An alternative model of gravitational forces in nature using the combined effects of repulsion and attraction forces on gaseous molecules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Laboratory experiments and natural phenomena investigations in this research series experimentally revealed the existence of gravitational repulsion force dependent on thermal energy content, pervading our surroundings both microscopically and macroscopically. This paper presents an alternative mathematical model of both gravitational repulsion and attraction forces between two gaseous molecules, validated by experimental data. The model is self-standing and independent of existing models built on idealistic assumptions. While existing models considered gravitational interaction as a single force, the presented experimental model considers it the resultant of two distinct forces: gravitational repulsion and attraction. When established experimental data on nitrogen, hydrogen, oxygen, water vapor, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide were applied, the model performed, both analytically and experimentally: (1) confirming the existence of both gravitational repulsion and attraction forces among gas molecules, (2) demonstrating that the two forces follow Inverse-Cube relationship with the distance between molecules, (3) revealing that repulsion force is linearly proportional to the absolute temperature, thus filling the critical gap between energy and fundamental forces. Orders of magnitude of gravitational repulsion and attraction forces are very large compared to the gravitational force between gas molecules calculated according to the classical theory, enabling manipulation to achieve hitherto unknown outcomes and developments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".