Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

171 submissions , 136 unreviewed
4,258 questions , 1,606 unanswered
5,069 answers , 21,527 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
623 active unimported users
More ...

  Sandbox

This is a sandbox question thread for testing purposes.

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
779 views

The Maximally Satirical Sandbox Model (MSSM)

The Maximally Satirical Sandbox Model is a model of an ideal sandbox, which can be stated as follows:- continued collaborative perturbations to the "Sandbox functional" results in \(\delta S=0\) where S is satire. This is equivalent through a simple R transformation (where R is reflection), to the Minimally Satirical Sandbox Model. The knowledge of the existence of knowledge of these two models can then be used to prove the PhysicsOverflow concavity theorem.

On the non-perturbative formulation of sock theory and the long standing missing sock problem

The Minimally Supersymmetric Sock Model (MSSM) is a supersymmetric \(\mathcal{N}=1\) matrix model that describes socks and sockinos. Socks are described as spin-2 massless particles while sockinos are described as spin 3/2 particles. Spontaneous supersymmetry breaking causes sockinos to gain mass, which explains the spontaneous disappearance of socks and their decoupling from the sockinos, besides when in a high-energy state, during which both sock disappear spontaneously and couple with their respective shoes and shoeinos (they are prevented from decoupling from their shoe because of Sock exclusion).

The Minimally Supersymmetric Sock Model exhibits S-duality with the Minimally Supersymmetric Shoe Model (MSSM). This means that a strongly-coupled sock is equivalent to a weakly-coupled shoe. This is unsurprising, because a very tight sock is the same as a very loose shoe, but the reverse is much more astonishing: a weakly-coupled sock is equivalent to a strongly-coupled shoe, i.e. a very loose sock is the same as a very tight shoe.

The Minimally Supersymmetric Sock Model also exhibits T-duality with the Minimally Supersymmetric Glove Model. This means that a very small sock is a very large glove, and vice versa.

This is an answer to the unsolved problem posted on Stack Exchange a few years ago, that was unfairly closed as being off-topic, despite the strong correlation observed by Shoesock Gloveson between the percentage of off-topic questions and the overall quality of a site.

april-fools

asked Mar 7, 2014 in Public Official Posts by dimension10 (1,955 points) [ revision history ]
edited Apr 3, 2015 by dimension10
Most voted comments show all comments

Testing testing (I am dimension10).      

@ArnoldNeumaier Fixed : )

please click again to confirm.

Most recent comments show all comments

comment - original revision.

If you see this comment, it means that there's a pretty annoying bug present in the autosave feature.

original revision of the comment.

32 Answers

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

Test stranges LaTex behavior in the body of submissions as for example here https://physicsoverflow.org/38924/superposition-memory-unlocking-quantum-automatic-complexity

$0^n1^n$

$n=2$

$n=2$

$n=60$

$n=60$

$Q_s(x)$

$Q_s(x)$

$x$

$(n,q)$

$(n,q)$

$G$

$PU(n)$

$PU(n)$

$U_0,U_1\in G$

$|G|≤q$

$\{e_k\}$

$\{e_k\}$

$U_xe_1=e_2$

$U_ye_1≠e_2$

$y≠x$

$|y|=|x|$

$Q_s$

$$Q_s(0^21^2)≤(2,12)<(3,1)≤Q_s(0^{60}1^{60})$$

$Q_s(0^{120})≤(2,121)$

Ok, the problem is that when copying the abstract from the arXiv the LaTex is in italic so that it does not compile here on PO...

answered May 4, 2017 by Dilaton.admin (0 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 0 dislike
Test
\(x = {-b \pm \sqrt{b^2-4ac} \over 2a}\)
answered Mar 15, 2014 by dimension10 (1,955 points) [ no revision ]
reshown May 1, 2014 by dimension10

It should be $x_{1,2}$.

@VladimirKalitvianski It's the default equation in the latex field, I was just testing fonts.

Font is not as important as math :-)

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

This is a test: $$\frac 1 2$$

answered Mar 20, 2014 by physicsnewbie (-20 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 0 dislike

\(x = {-b \pm \sqrt{b^2-4ac} \over 2a}\)

answered Mar 25, 2014 by physicsnewbie (-20 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 0 dislike
$$\begin{align*}
  E(R_{i,t})    &= E(\alpha_i)+E(\beta_{i,F_1 } F_{1,t})+E(\beta_{i,F_2 } F_{2,t})+\ldots+E(\beta_{i,F_m } F_{m,t}) \\
  \bar{R}_{i,t} &= a+\hat{\beta}_{i,F_1 } E(F_{1,t})+\hat{\beta}_{i,F_2 } E(F_{2,t})+\ldots+\hat{\beta}_{i,F_m } E(F_{m,t}) \\
  \bar{R}_{i,t} &= a+\gamma_1\hat{\beta}_{i,F_1 } +\gamma_2\hat{\beta}_{i,F_2 } F_{2,t}+\ldots+\gamma_m\hat{\beta}_{i,F_m }
\end{align*}$$
answered Mar 26, 2014 by physicsnewbie (-20 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 0 dislike

>let there be light

let there be light
answered Mar 27, 2014 by Jia Yiyang (2,640 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 0 dislike

$$PHYSICS$$ 

$$physics$$

answered Mar 27, 2014 by physicsnewbie (-20 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 0 dislike

LaTex Elchtest

$$
g_{mn} = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
    g_{\mu\nu} & g_{\mu 5} \\
    g_{5\nu} &  g_{55} \\
\end{array}
\right)
$$

$$
\sum\limits_{I.J} R_{I.J} a_1^{I\dagger} \bar{a}_1^{I\dagger} ¦p^{+},\vec{p}_T \rangle
$$

Edit to test the edit history

Edit2

answered Apr 3, 2014 by Dilaton (5,140 points) [ revision history ]
edited Apr 3, 2014 by Dilaton

Why can I not see the edit history of this newly added answer?

It can be seen now.  

Test @Dilaton

Reply test

another test

+ 0 like - 0 dislike
This answer is waiting for your approval
This is an answer!
answered Apr 12, 2014 by dimension10 (1,955 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 0 dislike

test single dollar sign$F_{\mu\nu}$

answered Apr 13, 2014 by Jia Yiyang (2,640 points) [ revision history ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$y$\varnothing$icsOverflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...