MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2930189841 · doi:10.5539/apr.v11n3p23

Gravity as the Sole Fundamental Force

2019· article· en· W2930189841 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gregory L. Light

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsGeneral relativityGravitationQuantum gravitySpeed of light (cellular automaton)Feynman diagramMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsQuantum electrodynamicsQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We had explained electromagnetism by gravity before a recent publication in this Journal, in which we further incorporated the nuclear strong force in the framework of gravity. This paper, summarizing our cumulative results, continues to integrate the nuclear weak force with gravity, where we go by the following line of logic: Planck’s formula shows energy E = frequency = probability = wave; hence quantum waves have energies and the Universe is a diagonal spacetime manifold containing {(particle pi, electromagnetic wave λ (pi))}. By Feynman’s analysis on electromagnetic mass, we assume that the distribution of E over (p, λ (p)) is (3/4 , 1/4)E. Then Newton’s gravitational acceleration formula yields E = 1.6 × the observed energy o f p, so that p exists only for a duration of 5/8 λ/c over the cycle [0, λ/c], such as evidenced in quantum tunneling, opening the possibility for λ (p) to be combined with other waves forming new particle(s) for t > 58/ λ/c. By the time ratios of two frames in General Relativity we deduce neutron’s lifetime, and by the Higgs mechanism we show neutron’s decay products.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.009

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.322 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207