MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073820054 · doi:10.1119/1.4872409

Why Was Kelvin's Estimate of the Earth's Age Wrong?

2014· article· en· W2073820054 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Lovatt, M. Qasim Syed

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Physics Teacher · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarth (classical element)Work (physics)Function (biology)Exponential functionPhysicsPhilosophyTheoretical physicsMathematical economicsMathematicsThermodynamicsMathematical physicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a companion to our previous paper1 in which we give a published example, based primarily on Perry's work,2,3 of a graph of ln y versus t when y is an exponential function of t. This work led us to the idea that Lord Kelvin's (William Thomson's) estimate of the Earth's age was wrong not because he did not account for radioactivity, as is commonly believed,4 but because he used the wrong model for Earth's heat loss. We feel this idea is worth spreading. To this end (following England et al.2,3), we examine two questions, the first about the radioactivity part and the second about Perry's alternate model for Earth's heat loss.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Physics TeacherSame topicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical MechanicsFrench-language works237,207