Quantum entanglement of photons explained by a superluminal influence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bell's inequalities established in 1964 and the experiments carried out by Alain Aspect in 1982 on entangled photons [Aspect et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91 (1982) and Aspect et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982)] made it possible to refute all theories with local hidden variables and to confirm the predictions of quantum mechanics. This article has several objectives: to show that if quantum mechanics is correct, then there is a superluminal influence between entangled photons; to propose an explanation and a possible mechanism of this superluminal influence by the gravitons field of the dynamic medium of reference theory; to propose an experiment allowing a superluminal transmission of information; and to propose an expression of the superluminal speed of gravitons and a link with vacuum energy and dark energy by a new law of physics: E vacuum /E dark ≈ V2Gravitons/c2/ ≈ (D Univers/c.t Planck)2.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".