‘Kinetic Energy’ (I): On the Physical Meaning of the Product mv2: The Experiments of G. Poleni and of J. W. ‘sGravesande
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results of renowned experimental works of Giovanni Poleni in 1718 and of Jakob W. ‘sGravesande in 1722 suggest that the ‘energy of motion’ or ‘kinetic energy’ of a material body which is moved in a vacuum in a reference frame by a gravitational process is proportional to the ’mass’ of the body and to the velocity of the body in the reference frame, and not to the mass and to the square of the velocity. Consequently, the amount of mechanical energy which is expended by gravitation in moving a body in a vacuum over a vertical distance z is not, as is currently believed, proportional to this distance, but it is proportional to the time-span of action of the process. The product between the mass of the body and the square of the velocity of the body is not proportional only to the amount of mechanical energy of motion of the body moved by the gravitational process, but it is proportional also to the power with which such an amount of ‘kinetic energy’ is consumed by collision with a plastic target at rest in the reference frame.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".