2
$\begingroup$

I asked physics related question on 28 october. It was put on hold 'cause it wasn't clear. I changed the question context to a very specific example but worthless then I changed the whole question title but it is still on hold. Are questions reconsidered on this website?


Added from now-deleted meta-question:

Is the question still unclear?

https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/542877/is-force-strictly-continues-in-nature

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You have to bring attention to the changes. There is a thread here at meta devoting to requests to reopen questions: you can post to that thread. Or, you can do what you have just done --- by posting this question to meta, you will draw attention to the changes you have made (except you didn't tell us what question it was, so you're making it difficult for people to help you). $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Nov 1 '13 at 10:44
  • $\begingroup$ should i post the question on this meta site? $\endgroup$ – user103816 Nov 1 '13 at 10:48
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ NO! You should post a link to the question. $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Nov 1 '13 at 10:49
  • $\begingroup$ Don't post a new question on the same topic. Instead just edit this question. $\endgroup$ – user642796 Nov 1 '13 at 11:21
7
$\begingroup$

To answer the abstract question about what happens after a question is put on hold, I advise you to visit our help center, especially the pages on "closed and on hold questions" and "reopening".

In particular, if a question that is put on-hold is edited, it would be eligible to be placed into the review queue at which point users with the review privilege (earned by accruing sufficient amount of reputation) can vote on whether to re-open the question or not. It is generally advisable to edit the question to address all existing comments, so that when your question is up to review for re-opening, it makes a clear case for itself.


Now, on to your specific question: looking at the timeline for your question, it appears that by the time you asked in the comments about the status the question has already been up for review for re-opening, and the users have voted to leave it closed. This is after you've made the first revision. Evidently the users did not find that your edit sufficiently clarified the question.

Lastly, I am still not entirely clear on what you are asking in the question, but I do have a guess. If my guess is correct, however, your question is about the assumption, implicit in the statement of Newton's second law, that the velocity of a particle is a differentiable function of time. In that case your question would be off topic for this site: questions about formulation of physical laws and their underlying assumptions belong much better on the Physics StackExchange.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ i have put this on the Physics StackExchange it is very much downvoted 'cause people around their couldn't understand this perhaps it talks about calculus more than physics thats why i put it on mathstackexchange .tackExchange.physics.stackexchange.com/questions/82453/… $\endgroup$ – user103816 Nov 1 '13 at 11:34
  • $\begingroup$ "...it would be eligible to be placed..." or "...it would be placed..."? $\endgroup$ – user1729 Nov 1 '13 at 13:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user1729: I am not sure (a) exactly how long it takes for the edited question to pop into the review queue (b) whether there is a lower limit to the amount of editing that needs to be made (c) whether repeated edits change anything and (d) to whom the software shows the revised question. In other words, I do not want to accidentally convey the idea that "as soon as you edit, the question is bumped into the review queue". I think that statement is most likely inaccurate on several levels, so I wrote "eligible" as I don't have access to the actual algorithms. $\endgroup$ – Willie Wong Nov 1 '13 at 14:07

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .