MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046165700 · doi:10.1103/physreva.72.022109

Quantum mechanics of Hyperion

2005· article· en· W2046165700 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan Wiebe, L. E. Ballentine

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum chaos and dynamical systems
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum decoherencePhysicsClassical limitQuantum mechanicsQuantum dissipationQuantumClassical mechanicsAngular momentumMomentum (technical analysis)Statistical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is motivated by the suggestion [W. Zurek, Phys. Scri. T, 76, 186 (1998)] that the chaotic tumbling of the satellite Hyperion would become nonclassical within $20\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\text{years}$, but for the effects of environmental decoherence. The dynamics of quantum and classical probability distributions are compared for a satellite rotating perpendicular to its orbital plane, driven by the gravitational gradient. The model is studied with and without environmental decoherence. Without decoherence, the maximum quantum-classical (QC) differences in its average angular momentum scale as ${\ensuremath{\hbar}}^{2∕3}$ for chaotic states, and as ${\ensuremath{\hbar}}^{2}$ for nonchaotic states, leading to negligible QC differences for a macroscopic object like Hyperion. The quantum probability distributions do not approach their classical limit smoothly, having an extremely fine oscillatory structure superimposed on the smooth classical background. For a macroscopic object, this oscillatory structure is too fine to be resolved by any realistic measurement. Either a small amount of smoothing (due to the finite resolution of the apparatus) or a very small amount of environmental decoherence is sufficient to ensure the classical limit. Under decoherence, the QC differences in the probability distributions scale as ${({\ensuremath{\hbar}}^{2}∕D)}^{1∕6}$, where $D$ is the momentum diffusion parameter. We conclude that decoherence is not essential to explain the classical behavior of macroscopic bodies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations44
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ASame topicQuantum chaos and dynamical systemsFrench-language works237,207