MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117461304 · doi:10.4006/0836-1398-38.4.341

Aether Lagrangian for galactic black hole parameters

2025· article· en· W7117461304 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David W. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Essays · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAetherEvent horizonSchwarzschild radiusBlack hole (networking)Scalar fieldGalaxyCosmic microwave backgroundMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Aether Physics Model (APM) presents a classical effective field description in which a structured Aether carries distributed magnetic-charge capacity together with a scalar “length-density” field that governs light propagation and compact-object scales. In this framework, galactic black holes arise when the Aether curl reaches a reference value fixed by QMU (Quantum Measurement Units) ledger identities; specifically, the reference curl is set by the ratio of the maximum magnetic charge squared to the product of the electron mass and the Compton wavelength. A single velocity ledger states that the speed of light equals the Compton wavelength times the quantum frequency, linking optical behavior to the same ledger that normalizes gravity. The resulting prediction for the event-horizon radius is simple: it equals two times an effective factor times the usual Schwarzschild radius. The effective factor, called feff, summarizes local composition by encoding how bound matter, especially neutrons, compresses Aether units relative to unbound electrons and protons. Diffuse, unbound environments drive feff close to one-half, reproducing general-relativistic shadow sizes; fully bound, stable matter drives feff toward unity, predicting horizons twice the general-relativistic value. Event Horizon Telescope measurements for M87* and Sgr A* are consistent with feff near one-half, aligning APM predictions with observations while preserving falsifiable departures in bound-matter regimes. The model remains strictly within QMU and Gaussian-cgs ledgers and anticipates distinctive “Aether imprints” near compact objects, including rotation of polarization and helical jet collimation, which provide concrete experimental discriminants in addition to shadow sizes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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 venuePhysics EssaysSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207