Bibliographic record
Abstract
The gravitational aether theory is a modification of general relativity that decouples vacuum energy from gravity, and thus can potentially address the cosmological constant problem. The classical theory is distinguishable from general relativity only in the presence of relativistic pressure (or vorticity). Since the interior of neutron stars has high pressure and as their mass and radius can be measured observationally, they are the perfect laboratory for testing the validity of the aether theory. In this paper, we solve the equations of stellar structure for the gravitational aether theory and find the predicted mass-radius relation of nonrotating neutron stars using two different realistic proposals for the equation of state of nuclear matter. We find that the maximum neutron-star mass predicted by the aether theory is 12%--16% less than the maximum mass predicted by general relativity assuming these two equations of state. We also show that the effect of aether is similar to modifying the equation of state in general relativity. The effective pressure of the neutron star given by the aether theory at a fiducial density differs from the values given by the two nuclear equations of state to an extent that can be constrained using future gravitational wave observations of neutron stars in compact systems. This is a promising way to test the aether theory if further progress is made in constraining the equation of state of nuclear matter in densities above the nuclear saturation density.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".