2
$\begingroup$

In the Area 51 Exchange I've found that "The Theoretical Physics site didn't have enough activity during the beta. It has been closed, and its content has been merged into Physics". But when I've done a question in the Physics exchange about other universes my question was

closed as off-topic by Alfred Centauri, Brandon Enright, Kyle, Chris White, Qmechanic♦ Jun 17 at 5:02.

If in Physics exchange can't I ask questions about other universes, where is the place to do this? And if the content of the closed Theoretical Physics was merged into Physics, why can't I ask questions in that exchange account?

I think that the questions of Theoretical Physics should by into the Physics exchange tagged as Theoretical Physics.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ BTW: The question you have linked would likely have been closed even faster on Theoretical Physics SE as it was conceived and maintained as a site for working professional physicists to the exclusions of laymen, undergrads and even to some extent beginning graduate students. Think of the difference between Math Overflow and Math SE. If you are not "just guessing" from a layman's perspective, then you have totally failed to communicate that to us. Editing your questions to show explicitly that you know what you are doing and that the questions reflects real work would be in order. $\endgroup$
    – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten
    Jul 1, 2014 at 21:14
  • $\begingroup$ Then "it was conceived and maintained as a site for working professional physicists to the exclusions of laymen, undergrads and even to some extent beginning graduate students. Think of the difference between Math Overflow and Math SE. If you are not "just guessing" from a layman's perspective, then you have totally failed to communicate that to us" put it in the description of the site. $\endgroup$
    – hcarrasko
    Jul 2, 2014 at 20:07
  • $\begingroup$ @hector: the statement it was conceived and maintained as a site for working professional physicists to the exclusions of laymen, undergrads and even to some extent beginning graduate students applies only to the now defunct Theoretical Physics SE. The faq for this site says only Physics Stack Exchange is for active researchers, academics and students of physics and astronomy. We welcome questions of all levels. However some effort in making your question clear is appreciated and is more likely to attract answers. $\endgroup$
    – John Rennie
    Jul 3, 2014 at 5:13

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
4
$\begingroup$

I think your question (well, my interpretation of it) is within the scope of the site and was closed unfairly, and the number of likes my comment got suggests others agree with me.

But, but, but ...

If you're asking a technical question about how metrics like the Reissner-Nordstom or Kerr have null geodesics that allow light from other universes to reach ours then that's a fair question, because I can write down equations to demonstrate it. If on the other hand you're about to propose something more appropriate to the Sci-Fi SE then you're unlikely to get a warm reception here.

I suspect the real reason your question was closed is that it wasn't clear what you were asking.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

This is the place to ask questions about theoretical physics. You can't assume that just because your question was closed, it means that theoretical physics is off topic; if that were the case, the post notice explaining why it was closed would say "This question is off topic because it is about theoretical physics." Notice that it doesn't say that. (Also notice that almost every other question on the site is about theoretical physics.)

The notice displayed below your post gives you a brief summary of reason it was considered off topic. You can generally find more information about it in the comments. That being said, it's fine to ask for more detail here on meta, and perhaps one of the people who closed it will chime in to provide more detail.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ ok, thank you, then I should modify my questions from theoretical physics to non peer-validated physics. In my opinion that is an error because the most brilliant ideas were in their moment non peer-validated physics. $\endgroup$
    – hcarrasko
    Jul 1, 2014 at 16:46
3
$\begingroup$

We allow theoretical physics here. But only the mainstream kind.

Proposing new theories or talking about physics which hasn't been peer-validated is not allowed, to avoid making this site a hotbed for kook theorists.

You can check this link from the close reason for more information. Others have already mentioned how the post can be improved in the comments.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ok, thank you, then I should modify my questions from theoretical physics to non peer-validated physics. In my opinion that is an error because the most brilliant ideas were in their moment non peer-validated physics. $\endgroup$
    – hcarrasko
    Jul 1, 2014 at 16:45
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Hector that's not really true, but it doesn't matter. Read the link from the close reason, which Manishearth also linked above, to see what sorts of questions you should and shouldn't ask here, at least with respect to mainstream physics. If you have questions about the content of that post, you can ask another question here on meta to get it clarified. $\endgroup$
    – David Z
    Jul 1, 2014 at 16:50
  • $\begingroup$ ok thanks this clarified my doubts. I understand then that StackExchange is not the place to talk about physics than not be the mainstream. $\endgroup$
    – hcarrasko
    Jul 1, 2014 at 19:08

You must log in to answer this question.

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