Aether dynamics: Aether destruction and the expansion of the universe. A new theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new theory is presented to explain the expansion of the universe. The theory is based on the aether destructive theory of gravity, which states that gravity is due to aether destruction within all objects. In the case of an object such as the earth, aether is destroyed within the earth. Aether then accelerates into the earth from outer space, creating an accelerating aether flow into the earth. Any object, such as the moon, caught in this accelerating aether flow will be pushed towards the earth. This process is the fundamental cause of gravity. As a result of aether destruction, and no immediate replacement, aether density throughout the universe gradually decreases. This results in a gradual fall in the strength of gravity. All celestial objects are in orbit around other celestial objects. As the force of gravity falls, orbiting objects move away from each other in order to keep the balance between centrifugal and centripetal forces intact. We propose that this fall in gravitational strength is the cause of the expansion of the universe. The conditions and the reason for that fall caused by the aether dynamic are given. To understand our model, we suggest a study based on a closed group of selected celestial objects orbiting around one another, and the accelerating expansion of the universe is due to the weakening of the gravitational force between the selected objects and their center, which is later inferred between this center and the rest 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 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".