tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics) Sun, 04 Nov 2018 13:49:50 -0800 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.1.9 & Feed Publisher Joe Fitzsimons comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (16124) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16124#Comment_16124 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16124#Comment_16124 Fri, 16 Sep 2011 00:46:05 -0700 Joe Fitzsimons José Figueroa comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (16094) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16094#Comment_16094 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16094#Comment_16094 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 11:30:00 -0700 José Figueroa I too support the banner.

]]>
Noah Snyder comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (16093) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16093#Comment_16093 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16093#Comment_16093 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 08:25:19 -0700 Noah Snyder I support such a banner.

]]>
Michael Kissner comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (16092) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16092#Comment_16092 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16092#Comment_16092 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 02:57:29 -0700 Michael Kissner Anton Geraschenko comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (16091) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16091#Comment_16091 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16091#Comment_16091 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 00:30:07 -0700 Anton Geraschenko Once the public beta starts, I propose a short term banner on MO plugging the site (like we did for math.SE and tex.SE). If you have an opinion--particularly if you're opposed to such a plug--please speak up.

]]>
Qiaochu Yuan comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (16090) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16090#Comment_16090 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16090#Comment_16090 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:40:52 -0700 Qiaochu Yuan The private beta has just started.

]]>
Kaveh comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (16017) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16017#Comment_16017 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=16017#Comment_16017 Wed, 07 Sep 2011 19:20:03 -0700 Kaveh The proposal is now at 99% (up from 76% last week) and will probably reach 100% in a few hours. Thanks for the support.

]]>
Scott Carnahan comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (15982) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15982#Comment_15982 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15982#Comment_15982 Tue, 06 Sep 2011 02:40:47 -0700 Scott Carnahan At this point the site only needs commits from about 18 users who are new, or even fewer users who have accumulated points on StackExchange sites. It would also help if those of you who committed a while ago did a cycle of uncommit-and-recommit, because StackExchange does some kind of time-dependent weighting.

]]>
Michael Kissner comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (15958) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15958#Comment_15958 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15958#Comment_15958 Sun, 04 Sep 2011 01:12:11 -0700 Michael Kissner
Edit: I believe this topic gave the project quite a bump (According to the Committers graph on the right) ]]>
Steve Huntsman comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (15957) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15957#Comment_15957 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15957#Comment_15957 Sat, 03 Sep 2011 19:17:17 -0700 Steve Huntsman José Figueroa comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (15952) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15952#Comment_15952 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15952#Comment_15952 Fri, 02 Sep 2011 15:36:20 -0700 José Figueroa I think it's certainly OK to post here and I wish I had thought about it myself. I committed to it back in December, but it seemed to be going very slowly. Hopefully this will make it more visible. I have serious doubts about the willingness of the theoretical physics community (or, let me be more precise, the hep-th community to which I belong) to be as generous with their time and their knowledge as the MO community has proved to be, but I would be very happy to be proved wrong.

]]>
Kaveh comments on "A Q&A site for research-level theoretical physics" (15950) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15950#Comment_15950 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1128/a-qa-site-for-researchlevel-theoretical-physics/?Focus=15950#Comment_15950 Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:25:26 -0700 Kaveh I hope that it is OK to post this here.

There is a proposal for a research-level Q&A site for theoretical physics (MO style). One of the requirements for getting the proposal into beta is that it should have enough commitments from people who use SE sites (TeX.SE, MSE.SE, ...) which is not satisfied at the moment (the idea was to get a large percentage of initial users from researchers in theoretical physics and most of them haven't used the SE network). Theoretical physics is quite close to mathematics so we thought that people on MO might be interested in the proposal. Please check the proposal if you are interested in theoretical physics and commit to it if you find it interesting.

Thanks.

]]>