MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903466145 · doi:10.5539/apr.v10n6p15

The Physical Nature of Velocity

2018· article· en· W2903466145 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhonggang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSubatomic particleParticle (ecology)Elementary particleClassical mechanicsParticle velocityInvariant massElectronMechanicsTheoretical physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Matter and energy are made up of the same basic particles. Why, then, is there a significant difference between matter and energy? This is because their basic particle compositions differ. The basic particle is the basic unit of mass and energy. Mass and energy conservations are essentially basic particle conversions. The basic particle is a vector, moving at the maximum velocity of the universe; however, after a substance tangibly solidifies, this velocity becomes zero. The velocity of a moving object is, thus, the ratio between the basic particles contributing to energy and those contributing to mass, and the direction of its velocity is determined by the basic particle directions. Electrons, photons, neutrons, protons, neutrinos, and other microscopic particles consist of basic particles. The total mass of a moving body increases with increasing velocity. This added mass is composed of basic particles provided by an external system. As relativity is a mathematical model, its equations may satisfy mathematical principles even though some of them may not represent objective physical facts; instead, these may simply be mathematical solutions without physical meanings.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.012
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicComputational Physics and Python ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207