Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".