Theoretical Basis for a Solution to the Cosmological Constant Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following a short discussion of some unresolved issues in the standard model of cosmology (considered to be a generic LCDM model with flat geometry and an early period of inflation), an update on the current state of research regarding the problem of negative energy is provided. Arguments are then given to the effect that traditional assumptions concerning the behavior of negative-energy matter give rise to various inconsistencies, including a violation of the requirement of relational definition of physical attributes. An alternative set of axioms is proposed that would govern the behavior of negative-energy matter if it is to be considered a viable element of physical theories upon which cosmological models are build. A generalization of the core mathematical framework of general relativity theory is derived from the proposed axioms, which enables the formulation of quantitative predictions concerning the interaction of positive- and negative-energy objects. Based on those developments, solutions are proposed to the problem of the discrepancy between theoretical and experimental values of the average density of vacuum energy and to several other related issues in theoretical cosmology, including the problem of the nature of dark matter and dark energy and that of the origin of thermodynamic time asymmetry.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".