MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003793689 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.gr-qc/0603005

Theoretical Basis for a Solution to the Cosmological Constant Problem

2006· preprint· en· W3003793689 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jean-Christophe Lindner

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsTheoretical physicsPhysicsAxiomCoincidenceDark energyCosmologyGeneral relativityAction (physics)Theory of relativityContext (archaeology)Classical mechanicsBasis (linear algebra)MathematicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207