5 ms·

There are only 3 entries, am I correct?

• ManuelSH 1y ago
  Yes, we are at very early stage. Looking for other physics experts to help increasing it.
  • somethingsome 1y ago
    I like the idea of having a dataset for physics, but those entries are very basics, most of the physics happens with very complicated maths and it will be difficult to make an entry for a lot of physics. For example, imagine the entry for the standard equation, should all the derivation and symbolic implementation done as a unique entry? It will be difficult to separate it in logical entries that reference each others, and many physical ideas are fundamentally different, leading to divergences. I have the impression that it should be easier to just parse reference books and format each paragraph/section as an entry, and maybe build a graph. (considering the reference book as authoritative on the subject)
    • ManuelSH 1y ago
      I guess you mean the Lagrangian of the Standard Model… which I agree, it will be daunting… although there is no limit in a json… The idea of automatically parsing books is very nice and possibly faster, but note that: - there are already various datasets of physics papers and such content - the result will be quite different versus what we intent here, which is to have a high quality dataset of physics results with clear derivations (whenever derivation exist) Maybe we can still use your idea to achieve the last point in some way… maybe there is a book that is already formatted as the dataset and we could use it as a starting point. But I don’t know any.