-8
$\begingroup$

I admit I'm a little frustrated. Long ago I asked questions from physics that I didn't know the answer to, and these questions were ignored. Now I know a lot of answers. So I asked questions and gave them answers showing that the questions made sense and were correct.

Example: How to calculate the internal angular acceleration?

Despite this, questions and answers are considered undesirable without giving a reason or proof of erroneous claims. What is the difference between such conduct and the Inquisition? Is anyone else interested in the truth?

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ Regardless of whether you provide an answer with the question, the question needs to stand on its own. If the question text isn't clear to others, then it will be closed as Unclear What You're Asking, regardless of how clear it was in your mind, and regardless of any answers. The same goes for the other closure reasons. $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Sep 10 '19 at 20:44
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ In regards to the linked question, I voted to close it because it didn't actually ask a question and seemed to require my watching some YouTube video (which shouldn't be a requirement for any Q&A, posts should be entirely self-contained) $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Sep 10 '19 at 22:56
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Questions need to be on-topic as well as clear. Your first question was an off-topic homework-style question. Please do not post more like this. $\endgroup$ – G. Smith Sep 11 '19 at 0:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you're actually asking about an automatic question ban, keep in mind that your closed and deleted questions and answers also count when evaluating your participation. You appear to prefer to delete and re-post questions and answers rather than trying to edit them into shape; the system penalizes users who post this way. $\endgroup$ – rob♦ Sep 11 '19 at 21:48
  • $\begingroup$ what exactly is the question in the link you refer to? The "question" as written basically a placeholder so you can insert your answer. $\endgroup$ – ZeroTheHero Sep 13 '19 at 16:03
  • $\begingroup$ @ZeroTheHero Consequence of changing the moment of inertia is changed angular velocity vector. And this is angular acceleration. I asked how to calculate this angular acceleration and I gave the answer. $\endgroup$ – Sylwester L Sep 13 '19 at 16:35
6
$\begingroup$

Some of the criteria that “rule” here are:

Be on-topic. Be clear. Be correct (when answering). Be concise. Be interesting. Use proper English. Use MathJax. Don’t use images of text or equations. Don’t ask a question that can be answered with a quick search of the web or of this site.

There is no requirement that downvoters explain why they have downvoted. Lots of us experience “Why did I get downvoted?” (I certainly have) and it can be painful. Some people will tell you why but others won’t give you any feedback. It is your job to learn how to ask good questions, not other people’s job (at least not here) to teach you.

| |
$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

I'm going to answer your question by highlighting something you wrote in a comment:

I don't need "good relevant advice", I need answers and verification of my calculations :)

If you want answers and verification of calculations, we're not the right community for you. We're in the business of providing relevant advice. If you start exploring this meta site, you'll find years of discussion on the topic.

Some starting points:

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ "Physic Stack Exchange" obliges for discussion and exchange of ideas in the field of Physics. If you don't want to discuss it, change the name because you don't deserve the name which you have. You use words as meaningless propaganda but words should have value. $\endgroup$ – Sylwester L Sep 11 '19 at 20:41
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ We're not a discussion forum; we're a question-and-answer community. $\endgroup$ – rob♦ Sep 11 '19 at 20:44
  • $\begingroup$ "we're a question-and-answer community." I asked the question and gave the answer, which means I used your portal correctly. You sort the questions into those that you like and those that are not correct (those you don't know the answer). This behavior has nothing to do with Physics. $\endgroup$ – Sylwester L Sep 11 '19 at 21:19
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @SylwesterL We're a question and answer community with specific guidelines (made mostly by community discussion). It's not as straightforward as "any questions and answers related to physics are on topic". You need to stop asserting that people are closing things because they don't know the answer. I would say a majority of the questions closed here, people know the answers, they just don't fit on the site and shouldn't be answered here. $\endgroup$ – JMac Sep 11 '19 at 21:31
-7
$\begingroup$

Because the majority of dictatorship will kick my questions out, then let me answer my question again.

Current criteria rule are:

-compliance with books. Something that doesn't match the book must be wrong, currently this is proof of falsity.

-Written in the correct English. Someone who doesn't speak this language can't be right.

-It depends on what the sponsor is behind you. Someone who has no back is nobody.

The truth is not important. Arguments, calculations, mathematical evidence now are rubbish.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ When you posted this question, what was your goal? Was it a genuine interest in the answer? Or were you just looking to rant and lash out at a community that keeps certain quality standards because they're asking you to match the same criteria as everyone else? (hint: only one of those two is appropriate.) $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Sep 11 '19 at 17:15
  • $\begingroup$ @Emilio Pisanty My goal is looking for answers to my questions. The problem is that for many these questions are uncomfortable because they should know the answers but do not know them. Instead of seeking answers, they prefer to burn them at the stake and pretend they aren't there. Contemporary Inquisition. $\endgroup$ – Sylwester L Sep 11 '19 at 17:54
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @SylwesterL ... no. You need to stop acting like you know why users chose to close your questions, even when it goes against everything that the users are telling you. You're assuming that the questions are being closed because people don't know the answers, but there is no evidence of that. You've been given plenty of good relevant advice in the comments about what you should work on improving to get questions well received here. If you keep assuming that it's for other reasons, you're going to have a bad time here. $\endgroup$ – JMac Sep 11 '19 at 18:33
  • $\begingroup$ @JMac I don't need "good relevant advice", I need answers and verification of my calculations:) $\endgroup$ – Sylwester L Sep 11 '19 at 19:12
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @SylwesterL If you want to get the answers and verification of your calculations on this site, you absolutely do need good relevant advice, because your responses (and this answer) show that you seem to be misunderstanding how the system works. $\endgroup$ – JMac Sep 11 '19 at 19:17
  • $\begingroup$ @JMac You must understand that the system which you promoting is ineffective. Using my methods, I found the answers to the questions which you couldn't answer. The answers which I found should have been found a long time ago but the current system does not allow it. Now I have a lot of answers and I have to break the system which blocks them. $\endgroup$ – Sylwester L Sep 11 '19 at 19:54
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @SylwesterL You're misunderstanding the conversation. There's a difference between questions people couldn't answer, and questions that shouldn't be answered on this site. People aren't answering them because they don't belong here in that format, not because they aren't able to. $\endgroup$ – JMac Sep 11 '19 at 20:07
  • $\begingroup$ @JMac I would like to ask questions as you expect but this is beyond mine possibilities. This is a standard problem for those who propose new solutions, are not understood by those who are old habits. It is impossible to introduce new solutions as not to break the old schemes. If something does not break the current schemes there is nothing new there. $\endgroup$ – Sylwester L Sep 11 '19 at 20:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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