@ChrisWhite Sorry, I am not blaming you. I have no problem with the number of retagging everyday, and it indeed show interesting questions in front page. But you two should avoid posting at the same time.
Yes, it did show +2. I leave for four hours and then open a new one. In comparison, the only difference are the the vote go from +2 to -1, an new comment and close message. Probably someone retract their votes later???
The astro data dump also show that the score is 2. It seems like a bug
I thought I was just imagining the +2 that was there before
Maybe when the question was migrated, the score field was just copied over directly, but then when it got the automatic downvote from being closed, the system recalculated the votes, and since the two people who had upvoted it on astro.SE don't have accounts on Physics (I'm guessing), it realized those votes didn't actually exist
This is a trivial query so I didn't want to ask it on the main site : Which one of these represents the Atomic mass and which one the Nuclear mass : m(X^A_Z) or m(X^A) , is there a reason for this ?
@DavidZaslavsky actually i had two questions as an assignment one over the other the first one had data with the m(X^a_z) notation the other had data with m(x^a) notation . I got both of them wrong . Some trials later i found that m(X^a) was giving me the Atoms mass in amu and the m(X^a_z) was giving me the nucleus' mass in amu so all i wanted to know was which notation is for which . as the atomic mass in amu includes the electrons so .....
The numbers that are written as superscripts and subscripts are always integers, at least as far as I've ever seen
If you're talking about non-integers, then this might be something to ask on the chemistry site. I suspect that it would be on topic there, but @Manishearth could tell you for sure.
although I guess maybe atomic physicists would use those numbers...
Binding energy is the mechanical energy required to disassemble a whole into separate parts. A bound system typically has a lower potential energy than its constituent parts; this is what keeps the system together—often this means that energy is released upon the creation of a bound state. The definition above corresponds to a positive binding energy (this is often causing confusion, e.g. a prominent term in chemistry is the 'free energy of binding', which is the difference of bound and unbound state and thus negative).
General idea
In general, binding energy represents the mechanical...
electron masses are too tiny to make that big a diff
Yeah, the notation trips me up as well. You have chemistry notation, nuclear physics notation, and particle physics notation, which are all slightly different.
Blame Pekka for this answer, he put me up to it ;-) . Enough cats, Pekka?
Yes, we need something linkable. The FAQ is an ideal place for this, but there are lots of other similar things that can go there as well. We don't want to bloat the faq, too few people read it already. Still, this par...
@CrazyBuddy Well, I like metas a lot. Formulating policies/etc is fun. I started early off on the Physics meta. dmckee introduced me to MSO later. MSO is a really fun and informal place, so I liked it there. And started participating..
As a matter of fact, Einstein's theory of relativity is what predicts the possibility of tachyons (faster-than-light particles) - or rather, relativity is what makes tachyons special. Without relativity, particles moving faster than light would just be really fast particles.
Although it's often ...
Even I mistook SR. I can't really hold myself from upvoting this one...
@CrazyBuddy It is meant to be private, but it's ok to urge others to explain a -1. Forcing it is a bad thing. Basically (regardless of the downvote), I wanted a comment on that post explaining what's wrong.
Plus I knew that you wouldn't take offence if I asked you to explain it :)
I have found few old posts in P SE in which asked questions are not clear. So no one has answered it or it has ambiguous answers in it. Is it possible for someone else other than the author to modify the contents of the post and re post it, so it can be useful to others. The reason I am asking th...
I was going through some old questions, where the accepted answers aren't usually the most thorough/best ones (in my opinion), which leads me to my suggestion -
Would it be possible for other users to vote to change the "correct" answer? I can't seem to find the couple of questions I was lookin...
This is strange, the last few days I have obtained 3 down votes on two of my (generally upvoted) answers and I am 100% sure that there is nothing wrong with the physics I have written in neither of these two answers ... :-/ On the main site votes should review the physics of the post and not the sympathy (or antipathy) for the poster or something like that ...
Yeah, I just hope this is not a revenge downvoter who has learned something from what has happend to Chris Gerig and others and is now more careful ... I it sums up to 10 downvotes on posts where I am 100% sure that there is nothing wrong with the physics, I'll probably bring it up in meta. Anyway, I am not sure if this would help if he/they are careful enough.
yeah thanks that is a good idea. If it continues, I will list the posts that got downvoted to see if I can gather some explanations. Now I'm gonna watch a nice Lenny Susskind Lecture to forget about these stupid downvotes :-)