MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388976329 · doi:10.24297/jap.v21i.9551

QUASARS – POINTERS TO AN INFINITE, ETERNAL AND DIALECTICAL UNIVERSE AND A REPUDIATION OF THE BIG BANG COSMOLOGY

2023· article· en· W4388976329 on OpenAlexaff
Abdul Malek

Bibliographic record

VenueJOURNAL OF ADVANCES IN PHYSICS · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial Life
Canadian institutionsAxdev Group (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig Bang (financial markets)UniversePhysicsDialecticTheoretical physicsCosmologyQuasarAstrophysicsAstronomyPhysical cosmologyNarrativeEpistemologyPhilosophyDe Sitter universeGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quasars (quasi-stellar [star-like] radio sources) represent the critical criteria for choice between two opposite and widely different ontological and epistemological narrative of the universe. The first one, which is mainly based on mathematical idealism, views the universe as deterministic and an essentially unidirectional condensation of diffuse matter created through a single primordial explosion (The Big Bang) about 13.8 billion years ago. The second view, based on (limited) observational and empirical evidence asserts a rather intrinsic and dialectical evolution (appearance/disappearance) of matter and motion in this infinite, eternal and ever-changing universe; where new cosmic bodies are formed from ejected and/or dissipated newly created material; from the core of the existing cosmic bodies.; mediated by chance and necessity. Evidence and resource materials provided in this article clearly favours the dialectical narrative of the universe.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.087
Scholarly communication0.0130.020
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJOURNAL OF ADVANCES IN PHYSICSSame topicSpace Science and Extraterrestrial LifeFrench-language works237,207