Quantum Mechanics Hypothesis of Solar System Structure: Quantum de Broglie Wavelength
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantifying the energy of objects orbiting the Sun is not a novel concept. We have found that if we use the real quantum number associated with the real energy state of rotating bodies, quantization works well. This quantum number is very high for the main bodies or planets (10~70 to 76). However, since quantum energy levels are very high \(\Delta\)E and very low we observe that body can in practice occupy all orbits. As a result, the current stable positions of the bodies as they are currently viewed are the aggregate of the impacts of all other perturbing phenomena as well as the quantization. We expressed the genuine integer quantum numbers as a function of the planet Mercury in order to locate a quantum state with n=1 and discovered a good correlation. However, the search for a correlation of prediction of the average orbital radius of bodies using the simple integer number n=1,2,3,4,5,6,7 is not excellent for bodies beyond the planet Pluto. Indeed, so many trans-Neptunian bodies have identical integer quantum numbers, which complicates the sequence of integer numbers beyond 10. Moreover, it appears that the trans-Neptunian bodies seem to be grouped for many of them according to relatively well-defined bands. The study made it possible to question the de Broglie wavelength of bodies (10~-58 to -65m). Indeed, with the hypothesis of Planck’s quantities that would apply to the scale of the universe, it is difficult to conceive that de Broglie wavelengths are less than the Planck length lm. This led to an expression of the modified de Broglie wavelength \(\lambda\)m that predicts an asymptotic lower limit value equal to . With the help of this modified de Broglie wavelength, it is feasible to forecast the average orbital radius of bodies with more accuracy.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".