Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we propose a new model of dark matter. According to this new model, dark matter is a substance, that is a new physical element not constituted of classical particles, called dark substance and filling the Universe. Assuming some very simple physical properties to this dark substance, we theoretically justify the flat rotation curve of galaxies and the baryonic Tully-Fisher’s law. We then study according to our new theory of dark matter the different possible distributions of dark matter in galaxies and in galaxy clusters, and the velocities of galaxies in galaxy clusters. Then using the new model of dark matter we are naturally led to propose a new geometrical model of Universe, finite, that is different from all geometrical models proposed by the Standard Cosmological Model (SCM). Despite that our Theory of dark matter is compatible with the SCM, we then expose a new Cosmological model based on this new geometrical form of the Universe and on the interpretation of the CMB Rest Frame (CRF), that has not physical interpretation on the SCM and that we will call local Cosmological frame. We then propose 2 possible mathematical models of expansion inside the new Cosmological model. The 1st mathematical model is based on General Relativity as the SCM and gives the same theoretical predictions of distances and of the Hubble’s constant as the SCM. The 2nd mathematical model of expansion of the Universe is mathematically much simpler than the mathematical model of expansion used in the SCM, but we will see that its theoretical predictions are in agreement with astronomical observations. Moreover, this 2nd mathematical model of expansion does not need to introduce the existence of a dark energy contrary to the mathematical model of expansion of the SCM. To end we study the evolution of the temperature of dark substance in the Universe and we make appear the existence of a dark energy, due to our model of dark matter.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".