Cosmology: a bird's eye view

Alan A. Coley; Sigbjorn Hervik; Woei Chet Lim

RECORD

Cosmology: a bird's eye view

Alan A. Coley, Sigbjorn Hervik, Woei Chet Lim

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology · Submitted 15 May 2006

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We point out that the information these observers collect regarding the state of the Universe can be radically different; while one observes a non-inflating ever-expanding ever-lasting universe, the other observer can experience a dynamical behaviour reminiscent to that of quintessence or even that of a phantom cosmology leading to a 'big rip' singularity within finite time (but without the need for exotic forms of matter).

how it is stated · hedged possibility 0.51 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,037 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.13 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.13 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.04 · compares with prior results 0.24 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

In this essay we discuss the difference in views of the Universe as seen by two different observers. While one of the observers follows a geodesic congruence defined by the geometry of the cosmological model, the other observer follows the fluid flow lines of a perfect fluid with a linear equation of state. We point out that the information these observers collect regarding the state of the Universe can be radically different; while one observes a non-inflating ever-expanding ever-lasting universe, the other observer can experience a dynamical behaviour reminiscent to that of quintessence or even that of a phantom cosmology leading to a 'big rip' singularity within finite time (but without the need for exotic forms of matter).

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	In this essay we discuss the difference in views of the Universe as seen by two different observers.	contribution 0.79	0.70	0.04	asserted 0.70
s1	While one of the observers follows a geodesic congruence defined by the geometry of the cosmological model, the other observer follows the fluid flow lines of a perfect fluid with a linear equation of state.	method 0.74	0.16	0.05	asserted 0.99
s2	We point out that the information these observers collect regarding the state of the Universe can be radically different; while one observes a non-inflating ever-expanding ever-lasting universe, the other observer can experience a dynamical behaviour reminiscent to that of quintessence or even that of a phantom cosmology leading to a 'big rip' singularity within finite time (but without the need for exotic forms of matter).	result 0.94	0.76	0.84	hedged possibility 0.51

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.69 · evidence from argument 0.54.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper

Original abstract

In this essay we discuss the difference in views of the Universe as seen by two different observers. While one of the observers follows a geodesic congruence defined by the geometry of the cosmological model, the other observer follows the fluid flow lines of a perfect fluid with a linear equation of state. We point out that the information these observers collect regarding the state of the Universe can be radically different; while one observes a non-inflating ever-expanding ever-lasting universe, the other observer can experience a dynamical behaviour reminiscent to that of quintessence or even that of a phantom cosmology leading to a 'big rip' singularity within finite time (but without the need for exotic forms of matter).

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

How the literature uses it

1 arXiv paper cite this in 1 sentence

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it

Contests it 1 paper

For the $^$ terms to be important in Rayapp–consapp, $_^$ would have to be of the order of the square of the expansion rate in a large fraction of space (contrary to what was argued in [ref] ; see also [ref] ), or the contraction of the energy flux and $^$ would have to be of the order of the product of the average energy density and the average expansion rate.

Light propagation in statistically homogeneous and isotropic universes with general matter content · Evolution equations for the scale factor · contest 0.86

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.