MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046309317 · doi:10.5539/apr.v12n4p8

Quantum Model of Inertia - Predictions - Confirmations, Consequences for Gravitation into Galaxies, and LCDM Cosmology Models

2020· article· en· W3046309317 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Claude Poher, Danielle Poher

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsDark matterDark energyAstrophysicsGravitationGalaxyCosmologyClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a Quantum model of Inertia using two main hypotheses, (i) existence of a general isotropic flux of Quanta (named “Universons”, which differ from Gravitons), propagating at light velocity into the Universe, (ii) a very short time duration interaction of these Quanta with elementary massive matter particles, with temporary momentum transfer (really a 2π phase shift of the wave function). Model parameters values are obtained from observations. The natural flux has Random Fluctuations in intensity and in direction, predicted to be the cause of Gravitational acceleration, a model of Gravitation is deduced. Predictions of the two models are confirmed by free fall of cold Neutrons; and by strong electrons accelerations into superconducting devices. A supplementary Cosmological acceleration H0 c, from Universe expansion, is predicted and confirmed by Astronomical observations. Galaxies rotation velocities are predicted from quantum fluctuations and H0c effect, solving the enigma that required Cold Dark Matter mass hypothesis. The cosmological concordance model has therefore to be strongly modified, and the isotropic flux expansion could also explain observations without “Dark Energy”.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamicsFrench-language works237,207