MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2477313367 · doi:10.5539/apr.v8n4p134

On the Trigonometric Description of the Michelson-Morley Experiment

2016· article· en· W2477313367 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiřı́ Stávek

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRelativity and Gravitational Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsTrigonometryLIGOInterferometryTrigonometric functionsMichelson interferometerOpticsMathematical analysisMathematicsGeometryDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="1Body">One formula with two trigonometric corrections describing the round trip of the beams in the Michelson-Morley experiment is presented. The first trigonometric correction describes the round trip path of those beams, while the second trigonometric correction describes the trigonometric geometric mean of the two-way speed of those beams. This formula gives the null fringe shift result for the first order experiments (Fizeau experiment, Hoek experiment), the null fringe shift result for the second order experiment (Michelson-Morley experiment), and predicts a measurable fringe shift result for the fourth order experiment. This trigonometric model can be tested experimentaly by the advanced LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Waves Observatory) technology with three arms separated by the angle π/4 and the longitudinal arm directed to the CMB rest frame in the direction to the constellation Crater (known in the Greek mythology as the Cup of the god Apollo). This proposed fourth order experiment can be named as the advanced LIFE (Laser Interferometer Fringe Enigma) experiment. The published predictions before the arrival of experimental data from the advanced LIFE experiment can estimate the power of our models.</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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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