User talk:DoctorQuoi

'''Welcome to the Thanks for your edits! We hope you'll keep on editing with us. This is a great time to have joined us, because now you can play the Game of Rassilon with us and win cool stuff! Well, okay, badges. That have no monetary value. And that largely only you can see. But still: they're cool!

We've got a couple of important quirks for a Wikia wiki, so let's get them out of the way first. British English, please We generally use British English round these parts, so if you're American, please be sure you set your spell checker to BrEng, and take a gander at our spelling cheat card. Spoilers aren't cool We have a strict definition of "spoiler" that you may find a bit unusual. Basically, a spoiler, to us, is anything that comes from a story which has not been released yet. So, even if you've got some info from a BBC press release or official trailer, it basically can't be referenced here. In other words, you gotta wait until the episode has finished its premiere broadcast to start editing about its contents. Please check the spoiler policy for more details. Other useful stuff Aside from those two things, we also have some pages that you should probably read when you get a chance, like:
 * the listing of all our help, policy and guideline pages
 * our Manual of Style
 * our image use policy
 * our user page policy
 * a list of people whose job it is to help you

If you're brand new to wiki editing — and we all were, once! —  you probably want to check out these tutorials at Wikipedia, the world's largest wiki:
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial

Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes like this: ~ ~ ~ ~

Thanks for becoming a member of the TARDIS crew! If you have any questions, see the Help pages, add a question to one of the Forums or ask on my talk page. Doug86 ☎  04:39, June 10, 2020 (UTC)

Explanation
Hi. I thought I would just pop by to explain why I removed your first edit on Hexagora (audio story) about the reference to A Christmas Carol. The main issue with that edit was that the sentence you added the source to said that the Doctor had been engaged before, and the engagement to Marilyn Monroe did not fit that criteria as it happened in the Doctor's future. LauraBatham ☎  05:56, June 13, 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi LauraBatham, thank you very much for the explanation, I completely understand! I'm still new to the wiki so I'm still in the learning process. Thank you very much for fixing my silly mistake(s)! 

Just FYI
Not an admin, but just a heads up, deleting your own talk page isn't kosher under T:VAN. Najawin ☎  06:09, June 13, 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Yes I'm terribly sorry, I'm still new to the wiki and still learning how it works, and still having a bit of trouble. Thank you for undoing my "idiotic" mistake!


 * Also going to note that you can indent code with multiple ":" s and sign your comments with "~" (four tildes). Najawin ☎  06:23, June 13, 2020 (UTC)


 * I see, thank you very much for the helpful information user Najawin! What is required for making a sign for comments? Also, I notice that you are a mathematics and philosophy major! I study Chemical Physics and would be very interested in writing more wiki articles based on mathematics and science. How can we get started on this project? DoctorQuoi ☎  06:30, June 13, 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi


 * I'm not technically a philosophy major, my minor was that. I don't like talking about my personal life too much, but effectively my areas of interest (without going into issues of specialization, which is too much for me to be comfortable about) would be something like history and philosophy of science, as well as foundations of physics, and both of those specifically related to quantum mechanics and structuralism. In general though, this wiki doesn't talk about issues unless they're mentioned in the DWU, and it doesn't talk about them that much past what is said about them in the DWU. So for instance, I've gone through and tried to add or clean up small behind the scene sections for most of the quantum physics entries here. EG: Klein-Gordon field had no behind the scenes section and so the entire thing was just technobabble to any reader of the wiki. But creating an entry for, say, Bohmian Mechanics, while something I would adore, would be outside the scope of this wiki. Najawin ☎  06:44, June 13, 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh, I see. My apologies for asking, that was very rude of me. Thank you for the explanation though. That really is a shame as there is quite a lot of potential in that and honestly I do get rather sad when the show and the wiki rely on technobabble rather than legitimate science but it is understandable. I guess that would explain why the Happy prime page was so small. That is too bad. I do also remember seeing the Klein-Gordon field page and was wondering why it was so small compared to the chapters I have seen in my QFT course textbook! Is there no way to convince the admins of the legitimacy of such a project? I would be happy to continue this conversation in private if that is what you may prefer. Is there a way to exchange such information on the wiki via some communication channel that is not related to the "talk" button featured on a user's page? DoctorQuoi ☎  06:53, June 13, 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi
 * P.S. I also notice that each time I update this page, your edit for the note that user LauraBatham left seems to disappear. Is there something I am doing wrong or that I am doing to cause this. Each time I see a new message I just "edit" the talk page. Should I not be doing this?

No worries, but I'd really rather not. The policy for the wiki is that things are meant to be for the average user who will come to the site. So saying, "oh, you've heard of the Schrodinger equation and relativity, combine those for some particles, that sorta works" makes sense. Getting into the nuances of what the exact equation is, spin, QFT, etc etc, that will harm the average reader more than it helps them. I don't think I ever edited Laura's comment. So I'm not sure what that's about. Speaking of Chemical Physics though, have you read Woolley's 1978 paper? Must a Molecule Have a Shape? It raised a lot of questions people still haven't found completely satisfactory answers for. Najawin ☎  07:11, June 13, 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem, I understand about it being too much for a general user. My friends certainly get bored to tears anytime I start talking about my work. I guess I just need some new friends haha! Anyhow, don't worry about the problem with user LauraBatham 's comment, I found out what happened, I kept clicking on the "recent edit" part of the notification so it was showing me the most recent edit to the page (the green text that usually appears at the top of the page when you check the latest update to a page showing you where the update happened. Actually, it's funny you should mention R. Guy Woolley. His name was brought up a few times in an advanced undergraduate Inorganic Chemistry class I took since I believe his work on calculating Hamiltonians for those types of high-spin molecules is quite prominent in the field. The professor also mentioned about his work in other areas of Chemistry and Physics but I was, ashamedly, uninterested by it at the time and never really bothered to check out more. I am currently a "graduate grunt" who is more focused on experimental theoretical science rather than philosophical so I have never really had a chance to pursue that area. To bring this back around to R.G. Woolley, I also took a statistical mechanics class in which his name was brought up again and the professor for that course recommended we, in fact, read that very same 1978 paper you mentioned. Sadly, I am ashamed to admit that I failed to for the second time, mostly because I was more interested when I found out at the end of the course about how Statistical Mechanics has been revived since it is playing such a big role in machine learning and neural networks currently (I even wrote my term paper on it) so I spent all my holiday reading time on that instead. I may have some time to go over that paper now that quarantine is still in full force, so we'll see! Why, may I ask, do you ask? DoctorQuoi ☎  07:33, June 13, 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi


 * Curiosity to some extent. It's probably one of the few areas of chemistry I have any knowledge of whatsoever though, since it's specifically about whether shape, a form of structure, can become emergent from quantum mechanics (the answer being in general no, meaning that chemistry isn't straightforwardly reducible to physics [actually there was a later paper by someone else, I forget who, arguing that pilot wave theory has the philosophical capacity to allow for chemistry, but the point remains that quantum mechanics in general can't necessarily produce chemistry]). Najawin ☎  07:54, June 13, 2020 (UTC)


 * I see! Sadly for us "scientific scumbags" we just assume that it's true and run with it from there hehehe! Although it's fascinating to think about the implications and even moreso that Chemistry cannot be purely reduced to Physics. No wonder we can only use crude approximations and very poor models to help us. Thanks for bringing it to my attention! Hopefully when things are a bit more calm this summer I'll have some time to pursue the article. DoctorQuoi ☎  18:49, June 13, 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi