Testing Loop Quantum Gravity from Observational Consequences of Nonsingular Rotating Black Holes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lack of rotating black hole models, which are typically found in nature, in loop quantum gravity (LQG) substantially hinders the progress of testing LQG from observations. Starting with a nonrotating LQG black hole as a seed metric, we construct a rotating spacetime using the revised Newman-Janis algorithm. The rotating solution is nonsingular everywhere and it reduces to the Kerr black hole asymptotically. In different regions of the parameter space, the solution describes (1) a wormhole without event horizon (which, we show, is almost ruled out by observations), (2) a black hole with a spacelike transition surface inside the event horizon, or (3) a black hole with a timelike transition region inside the inner horizon. It is shown how fundamental parameters of LQG can be constrained by the observational implications of the shadow cast by this object. The causal structure of our solution depends crucially only on the spacelike transition surface of the nonrotating seed metric, while being agnostic about specific details of the latter, and therefore captures universal features of an effective rotating, nonsingular black hole in LQG.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it