MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905183223

(November 2018 to 2014) The UNBELIEVABLE similarities between the ideas of some people (2011-2016) and my ideas (2002-2008) in physics (quantum mechanics, cosmology), cognitive neuroscience, philosophy of mind, and philosophy (this manuscript would require a REVOLUTION in academy environment!)

2018· article· en· W2905183223 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gabriel Vacarìu

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicScientific Research and Philosophical Inquiry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophy of mindPhilosophy of scienceNeurophilosophyEpistemologyCognitive sciencePhilosophyPsychologyPhysicsTheoretical physicsMetaphysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some preliminary comments \n Introduction: The EDWs perspective in my article from 2005 and my book from 2008 \n \n I.\tPHYSICS, COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY (‘REBORN DINOSAURS’ )\n •\t(2016) Did Sean Carroll’s ideas (California Institute of Technology, USA) (within the wrong framework, the “universe”) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2010) (within the EDWs framework) on quantum mechanics, the relationship between Einstein relativity and quantum mechanics, life, the mind-brain problem, etc.?\n •\t(2016) The unbelievable similarities between Frank Wilczek’s ideas (Nobel Prize in Physics) and my ideas (2002-2008, etc.) (Philosophy of Mind and Quantum Mechanics)\n •\t(2017) Strong similarity between Carlo Rovelli’s ideas (Italy) in two books (2015, 2017) to my ideas (2002-2008) + commentary February 2018!\n •\t(2016) Kastner + (2017) R. E. Kastner, Stuart Kauffman, Michael Epperson “Taking Heisenberg’s Potentia Seriously”: Quite similar ideas to my ideas (2008) + \n •\t(2017) A trick: Unbelievable similarities between Lee Smolin’s ideas (2017) and my ideas (2002-2008) \n •\t(May 2018) ‘Thus spoke Zarathustra!’ - A fairy-tale with Eugen Ionesco and the Idiot about Nothingness\n \n \n II.\tPHYSICS\n •\t(2011) The unbelievable similarities between Radu Ionicioiu (Physics, University of Bucharest, Romania) and Daniel R. Terno’s ideas (Physics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia) and my ideas (Quantum Mechanics)\n •\t(2013) Côté B. Gilbert (Oontario, Canada) Unbelievalbe similarities\n •\t(2015) The strong similarity between Pikovski Igor, Zych Magdalena, Costa Fabio, and Brukner Časlav’s ideas and my ideas (2006-2008) regarding the Schrodinger’s cat’s interactions with its environment (the gravitation of Earth) (both entities being macro-objects) (Quantum Mechanics)\n •\t(2015) The strong similarity between Elisabetta Caffau’s ideas (Center for Astronomy at the University of Heidelberg and the Paris Observatory) and my ideas (2011, 2014) regarding the appearance of Big Bang in many places (Cosmology)\n •\t(2015) Did Wolfram Schommers (University of Texas at Arlington, USA & Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany) plagiarize my ideas? (Physics)\n •\t(2015) Some astrophysicists about "Dark Matter May be 'Another Dimension' - Or Even a Major Galactic Transport System" January 22, 2015\n •\t(2016) The strong similarities between Dylan H. Mahler, Lee Rozema, Kent Fisher, Lydia Vermeyden, Kevin J. Resch, Howard M. Wiseman, and Aephraim Steinberg’s ideas (USA) and my ideas (Quantum Mechanics)\n •\t(2016) The unbelievable similarities between Bill Poirier’s ‘Many Interacting Worlds’ and my EDWs (Quantum Mechanics)\n •\t(2016 or 2017) Similarities between Adam Frank’s ideas (University of Rochester in New York , USA) (“Minding matter - The closer you look, the more the materialist position in physics appears to rest on shaky metaphysical ground”) and my ideas (2005, 2008)\n •\t(2017, 2017) Did Sebastian de Haro (HPS, Cambridge, UK) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2008) \n •\t(2017) Unbelievable similarities between Laura Condiotto’s ideas and my ideas (2002-2008)\n •\t(2016) The unbelievable similarities between Hugo F. Alrøe and Egon Noe’s (Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Denmark) ideas (USA) and my ideas (2002-2008) (Bohr's complementarity extended to ontology)\n •\t(2017) The unbelievable similar ideas between Federico Zalamea’s ideas and my ideas\n •\t(2018) Unbelievable similarities between Peter J. Lewis’s ideas (2018) and my ideas (2002-2008) \n •\t(2018) Timothy Hollowood, ‘Classical from Quantum’, [arXiv:1803.04700v1 [quant-ph] 13 March 2018]\n •\t(2018) Mario Hubert and Davide Romano, ‘The Wave-Function as a Multi-Field’\n \n III.\tCOGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY OF MIND\n •\t(2011-2014) Did Georg Northoff (Psychoanalysis, Institute of Mental Health) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2008)?\n •\t(2011) The unbelievable similarities between Kalina Diego Cosmelli, Legrand Dorothée and Thompson Evan’s ideas (USA) and my ideas (Cognitive Neuroscience)\n •\t(2015) Did David Ludwig (Philosophy, University of Amsterdam) plagiarize many of my ideas? (Philosophy (of Mind)\n •\t(2016) Did Neil D. Theise (Department of Pathology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA) and Kafatos C. Menas (Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA) plagiarize my ideas of Physics and Cognitive Neuroscience and Philosophy (the mind-brain problem, quantum mechanics, etc.) from 2002-2008? \n •\tDid David Bourget (2018) (Director, Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University (or University of Western Ontario) plagiarize my ideas regarding the mind-brain problem? + Chalmers\n •\t(2016) Unbelievable similarities between Dan Siegel’s ideas (Mindsight Institute, USA) and my ideas (2002-2008)\n \n IV.\tPhilosophy (of science)\n •\t(2010) The unbelievable similarities between Alexey Alyushin (Moscow, Russia) and my ideas (on Ontology)\n •\t(2013 + 2017) Did Markus Gabriel (Bonn University) plagiarize my ideas?\n •\t(2013) The unbelievable similarities between Andrew Newman’s ideas (University of Nebraska, at Omaha, USA) and my ideas (Ontology)\n •\t(2016) Did Tahko E. Tuomas (University of Helsinki, Finland) plagiarize my ideas? + Tahko E. Tuomas (‘The Epistemology of Essence’) \n •\t(2017) Did Jani Hakkarainen (University of Tampere, Finland) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2008)? + (2017) Markku Keinänen, Antti Keskinen & Jani Hakkarainen\n •\t(2017) The unbelievable similarities between Dean Rickles’s ideas (HPS, Univ. of Sydney) and my ideas (2002-2008)\n •\t(2017) Did Dirk K. F. Meijer and Hans J. H. Geesink (University of Groningen, Netherlands) plagiarize my ideas (2002-2008)? (2017) \n •\t(2018) Unbelievable similar ideas between Jason Winning’s ideas (2018) and my ideas (2002-2008)\n •\t(2018) David Mark Kovacs (Lecturer of philosophy at Tel Aviv University), ‘The Deflationary Theory of Ontological Dependence’, Philosophical Quarterly (forthcoming)\n \n July 2018\n \n •\tOreste M. Fiocco \n •\tBaptiste Le Bihan (University of Geneva, forthcoming) \n •\tAntonella Mallozzi (The Graduate Center – CUNY, forthcoming in Synthese, penultimate draft) \n •\tErik C. Banks (Wright State University, 2014) \n •\tSami Pihlström (2009)\n •\tKatherin Koslicki’s ideas (2008) The Structure of Objects, Oxford University Press) and my ideas (2002-2005-2006)\n \n November 2018\n •\tMaurizio Ferraris (2014/2012) Manifesto of New Realism\n \n •\tGraham Harman (2017) : Object-Oriented Ontology: A New Theory of Everything (Penguin Books)\n \n \n \n Conclusion [Obviously, there are other “specialists” that published UNBELIEVABLE similar ideas to my ideas but I have not discovered them yet…]\n Bibliography\n [Some people haven't read my works but they claim my ideas can be found in other works. Soon, they will discover EDWs in Shakespeare, Bach, Sophocles and ET's letter sent 10 million years ago... me vs. people who have plagiarized my ideas: on Youtube] \n [Obviously, there are other “specialists” that published UNBELIEVABLE similar ideas to my ideas but I have not discovered them yet…]\n THE REVOLUTION: PLEASE share this document with your colleagues and friends. \n If you want to change this ACADEMIC ENVIRONMENT, share this manuscript! PARTICIPATE TO THE REVOLUTION!!! If you are content with your academic environment, continue to sleep…\n

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science 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 score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation)Same topicScientific Research and Philosophical InquiryFrench-language works237,207