Bibliographic record
Abstract
We review the Thomas precession exhibiting the exact form of the Thomas rotation in the axis-angle parameterization. Assuming three inertial frames S, S′, and S″ moving with arbitrary velocities and with S and S″ having their axes parallel to the axes of S′, we focus our attention on the two essential elements of the Thomas precession: (i) there is a rotation between the axes of frames S and S″ and (ii) the combination of two Lorentz transformations from S to S′ and from S′ to S″ fails to produce a pure Lorentz transformation from S to S″. The physical consequence of (i) and (ii) refers to the impossibility of arbitrary frames S, S′, and S″ moving with non-parallel relative velocities having their axes mutually parallel. Then, we reexamine the validity of (i) and (ii) under the conjecture that time depends on the state of motion of the frames and we show that the Thomas precession assumes a different form as formulated in (i) and (ii).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".