MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903030543 · doi:10.5539/apr.v10n6p90

Kepler´s Ellipse Observed from Newton´s Evolute (1687), Horrebow´s Circle (1717), Hamilton´s Pedal Curve (1847), and Two Contrapedal Curves (28.10.2018)

2018· article· en· W2903030543 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiřı́ Stávek

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHistorical Astronomy and Related Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEllipseHodographKeplerEccentricity (behavior)PhysicsCurvatureTangentPlanetRealmGeometryElliptic orbitClassical mechanicsMathematical analysisMathematicsAstronomyLawMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Johannes Kepler discovered the very elegant elliptical path of planets with the Sun in one focus of that ellipse in 1605. Kepler inspired generations of researchers to study properties hidden in those elliptical paths. The visible elliptical paths belong to the Aristotelian World. On the other side there are invisible mathematical objects in the Plato´s Realm that might describe the mechanism behind those elliptical paths. One such curve belonging to the Plato´s Realm discovered Isaac Newton in 1687 - the locus of radii of curvature of that ellipse (the evolute of the ellipse). Are there more curves in the Plato´s Realm that could reveal to us additional information about Kepler´s ellipse? W.R. Hamilton in 1847 discovered the hodograph of the Kepler´s ellipse using the pedal curve with pedal points in both foci (the auxiliary circle of that ellipse). This hodograph depicts the moment of the tangent momentum of orbiting planets. Inspired by the hodograph model we propose newly to use two contrapedal curves of the Kepler´s ellipse with contrapedal points in both the Kepler´s occupied and Ptolemy´s empty foci. Observers travelling along those contrapedal curves might bring new valuable experimental data about the orbital angular velocity of planets and a new version of the Kepler´s area law. Based on these contrapedal curves we have defined the moment of the normal momentum. The first derivation of the moment of the normal momentum reveals the torque of the ellipse. This torque of ellipse should contribute to the precession of the Kepler´s ellipse. In the Library of forgotten works of Old Masters we have re-discovered the Horrebow´s circle (1717) and the Colwell´s anomaly H (1993) that might serve as an intermediate step in the solving of the Kepler´s Equation (KE). Have we found the Arriadne´s Thread leading out of the Labyrinth or are we still lost in the Labyrinth?

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicHistorical Astronomy and Related StudiesFrench-language works237,207