MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1565332011 · doi:10.3390/e17127883

Gravitational Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics

2015· article· en· W1565332011 on OpenAlexaff
J. W. Moffat

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecond law of thermodynamicsLaws of thermodynamicsEntropy (arrow of time)Statistical physicsNon-equilibrium thermodynamicsGravitationThermodynamicsPhysicsLawTheoretical physicsClassical mechanicsMathematicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spontaneous violation of Lorentz and diffeomorphism invariance in a phase near the big bang lowers the entropy, allowing for an arrow of time and the second law of thermodynamics. The spontaneous symmetry breaking leads to O(3,1) → O(3) × R , where O(3) is the rotational symmetry of the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker spacetime. The Weyl curvature tensor Cμνρσ vanishes in the FLRW spacetime satisfying the Penrose zero Weyl curvature conjecture. The requirement of a measure of gravitational entropy is discussed. The vacuum expectation value 〈0|ψμ|0〉 ≠ 0 for a vector field ψμ acts as an order parameter and at the critical temperature Tc a phase transition occurs breaking the Lorentz symmetry spontaneously. During the ordered O(3) symmetry phase the entropy is vanishingly small and for T < Tc as the universe expands the anti-restored O(3,1) Lorentz symmetry leads to a disordered phase and a large increase in entropy creating the arrow of time.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntropySame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207