MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2384935028

Notes on Pioneer Anomaly Explanation by Sattellite-Shift Formula of Quaternion Relativity: Remarks on "Less Mundane Explanation of Pioneer Anomaly from Q-Relativity"

2007· article· en· W2384935028 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander P. Yefremov

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPlanetTheory of relativityAnomaly (physics)QuaternionEarth's rotationGeneral relativityTheoretical physicsGeodesyClassical mechanicsAstrophysicsAstronomyMathematicsGeometryQuantum mechanicsGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Use of satellite shift formula emerging in Quaternion (Q-) model of relativity theory for explanation of Pioneer anomaly [1] is critically discussed. A cinematic scheme more suitable for the case is constructed with the help of Q-model methods. An appropriate formula for apparent deceleration resulting from existence of observerobject relative velocity is derived. Preliminary quantitative assessments made on the base of Pioneer 10/11 data demonstrate closure of the assumed “relativistic deceleration” and observed “Doppler deceleration” values. 1 Introduction. Limits of satellite-shift formula Recently [1] there was an attempt to give an explanation of Pioneer anomaly essentially using formula for relativistic shift of planet’s fast satellites observed from the Earth. This formula was derived within framework of Q-method developed to calculate relativistic effects using SO(1, 2) forminvariant quaternion square root from space-time interval rather than the interval itself [2]; in particular this advantageously permits to describe relativistic motions of any noninertial frames. The last option was used to find mentioned formula that describes cinematic situation comprising three Solar System objects: the Earth (with observer on it), a planet, and its satellite revolving with comparatively large angular velocity. Due to existence of Earth-planet relative velocity, not great though and variable but permanent, the cycle frequency of satellite rotation (observed from the Earth) is apparently less that in realty, i.e. the “planet’s clock” is slowing down, and calculation shows that the gap is growing linearly with time. Visually it looks that the satellite position on its orbit is apparently behind an expected place. For very fast satellites (like Jupiter’s Metis and Adrastea) and for sufficiently long period of time the effect can probably be experimentally detected. Same effect exists of course for Mars’s satellites and it is computed that monthly apparent shift on its orbit of e.g. Phobos is about 50 meters (that is by the way can be important and taken into account when planning expedition of spacecraft closely approaching the moon).

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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress in physics→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→