MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2269922732 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2015-0593

Estimation of the physical parameters of planets and stars in the gravitational equilibrium model

2016· article· en· W2269922732 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sergey G. Fedosın

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsGravitational fieldGravitational accelerationGravitationNeutron starGravitational potentialClassical mechanicsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The motion equations of matter in a gravitational field, acceleration field, pressure field, and other fields are considered based on the field theory. This enables us to derive simple formulas in the framework of the gravitational equilibrium model, which allow us to estimate the physical parameters of cosmic bodies. The acceleration field coefficient, η, and the pressure field coefficient, σ, are a function of the state of matter, and their sum is close in magnitude to the gravitational constant, G. In the presented model the dependence is found of the internal temperature and pressure on the current radius. The central temperatures and pressures are calculated for the Earth and the Sun, for a typical neutron star and a white dwarf. The heat flux and the thermal conductivity coefficient of these objects’ matter are found, and the formula for estimating the entropy is provided. All the quantities are compared with the calculation results in different models of cosmic bodies. The discovered good agreement with these data proves the effectiveness and universality of the proposed model for estimating the parameters of planets and stars and for more precise calculation of physical quantities.

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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207