MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389814835 · doi:10.4006/0836-1398-36.4.411

The fourth dimension of space and the entanglement principle

2023· article· en· W4389814835 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahmood Alborzi

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Essays · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRelativity and Gravitational Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSpace (punctuation)Position (finance)Dimension (graph theory)Quantum entanglementPoint (geometry)Speed of light (cellular automaton)Event (particle physics)Unit vectorMathematical analysisGeometryMathematicsPure mathematicsQuantum mechanicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on the reason behind the entanglement phenomena, which is still an unknown fundamental question. It argues that while two entangled particles are separated in the 3D space the flow of information between them is instantaneous through the 4D space. The fourth dimension of space has the unit of measurement of length like the other three space dimensions. We shall call it Q, from the word quatre (four) in French. Its magnitude is equal to the invariant proper time τ times the speed of light c. Q = cτ. Each point in the 4D space corresponds to an event. Distances between events in the four-dimensional space can be computed using the Pythagoras theorem. It is argued that time t as measured by clock in our 3D space times the speed of light gives the length of the position vector of an event in the 4D space. At time t, when an observation is made at one of the entangled particles, the length of the position vectors of both entangled particles, sharing the same wave function, in 4D space are equal to t times the speed of light, i.e., ct. The time t is also the same for all the points on the line connecting the two events in the 3D space. Consequently, the length of the position vectors of all the points on the line connecting the two events in the 3D space is equal to ct in the 4D space. The corresponding points in the 4D space make an arc of equidistance to the origin. It is conjectured that the flow of information between the two entangled particles through this arc in the 4D space is not carried by energy or mass particles. It is, therefore, not bound by the time nor the speed of light constraint in 4D space and is instantaneous.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.014
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics EssaysSame topicRelativity and Gravitational TheoryFrench-language works237,207