1
$\begingroup$

I have a question that was closed with the following motivation:

We deal with mainstream physics here. Questions about the general correctness of unpublished personal theories are off topic, although specific questions evaluating new theories in the context of established science are usually allowed. For more information, see Is non mainstream physics appropriate for this site?.

I would love to edit my question and remove the “non-mainstream” bits. But I don't know who to ask about what is non-mainstream in my question (you can find the question here).

How am I supposed to do that? Who can I ask for help?

$\endgroup$
7
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I glanced through your question and I think the title would give an "automatic" close impulse for some users, and if you get five of them, it is a close. Your title sounds too science fiction. A title like "can the Casimir effect be used in building an effective negative mass in italics, would attract people who have researched the Casimir effect, while keep a general audience off voting. $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Jan 1 at 5:31
  • $\begingroup$ @annav Thank you. It sounds like a good suggestion. How does it work now, technically? I have already tried to edit my question in order to re-open it. Can I do that again? $\endgroup$
    – moonblink
    Jan 1 at 6:28
  • $\begingroup$ yes, the Original Poster can always edit a closed post. $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Jan 1 at 7:01
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ As Anna said, click-bait titles are generally a bad idea on Physics.SE (and throughout the network). Also, "Please verify that this contraption does what I think and doesn't violate the laws of physics" questions don't tend to do well, since they're bordering on engineering and they're also a "check my work" question. $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Jan 1 at 7:29
  • $\begingroup$ To make your post on-topic, try to distill the essence into a clear conceptual question (or a couple of closely connected questions). You can briefly describe your gizmo, but the conceptual question needs to be the primary content. $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Jan 1 at 7:34
  • $\begingroup$ The killer (for me at least) is “I would love to find out where the error is”. This isn’t a check-my-personal-idea site. $\endgroup$ Jan 1 at 15:16
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you everyone for your precious suggestions. I have done my best to improve my question now. $\endgroup$
    – moonblink
    Jan 1 at 20:24

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .