2
$\begingroup$

In a question I asked a while ago, somebody set a bounty of 200 and awarded it to an answer. I can now not find who it was since it was awarded, and my memory is not so good on who set the bounty.

Maybe it would be good to keep the name of the one offering the bounty by the answer chosen by him/her, next to the price, so that it is clear that the original questioner did not set the bounty and the choice. It looks funny to have an answer awarded a bounty and not chosen by the questioner. Now it seems that the questioner has set the bounty awarded it and not chosen the awarded question!

| |
$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

If you mouse over the bounty symbol (the +200) a tooltip will pop up showing who awarded the bounty.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ right, found it, It is not evident unless I line up my pointer on the line of the "+", nowhere else on the +200 panel, a very narrow field, at least using my browser ( firefox). It still looks funny for the casual reader not to have it as a chosen answer since it looks as if the questioner awarded the bounty. $\endgroup$ – anna v Jul 24 '12 at 19:19
0
$\begingroup$

I figured you're not satisfied with the answers so far and so I actually set the bounty because you didn't choose and answer. When the week was over I awarded the answer with the most votes among the new answers.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I have asked @Kostya to expand his last paragraph, because his answer, though similar is not dogmatic. Theoretical definitions cannot substitute for experimental explorations, in the sense of QED (Quod Erat Demonstrandum). Kosya correctly asseses that a different definition may be necessary to observe interactions of this type, but thinks that at the limit where known QFT applies the "no effect by definition would hold". Looking at historic limits of one theory subsumed by a more modern one I think a window of "not yet known" should be left open. $\endgroup$ – anna v Jul 25 '12 at 13:16
  • $\begingroup$ @annav: Errm, okay. $\endgroup$ – Nikolaj-K Jul 25 '12 at 13:22
  • $\begingroup$ of course it is ok. :) $\endgroup$ – anna v Jul 25 '12 at 13:32

You must log in to answer this question.

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