@tpg2114 well... it's asking about a mathematical model, not asking for a software program, which makes it not a clear case of software recommendation IMO. But I also think it's iffy for other reasons, as described above.
@Walkerneo Only tiny ones, and they're already filled with lava
@ChrisWhite If you have over 2000 rep, then no, you can't suggest edits.
Of course most suggested edits are not reviewed by the post authors anyway
In a situation like that I usually leave a comment suggesting the change.
or if it's a really minor edit, like just a spelling correction or a retagging, I'll just do it
Also in cases where the OP is new to SE and is having trouble formulating the post effectively, I'll sometimes just edit and post a comment asking them to review it. Remember that edits can always be rolled back.
This is really a one-and-a-half part question.
I know that when paint is mixed with a solvent or used with a primer, it sometimes wrinkles. As I understand, a key physical phenomena here is a non-uniform evaporation of the primer or solvent that gives rise to different evaporation rates at the p...
In his discussion of the radial wave function of hydrogen Griffiths (Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, 2nd ed, p.146) gives the general solution of$$\frac{d^{2}u}{d\rho^{2}}=\frac{l\left(l+1\right)}{\rho^{2}}u$$
as$$u\left(\rho\right)=C\rho^{l+1}+D\rho^{-l}.$$
Why is this? There's not even a...
@DavidZaslavsky I don't know if bicycles should exist, or not... I'm a bicyclist and bicycles.se user (and mod), and I don't know the physics.se tags very well at all. Bicycles (and motorcycles) are a somewhat interesting dynamic system that's commonly misunderstood. There's research into bicycle dynamics as recent as 2 years ago. Also, the tag has 3 followers (one of which is me).
@DavidZaslavsky @freiheit I would vote no (as a cyclist too!) just because we don't have tags like car even though there's a lot of interesting vehicle problems in physics.
Although we do have aircraft which should be killed under that argument
I think i'd personally be better off if there were no bicycles tag, because reading the questions and answers makes me want to go try to clear up misconceptions about bicycles/bicycling.
@tpg2114 give HW hints. Answer fluid mech qs. Answer simple conceptual mechanics stuff. Answer simple relativity/QM qs. How do you think I got my rep here?
Maimon has now voted down my accepted answer to physics.stackexchange.com/questions/45598/… twice now. The first time was a week or two ago. I commented back that his answer was superficial and likely wrong. We went back and forth a couple of times in comments. Now those comments have vanished. But I now see that he has voted down the answer again and said that it was "bad physics." This is just ad hominem. ...
Since according to his profile Maimon no longer participates in this site, should he have the ability to vote past, accepted answers down?
@Manishearth I jump on as many fluids questions as I can, even though I think since I didn't put pictures on this one I'm not going to get votes even though I have the same answer but earlier ;)
When driving a car while smoking with the window open (safety and legal issues aside), I've noticed that the smoke tends to go outside the window.
Why does the smoke go outside?
If the car is standing still and there is wind blowing at the same velocity the car was going - will the smoke behave...
Hi @Mansihearth -- thanks. I should have mentioned that the main point is that he voted down the answer twice. The first time Maimon and I had an exchange in comments, they were all deleted but the down-vote remained. Then he commented and down-voted again two days ago. It's not a big deal for me -- annoying, for sure -- but it seems he's abusing a site he no longer cares to participate in.
@MarkWayne Well, it's close, and I might take it personally in some cases, but it's not an ad hominem attack :/ He commented on your answer (albeit in an abrasive manner), and called it "bad". He didn't call you "bad"
Though I shall edit out the bad science part
(Next time, if you feel someone is offending you, flag the comment as "rude/offensive"
You may not always find a mod in chat
> An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument
Here, the argument was made against the opponent's argument, so yeah, it's not ad hominem
Though having your work called "bad" can be taken personally :/
This is really a one-and-a-half part question.
I know that when paint is mixed with a solvent or used with a primer, it sometimes wrinkles. As I understand, a key physical phenomena here is a non-uniform evaporation of the primer or solvent that gives rise to different evaporation rates at the p...
@Manishearth - that's some serious hair-splitting you've got going on there. I'll leave it alone but if you condone this sort of "abrasive" behavior, I think you don't have to wonder much why more people aren't participating. Maimon's point, that I've heard him voice on several occasions, is something like, "I'm too busy to be polite." That's just ridiculous. That sort of attitude is counterproductive. Maimon is due no special deference. He is consistently offensive.
@MarkWayne No, not hair splitting. We have to allow people to disagree with posts. That's a given. If someone says "your post is wrong", yes, people take it personally. But not allowing it introduces the risk of wrong posts not being recognized/corrected
@MarkWayne Yeah, that is his point. Which is counterproductive, and he's been banned for it X times
@MarkWayne And we give him no special deference, even though the community has asked for it a few times
@MarkWayne Basically, as long a "this answer is wrong" comment explains why it is wrong (and only attacks the answer, not the answerer), then it's fine. But yeah, such comments can be more abrasive than necessary (Ron's generally are), and they should be flagged+edited
But, while you may feel like taking a "this is wrong" comment personally, it's better if you don't.
@Manishearth I was under the impression that he'd been suspended twice. From what I've seen of his posts, whenever there is a disagreement, he goes postal. But thanks for letting me know that it has been "X" times that he was suspended (I take "banned" to mean "permanent"). If X >> 1, then it begs the question: if some folks don't learn, how many suspensions are allowed before a permanent ban is applied?
@Manishearth Thanks for explaining. Just one last comment. Maimon was contributing mostly good answers (though without, as far as I can tell any original work -- basically, he just regurgitates the literature or textbook). But now that he doesn't do that anymore, what's the point of allowing any counterproductive responses from him at all?
I think it could be on topic if it asked about the physics, but as it is I'm not sure what it's really asking. What is a "solvent problem" or a "primer" problem?
If it asked about the effects on surface tension due to differential evaporation, or the creating of wrinkles due to differences in surface tension and the physics behind that then it's on topic
@Manishearth That's not my statement. If a user is just going to abrasively comment on previous answers, why should that be tolerated? I'm done - thanks. See ya.
Okay, I'm sorry if I'm becoming part of the problem. I'm still fairly new to the site and apparently I need to develop thicker skin. As a working physicist though, with not a lot of time on my hands, who participates here for the fun of it, such interactions as I've recently had with Maimon make it less fun. And, here, I really will bow out of this chat.
@DavidZaslavsky when I see something bad and flag it or say so by a comment, all my flags get declined and the comments get deleted whereas the bad things keep going. For example what is wrong when I say this is a good answer, +1, there is nothing wrong with the PHYSICS therein? Why does this always get deleted whereas comments just nonconstructively stating that the poster does for whatever personal reasons (?) not BELIEVE in magnetic monopoles
If you just post a comment to say "+1 this is correct" or something like that, it's not constructive. It doesn't add anything that an upvote wouldn't. While we don't proactively delete such comments, it will get deleted if it's flagged or if we're clearing comments on the post for another reason.
But a comment which states a disagreement with supporting evidence is constructive, and will often be left alone.
What is constructive about "show us a magnetic monople Ron" then? This is just a snarky nonconstructive comment and such things obviously are allowed to stay there.
Ok, got to go now, I should just learn to no longer get too involved in things here, it negatively affects my "real life" ... :-/
Ok @DavidZaslavsky there is just one last thing I am too curious about: would such a snarky comment be constructive too, if say Ron Maimon or I had said such a thing below another post? I unfortunately got recently the impression that everything what some people do or say is constructive and allowed by definition, while (even slightly and politely formulated) disagreeing with them is not allowed or at least badly received. This happend in particular on meta.
@DavidZaslavsky: It's not so obviously constructive. It looks to me like Sklivvz is simply nitpicking the first sentence in Maimon's answer. If you read to the end, Maimon makes it quite clear what he is saying.
In his discussion of the radial wave function of hydrogen Griffiths (Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, 2nd ed, p.146) gives the general solution of$$\frac{d^{2}u}{d\rho^{2}}=\frac{l\left(l+1\right)}{\rho^{2}}u$$
as$$u\left(\rho\right)=C\rho^{l+1}+D\rho^{-l}.$$
Why is this? There's not even a...
When driving a car while smoking with the window open (safety and legal issues aside), I've noticed that the smoke tends to go outside the window.
Why does the smoke go outside?
If the car is standing still and there is wind blowing at the same velocity the car was going - will the smoke behave...
