MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060812048 · doi:10.1063/1.1407836

Cosmological implications of a nonseparable 5D solution of the vacuum Einstein field equations

2001· article· en· W2060812048 on OpenAlexaff
Takao Fukui, Sanjeev S. Seahra, Paul S. Wesson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSingularityMathematical physicsEinstein field equationsHypersurfaceEinsteinBig Bang (financial markets)CosmologyNull (SQL)GeodesicCosmological constantBig CrunchMathematical analysisDe Sitter universeMathematicsUniverseQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An exact class of solutions of the 5D vacuum Einstein field equations (EFEs) is obtained. The metric coefficients are found to be nonseparable functions of time and the extra coordinate l and the induced metric on l=const hypersurfaces has the form of a Friedmann–Robertson–Walker cosmology. The 5D manifold and 3D and 4D submanifolds are in general curved, which distinguishes this solution from previous ones in the literature. The singularity structure of the manifold is explored: some models in the class do not exhibit a big bang, while others exhibit a big bang and a big crunch. For the models with an initial singularity, the equation of state of the induced matter evolves from radiation-like at early epochs to Milne-like at late times and the big bang manifests itself as a singular hypersurface in 5D. The projection of comoving 5D null geodesics onto the 4D submanifold is shown to be compatible with standard 4D comoving trajectories, while the expansion of 5D null congruences is shown to be in line with conventional notions of the Hubble expansion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207