MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2260011512 · doi:10.5539/apr.v8n1p81

Complement of Special Relativity and Limitation of General Relativity

2016· article· en· W2260011512 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kexin Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRelativity and Gravitational Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassical mechanicsEquivalence principle (geometric)Principle of relativityFour-forceTheory of relativityPhysicsGravitationTwin paradoxObject (grammar)AxiomGeneral relativityTheoretical physicsMathematicsComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="1Body">For a set of forces being in equilibrium, the equilibrium state will not vary from one observer to another. This generally acknowledged fact has been called as the Force Equilibrium Invariance Axiom. On the basis of this axiom, the force transformation formula can be derived when an object is in motion, so that the force, length, time and mass can be calculated as per the basic transformation formula for the special relativity. According to the results of experimental analysis obtained by J.C. Hafele and R.E. Keating, the concepts of absolute time delay and relative time delay have been put forward herein, so as to solve any problems on the traveling velocity and records of any object being in motion at the real-time. For the properties of the force, the force applied on an object being accelerated will be deemed as the energy transfer force, while the universal gravitation will be deemed as the applied force of field. Both forces have the different basic properties. It is unscientific to consider both forces being the same properties. Based on the Force Equilibrium Invariance Axiom, it is deduced that the gravitational mass can only be the constant irrelevant to the motion of an object. Therefore, the principle of equivalence will not be tenable in theory. Only if the motion velocity of an object is very small relative to the velocity of light, can the principle of equivalence be deemed being approximately tenable. Under this condition, the general relativity can be only consistent with the practical deducing principle. However, if the motion velocity of an object is relatively large, there will be a significant difference between the constant gravitational mass and the inertial mass; as a result, there may be a deviation between the inference on the general relativity and the practical deducing principle. Take the Black Hole as an example. Even if the Black Hole is made almost completely of neutrons, its actual volume is one million times greater than its theoretical volume. Therefore, it is concluded that the Black Hole cannot be deemed as the substance composed of real atoms. It also shows accordingly that, according to the general relativity of theoretical source of Black Hole, the analysis results obtained when an object is in motion at high-velocity can not conform to the reality.</p>

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)0.001
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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicRelativity and Gravitational TheoryFrench-language works237,207