Quantitative Support for Convergence of Intrinsic Energies from Applied Magnetic Fields and “Noise” Fluctuations of Newton’s Gravitational Value within the Human Brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When the energy within the mass of the human brain that is associated with the intrinsic range in fluctuations of the Gravitational Constant (G) is set equal to the energy from a magnetic field (B) within the cerebral volume and solved for B, a value in the order of 20 to 50 nT is obtained. Quantitative Electroencephalographic (QEEG) and sLORETA (Low Resolution Electromagnetic Tomography) analyses of cerebral cortical activity during exposure to a range of applied rotating, frequency-modulated, transcerebral (between the two temporal lobes) magnetic fields between < 1 nT and 7000 nT while volunteers sat within a darkened, quiet chamber were completed. There was marked enhancement of power within the 4 Hz to 10 Hz band within the right caudal (cuneus) hemisphere while the ~5 to 20 nT averaged strength magnetic fields were applied but no significant responses at lesser or greater intensities. These results suggest that a physical process coupled to the source of the fluctuation (~10-15 m3·kg-1·s-2) in G may interact with right hemispheric activity within the range at which gravity waves have been estimated to interact with Schumann frequencies generated between the earth and ionosphere.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".