MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942649849 · doi:10.5539/apr.v11n3p49

The Electrical Magnetism of Maxwell (1873) Is the “Crooked Mirror” of Physical Science

2019· article· en· W2942649849 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert A. Sizov

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetismPhysicistPhysicsMagnetic fieldTheoretical physicsMaxwell's equationsClassical mechanicsCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of the electric magnetism Maxwell (1873) is a result of the superficial and exceptionally erroneous impression of Great Physicist from the well-known experience of Oersted. However the world scientific community adopted this erroneous impression as the ultimate truth and, following Maxwell, declared the moving electric charges to be direct sources of the magnetic field. At same time, the true sources of the magnetic field the magnetic poles (magnetic charges) which are the real structural components of atoms and substance, were “buried alive”. Such theoretical discoveries as the curvature of four-dimensional space-time, explaining the physics of gravity, the big bang, the journey through “Black holes” in space and time, and many others, are well known. All these discoveries were formed without taking into account the existence of real magnetic poles (magnetic charges) since were based on the provisions of Maxwell’s flawed electromagnetic concept. The main reason which for more than 100 years inhibits the detection and recognition of real magnetic charges, are the special conditions of their confinement in a substance that are radically in the substance different from confinement of electrons. The results the experiments of F. Ehrenhaft, the present author and others in which of real magnetic charges were observed in the structures of atoms and substance prove that the existing concept of electric magnetism is deeply erroneous, and the fundamental change in physical priorities is the most important task today. Physical science, freed from vicious EM-concept of Maxwell and the accompanying relativism will offer humanity innovations in the form of practically useful physical effects and manifestations. This article presents 11 such innovations discovered by the author when embedded into the representations of real magnetic charges including, example, the electromagnetic (vortex) nature of the gravitational field, as well as the effects of Gravitational levitation and Intra-atomic gravitational shielding (IAGS). The first effect allows, for example, a person to go out into space without the use of jet thrust. The IAGS effect largely determines the physics of such fundamental manifestations as the chemical bonding, nuclear forces, and radioactivity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207