The Origin of Gravity An Attempt to Answer this Question with the Help of Existing Concepts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this document an attempt is made to explain the origin of gravity. The basis for the analysis is a merger of quantum theory and relativity. Nowhere in the analysis there is any need to deviate from well proven and successful concepts of both theories and rules of calculation, and no exotic new particles will have to be introduced. By doing so it is demonstrated that, next to its local interactions of a multi-particle system, the Schrödinger equation leads to pairs of two and only two members. This solution is used as the invariant term in the quantized Einstein energy equation which finally leads to gravitational interactions between members of the pairs. With this particular solution for the quantum-mechanical wave function it is found that gravity is a second order effect operating over a long range. In this document it is tried to give a complete and consistent account of all steps that have been taken in the derivation of the classical Newton’s gravity law. Further, the document emphasizes precise justification of some of the basic assumptions made and how it works out on a cosmological scale. It is also found that the generator of gravity is contributing mass to particles that have gravitational interaction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".