MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131080250 · doi:10.1142/s0218271821501212

Fresh look at the effects of gravitational tidal forces on a freely-falling quantum particle

2021· preprint· en· W3131080250 on OpenAlexaff
Fayçal Hammad, Parvaneh Sadeghi, N. Fleury, Alexandre Leblanc

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics D · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCold Atom Physics and Bose-Einstein Condensates
Canadian institutionsChamplain Regional CollegeUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de MontréalBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsGravitational fieldClassical mechanicsSchrödinger equationGravitationHamiltonian (control theory)Harmonic oscillatorFree particleQuantum mechanicsQuantumMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we take a closer and new look at the effects of tidal forces on the free fall of a quantum particle inside a spherically symmetric gravitational field. We derive the corresponding Schrödinger equation for the particle by starting from the fully relativistic Klein–Gordon equation in order (i) to briefly discuss the issue of the equivalence principle and (ii) to be able to compare the relativistic terms in the equation to the tidal-force terms. To the second order of the nonrelativistic approximation, the resulting Schrödinger equation is that of a simple harmonic oscillator in the horizontal direction and that of an inverted harmonic oscillator in the vertical direction. Two methods are used for solving the equation in the vertical direction. The first method is based on a fixed boundary condition, and yields a discrete-energy spectrum with a wavefunction that is asymptotic to that of a particle in a linear gravitational field. The second method is based on time-varying boundary conditions and yields a quantized-energy spectrum that is decaying in time. Moving on to a freely-falling reference frame, we derive the corresponding time-dependent energy spectrum. The effects of tidal forces yield an expectation value for the Hamiltonian and a relative change in time of a wavepacket’s width that are mass-independent. The equivalence principle, which we understand here as the empirical equivalence between gravitation and inertia, is discussed based on these various results. For completeness, we briefly discuss the consequences expected to be obtained for a Bose–Einstein condensate or a superfluid in free fall using the nonlinear Gross–Pitaevskii equation.

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 score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.883

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics DSame topicCold Atom Physics and Bose-Einstein CondensatesFrench-language works237,207