Physical Phenomena and Theoretical Problems Explained by the Micro-Quanta Paradigm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The physical research deals mostly with intriguing problems which appear beyond the current physics. Butsometimes they are not well established on theoretical and observational basis. There is however several alreadyobserved phenomena that are really beyond the current physics and wait for a rational explanation depending onnew physical paradigms. For instance, the source of energy heating the galactic cold clouds and QSO, the excessinfrared emission from planets, the planetary geophysical evolution and the cosmological evolution in nearlystatic universe. From the pure theoretical side there are good theories, as Special relativity that kept a“mysterious” character due to the persistent lack of interpretation within some physical paradigm. Consideringthe micro-quanta collisions with particles through the relativistic Doppler effect, some theoretical problems findsolution, as the origin of particle mass, the origin of inertial forces, etc. New physical concepts arise from thisparadigm, for instance the pushing gravitation that shows the basis for the unification of fundamental forces.Some old concepts hidden in our mind, as the Newton’s “gravitational mass”, hindered the gravitational researchin the last century. For instance the incorporation of the Newton’s constant G in General relativity theory guidedthe theoretical research towards some blind alleys, as the unlimited gravitational collapse (black holes), the Bigbang model, the dark energy, etc.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".