Inconsistencies of the New No-Boundary Proposal
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In previous works, we have demonstrated that the path integral for real, Lorentzian four-geometries in Einstein gravity yields sensible results in well-understood physical situations, but leads to uncontrolled fluctuations when the “no boundary” condition proposed by Hartle and Hawking is imposed. In order to circumvent our result, new definitions for the gravitational path integral have been sought, involving specific choices for a class of complex four-geometries to be included. In their latest proposal, Diaz Dorronsoro et al. advocate for integrating the lapse over a complex circular contour enclosing the origin. In this note, we show that, like their earlier proposal, this leads to mathematical and physical inconsistencies and thus cannot be regarded as a basis for quantum cosmology. We also comment on Vilenkin and Yamada’s recent modification of the “tunneling" proposal, made in order to avoid the same problems. We show that it leads to the breakdown of perturbation theory in a strong coupling regime.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it