As the title (hopefully tries to convey) - Is it advisable to answer a question with an answer that is more "supplementary"?


Like, based on other answers?

For example;

I would say, maybe, if the user (asker) is new, and an answer is (although correctly and accurately) explaining in a very detailed way - exactly what the question is asking about; I thought if I could write an answer based on the other answers, but in a "simpler" "language". That is,

(for a concrete example) (note I am kind of making this up, just to not make this question incredibly long)

Q: What is a simplest black hole?

  • A1: A Schwarzschild one.
  • A2: A hole that doesn't have angular momentum and no charge. (...)

My answer:

based on A1, it is a Schwarzschild black hole (and, based on A2 - it has no angular-momentum(in other words it does not spin) and no charge(no electric charge)

(Based on a comment I edit this to be a bit better example)

based on A1 and A2; it is a Schwarzschild black hole (related to the Schwarzschild metric (being, an solution to Einstein's equations in General Relativity, that describes the gravitational field outside a spherical mass(Like Earth), on the assumption that the electric charge of the mass, angular momentum of the mass, and universal cosmological constant are all zero. -Wikipedia

Some things in the answer could be

  • Added examples (when applicable).
  • Explanations (at a different "level" or "point of view").
  • More related (directly/indirectly) links.
  • ...

External Links

this was a Ubuntu question i posted; which I forgot about; adding it as well.

  • $\begingroup$ note, as I pointed out - I just made up the example just to try to explain the way I meant the above-question; it's not a great analogy :) $\endgroup$ Jan 12, 2023 at 13:07
  • $\begingroup$ edit thanks @PeterMortensen, will include them in comments instead: note, this is my first question (on Physics Meta) therefore, if I can improve this - point it out :) thanks! have a good, continuing nice day! Wishes from Sweden. $\endgroup$ Jan 12, 2023 at 14:38

1 Answer 1


I don't think we need to formulate specific criteria about which answers are "advisable" or not. If you, the author of the answer, think that the answer you are writing adds something over the answers already present, then you should post that answer. What it adds - being simpler, being more illustrative, being more complicated, being more mathematical, whatever - isn't really all that relevant.

If other people agree that your answer is useful, they'll upvote your answer, if they disagree, they'll downvote it.

The only thing you should perhaps consider when your potential new answer has a lot of overlap with other answers already present is whether it might be more efficient to suggest an edit to an existing answer instead of writing a separate answer.

However, the example you give in your question is, in my opinion, rather bad. It's bad on every level: Not only does your proposed answer not really add anything over the two answers already present (it just repeats the other answers with slightly different words), the question is already unclear (what does it even mean for a black hole to be "simplest"?), and the two suggested answers are also bad (e.g. just saying "Schwarzschild" without at least linking to an explanation of what that means is almost completely useless). I would have downvoted both the question and all the answers in this example.

  • $\begingroup$ thanks for the reply; and yes, it was a bad example, really, this I will save and follow, thanks again! :-) (and the example was really just, a short thing just to prove the point of the question, in a real scenario it wouldnt been like that at all, it was only for - a short - although (very)bad illustrating the idea) $\endgroup$ Jan 12, 2023 at 15:50

You must log in to answer this question.

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