MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040022822 · doi:10.4006/0836-1398-33.1.99

Newtonian quantum gravity

2020· article· en· W3040022822 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Essays · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRelativity and Gravitational Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsGeneral relativityEinsteinTheory of relativityTheoretical physicsQuantum gravityProblem of timeGravitationClassical mechanicsQuantumQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Newtonian Quantum Gravity (NQG) unifies quantum physics with Newton's theory of gravity and calculates the so-called “general relativistic” phenomena more precisely and in a much simpler way than General Relativity, whose complicated theoretical construct is no longer needed. Newton's theory of gravity is less accurate than Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity. Famous examples are the precise predictions of General Relativity at binary pulsars. This is the reason why relativistic physicists claim that there can be no doubt that Einstein's theory of relativity correctly describes our physical reality. With the example of the famous “Hulse-Taylor binary” (also known as PSR 1913 + 16 or PSR B1913 + 16), the author proves that the so-called “general relativistic phenomena” observed at this binary solar system can be calculated without having any knowledge on relativistic physics. According to philosophical and epistemological criteria, this should not be possible, if Einstein's theory of relativity indeed described our physical reality. Einstein obviously merely developed an alternative method to calculate these phenomena without quantum physics. The reason was that in those days quantum physics was not yet generally taken into account. It is not the first time that a lack of knowledge of the underlying physical phenomena has to be compensated by complicated mathematics. Einstein's theory of general relativity indirectly already includes additional quantum physical effects of gravitation. This is the reason why it cannot be possible to unite Einstein's theory of general relativity with quantum physics, unless one uses “mathematical tricks” that make the additional quantum physical effects disappear again in the end.

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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.231 · 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