MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201763026 · doi:10.4006/0836-1398-34.3.322

Pythagorean numbers and the calculation of the masses of the elementary particles

2021· article· en· W3201763026 on OpenAlex
Borros Arneth

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Essays · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Theories and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCharge (physics)Elementary particleBinding energyParticle (ecology)Atomic physicsMass formulaCharged particleQuantum mechanicsIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We attempt here to calculate the particle masses for all known elementary particles starting from the Rydberg equation and from the Sommerfeld fine structure constant. Remarkably, this is possible. Next, we try to explain why this is possible and what the meaning of the approach seems to be. Thereby, we find some interesting connections. In addition, we realize that there are two different kinds of mass-charge binding energies in an elementary particle: The internal mass-charge binding energy and the external mass-charge binding energy. These two kinds of mass-charge binding energies can explain the higher masses of the highly charged brother particles in some of the heavier particle triplets (such as the charmed sigma particles).

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · 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