The standard model of particle physics is a widely accepted theory, initially developed in the 1970’s, which dictates that all basic building blocks of matter are governed by four fundamental forces: the electromagnetic force, weak nuclear force, gravity, and strong nuclear force. But scientists at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) in Batva, Illinois, think they could be on the brink of discovering a fifth force of nature.

For the Muon g-2 experiment, scientists observed muons (essentially heavier electrons) sent around a 14-meter ring, to which a magnetic field was applied. They found that these muons wobbled at a faster rate than dictated by the Standard Model of Physics. There are many explanations for this occurrence: an analytical or chance mistake, a new particle, or perhaps even a new force of nature.  

There is a one in 40,000 chance that this preliminary result is a “statistical fluke”, according to BBC News. While this may seem like a very small likelihood of a mistake, it is still well below the measure that is commonly regarded as statistically certain. So why would Fermilab release the results of an experiment that isn’t yet fully confirmed? 

Well, says Dr. Andrea Lommen, a Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Haverford College, “Scientists often have to decide whether to wait on an exciting result in order to gather more evidence or they risk getting scooped,”(i.e. someone else announces it before they do). This is a phenomenon exacerbated by social media, she says, and specifically Twitter. 

There is also the issue of sensationalism and public perception of science. People are a lot more likely to be interested in an experiment which appears to disprove the Standard Model, rather than one which confirms it. “In the last five years,” says Lommen, “There have probably been 1,000 experiments that demonstrated that the standard model was correct, and the newspapers didn’t care about them at all.”

Here’s the thing: scientific theories can never actually be proved. The best thing scientists can do is conduct experiments which test certain hypotheses, and then once a significant number of those tests produce results in conjunction with a theory, it is generally accepted. 

“Results get ‘undone’ all the time in science,” says Dr. Lommen. “It’s the way it works. You have a theory. If the data seem to confirm it, you try to ‘poke holes’ in your theory. If your theory withstands a lot of prodding, your case gets better, and it starts to become accepted. But a lot of the time the bubble bursts.” For now, we will just have to wait and see what the confirmed results for the experiment are.