MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022895809 · doi:10.5539/apr.v12n3p1

Archimedes’ Principle and Gravitation as a Spontaneous Process

2020· article· en· W3022895809 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Giancarlo Cavazzini

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEarth Systems and Cosmic Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravitationPhysicsTheoretical physicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A different physical interpretation of floating of bodies - the so-called “Archimedes’ Principle” - relates the gravitational process to its essential characteristic: its spontaneity. Gravity is a spontaneous physical process - similar, for example, to the process we interpret as ‘heat transfer’ between bodies at different temperature; similar to the process which occurs when masses of gas in contact with each other are at different pressures; similar to the process we call ‘friction’. Gravitation has all the characteristics shown by other spontaneous processes, and, like them, its cause is disequilibrium, between matter in contact, in a ‘quality’ of that matter. In the case of gravitation, the quality of matter is related to its intensive property we call ‘density’. Just as the process we call ‘heat transfer’ is the spontaneous process by means of which the Universe reduces and eliminates disequilibria that exist between its parts, due to differences in ‘temperature’, what we call ‘gravitation’ is the spontaneous process by means of which the Universe reduces and eliminates disequilibria between its parts, due to differences in ‘density’. This is achieved by moving bodies. Ceteris paribus, the process moves a body in the direction in which the difference in density between the matter of the body and the matter of the fluid surrounding the body is reduced.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.013
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicEarth Systems and Cosmic EvolutionFrench-language works237,207