MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005986156 · doi:10.5539/apr.v6n4p42

How Can Non-Relativistic Projectile Motion Remain So in the Relativistic Limit?

2014· article· en· W2005986156 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masoud Asadi‐Zeydabadi, A. C. Sadun

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRelativity and Gravitational Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProjectile motionPhysicsProjectileAccelerationMotion (physics)Classical mechanicsRelativistic speedEquations of motionConstant (computer programming)Dynamics (music)Relativistic dynamicsRelativistic quantum chemistryRelativistic particleMechanicsQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceElectron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Projectile motion in classical physics can be defined as a two-dimensional motion with constant acceleration in one direction and uniform motion in another direction. In classical mechanics this motion can be achieved if a force is applied in one direction and with some initial velocity in another direction. In relativistic dynamics, the equations of motion in both directions are coupled to each other and surprisingly the object experiences varying accelerations in both directions. We can say the non-relativistic projectile motion is not a projectile motion at all in relativistic physics. In this paper the conditions for the projectile motion in the relativistic regime are discussed. We discuss the two cases of constant force and constant acceleration. Another goal of this paper is that to show a computational example can be discussed in class for students to learn a topic in physics and improve their computational skills.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.014
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicRelativity and Gravitational TheoryFrench-language works237,207