« first day (542 days earlier)      last day (3509 days later) » 

6:49 AM
David Zaslavsky has added an event to this room's schedule.
 
 
13 hours later…
7:49 PM
0
Q: benevolent attack on my account

Larry HarsonIn the space of 5 mins, two of my answers from other questions have been upvoted and all because I asked a good question today. It's very flattering, I must admit, but are there safe guards in place to prevent someone upvoting too many questions for one person?

 
8:45 PM
Just in case I can't attend tomorrow, I thought I'd pop in for a minute right now. I am here from cstheory, in particular I am the guy that is trying to steal part of your questions ;)
I think everybody at cstheory is excited about taking all the questions in the quantum-computing and quantum-information tags
does anybody over at Physics object?
We have a strong community of quantum computing and information experts at cstheory, including guys like Peter Shor, Tsuyoshi Ito, Joe Fitzsimons, Robin Kothari, Scott Aaronson, Martin Schwarz, Niel de Beaudrap, John Watrous and many more
so question on quantum computing and info would find themselves among experts who are truly interested in either answering them, or knowing the answers
If you look at the top-voted info/computing question then you will see it involves a lot cstheory folks in the discussion: it is asked by Scott Aaronson and answered by Abel Molina with feedback from his supervisor John Watrous and also Peter Shor (all 4 of those are frequenters of cstheory)
also, the high research level of the TP.SE site, even led to a paper based on that question written by Abel Molina, John Watrous and one of Scott's post-docs or students: Thomas Vidick
Although I understand that phys.SE welcomes all levels of physics questions, including research level ones, I feel like cstheory is more welcoming to researchers. I also feel that the community at cstheory more closely resembles the community of TP.SE even if the topic is closer between physics and TP
For that reason, I would love to see these two tags (quantum-info and quantum-computing) to be migrated over to cstheory.
 
9:02 PM
@ArtemKaznatcheev thanks for your input! Personally I think that'll be a good idea - quantum computing is an overlap area anyway.
Is everything in those two tags appropriate to be sent to CS theory?
 
@DavidZaslavsky Nobody seems to have an objection. On a quick glance by me (I am suppose to know something about quantum info/computing, apparently ;)) most of the questions seem fine.
Some of the quantum-info questions depart from the usual complexity-theory questions typical of cstheory
but I think cstheory is specifically trying to have more non-complexity questions
so they will be welcome
if people start pointing out off-topicness of questions post-migration then we can simply migrate the questions onto phys.SE using the standard methods.
However, I don't think there will be an issue
 
Sure, that sounds good.
If you folks at CS theory do happen to identify any questions on TP.SE in those two tags which wouldn't be appropriate on your site, I guess you could just make a note of them, and then either they can be migrated over after TP shuts down, or we can just ask the SE team to exclude them from the migration to CS theory.
 
The only concern I can see is if somebody at phys.SE feels incredibly strongly about wanting the question for physics, or has a very good argument for why physics would be a better home
@DavidZaslavsky will do
 
@ArtemKaznatcheev Yeah... I think that probably will not happen, but we'll see.
 
I hope someone gives the surface-area of balls answer to the news feed question
oh wait, just clicked on it... nevermind
 
9:11 PM
@ArtemKaznatcheev it still might not be a bad answer
depends on whether the OP is talking about a legit higher-dimensional gravity theory, or just a wild idea he has...
 
@DavidZaslavsky except I doubt it would satisfy the asker who seems to want to know why gravity is weaker than EM
but the analogy to how gravity would look like in 1D, 2D, or 4D I have found very useful
when trying to help kids understand why it is 1/r^2
and not 1/r^{something else}
anyways, not my place :D I have to run now!
 
OK, well thanks for stopping by!
 
hopefully I will see you guys in the group chat on Monday
 
Yep, hopefully see you then or some other time
 

« first day (542 days earlier)      last day (3509 days later) »