Ordinary Versus Novel Particle With the Example of Their Spontaneous Transition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The bicubic equation of particle limiting velocity formalism yields three solutions c1, c2 and c3, (primary, secondary and tertiary) limiting velocities in terms of the congruent parameter which is defined in terms of m, v, and E, respectively being particle mass, velocity and energy. The bicubic equation discriminant D is given in terms of the congruent parameter z(m). When one has z2(m) ≤ 1 with the discriminant satisfying D ≤ 0 then we are talking about limiting velocities of ordinary particles. Good examples are the relativistic particles such as electron, neutrino,etc., with luminal limiting velocity c3 = c and calculated superluminal c2, and imaginary superluminal c1, all corresponding to the real particle energy. On the specific level, the situations like these, we discuss in the muon neutrino velocities with the OPERA detector and the electron velocities from the 2010 Grab Nebula Flare. The z(m) = 1 value separates the ordinary particles from novel particles, associated with D ⪰ 0 and z2 ⪰ 1 with new novel particle limiting velocity solutions c1, c2 and c3 which depend, in addition to z(m), also on the congruent angle α(m), nonlinearly related to z(m). These solutions are discussed on the newly defined sterile neutrino which here is modeled as an ordinary particle with z2 ⪯ 1 spontaneously transiting via z(m) = 1 into the modeled novel sterile neutrino with z2 ⪰ 1. All ordinary and novel particles limiting velocities carry real particle energies; the ordinary particle limiting velocity solutions being in quadratic forms, while the novel particle limiting velocity solutions being respectively, in quadratic complex form, linear complex form, and just congruent angle α complex quadratic form.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".