MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013918869 · doi:10.1080/09505431.2013.768222

Figuring Matter: Quantum Physics as a New Age Rhetoric

2013· article· en· W2013918869 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Burwell

Bibliographic record

VenueScience as Culture · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommodificationPoliticsSociologyAestheticsEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyPolitical scienceLawPhilosophyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The language through which scientific advancements are relayed reflects specific social, political, and cultural needs and expectations, as well as specific constellations of hopes and anxieties. Constructions and applications of atomic discourse provide a material touchstone that is no less tangible than any other aspect of scientific enquiry. The 1970s New Age movement saw the deployment of quantum concepts with the publication of Fritjov Capra's (1975) widely popular The Tao of Physics and Gary Zukav's (1979) The Dancing Wu Li Masters, and from these publications the notions of quantum consciousness and quantum mysticism were born. In the late twentieth and early twenty-first century, the post-New Age concept of quantum healing began to structure a cluster of self-help programs, while at the same time quantum ‘get-rich’ schemes developed a presence on the internet. In these reconfigurations of the quantum, atomic particles have been transformed into vivified ‘agents’ whose unique movements and interactions promise to secure health, happiness, and wealth to self-directed and depoliticized consumers. The commodification inherent in this process extends increasingly to encompass areas of subjectivity—for example, spirituality—that historically have been considered immune to overt commercialization. This extension of the commodification process is evidenced in the way that quantum methodologies are commercialized and then sold to people as a means of advancing, not just their financial interests, but their spiritual well-being as well. The new economy of the atom also emerges from the late-twentieth and early twenty-first century retreat from the public sphere and the attendant atrophy of the public sphere as a site of interpersonal engagement. At the same time, the invocation and application of quantum rhetoric touches on a deep contemporary sense of being unmoored and the need for structured guidance as a means toward a renewed sense of control over one's life. The nomadic quality of quantum language and concepts ensures that, no matter what an individual's complaint or desire, there exists a quantum strategy to ameliorate or realize it. This remarkable adaptability marks twenty-first century quantum language as unique, not only within the discipline of physics, but also relative to all fields of scientific inquiry.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaScience and technology studies
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
gptScience and technology studies
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.046
Scholarly communication0.0120.025
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Science and technology studies

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual · Qualitative
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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience as CultureSame topicClimate Change Communication and PerceptionCategoryScience and technology studiesFrench-language works237,207