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 ...


21

My take on it: No, this question is nowhere near on-topic. It is simply not about physics. I agree it's a fun question, and that this can make it attractive to some people. But we don't set the site scope depending on whether questions are fun or not $-$ the site scope is physics, and questions are judged against that standard. And the fact of the matter is, ...


21

Suppose the question had asked “How do I find the approximate volume of an asteroid ?”. I doubt there would be any serious arguments for closing that question. If we are happy to accept a volume/asteroid question then why should we reject a surface area/chicken question ? Estimating volume is on-topic for PSE but estimating surface area isn’t ?? But that ...


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 ...


18

I agree and would vote to reopen if the closing vote weren't a mod. Reasons: One does not know before asking the question what the answer is going to look like. Once you've seen the answer then one could say it's a meteorological phenomenon and not a physics one, but a priori it could equally be an optics question. Meteorology is intimately related to ...


17

Generally speaking, mathematical physics questions are on-topic and more than welcome. Note that advanced questions naturally tend to have fewer views, upvotes, and potential answerers. But don't get discouraged by that. You'll just have to be patient. If Phys.SE currently don't have the expertise to answer them, we might get it in the future! Also it is a ...


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.


15

The question failed the reopen review with no vote to reopen. From the timing it is evident that least two of the three reviewers saw your edited version and did not think it merits reopening. Note that the lack of an explicit question was not the reason for closure as a duplicate, and your edit did nothing to address my point that it is unclear how this ...


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 ...


14

Closing questions is not an expression of disdain. It's merely saying that a question like this is not suitable for the site as it is today, in this instance because it is not inside the scope of physics as a natural science. When the scope of a site changes, which inevitably happens over the course of the years (and in particular we are today simply ...


14

While I do not speak on behalf of the other close voters, the facts are clear: If the velocity is constant, the acceleration is zero. If a quantity is constant, it does not depend on time (in this context). Zero is clearly a constant, and a constant can be zero. Therefore, constant acceleration comprises two cases: Uniformly-changing velocity, which means ...


14

I did not vote to close but I do not see a relation between the two comments pointing at the maths mistake and the closing vote. That is, I don't think the typo is what led them to close the question as 'non-mainstream'. I actually don't know why someone would treat this question as non-mainstream as I personally find it makes sense and fits within the ...


13

Honestly, asking people to upvote your answer is considered to be in bad taste. So the blunt answer is no, we won't upvote your answer because you asked us to. What you can do, however, is post a link to your answer in chat (if you have access to it) and invite people to read it and vote on it as they see fit. This is better than asking for upvotes since ...


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.


12

This behaviour isn't really frowned upon, so it should be fine. This answer by David Z is basically on that exact topic, and gives good advice how to do it properly. Given the comments are over a week old, and you feel they answer your question, I don't think it would be a problem to combine them into an answer, as long as you give proper attribution when ...


12

The title of the question is "Find the Thevenin's Voltage," and the first line is "Please solve this." In its current form, it is a straightforward homework question. If there is a deeper, on-topic question contained inside, then the question should be edited to contain only that question.


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 ...


11

There is always a random element to voting. Votes not only refer to the raw content of a question but also its presentation: How easy it is to read (due to formatting) and understand, how well it makes its argument. That two questions ask about the same phenomenon does not mean both of them are equally "good questions" in this sense, and your ...


11

Disclaimer: I did not give closing or reopening votes for the surface area of the chicken question. I have to say that this is one of the few times I completely disagree with Emilio Pisanty's opinion, usually so wise and equilibrate. Let's forget the funny context the question has been asked. The real problem is how to estimate the surface area of the ...


11

The issue I take with the question is its nonsensical context ("building a chicken army to conquer the world"). If the question were just about "How do I measure the surface area of an irregular object, e.g. a chicken", it would be fine. However, editing the question this way would make a lot of the answers look odd, since they are ...


11

Since my motives are being questioned, let me add this. I voted to close this question because I didn't think it was about physics as defined in the scope of this site. That's all. I don't see that the age of the post (which I didn't notice) makes any difference. Perhaps the criteria have changed in the 10 years since this question was asked? There isn't any ...


11

I for one think the question is unclear or too broad. “Inhabitable” is not really defined, and actually hard to define. One can imagine the surface of the Earth is cold but that doesn’t make it uninhabitable: some animals may thrive. The physics side is also vague. You do not specify anything about the black hole or its orbital parameter, so there is ...


11

In case you are talking about this question, it has been reopened by regular reopen review around the same time you posted this question. This site does not work in real-time and after I closed your question I had no further interaction with it, i.e. I neither actively refused to reopen it nor did I reopen it. Note that the first version I unilaterally ...


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