MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Origins and Unification of the Four Fundamental Forces of Nature

2025· preprint· en· W4406185357 on OpenAlex
Shangqing Liu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Science and Medicine
Canadian institutionsWillow Biosciences (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnificationTheoretical physicsPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The four fundamental forces of nature are extremely important because they dominate the formation and evolution of the universe. However, until now, their physical origins and essential qualities have not been explained with wide acceptance. Based on new and solid understandings, this paper provides new explanations for the origins and essences of these four forces, that is, all four fundamental forces originate from the electric force and can therefore be unified as one force. First, the gravitational force is a synthetic electric force produced by a huge number of electric charges via non-uniform charge distribution. Next, based on a novel inference of nuclear structure, which is strongly supported by observed phenomena, the strong and weak forces are also deduced to be electric forces. These introduced new understandings can explain observed confusing phenomena simply and effectively, such as “dark matter,” “dark energy,” “flat galaxies,” “filamentary nebulae,” and “gamma-ray bursts” in nuclear fission or fusion and from black holes. The author presents these new understandings in an effort to find the natural truth earlier.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.210 · 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