Explanation of the huge difference between vacuum energy and dark energy in the theory of the dynamic medium of reference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The object of this article is to present the vacuum energy and the dark energy within the framework of the theory of the dynamic medium of reference and to explain the phenomenal difference between the two energies. The dynamic medium is made up of entities (called gravitons) whose vectorial average of speed determines the speed of the flux of the medium at each point in space. It is shown that inside the horizon of black holes (defined by the Schwarzschild radius), the speed of flux is greater than the speed of light, which means that the gravitons themselves have a higher speed to that of light. The quantum entanglement of two photons which propagate in two opposite directions is due to a connection made by gravitons. It is therefore proposed that the gravitons move at the speed V G ≈ R universe t Planck ≈ 2.4 × 1069 m/s, which makes it possible to guarantee the entanglement of the two photons whatever their position in the Universe and the impossibility to measure the time taken by the influence of a photon to arrive at its twin photon because it is less than the Planck time t Planck. The expression of the vacuum energy and that of the dark energy within the framework of the theory of the dynamic medium of reference is established. The two expressions E vacuum and E dark and the value of the speed of the most distant galaxies V galaxy make it possible to calculate an approximate value of the speed of the gravitons V G ≈ V galaxy E vacuum E dark ≈ 2.8 × 1069 m/s. This value of the speed of the graviton is very close to that obtained by the quantum entanglement of two photons, which reinforces the existence of nonmaterial entities going at these phenomenal speeds.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".