Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem presented: how much of nature exists in time? Time is real, and everything that exists, or has ever existed, or will ever exist, takes place in time. From this thesis there results the idea that the laws of nature must in principle be susceptible to change. Like everything else in this one real universe, they have a history. The inclusive reality of time is not a tautology or a truism. It is a revolutionary proposition. Rightly and therefore radically understood, it is incompatible with a major element in the dominant tradition of modern science, the tradition that goes from Galileo and Newton to the particle physics of today. In particular, it contradicts the “block-universe” picture of the universe as well as the application of the Newtonian paradigm – the explanatory practice that explores law-governed phenomena within a configuration space bounded by initial conditions – to the universe as a whole. It puts pressure on our conventional notions of causality. It compels us to reconsider our beliefs about the possible and the new in nature. It suggests that the laws of nature are mutable and that the relation between laws of nature and states of affairs varies. It gives us reason fundamentally to invert the relation between historical and structural explanation in natural science, so that we may come to see the former as more fundamental than the latter rather than as derivative from it.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".