I find this a confusing way to lay out our tag space. Lots of questions (say, this one as a recent example) are about quantum computing as a field, or about some specific aspect of a given quantum computation, without necessarily being about the specific hypothetical objects we call quantum computers.

Generally, tags on this site tend to carry the name of the field of inquiry, not its central object of study: we say , not ; , not , and so on.

Shouldn't the main tag be ?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's a secret plot by me and my sock-puppet accounts, but I won't explain it like so many would-be great villains before me who prematurely spilled their guts to 007. $\endgroup$
    – DanielSank
    Commented Dec 15, 2017 at 17:52

1 Answer 1


For the time being for pragmatic reasons. Phys.SE used to have a and a tag, which were often misused by some users whenever they had to compute something in quantum mechanics. This practice stopped once they were redirected to the tag.

  • $\begingroup$ Hmmmmm, yeah, that's an interesting point; I guess if that does stop that kind of behaviour then the minor weirdness is worth it. When did the change take place? Was there some specific (chat, maybe?) conversation that led to it, that might be good to link to from here? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 3, 2017 at 12:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It was discussed in the hbar chat room around Jul 10th, 2013. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic Mod
    Commented Dec 3, 2017 at 14:02
  • $\begingroup$ OK, so ancient history, then. Thanks for filling in slow learners like me ;-). $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 3, 2017 at 14:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .