# Tag Info

21

It isn't compulsory to accept an answer. If you feel that neither answer is acceptable then do not accept either of them. If you haven't received an answer that satisfies you then placing a bounty is the correct approach. It hasn't worked (so far) in this case, but that's the risk you run. It may simply be that none of the site members are experts in this ...

20

Demanding that questions only deal with situations that unequivocally can occur in the real world rules out objects on infinite planes, point masses, Einsteinian trains, Maxwell's demon, supersymmetry, superstring theory, and any of the other standard thought experiments that form the underpinnings of a standard physics education. The ability of applying ...

18

No, you have done the right thing. With some many questions on the site it's very easy to miss the fact that a duplicate exists, and to be fair the site search isn't as great as it could be. Don't attach too much significance to the downvotes. It's easy to feel that downvotes are a personal criticism, but really they are just a statement that the question ...

15

The fault here is mine. I didn't take enough care in checking the match between the post and the proposed source. I can only offer by apologies and delete the accusatory comment on the post.

14

I think this question should be on-topic. To the extent that it is a software-recommendations question, it's precisely the kind of recommendation question we want to encourage: it is well-researched, it has a clear statement of goals and of the OP's situation, and clear requirements on the answers, which also make it clear that the answers are expected to be ...

14

Your question does not ask a conceptual question about physics, it simply asks users to solve the exercise you call "the Devil's problem". That you ask us to solve the exercise not by saying "Solve this for me" but by asking whether a given number is the answer doesn't change anything in my eyes - how is an answer supposed to make the ...

13

13

First, note that not all homework related questions are off topic here. However... I wasn't interested in learning or understanding any physics methods; my interest was to find out whether 13 is indeed the answer for the problem in question. It's the Devil's dozen that made me interested. For me, the value of the posted solutions is that they prove that 13 ...

12

Yeah, I think that makes sense. The question in its current form seems like just the kind of thing the new recommendation policy is designed to encourage, and we should definitely have one open question about intro QM books. (Of course we also have to make sure the answers are in shape, but that can happen whenever.) Since this is an active meta discussion ...

12

You are asking us to do a literature review on the subject of carbon dioxide and global warming. A student starting a PhD on the subject would spend weeks doing a review like this. Your question was closed as too broad because, well, it's too broad.

11

I don't speak for the other moderators, but my concern with this question and the other like it is that very often the answers that such questions attract are not about physics. In this particular case that are at least a half a dozen answers that are frankly terrible that have received lots of upvotes. "Explanations" in terms of other forces might shut the ...

11

The most-upvoted answer to that question is a great example of discussing mathematics as opposed to doing mathematics. The meat of the answer is [T]he real problem is not so much nonrenormalizability as high-energy behavior inconsistent with local quantum field theory. ... With gravity, this high-energy/short-distance correspondence breaks down. ... This ...

11

The answer is pretty much irrelevant as to whether the question should be closed, particularly for homework-like questions: that determination should be done based on the question text itself, and the fact that you've also provided an answer to that question not a factor there. In the specific example you linked to, the question itself is very poorly ...

10

I want to point out one aspect of the question closure procedure which is relevant here but is not apparent to <3k users (and even then takes a while to realize). When voting to close a question, one gets to choose between the multiple options, but after you have five close votes the question gets closed regardless of what the mix of options is. (That is, ...

10

Questions which are edited are put into a queue to be reviewed for reopening. This is the primary mechanism by which questions get reopened after being put on hold. Flagging for moderator attention is a backup option, to be used when the review process isn't working - either because the question is too old to be reviewed, or, if you really believe that the ...

10

10

Of the seven questions you have asked five of them have been answered with no or only minor edits to the question. The question Cosmology parameters was edited because it contained multiple different questions and we require only one question per post. The question was edited and subsequently answered, and you have accepted the answer. In fact four of the ...

10

First, thanks for coming to meta and asking! It's not your hunch, though. We don't discourage using external sources; actually, it's encouraged to link or cite useful and relevant external resources whenever appropriate, but when doing so in a question or answer, you need to do it in such a way that your question or answer makes sense even to a reader who ...

10

This question is based on a bit of a false premise. Errata related to the concepts seems to be accepted as on-topic. See here. The difference in this post is that you're not asking about a concept, you're asking about "what's happening" with the lack of mention of "$^{(4)} R$ in Box 8.4 (pg 202)". It's not clear what conceptual difficulty you're having....

9

It seems that OP's question (v3) is a valid mainstream conceptional question concerning the thermodynamical arrow of time in the same category as, say, inquiries about the Boltzmann H-theorem and Loschmidt's paradox. The question should therefore be reopened. As to why OP's question was closed as non-mainstream: Well, it seems it was a mistake. I want to ...

9

I think this is a typical case where an initial close vote encouraged others, in a snowball effect. We've seen a very similar occurrence recently here. This is worrying and should be reversed. I think much of this stems from a misguided urge to help the community, the thinking being that if a question already has close votes, it must be bad; hence anybody ...

9

No, I do not think that a statement of the OP's age should be edited out, or (as DavidZ suggests) replaced with a statement identifying the type of answer requested. In my opinion this is an unnecessary and unhelpful interference with the question. Most questions (and answers) do contain a lot of irrelevant material. If we are going to enforce a policy that ...

9

The closure/on hold banner, which was posted under your question when it was put on hold (and politely linked to in a comment beforehand), contains a link to this site's guidelines for homework and exercise-based questions; you're expected to read them carefully and act accordingly. If you're not willing to spend the effort to understand the community's ...

9

Questions founded on a misunderstanding of something are a work-a-day reality of teaching physics and on Physics Stack Exchange. If you have the time and inclination, then correct the misunderstanding. Sometimes that might just be a comment, sometimes it's an answer to the question (if not he one the OP expected), and occasionally it's not clear which it ...

9

Reviewing and (possibly) re-opening questions is part of the normal operation of the site—it is the purview of normal users with at least 3000 reputation. It does not call for the intervention of elected moderators (distinguished by a ♦ after their username) who are there to deal with unusual or rapidly evolving cases.

9

We do have a procedure in place where users of the site can vote to reopen closed questions, and I see that your question currently has one reopen vote. The best way for you to speed this process along is for you to edit your question with some text like "it's been suggested that this question is a duplicate of [link]. But that's a question about X, while I'...

9

This is a question that would help with the understanding of specific heat and conductivity and which has a greater effect when it comes to transfer of energy between objects. If the question is about that, then it should be clear that this is what it's about. In other words, the question could be something like: "How do the thermal conductivity and ...

9

TL;DR It looks like you put the duplicate stuff up front as the title and as the main part of the question, and you hid the new and important stuff at the bottom of a "note". Therefore, it makes sense that the question was closed, as it really does seem to mainly be a duplicate. This can easily be fixed by focusing on the right things though. Full response: ...

9

The post you've linked to is in a curious position, in that both of the following are true: It is not a solvable problem, and it would never ever be set as homework by a competent instructor. It is an archetypal example of the type of question that should get closed under the site's homework policy. Let me expand a bit on those two points. The problem you'...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible