1
$\begingroup$

I recently asked this question Understanding forces in QFT and as far as I could possibly think I concluded thag yes my question was within the site's giidelines of a good question, as I was asking about a physical observation (force) and what is the explanation provided for it by modern science using force carriers or force fields.

I initially started searching on internet and found out that forcd carriers are virtual particles and do not actually exist and that force fields are generally defined as force per unit charge/mass etx and hence implying that they are not the cause of themselves ( since they are derived from force only) being confused i posted my question as mentioned above and only got downvoted.

How can I ask questions better in future( or even improve this one ) to better meet the sites standards/guidelines ?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

I didn't downvote, although I didn't like much the question (maybe because it's a bit vague and saying Another source disproving fields existence, like if you know everything, doesn't help).

On the other hand, your question is rather philosophical and controversial, so it doesn't fit very well in the Q/A format.

If you want to improve your questions, you should also worry about presentation (boldface is always welcome) and grammar (I found at least five spelling errors in this question). And dont forget to start your question with capital letters ("Improving quality of my questions")!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Controversial I can understand, but I am not able to wrap my head around the fact that how is this philosophical ? $\endgroup$ – Rijul Gupta Oct 28 '13 at 10:49
  • $\begingroup$ @rijulgupta See my answer in main. $\endgroup$ – jinawee Oct 28 '13 at 10:53
  • $\begingroup$ But I am not questioning the existence of force, motion etc. I am just trying to find an explanation for why does this happen. Is that still inappropriate for the website ? $\endgroup$ – Rijul Gupta Oct 28 '13 at 10:59
  • $\begingroup$ @rijulgupta You question the existence of fields (many people do), but you could also question the existence of forces (or anything you want). So it's an open question (although other user's opinions might be interesting). $\endgroup$ – jinawee Oct 28 '13 at 11:06
  • $\begingroup$ I would like to defend me and my question by pointing that my question was actually how force is mediated, I did not question the exietence of field per se, although I did say that I observed that fields were derived and expressed in terms of force and hence can not be the reason of force from which they derive $\endgroup$ – Rijul Gupta Oct 28 '13 at 11:10
  • $\begingroup$ Now I am even unable to delete the question, its just reducing my reputation points, can you delete it ? $\endgroup$ – Rijul Gupta Oct 28 '13 at 11:18
  • $\begingroup$ @rijulgupta I'm not a moderator, please flag it as "needs moderator attention" an explain your issue. $\endgroup$ – jinawee Oct 28 '13 at 11:20
  • $\begingroup$ Your answer was really helpful, thanks a lot. On a different front would you agree that nowadays physics is more associated with making predictions than explaining the observed phenomenons ? $\endgroup$ – Rijul Gupta Oct 28 '13 at 11:24
  • $\begingroup$ @rijulgupta The key point is that derived and expressed in terms of force is false, it true in high school physics, but not in QFT. Note that I have similar doubts but I won't care until I graduate. True understanding comes after mathematical understanding (or maybe never). Just don't get stuck too often in this "philosphical" problems. Just carry on and do physics. $\endgroup$ – jinawee Oct 28 '13 at 11:29
  • $\begingroup$ Wish I could separate physics from explanations I seek of the world, I strongly believe that physics has the capabilty of explaining not some but all phenomenon of the world. Anyways thanks a lot once again. $\endgroup$ – Rijul Gupta Oct 28 '13 at 11:32
3
$\begingroup$

I'll add a couple more points to jinawee's answer:

  • You should consider accepting more answers to your previous questions. The fact that you generally don't accept any answers implies that you're more interested in soliciting an open-ended discussion, which is frowned-upon here. Accepting an answer also demonstrates that you've successfully understood the subject material, and are ready to move on to your next question.

  • Looking at many of your questions, it seems like you can answer most of them yourself, with just a little more research effort. Try reading a Wikipedia entry on the subject, or glance at a textbook, or indeed search Physics SE for similar questions.

The second point is my biggest reason for downvoting questions (not necessarily yours, but in general).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I did accept the answers where I got satisfied with them, wherever I had trouble understanding, or did not find the answer completely fulfilling my query I did not accept them, I believe that is the expected behaviour of the person asking the question. $\endgroup$ – Rijul Gupta Oct 28 '13 at 16:21
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I've looked at some of your questions without an accepted answer, and I can attest that the answers are very satisfactory. The fact that you don't find them satisfactory implies that you have some work to do regarding grasping the subject matter. $\endgroup$ – Dmitry Brant Oct 28 '13 at 16:30
  • $\begingroup$ But I did try to grasp as much as possible by posting comments for ex here physics.stackexchange.com/questions/81799/… I initially was not satisfied with the answer, but after the long conversation in comment I accepted it. I am trying my best to learn as much as possible, in many questions you can see that answers have comments with no replies, I am hoping that there would be some more explanations so that I can accept the answer, if later on I understand the answers on my own I would definitely accept them. Hope you understand. $\endgroup$ – Rijul Gupta Oct 28 '13 at 16:39

You must log in to answer this question.

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