praj-17/QA-MCQ-Open-ended huggingface dataset:
Title: Ottoman_Empire
Context: The main sports Ottomans were engaged in were Turkish Wrestling, hunting, Turkish archery, horseback riding, Equestrian javelin throw, arm wrestling, and swimming. European model sports clubs were formed with the spreading popularity of football matches in 19th century Constantinople. The leading clubs, according to timeline, were Beşiktaş Gymnastics Club (1903), Galatasaray Sports Club (1905) and Fenerbahçe Sports Club (1907) in Istanbul. Football clubs were formed in other provinces too, such as Karşıyaka Sports Club (1912), Altay Sports Club (1914) and Turkish Fatherland Football Club (later Ülküspor) (1914) of İzmir.

question: When did European sport clubs begin to form in the Ottoman empire? 

answer: 19th century

question: Where did football matches become to be popular in the Ottoman empire? 

answer: Constantinople

question: What was the leading sport club in 1905? 

answer: Galatasaray Sports Club

question: In what year did the Altay Sports Club form? 

answer: 1914

question: What was the football club known as Ülküspor formerly known as? 

answer: Turkish Fatherland Football Club
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Philosophy of space and time is the branch of philosophy concerned with the issues surrounding the ontology, epistemology, and character of space and time. While such ideas have been central to philosophy from its inception, the philosophy of space and time was both an inspiration for and a central aspect of early analytic philosophy. The subject focuses on a number of basic issues, including whether or not time and space exist independently of the mind, whether they exist independently of one another, what accounts for time's apparently unidirectional flow, whether times other than the present moment exist, and questions about the nature of identity (particularly the nature of identity over time).

question: Which philosophy branch is concerned with issues surrounding ontology? 

answer: Philosophy of space and time

question: The philosophy of space and time was inspired by what kind of philosophy? 

answer: early analytic philosophy

question: The  philosophy of space and time focuses on whether or not time and space exist independently of what? 

answer: the mind

question: The  philosophy of space and time focuses what kind of flow within time?  

answer: unidirectional
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: The earliest recorded Western philosophy of time was expounded by the ancient Egyptian thinker Ptahhotep (c. 2650–2600 BC), who said, "Do not lessen the time of following desire, for the wasting of time is an abomination to the spirit." The Vedas, the earliest texts on Indian philosophy and Hindu philosophy, dating back to the late 2nd millennium BC, describe ancient Hindu cosmology, in which the universe goes through repeated cycles of creation, destruction, and rebirth, with each cycle lasting 4,320,000 years. Ancient Greek philosophers, including Parmenides and Heraclitus, wrote essays on the nature of time.

question: Who expounded the earliest recorded Western philosophy of time? 

answer: Ptahhotep

question: When do the Vedas date back to? 

answer: late 2nd millennium BC

question: Which philosophies are the Vedas oriented with? 

answer: Indian philosophy and Hindu philosophy

question: What do the Vedas describe? 

answer: ancient Hindu cosmology

question: How long is the cycle of rebirth discussed in the Vedas? 

answer: 4,320,000 years
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: In Book 11 of St. Augustine's Confessions, he ruminates on the nature of time, asking, "What then is time? If no one asks me, I know: if I wish to explain it to one that asketh, I know not." He goes on to comment on the difficulty of thinking about time, pointing out the inaccuracy of common speech: "For but few things are there of which we speak properly; of most things we speak improperly, still the things intended are understood."  But Augustine presented the first philosophical argument for the reality of Creation (against Aristotle) in the context of his discussion of time, saying that knowledge of time depends on the knowledge of the movement of things, and therefore time cannot be where there are no creatures to measure its passing (Confessions Book XI ¶30; City of God Book XI ch.6).

question: Which christian philosopher ruminated on time? 

answer: St. Augustine

question: What did St. Augustine comment on in Book 11, regarding thinking about time? 

answer: the difficulty

question: Who presented the first philosophical argument for the reality of Creation?  

answer: Augustine

question: What did Augustine say that the knowledge of time depended on? 

answer: the knowledge of the movement of things

question: Where did Augustine say time could not appear? 

answer: where there are no creatures to measure its passing
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: In the early 11th century, the Muslim physicist Ibn al-Haytham (Alhacen or Alhazen) discussed space perception and its epistemological implications in his Book of Optics (1021), he also rejected Aristotle's definition of topos (Physics IV) by way of geometric demonstrations and defined place as a mathematical spatial extension. His experimental proof of the intromission model of vision led to changes in the understanding of the visual perception of space, contrary to the previous emission theory of vision supported by Euclid and Ptolemy. In "tying the visual perception of space to prior bodily experience, Alhacen unequivocally rejected the intuitiveness of spatial perception and, therefore, the autonomy of vision. Without tangible notions of distance and size for correlation, sight can tell us next to nothing about such things."

question: Which 11th century Muslim physicist discussed space perception and its epistemological implications?  

answer: al-Haytham

question: Which 11th century book discussed space perception and its epistemological implications? 

answer: Book of Optics

question: Whose definition of topos did Alhazen reject? 

answer: Aristotle's

question: Alhazen's  experimental proof of the intromission model of vision led to the change of understanding of what? 

answer: Without tangible notions of distance and size for correlation, sight can tell us next to nothing about such things

question: Alhazen stated that without tangible notions of distance and size for correlation, sight can tell us what about spatial perception? 

answer: next to nothing
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: In 1781, Immanuel Kant published the Critique of Pure Reason, one of the most influential works in the history of the philosophy of space and time. He describes time as an a priori notion that, together with other a priori notions such as space, allows us to comprehend sense experience. Kant denies that either space or time are substance, entities in themselves, or learned by experience; he holds, rather, that both are elements of a systematic framework we use to structure our experience. Spatial measurements are used to quantify how far apart objects are, and temporal measurements are used to quantitatively compare the interval between (or duration of) events. Although space and time are held to be transcendentally ideal in this sense, they are also empirically real—that is, not mere illusions.

question: When did Kant publish one of the most influential works in the history of the philosophy of space and time. 

answer: 1781

question: What was Kant's influential work on the history of the philosophy of space and time titled? 

answer: Critique of Pure Reason

question: What did Kant describe time as? 

answer: a priori notion

question: What did Kant say was similar notion to time? 

answer: space

question: What did Kant say time and space allow one to do? 

answer: sense experience
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Arguing against the absolutist position, Leibniz offers a number of thought experiments with the purpose of showing that there is contradiction in assuming the existence of facts such as absolute location and velocity. These arguments trade heavily on two principles central to his philosophy: the principle of sufficient reason and the identity of indiscernibles. The principle of sufficient reason holds that for every fact, there is a reason that is sufficient to explain what and why it is the way it is and not otherwise. The identity of indiscernibles states that if there is no way of telling two entities apart, then they are one and the same thing.

question: What did Leibniz argue against? 

answer: the absolutist position

question: Which principles did Leibniz's arguments trade heavily upon? 

answer: the principle of sufficient reason and the identity of indiscernibles

question: Leibnitz held that there is a reason that is sufficient to explain what and why it is the way it is and not otherwise for every what? 

answer: fact

question: What states that if there is no way of telling two entities apart, then they are one and the same thing? 

answer: identity of indiscernibles
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: The example Leibniz uses involves two proposed universes situated in absolute space. The only discernible difference between them is that the latter is positioned five feet to the left of the first. The example is only possible if such a thing as absolute space exists. Such a situation, however, is not possible, according to Leibniz, for if it were, a universe's position in absolute space would have no sufficient reason, as it might very well have been anywhere else. Therefore, it contradicts the principle of sufficient reason, and there could exist two distinct universes that were in all ways indiscernible, thus contradicting the identity of indiscernibles.

question: Leibniz's example involves how many universes? 

answer: two

question: Where are Leibniz's universes situated? 

answer: absolute space

question: How far are Leibniz's universes situated apart? 

answer: five feet

question: What is the only way Leibniz's example would be possible? 

answer: absolute space exists
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Standing out in Clarke's (and Newton's) response to Leibniz's arguments is the bucket argument: Water in a bucket, hung from a rope and set to spin, will start with a flat surface. As the water begins to spin in the bucket, the surface of the water will become concave. If the bucket is stopped, the water will continue to spin, and while the spin continues, the surface will remain concave. The concave surface is apparently not the result of the interaction of the bucket and the water, since the surface is flat when the bucket first starts to spin, it becomes concave as the water starts to spin, and it remains concave as the bucket stops.

question: What stood out in Clark's response to Leibniz? 

answer: the bucket argument

question: According to Clark's argument, water in a bucket, hung from a rope and spun, will begin with kind of surface? 

answer: flat

question: As the buck spins, what happens to the water? 

answer: the water will become concave

question: If the buck stops, the water will do what? 

answer: continue to spin

question: What is the surface of the water apparently not caused by? 

answer: the interaction of the bucket and the water
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Leibniz describes a space that exists only as a relation between objects, and which has no existence apart from the existence of those objects. Motion exists only as a relation between those objects. Newtonian space provided the absolute frame of reference within which objects can have motion. In Newton's system, the frame of reference exists independently of the objects contained within it. These objects can be described as moving in relation to space itself. For many centuries, the evidence of a concave water surface held authority.

question: Leibniz describes space as existing only as a relation between what? 

answer: objects

question: According to Leibniz, what has no existence apart from the existence of objections? 

answer: space

question: What provides the absolute frame of reference within which objects can have motion? 

answer: Newtonian space

question: In Newton's system, how does the frame of reference exist between objects within it? 

answer: independently

question: For how long did the evidence of a concave water surface hold authority in reference to space? 

answer: many centuries
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Mach suggested that thought experiments like the bucket argument are problematic. If we were to imagine a universe that only contains a bucket, on Newton's account, this bucket could be set to spin relative to absolute space, and the water it contained would form the characteristic concave surface. But in the absence of anything else in the universe, it would be difficult to confirm that the bucket was indeed spinning. It seems equally possible that the surface of the water in the bucket would remain flat.

question: How did Mach describe thought experiments like the bucket argument? 

answer: problematic

question: What is difficult to confirm about the bucket in the absence of anything else in the universe? 

answer: that the bucket was indeed spinning

question: What was equally possible about the surface of the water in the bucket? 

answer: would remain flat.
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Mach argued that, in effect, the water experiment in an otherwise empty universe would remain flat. But if another object were introduced into this universe, perhaps a distant star, there would now be something relative to which the bucket could be seen as rotating. The water inside the bucket could possibly have a slight curve. To account for the curve that we observe, an increase in the number of objects in the universe also increases the curvature in the water. Mach argued that the momentum of an object, whether angular or linear, exists as a result of the sum of the effects of other objects in the universe (Mach's Principle).

question: What did Mach argue about the water experiment in an otherwise empty universe? 

answer: would remain flat

question: What did Mach argue would happen if another object were introduce in the bucket's universe? 

answer: the bucket could be seen as rotating

question: What does the increase in the number of objects in the universe do to the curvature of the water? 

answer: increases the curvature

question: The Mach argument is called what? 

answer: Mach's Principle

question: Mach argued that the momentum of an object exists as a result of the sum of the effects of what? 

answer: effects of other objects in the universe
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Albert Einstein proposed that the laws of physics should be based on the principle of relativity. This principle holds that the rules of physics must be the same for all observers, regardless of the frame of reference that is used, and that light propagates at the same speed in all reference frames. This theory was motivated by Maxwell's equations, which show that electromagnetic waves propagate in a vacuum at the speed of light. However, Maxwell's equations give no indication of what this speed is relative to. Prior to Einstein, it was thought that this speed was relative to a fixed medium, called the luminiferous ether. In contrast, the theory of special relativity postulates that light propagates at the speed of light in all inertial frames, and examines the implications of this postulate.

question: lbert Einstein proposed that the laws of physics should be based on what principle? 

answer: relativity

question: The principle of relativity holds that the rules of physics must be the same for who? 

answer: all observers

question: In all reference frames, how is the the speed of light? 

answer: the same

question: Einstein's theory was motivated by who? 

answer: Maxwell

question: Before Einstein, speed was though to be relative to what? 

answer: the luminiferous ether
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: In classical physics, an inertial reference frame is one in which an object that experiences no forces does not accelerate. In general relativity, an inertial frame of reference is one that is following a geodesic of space-time. An object that moves against a geodesic experiences a force. An object in free fall does not experience a force, because it is following a geodesic. An object standing on the earth, however, will experience a force, as it is being held against the geodesic by the surface of the planet. In light of this, the bucket of water rotating in empty space will experience a force because it rotates with respect to the geodesic. The water will become concave, not because it is rotating with respect to the distant stars, but because it is rotating with respect to the geodesic.

question: In classical physics, an inertial reference frame is one in which an object without force does what? 

answer: does not accelerate

question: What follows a geodesic of space-time? 

answer: an inertial frame of reference

question: An object in free fall does not experience what? 

answer: force

question: What holds an object standing on earth against the geodesic? 

answer: the surface of the planet

question: Why will water become concave, according to the relativity theory? 

answer: it is rotating with respect to the geodesic.
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Einstein partially advocates Mach's principle in that distant stars explain inertia because they provide the gravitational field against which acceleration and inertia occur. But contrary to Leibniz's account, this warped space-time is as integral a part of an object as are its other defining characteristics, such as volume and mass. If one holds, contrary to idealist beliefs, that objects exist independently of the mind, it seems that relativistics commits them to also hold that space and temporality have exactly the same type of independent existence.

question: How does Einstein advocate Mach's principle? 

answer: partially

question: How Einstein's theory compared to Leibniz's? 

answer: contrary

question: What is considered contrary to idealist beliefs in regards to space? 

answer: objects exist independently of the mind
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: Coordinative definition has two major features. The first has to do with coordinating units of length with certain physical objects. This is motivated by the fact that we can never directly apprehend length. Instead we must choose some physical object, say the Standard Metre at the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures), or the wavelength of cadmium to stand in as our unit of length. The second feature deals with separated objects. Although we can, presumably, directly test the equality of length of two measuring rods when they are next to one another, we can not find out as much for two rods distant from one another. Even supposing that two rods, whenever brought near to one another are seen to be equal in length, we are not justified in stating that they are always equal in length. This impossibility undermines our ability to decide the equality of length of two distant objects. Sameness of length, to the contrary, must be set by definition.

question: Coordinative definition has how many major features? 

answer: two

question: The first feature of Coordinative definition involves what? 

answer: coordinating units of length with certain physical objects

question: What is the first feature motivated by? 

answer: we can never directly apprehend length

question: The second feature of Coordinative definition involves what? 

answer: separated objects

question: Sameness of length must be set how? 

answer: by definition
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: In the classical case, the invariance, or symmetry, group and the covariance group coincide, but, interestingly enough, they part ways in relativistic physics. The symmetry group of the general theory of relativity includes all differentiable transformations, i.e., all properties of an object are dynamical, in other words there are no absolute objects. The formulations of the general theory of relativity, unlike those of classical mechanics, do not share a standard, i.e., there is no single formulation paired with transformations. As such the covariance group of the general theory of relativity is just the covariance group of every theory.

question: The symmetry group of the general theory of relativity includes what? 

answer: all differentiable transformations

question: What else besides  invariance, or symmetry and group part ways in relativistic physics? 

answer: the covariance group

question: Which theory does the relativity depart from? 

answer: classical mechanics

question: What are not pair with transformations in the theory of relativity? 

answer: single formulation

question:  The covariance group of the general theory of relativity is the covariance group of how many theories? 

answer: every
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: The problem of the direction of time arises directly from two contradictory facts. Firstly, the fundamental physical laws are time-reversal invariant; if a cinematographic film were taken of any process describable by means of the aforementioned laws and then played backwards, it would still portray a physically possible process. Secondly, our experience of time, at the macroscopic level, is not time-reversal invariant. Glasses can fall and break, but shards of glass cannot reassemble and fly up onto tables. We have memories of the past, and none of the future. We feel we can't change the past but can influence the future.

question: How many contradictory facts does the problem of the direction of time arise from? 

answer: two

question: What kind of physical laws are time-reversal invariant? 

answer: fundamental

question: If if a cinematographic film were taken by means of physical  laws and then played backwards, it would still portray what? 

answer: physically possible process

question: How is our experience of time at the macro level? 

answer: not time-reversal invariant

question: What do we not have memories of? 

answer: the future
Title: Philosophy_of_space_and_time
Context: But in statistical mechanics things get more complicated. On one hand, statistical mechanics is far superior to classical thermodynamics, in that thermodynamic behavior, such as glass breaking, can be explained by the fundamental laws of physics paired with a statistical postulate. But statistical mechanics, unlike classical thermodynamics, is time-reversal symmetric. The second law of thermodynamics, as it arises in statistical mechanics, merely states that it is overwhelmingly likely that net entropy will increase, but it is not an absolute law.

question: How are things in statistical mechanics?  

answer: complicated

question: What are superior to classical thermodynamics? 

answer: statistical mechanics

question: In order to explain glass breaking, Fundamental laws of physics can be paired with what?  

answer: a statistical postulate

question: Is statistical mechanics asymmetric or symmetric in regards to time-reversal? 

answer: symmetric

question: What kind of law is the second law of thermodynamics, as it arises in statistical mechanics? 

answer: not an absolute law