MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739361764 · doi:10.5539/apr.v9n4p17

Elucidating the Nature of the Fine Structure Constant and Indicating the Existence of an Unknown Angular Momentum

2017· article· en· W2739361764 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Koshun Suto

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicExperimental and Theoretical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsFine-structure constantPhotonPlanck constantConstant (computer programming)Hydrogen atomElectronAtomic physicsAngular momentumAtom (system on chip)Photon energyQuantum mechanicsPlanckMomentum (technical analysis)Virtual particleGroup (periodic table)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the author searches for a formula different from the existing formula in order to elucidate the nature of the fine structure constant a. The relativistic energy of the electron in a hydrogen atom is expressed as E_re,n and the momentum corresponding to that energy is taken to be P_re,n. Also, P_p,n is assumed to be the momentum of a photon emitted when an electron that has been stationary in free space transitions to the inside of a hydrogen atom. When n=1, the ratio of P_re,1 and P_p,1 matches with a. That is, P_p,1/Pre,1=a Also, the formula for the energy of a photon is E=hv. However, this formula has no constant of proportionality. If one wishes to claim that the energy of a photon varies in proportion to the photon's frequency, then a formula containing a constant of proportionality is necessary. Thus, this paper predicts that, in the natural world, there is a minimum unit of angular momentum h_vp smaller than the Planck constant. (The vp in h_vp stands for “virtual particle.”)If this physical constant is introduced, then the formula for the energy of the photon can be written as E=h_vp v/a. If h_vp exists, a formula can also be obtained which helps to elucidate the nature of the fine structure constant.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.324 · 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.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicExperimental and Theoretical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207