I recently asked a question about a theory proposed by someone I know. It is not a scientifically known one, but it is not so obviously true or false that one can avoid speculating on it, to reason out why it should be false.

I admit, it was not a "mainstream" question as required by the site. My question got closed with the reason that it was not mainstream, and theories can be discussed only if they have already been researched, new work is not allowed on the site.

However, before its closing, there was a person who commented that they could discuss it according to the known facts. There was 1 upvote on it. Someone else countered him by saying that the same could be done with any off-topic question, hence that was not a valid reason.

Anyway, it shows that there are people willing to answer it.

Would it be a good idea to create an "off-stream" tag, where unpublished theories can be discussed scientifically. Those who don't like the idea could just avoid browsing through such questions, instead of banning them from the site altogether.

| |
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ So, you are proposing to make off-topic on-topic? $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Jan 18 '15 at 17:09
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ possible duplicate of Should there be a special section for non-mainstream physics? $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Jan 18 '15 at 17:13
  • $\begingroup$ NB: I was having an entirely off-kilter day when I stated that. I concur with the sentiments of JohnRennie & Jim, that the question was off-topic and should be closed. I've retracted my comments. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Jan 18 '15 at 17:34
  • $\begingroup$ Also: the random people on this site upvote all sorts of bad posts, I wouldn't take your upvote to heart. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Jan 18 '15 at 17:35
  • $\begingroup$ mainstream physics site policy $\endgroup$ – vzn Jan 18 '15 at 23:30
  • $\begingroup$ On my opinion, the critical views of the non-mainstream questions or even pseudoscientific "results" should be allowed until the talk about them remains undoubtly in the scientific frame. But unfortunately, you have few chance to convince the modaretator/reviewer community about this here. Until that, I suggest come to area51 and support the "Popular Science" proposal, which will be a good site for exactly similar questions. $\endgroup$ – peterh - Reinstate Monica Jan 27 '15 at 11:54

Browse other questions tagged .