MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046818223 · doi:10.5539/apr.v12n4p1

Consistency of the Ether Theory with the Time Concept, the Mass Concept and the Special Relativity

2020· article· en· W3046818223 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Zareski

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRelativity and Gravitational Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotonEtherPhysicsObserver (physics)Speed of light (cellular automaton)EinsteinClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate that it is by considering the existence of an “ether” that one can define the notions of time, velocity and mass, and prove that Einstein’s second principle implies the existence of this ether since the light propagates independently of its emitter velocity. Then, that the particle velocity is a group velocity different from the phase velocity when the particle is massive. One interprets then the Morley-Michelson experiment in the frame of the ether. Let be L0  a fixed distance between two points immobile in a long vehicle in the ether, and let a photon that, when this vehicle is immobile relatively to the ether, travels the distance L0  in this vehicle. An observer immobile in the immobile vehicle sees that the distance traveled by the photon is also L0 . But, if the vehicle moves, e.g., at the velocity V  relatively to the ether, and the photon at the velocity c  also relatively to the ether, then an observer immobile in the moving vehicle will find that the distance traveled by this photon is not L0  but is L(V)  defined by L(V)=L(0)1-V/c2 ). We prove then that L(V)  is not the new dimension of the vehicle, but is simply the distance travelled by the photon in this vehicle. That is, as demonstrated in our previous publications: the ether volumetric density is constant.

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 categoriesScience 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicRelativity and Gravitational TheoryFrench-language works237,207