Derived Functions from the Hubble-Lemaitre Equation and Some Related Methaphysical Especulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the Hubble-Lemaitre equation v = Hr (1) proposes the expansion velocity of the Space (International Astrophysical Union, 2018), the equation H2r2 has been assumed as the squared of velocity (Cassé, 2001). Therefore, it may be proposed, logically, the equation ΓH = H2r (2) to correspond to the Space acceleration expansion, which was demonstrated to be a constant in reference (Lartigue, 2016). On this assumption, the expression for the Hubble parameter results as (Lartigue, 2018a) H = √2/t (3). In this paper it is revised the concept of the Hubble potential to substitute the dark energy. The present values of some Space parameters are also obtained. In ref. (Lartigue, 2018b) they were discussed the two main theories about the origin of the Universe: the Big Bang and the Quantum Fluctuation, arriving to the conclusion that the Big Bang (creation ex-nihilo) was the most probable option; besides, they were mentioned two metaphysical conditions in the creation of human beings: transcendence and ethics. This paper reviews those conditions and proposes some metaphysical subjects related to probable steps in the creational task.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".