MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4292571949 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2021-0406

Einstein–Cartan–Holst–Proca dynamos massive photons as dark matter and GWs

2022· article· en· W4292571949 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
L. C. García de Andrade

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPhotonTorsion (gastropod)Dark matterMathematical physicsParticle physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we extend Shaposhnikov et al.'s parity violating the Einstein–Cartan–Holst action by adding to Holst term H, a Proca photon–torsion coupling χpt = 10−24 as computed by De Sabbata, Garcia de Andrade, and Sivaram. The strength of Holst term is obtained, in the case of early universe torsion as, T ∼ 1 MeV. The gravity part is the Planck mass product with the Holst term. The photon mass in this case yields m2 γ H ∼ 10−69 GeV4. Therefore, in this case, the photon interacts very weakly with spin-torsion matter in Einstein–Cartan (EC) gravity and the strength of the Maxwell–Proca–Holst interaction is much weaker than in the pure gravity sector. For dark photons, this situation changes drastically since a dark photon mass reaches 1.5 GeV, and from this mass and T = 10−3 GeV, one obtains a Maxwell–Proca–Holst strength of 10−6 GeV4, which is now comparable with the gravity sector. Dynamo mechanism competes with the chirality and dissipation by the handness of the magnetic field with respect to the torsion trace vector to regenerate the magnetic field decay. Bombacigno and Mantovani recently found a sign of the Immirzi parameter in the Holst–Nieh–Yan extension of EC gravity. Here, we also find torsion waves for the Immirzi inverse parameter in the sense that this divergence of torsion trace is porportional to the Immirzi field.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physics→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→