MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339031632 · doi:10.5539/apr.v8n3p5

On the Trigonometric Descriptions of Colors

2016· article· en· W2339031632 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiřı́ Stávek

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAstronomical Observations and Instrumentation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsGravitonAtomic physicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Quantum mechanicsGravitationChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="1Body">An attempt is presented for the description of the spectral colors using the standard trigonometric tools in order to extract more information about photons. We have arranged the spectral colors on an arc of the circle with the radius R = 1 and the central angle θ = π/3 when we have defined cos (θ) = λ<sub>380</sub>/λ<sub>760</sub> = 0.5. Several trigonometric operations were applied in order to find the gravity centers for the scotopic, photopic, and mesopic visions. The concept of the center of gravity of colors introduced Isaac Newton. We have postulated properties of the long-lived photons with the new interpretation of the Hubble (Zwicky-Nernst) constant H<sub>0</sub> = 2.748… * 10<sup>-18</sup> kg kg<sup>-1 </sup>s<sup>-1</sup>, the specific mass evaporation rate (SMER) of gravitons from the source mass. The stability of international prototypes of kilogram has been regularly checked. We predict that those standard kilograms due to the evaporation of gravitons lost 8.67 μg kg<sup>-1</sup> century<sup>-1</sup>. The energy of long-lived photons was trigonometrically decomposed into three parts that could be experimentally tested: longitudinal energy, transverse energy and energy of evaporated gravitons. We tested the properties of the long-lived photons with the experimental data published for the best available standard candles: supernovae Type Ia. There was found a surprising match of those experimental data with the model of the long-lived photons. Finally, we have proposed a possible decomposition of the big G (Newtonian gravitational constant) and the small kappa κ (Einsteinian gravitational constant) in order to get a new insight into the mysterious gravitational force and/or the curvature concept.</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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicAstronomical Observations and InstrumentationFrench-language works237,207