Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is usually assumed that the t parameter in the equations of dynamics can be identified with the indication of the pointer of a clock. Things are not so simple, however. In fact, because the equations of motion can be written in terms of t but also in terms of t′ = f(t), f being any well-behaved function, any one of those infinite parametric times t′ is as good as the newtonian one to study classical dynamics in hamiltonian form. Here we show that, as a consequence of parametric invariance, one of the foundations of classical dynamics, the relation between the mathematical parametric time t in the equations of dynamics and the physical dynamical time σ that is measured with a particular clock (which is itself a dynamical system) requires the characterization of the clock that is used to achieve a complete treatment of dynamical systems. These two kinds of time, therefore, must be carefully distinguished. Furthermore, we show that not all the dynamical clock-times are necessarily equivalent and that the observational fingerprint of this nonequivalence has, curiously, the same form as that of the Pioneer anomaly. This suggests, therefore, that an acceleration to one another of the astronomical and the atomic times, tastr and tatom, can contribute to the total amount of the anomaly.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".