Cosmological constant, violation of cosmological isotropy and CMB
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We suggest that the solution to the cosmological vacuum energy puzzle does not require any new field beyond the standard model, but rather can be explained as a result of the interaction of the infrared sector of the effective theory of gravity with standard model fields. The cosmological constant in this framework can be presented in terms of QCD parameters and the Hubble constant $H$ as follows, $\epsilon_{vac} \sim H \cdot m_q\la\bar{q}q\ra /m_{\eta'} \sim (4.3\cdot 10^{-3} \text{eV})^4$, which is amazingly close to the observed value today. In this work we explain how this proposal can be tested by analyzing CMB data. In particular, knowing the value of the observed cosmological constant fixes univocally the smallest size of the spatially flat, constant time 3d hypersurface which, for instance in the case of an effective 1-torus, is predicted to be around 74 Gpc. We also comment on another important prediction of this framework which is a violation of cosmological isotropy. Such anisotropy is indeed apparently observed by WMAP, and will be confirmed (or ruled out) by future PLANCK data.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".