Filozoficzne idee w fizyce i kosmologii Alberta Einsteina
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper deals with the issue of some mutual dependencies between science and philosophy. It turns out that it is not possible easily to separate these two disciplines. All the great physical theories are entangled with notions and ideas which belong to the domain of philosophy. It is well known from the history of science that such notions and ideas very often were an important stimulus that pushed a scholar toward some strictly scientific problem and made him start working on a physical theory which would allow to solve this problem. This subject matter is presented in the article in the context of scientific as well as philosophical achievements of Albert Einstein. It is shown that some philosophical ideas considerably influenced the process of formation of his relativity theory and of his first cosmological model. Special attention is paid to the so called Mach’s Principle, which is a postulate concerning the relativity of mass, and to the idea of staticity of the universe which caused Einstein to change his field equations in such a way that they would produce a static model of the universe.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.033 |
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 it