Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a two-sentence Letter to the Editor of Physical Review, Friedrich Lenz made the noteworthy observation11. F. Lenz, Phys. Rev. 82, 554 (1951). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.82.554.2 that the value of the ratio mp/me could be expressed to all significant figures of the time by 6π5. That was in 1951, and remarkably, years later the observation holds true to good approximation. His note is perhaps also the shortest article ever published in Physical Review (27 words, 1 number, 1 equation, and 1 reference).Its modern version could read as follows: The most exact value at present22. P. J. Mohr, D. B. Newell, B. N. Taylor, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035009 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.88.035009 for the ratio of proton to electron mass is mp/me = 1836.152 673 89(17). Despite years of experimental improvements, that number still coincides, to good approximation, with the simple, unambiguous representation 6π5.With the 66th birthday of Lenz’s intriguing observation, it seems fitting to make his result better known to the community. This reminder should not be construed as trumpery—a showy but worthless statement—but as a comfort that some facts remain true with the passing of time.ReferencesSection:ChooseTop of pageReferences <<1. F. Lenz, Phys. Rev. 82, 554 (1951). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.82.554.2, Google ScholarCrossref2. P. J. Mohr, D. B. Newell, B. N. Taylor, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035009 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.88.035009, Google ScholarCrossref, ISI© 2017 American Institute of Physics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".