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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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