MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022158645 · doi:10.1088/0031-9120/43/5/002

The physics of Colonel Kittinger’s longest lonely leap

2008· article· en· W2022158645 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Robinson, C G Patrick

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Education · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicExperimental and Theoretical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPhysics educationMathematics educationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a case study of the physical principles necessary to model the high altitude parachute jump made by Colonel Joseph Kittinger, USAF, in 1960, in order to determine the maximum speed attained and to calculate whether this speed was sufficient to exceed the speed of sound at that altitude. There is considerable discrepancy in the value of the maximum speed attained—614 miles per hour (mph) or 714 mph—in material available over the internet. Using a very simple physical model we are able to conclude that the lower figure is correct and that it is likely that Colonel Kittinger did not 'break the sound barrier' during his descent. The wealth of audio-visual material and animations available makes this a particularly attractive case study to instruct students in elementary kinematics, approximation and physical modelling.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics EducationSame topicExperimental and Theoretical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207