MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sixfold Discrete Symmetry Explains Dark Matter

2025· preprint· en· W4414076211 on OpenAlexaff
Avraham Nofech

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicScientific Research and Discoveries
Canadian institutionsNorthern Alberta Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFermionPauli exclusion principleElectroweak interactionDirac fermionSymmetry (geometry)Dirac equationFermionic fieldStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Dirac (video compression format)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the Pauli algebra version of the Dirac equation we show the existence of its six symmetric versions whose solutions are referred to as the six sectors of fermion fields. It is shown that the sectors are distinct, by showing that if a fermion field belongs to two sectors at once then its mass must be zero. Also shown is the lack electromagnetic interaction between different sectors, since each sector has its own unique matrix coupling its fermion field to its EM field. Altogether this predicts the ratio of dark matter to ordinary matter of 5 to 1, which is close to the observed ratio of 5.2 to 1. In order to fully justify this prediction, the sixfold discrete symmetry must first of all be extended to the electroweak sector, then to strong interactions. This article only deals with coupling of fermion fields to electromagnetic fields. This paper essentially depends on the full equivalence of the Pauli algebra version of the Dirac equation with its standard version, which is proven in (2.1). The sixfold symmetry can be seen in the Pauli algebra version of the Dirac equation, but is harder to see in its standard version.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicScientific Research and DiscoveriesFrench-language works237,207