Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been shown that Einstein’s general relativity is not derived from his field equation, but manufactured with a few invalid ad hoc assumptions. Our recently proposed Ether Dynamics truly, for the first time ever, yields a complete set of field equations of the gravitational field, including the wave equation. The speed of the gravitational wave, however, cannot be determined without direct experimental measurement. Whether the speed of gravitation equals the speed of light logically remains an open question. It does not, however, affect the rigorousness of Ether Dynamics. If the two speeds are different, the unification of gravitational and electromagnetic forces is a weak unification . If the two speeds are the same, the unification of gravitational and electromagnetic forces is a strong unification. We have argued strongly for the strong unification and predict that the speed of the gravitational wave is the same as the speed of light based on our theory that both interactions are propagated by ether and governed by the fluid dynamics of ether. The strong unification not only allows a tighter unification of forces but also points to a profound perspective, i.e., the mass and the charge might be directly related, a great secret yet to be discovered.
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".