MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918030779 · doi:10.5539/apr.v11n2p1

Quantum Mechanics by General Relativity

2019· article· en· W2918030779 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gregory L. Light

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRelativity and Gravitational Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSpacetimeClassical mechanicsVacuum energyDuality (order theory)General relativityQuantum mechanicsElectromagnetismTheoretical physicsMathematical physicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the framework of General Relativity we explain the creation of all particles, ordinary and anti, in two chiral directions, with multiple generations, as well as electromagnetism and the strong nuclear force. Quantum mechanics is well-known to have its foundational problems revolving around the wave-particle duality, which actually has an exact solution, viz., a diagonal spacetime manifold that admits any particle of energy coupled with its wave of energy co-existing at the same spacetime (t + it, x + iy, y + iz, z + ix). I.e., a photon can travel along x = ct with its associated electromagnetic wave spinning from y to z in circular motion as (y = cos t, z = sin t) ≡ eit. The construct of diagonal manifold, seemingly artificial, is fundamental in differential topology as it leads to the Euler characteristic. That Nature is inherently of duality cannot have a more evident example than that of the complex number x + iy, where 1 implies a linear motion in R and i = eπ2 i implies a circular motion along S 1. That the quantum wave itself possesses energy can be argued simply as: wave = probability = frequency = energy by Planck’s formula. By assigning energy entirely to particle, quantum mechanics has missed an entire copy of the Universe (the wave universe treated as the quantum vacuum).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicRelativity and Gravitational TheoryFrench-language works237,207