User:Alkhowarizmi/sandbox3

For anyone who arrives here by accident or curiosity: this is perhaps obvious, but I'm using my Sandbox 'namespace'. along with the usual purpose, as an area to store draft edits, typically when I'm tired and want to review material when of sound mind before submitting.


 * I've just been reviewing this page in relation to the research namespace discussion, and noticed something (probably not relevant to that discussion) that I missed previously. You said "To conduct original research regarding atomic nuclei to explore the strong interaction." I'm having problems as your hypothesis does not seem to relate (directly) to the nucleus or the strong interaction, unless an extension of the hypothesis is that the strong interaction is a an artefact of the weak force working on the thousands of leptons that make up the nucleus.


 * I think in my initial response, I missed some ambiguity with respect to the meaning of "nucleons" in your hypothesis. As far as nuclear physics, rather than particle physics, is concerned, it seems to endorse the Standard Model. I assumed the translation of "nucleons" into "protons and neutrons",


 * I don't find the proposal puzzling. My experience as a fairly new user is puzzling, for two reasons. One is the difficulty figuring out a learning programme, but the relevant one here is the high frequency with which I land on pages that turn out not to be learning materials at all. This would make me inclined to support the proposal, although I don't feel qualified to vote unless I have made a commitment to living here for a reasonable period. Against the proposal, I am skeptical about the implementation.


 * Nuclear physics is probably not a good candidate for motivating a voting choice. I can sympathise with Dave Braunschweig on this: I arrived on this page by curiosity, via Recent Changes, and was alarmed that it began with some (quoted) standard nuclear physics and then ended with a 'hypothesis' that goes totally against most of the current understanding of nuclei and of particle physics (the discipline to which the hypothesis belongs.) It's not obvious from my visible activity here, but I came here to learn (mainly programming, initially at least) and I think I would be alarmed if I found this kind of anomaly in a page I visited for the purpose of learning. That experience would make the strongest personal, emotional, basis for me to support the new namespace proposal.


 * Apart from the word 'exclusive' which I don't understand in this context, I have to agree with Dave Braunschweig that "This has been defined by the author as exclusive research". At this point I remain perplexed about the details of the author's plans, but since we're evaluating