MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035840130 · doi:10.4006/0836-1398-33.2.208

About a possible derivation of the London equations

2020· article· en· W3035840130 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Spiros Koutandos

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Essays · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicExperimental and Theoretical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsVorticityClassical mechanicsVortexPoint particleAngular momentumMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In continuation of some previous work published by this author in an open access journal [S. Koutandos, IOSR J. Appl. Phys. 10, 26 (2018); 10, 35 (2018); 9, 47 (2017); 11, 72 (2019)], he now derives the London equations from an expansion of the rotation of vorticity. Vorticity is a vector quantity described in fluid mechanics which characterizes the angular motion of a point particle as it moves. A small ball, for example, found in a field of vorticity would turn around itself. This is in accordance with the existence of the spin of a particle. We claim that due to the dipolar nature of the electric charge, its rotation vortex effects appear. It is found that the total time derivative of the radius possibly due to Brownian motion is different from the velocity but is used as a starting point in describing a fluid-like flow for the electron where all the quantities behave accordingly. Finally, we ascribe the relativistic radius of the electron to a curvature of spacetime from the mass energy equivalence for the electric energy. This paper may also be looked at as one more discussion about the hidden variables quest in quantum mechanics, offering some progress in understanding them.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics EssaysSame topicExperimental and Theoretical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207