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

there does not seem to be any opposition from TP.SE either

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.

@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

@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

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