More Evidence for an Oscillation Superimposed on the Hubble Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a recent investigation evidence was presented for a low-level sinusoidal oscillation superimposed on top of the Hubble flow. This oscillation was in V$_{CMB}$, in a sample of type Ia Supernovae sources with accurate distances, and it was found to have a wavelength close to 40 Mpc. It became easily visible after the removal of several previously identified discrete velocity components. Its amplitude like that of the Hubble velocity showed an increase with distance, as would be expected for a constant-amplitude space oscillation. Here we report that this oscillation is also present in distance clumping in these sources, with the same wavelength, but in phase quadrature. The discrete velocity components do not play a role in detecting the distance clumping wavelength. Assuming that time proceeds from high cosmological redshift to low, the blue-shifted velocity peaks, which represent the contraction stage of the velocity oscillation, then lead the density peaks. With the discrete velocity components removed we also find evidence for at least one other, weaker velocity oscillation. It is found to have a wavelength similar to one reported in density clumping by previous investigators. In those cases the source samples were much larger.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".