Are the intermediate vector bosons real (like the electrons) or just mathetical constructs?i have got a theory to unify the 4 forces, but it does not tell anything about  exchange particles in case of the weak force.I could proceed only if they are imaginary.
W and Z bosons are observed/discovered. But as force carrying bosons they should be virtual particles, unobservable? And also they require to have mass, but if they are virtual they may be off-shell, so are they virtual or not.
"He committed a crime killing/by killing a bird" Which wording with kill should be used here:     He committed a crime (killing/by killing) a bird.   My guess is the answer would be by killing. But I am really confused with the answer killing.   My questions relating to this sentence are:   Which one is correct and why? (or are they both correct?) If one of them is incorrect, why is it incorrect? (or, if both of them are, why?) If they are both correct, what is the difference in meaning? If they are both correct, what is the difference in their grammar? How can I add a "C" wire to my thermostat? Equation left margin Creating point to center of polyline? I'm trying to create a points in the middle of polylines. The data is now in the form of shapefile. Is there an easy way to do this? Does proving (second countable) $\Rightarrow$ (Lindelöf) require the axiom of choice? I'm trying to show that if $f$ is a continuous function on $[0,1]$ and $\int_0^{1} f(x)e^{nx}\,{\rm d}x = 0$ for all $n = 0, 1, 2, \dots$, then $f(x) = 0$.  I'd like to use Weierstrass approximation theorem to find a sequence of polynomials $p_m$ that converge uniformly to $f(x)$. Then we could say $\lim\limits_{m\to \infty} \int p_m(x)e^{nx}\,{\rm d}x = \int f(x)e^{nx}\,{\rm d}x = 0$, but I'm struggling to deduce that then all the $p_m$ are zero which would give the result. Convert char to int in C# Density of $\mathbb{Q}^n$ in $\mathbb{R}^n$ Who is the eponymous Jedi in Return of the Jedi? Conditional expectation of $X$ given $\sin(X)$ Can one of Newton's Laws of motion be derived from other Newton's Laws of motion? Can one derive Newton's  second and third laws from the first law or   first and third laws from the second law or  first and second  laws from the third  law  I think Newton's laws of motions are independent to each other. They can not be derived from one another. Please share the idea. How do I prove that $x^p-x+a$ is irreducible in a field with $p$ elements when $a\neq 0$? What is the size of an enum in C? I'm creating a set of enum values, but I need each enum value to be 64 bits wide. If I recall correctly, an enum is generally the same size as an int; but I thought I read somewhere that (at least in GCC) the compiler can make the enum any width they need to be to hold their values. So, is it possible to have an enum that is 64 bits wide? Calculus book recommendations (for complete beginner) Well I have not started calculus yet but I am really keen to. I would love if you suggest some books.  Points to be noted:   I really don't like the way textbooks are written so please no "textbooks"  I am COMPLETELY beginner in calculus. I know a little bit of trigonometry and what functions are but not really in depth.The book should start from the base, I mean really from the base. I may require a precalculus book too if the books don't cover that. I would really love if the book shows how calculus was developed, why it was developed and things like that.   Well,thanks in advance! Is there a travelling speed of for electric field? If yes, what is it? Consider two circuits containing a battery, bulb, switch and conducting wires but of length 1 meter in one case and 1000KM in other. When switched on at the same time both the bulbs glow instantaneously. I think it is because, electric filed travels from positive terminal of battery to negative terminal through wire almost instantaneously.  My question is there any speed for this electric field? If yes, what is it? By any modification in this circuit is it possible to induce any delay in glowing the bulb? What algorithm for a tic-tac-toe game can I use to determine the "best move" for the AI? I am pretty sure that this is such a stupid, stupid question, but how do you prove that $d_2(x,y)={|x-y|\over {1+|x-y|}}$ satisfying the third condition to be a metric, which is the triangle inequality.   I know that I should really be able to do this, but I just can't, I keep seeing a contradiction. Please help me. A Riemann integrable function must have infinitely many points of continuity What is the amplitude of a light wave? Referring to this question   I'm curious about what is a amplitude of a light wave. Especially for light from a thermic source. Today I had some time and felt like writing a relatively good answer on Stack Overflow; explaining both the underlying mechanisms and good practices, unlike usual declarative answers in a "do that" style.  It took me like an hour of time, $50 if I were free lance. It'll bring me nothing but 3-5 occasional views, and - if I get lucky - some ignorant comments.  You know, it's quite discouraging.  Instead of pride for the job that was done, I feel frustrated. I know, this answer may offer help to the OP, if he ever notices it (being already satisfied with other answers).  So the only fate the answer will meet is to sink forever, below thousands other questions, falling like snow.  So, being a programmer, I am thinking of efficiency. It's a waste of time to spend so much effort to answer one question when there is no way to [actually] reuse it. So, I wouldn't do it again but just turn back into short answers mode without explanations.       Seeing other answers, I don't think I am only one with such feeling.  The current policy is driving knowledgeable and educational users away, yet it attracts inexperienced ones in numbers. Ones who will tell you to use [some technology] which they never have laid their hands upon. Ones who write answers just because they have learned some "good practice" from other questions, and this "knowledge" becomes an endless source of rep points.  The idea of Stack Overflow is rotten. It was excellent when trees were high and traffic was low.  It turned bad now; it has become a honeypot for all the "enthusiast programmers" of the world, eager to share their 2 cents faster than you can say the word "close".  You're killing a great resource. Despite all the nice words and proper declarations, it discourages the reuse of the knowledge. And encourages fast on-site answers.  Of course, the rules will tell you contrary. It's all nice and proper (if you don't mind it's strict mutual exclusivity). But mechanically, technologically it works in the way I described.  I tried to write a tag wiki. You know, it was biggest waste of time in my life. As a matter of fact, it is not a wiki at all; you can't even link to a certain section. Not to mention that nobody ever has the idea to read tag wikis.  Reference questions? Don't make me laugh. There is no good mechanism to store and categorize links. Favorites, although intended for the different purpose, are a chunk of crap when you want to use it as a reference. So, you can't compete with 30-seconds answers: a question will get 5 answers before you can even find an appropriate link.  Okay, I can organize links myself but, there are some problems:   I am just a human. I cannot remember everything I am just a human and I cannot answer questions at rate of 1 qpm. One person cannot fight the Tide. It's helpless. When technology makes people writing fast [incomplete] answers -  no good will of proper declarations can do a thing.  Even if a question gets finally closed, it won't hurt anyone - the hydra grew two more already.   You'll call me a brute for insulting honest users and innocent volunteers, but that's fact: There are much more inexperienced users than experienced ones. And inexperienced users have much more spare time to hang over than experts who have their job to do. So, from that fact we can conclude that most of the answers on Stack Overflow have a low quality. Nobody cares. But I do.   There should be a technical way to limit the activity of not-so-knowledgeable-yet-eager-to-answer users. There should be a technical preference for the closing a question over answering it (have a silly answer for the silly question? welcome to comments). There should be a technical solution to accumulate and structure knowledge, a system that lets you choose a good answer instead of writing it by hand.   That's the only way. Otherwise Stack Overflow will remain an automated dispenser of bad practices.  Well, I just felt like letting it out again. Thank you for reading.