« first day (552 days earlier)      last day (62 days later) » 

5:59 AM
@Mithrandir24601 Would your answer been along the lines of glS?

Also they closed the question on physics stack exchange :(((
Atleast I got my bounty back!! :)))

They closed it on grounds of it being unclear ... Though I would have prefered if they closed it on grounds of being too massive ... to be fair it only became that way because people in the comments/chat didn't know what I was going on about ... I really gotta learn how to write better questions on tricky topics ...
@MoreAnonymous Not massively so, but I'm very slow at writing answers, so I wouldn't hang around or anything waiting on me
Haha ... I'm not waiting for u (atleast not yet :P ) ... but I haven't awarded the bounty to glS because of the comments of what I write to answers ... I hope they come across as fair?
Even if you manage to write an answer after the bounty ... Id be really glad :)))
feel free to ping me then??
@Mithrandir24601 I actually quite impressed with the quality of answers u write .. just saw this one: quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/1654/…
@MoreAnonymous We'll see what happens - hopefully I'll get something decent down :P
Although you should get some sort of notification when someone answers a question
Yea but if I see a notification of ur ping to then I know its ur answer for sure! :P
@MoreAnonymous Thanks :) I usually find it's worth taking my time to write a good answer, as they tend to get more upvotes :P
6:13 AM
@Mithrandir24601 do u ever win bounties?
A: How efficient can my neutrino detector be?

Mithrandir24601Both the (current) answers to the question state that it is not possible for your idea to work. Aside from the fact that you are explicitly not asking for a feasibility study, the obligatory XKCD reference shows that it's all about the solid angle of the detector from the supernova and so, such a...

That one took weeks
6:38 AM
@Mithrandir24601 created an id just to upvote that one!
Also are u sure ur not Randall (Xkcd) in disguise ...
I only expected that level of thoroughness from him
9 hours later…
3:36 PM
4 hours later…
7:22 PM
@MoreAnonymous Ha! Thanks :) It is one of my favourite answers of my own :) I don't think I'm Randall, considering how absurdly awful my drawing skills are :P
7:38 PM
@Mithrandir24601 So it's only the drawing :P
@MoreAnonymous Well... I suspect I'm not as funny, but the only people who'd know that would be my friends. Considering I'm in my flat right now and they're not (in my flat), I can't really ask them, can I? :P
@Mithrandir24601 Hahaha
8:03 PM
@Mithrandir24601 since you have ur posts ur proud of can I ask if u appreciate recreational mathematics?
@MoreAnonymous I'm not sure what you mean by recreational maths, to be honest :/
I think graph theory was once considered recreational math
It's a proper tag in math stack exchange as well
graph theory, really? Wow, that's surprising
Yea ... read that somewhere
Anyway while u have ur answers ur proud of I have my quesitons :P
Dont like to answer :P
@Mithrandir24601 actually this was quite an old conjectured formula of mine but my insights changed hence the edit :P

Don't read the "Heuristic proof" ... There too much cheating there
@MoreAnonymous Ha! I'm the opposite - I don't ask very much
8:13 PM
@Mithrandir24601 any thoughts of the problem I have conjectured solution to ??
@MoreAnonymous That I'm clearly not a mathematician and don't quite understand the notion that people need incredibly complicated proofs for what is surely true ;)
@Mithrandir24601 No even by my own standard I am cheating ... I'm cheating sooo bad that I know I've put taken out a bunny from a hat which was empty ... And the real conundrum is I don't know how :P I know my manipulations ... but don't know why they work
Heuristic Proof should be called crazy cheating method that somehow gave the right (?) answer
8:33 PM
Meh. Physicists cheat all the time and the universe hasn't quite imploded yet
9:02 PM
@Mithrandir24601 probably because we don't use any "highly" conjectured math in a lot of engineering?

« first day (552 days earlier)      last day (62 days later) »