MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965583285 · doi:10.4006/1.3025649

Laboratory Physics and Cosmology.

2004· preprint· en· W1965583285 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Antonio Alfonso‐Faus

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Essays · 2004
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCosmological constantPlanck massCosmologyMetric expansion of spacePlanck timeTheoretical physicsGeneral relativityScale factor (cosmology)Planck lengthHomogeneity (statistics)GravitationDark energyClassical mechanicsAstrophysicsQuantumQuantum gravityQuantum mechanicsPlanck scaleStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We find five fundamental reasons demanding that any gravitational mass m, and the speed of light c, vary with cosmological time such that mc remains constant. This is required by the universal condition of conservation of momentum in a Universe with spatial homogeneity. We prove that this is consistent with Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. We call this effect a "MASS BOOM". At the LAB system no such time variations can be detected, unless we make comparisons with cosmological observations. We have to stress that the physical conditions implied by a time varying mass, together with a time varying speed of light, preserving the constancy of momentum, are compatible with Einstein's field equations. We then integrate his cosmological equations and find the solution for the cosmological scale factor a(t) proportional to the square of time, implying an apparent accelerated expansion for the Universe, as seen from the LAB frame. This is the interpretation given to recent observations obtained from the Supernova Type Ia. This determination of the scale factor a(t) is based upon a LAB interpretation and therefore is an apparent effect. On the other hand we note that the product ct being a constant determines the real Universe as a static one, of constant size. The observed red shift at the LAB system is due to a real shrinkage of the quantum world, due to the decrease in size of the quantum particles determined by a decreasing Planck's "constant".

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics EssaysSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207