Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1998, two groups of astronomers, one led by Saul Perlmutter and the other by Brian Schmidt, set out to determine the deceleration—and hence the total mass/energy—of the universe by measuring the recession speeds of type la supernovae (SN1a), came to an unexpected conclusion: ever since the universe was about 7 billion years old, its expansion rate has not been decelerating. Instead, the expansion rate has been speeding up. To justify this acceleration, they suggested that the universe does have a mysterious dark energy and they have emerged from oblivion the cosmological constant, positive this time, which is consistent with the image of an inflationary universe. To explain the observed dimming of high-redshift SN1a they have bet essentially on their distance revised upwards. We consider that an accelerated expansion leads right to a “dark energy catastrophe” (i.e., the chasm between the current cosmological vacuum density value of 10 GeV/m3 and the vacuum energy density proposed by quantum field theory of ~10122 GeV/m3). We suppose rather that the universe knows a slowdown expansion under the positive pressure of a dark energy, otherwise called a variable cosmological constant. The dark luminosity of the latter would be that of a “tired light” which has lost energy with distance. As for the low brilliance of SN1a, it is explained by two physical processes: The first relates to their intrinsic brightness—supposedly do not vary over time—which would depend on the chemical conditions which change with the temporal evolution; the second would concern their apparent luminosity. Besides the serious arguments already known, we strongly propose that their luminosity continually fades by interactions with cosmic magnetic fields, like the earthly PVLAS experiment which loses much more laser photons than expected by crossing a magnetic field. It goes in the sense of a “tired light” which has lost energy with distance, and therefore, a decelerated expansion of the universe. Moreover, we propose the “centrist” principle to complete the hypothesis of the cosmological principle of homogeneity and isotropy considered verified. Without denying the Copernican principle, he is opposed to a “spatial” theoretical construction which accelerates the world towards infinity. The centrist principle gives a “temporal” and privileged vision which tends to demonstrate the deceleration of 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".