Bibliographic record
Abstract
Light is fundamentally essential to the universe. It can be said that light fills and builds the universe. Because of light, energy is transmitted, information is delivered, plants are developed, and the universe is investigated. However, what is the physical origin of light? What is the intrinsic nature of light? These questions have not been clearly comprehended until now. Multiple observed optical phenomena cannot be satisfactorily explained by current theories, such as "photon mass," "light pressure," "light bending," "wavelength redshift," "wave-particle duality," "light speed," and even "photosynthesis." Inspired by the observed phenomena of a photon appearing after electron-positron annihilation, and a photon splitting into an electron and a positron after a collision, the author has realized that the photon is composed of a pair of a positron and an electron, making the photon an extremely tiny electric dipole. Additionally, the well-known facts of strong gamma-ray bursts from nuclear fission, fusion, and black holes reveal that atoms are made of photons, meaning that photons are the basic building blocks of the universe. The gamma-ray bursts are real substances, not just energy, released from the nuclei. The so-called mass-energy conservation is not true. The electric dipole model of the photon can explain the aforementioned confusing phenomena simply and effectively, including why light has its electromagnetic wave properties accurately. Furthermore, the author indicates that there is a difference between light and electromagnetic waves and that, perhaps because of this, photosynthesis can be induced by light, not just electromagnetic waves. Additionally, the crucial concept that "light speed in a vacuum is constant" is questioned. The author is confident in these new understandings and welcomes discussions to help 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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".