weaken according to an inverse-cube or inverse-4th-power law, then they would propagate away from their source on the “surface” of an imaginary higher-dimensional hypersphere, right? My question is: _Don’t the strong and weak nuclear forces weaken with distance along an inverse-cube or inverse-4th law, or something like that? If so, does that mean that those forces are expanding into other dimensions along the “surface” of imaginary higher-dimensional hyperspheres?_\* \*I got this idea from the fact that the two nuclear forces only have significant effect at very close distances. Thus, I assumed they dropped off very fast. So, I assumed that they must be obeying something stronger than an inverse-square law. Yes, my question is born from a lot of assuming. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2002, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/2 "2002-06-15T22:42:53Z")
OOOooohh-kay. Going to that tinfoil haberdasher, huh **Recursion**? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2002, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/3 "2002-06-15T22:56:12Z")
Darn, I was beaten to the tinfoil hat bit. Maybe you should re-state the question, Recursion, breaking it down into smaller sub-problems. Get it? “recursion”. Duffman can program, BOO-yeah! ---
**Author:** ![Victory\_Candescence](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Victory\_Candescence](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Victory_Candescence)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2002, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/4 "2002-06-15T23:01:20Z")
I’m referring to the tiny curled-up dimensions of Superstring theory, not the “Invaders from Another Dimension Will Eat Your Brain!” dimensions. **Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor** : Actually, I prefer alumin(i)um foil. ---
**Author:** ![Com2Kid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4af34b/32.png) [@Com2Kid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Com2Kid)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2002, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/5 "2002-06-15T23:02:59Z")
This is a somewhat popular plot line in many science fiction stories; aside from that though, all I can give you is a Google link; [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=nuclear+forces+leaking+dimensions](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=nuclear+forces+leaking+dimensions) Apparently some people in the past have thought yes, others have thought no, and all in all nobody is really working about it because it would take a long time. 🙂 There was some evidence awhile back that stated that some of the constants in the universe have changed a tad wee little bit since the big bang, but once again, nobody gave much of a care cuz hey, looong time before anybody notices any real effects. 🙂 > **[More on the Fine Structure Constant - Slashdot](https://science.slashdot.org/story/02/05/19/0513200/more-on-the-fine-structure-constant)** > > Bonker writes "Neat news from the Beeb. It turns out that data collected from observation of quasars indicates that the fine structure constant of the universe, aka 'Alpha', may have changed since the universe began. It may have been very slightly... ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2002, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/6 "2002-06-15T23:12:57Z")
Not if John Ashcroft can help it !😃 ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2002, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/7 "2002-06-15T23:42:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Recursion \* > Don’t the strong and weak nuclear forces weaken with distance along an inverse-cube or inverse-4th law, or something like that Bottom-line: nope. The weak force falls off as an exponential, while the strong force increases roughly linearly with distance. The complication with the latter is that we primarily observe it’s _residual_ effects - but they’re exponential as well. ---
**Author:** ![Victory\_Candescence](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Victory\_Candescence](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Victory_Candescence)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2002, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/8 "2002-06-15T23:54:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bonzer \* > \*\* > > The weak force falls off as an exponential, while the strong force increases roughly linearly with distance. The complication with the latter is that we primarily observe it’s _residual_ effects - but they’re exponential as well. \*\* Cite? ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2002, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/9 "2002-06-16T00:32:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Recursion \* > Cite? Absolutely off the cuff, a textbook cite for the strong force being primarily linear would be equation (1.20) from Collins, Martin and Squires _Particle Physics and Cosmology_ (Wiley, 1989). As for the residual effect being exponential, I suppose that’s orignally Yukawa’s _Proc.Phys.Math.Soc.Japan._\*\* 17\*\*, 48, 1935. For the weak interaction, you want Weinberg or Salam. Or the experimental paper on W and Z of Banner _et al_, either of the G. Arnison _et al_ papers or P. Bagnaia_et al_, all from 1983. ---
**Author:** ![fighting\_ignorant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ac8455/32.png) [@fighting\_ignorant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fighting_ignorant)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2002, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/10 "2002-06-16T01:08:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bonzer \* > \*\* > > Absolutely off the cuff, a textbook cite for the strong force being primarily linear would be equation (1.20) from Collins, Martin and Squires _Particle Physics and Cosmology_ (Wiley, 1989). As for the residual effect being exponential, I suppose that’s orignally Yukawa’s _Proc.Phys.Math.Soc.Japan._\*\* 17\*\*, 48, 1935. For the weak interaction, you want Weinberg or Salam. Or the experimental paper on W and Z of Banner _et al_, either of the G. Arnison _et al_ papers or P. Bagnaia_et al_, all from 1983. \*\* Damn! Easily the _best_, most decisive response to “cite?” … EVER! ---
**Author:** ![Ring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Ring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ring)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2002, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/11 "2002-06-16T02:56:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Recursion \* > \*\* > > Cite? \*\* When Bonzer posts something about physics there is no need for a cite. Just listen to what he says. He will, indubitably, be correct. ---
**Author:** ![Omphaloskeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bcef8e/32.png) [@Omphaloskeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omphaloskeptic)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2002, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-nuclear-forces-leaking-into-other-dimensions/114266/12 "2002-06-16T20:04:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Recursion _My question is: Don’t the strong and weak nuclear forces weaken with distance along an inverse-cube or inverse-4th law, or something like that? If so, does that mean that those forces are expanding into other dimensions along the “surface” of imaginary higher-dimensional hyperspheres?_ There have already been some good responses, but I want to add that the inverse-square law only holds if the force carriers have infinite range (true, as far as we know, for the photon and graviton). The weak force decays exponentially because the W and Z bosons (the carriers of the weak force) have short lifetimes. The behavior of the strong force is a little more difficult to explain because the force carriers (the gluons) interact strongly with each other as well as with the quarks. This idea has been considered recently by some theorists in The Field Formerly Known As String Theory. In some theories, the three forces other than gravity are confined to a three-dimensional surface, while gravity is not. If there are extra dimensions, then gravity would not be inverse-square at short ranges. This is ruled out by experiments down to about the millimeter scale, but it’s pretty tough to do precision tests of gravity at short ranges, so it isn’t ruled out below this level. So there’s currently no evidence to support this idea, either.