4 ms·
"Than it should be." Am I the only one who thinks that the wording roots in Hubris? And then, at the same time, I read "are flying apart" as if that's how it
by MrYellowP 5y ago
"Than it should be."
Am I the only one who thinks that the wording roots in Hubris?
And then, at the same time, I read "are flying apart" as if that's how it actually works. It doesn't. Wording it that way is misleading.
I never read National Geographic, but I thought it's better than this.
- bumby 5y agoFrom the article: “faster than our best models of the cosmos predict it should.” It’s more an implied statement about the current models than the limits of human of human knowledge.
- marcyb5st 5y agoThe target audience of National Geographic are people with some science background but not researchers/experts. It a publication for the masses and so they have to tone down the technical lingo. For physics I read Nature, but for every other topic that might interest me but is above my knowledge level National Geographic works.
- MrYellowP 5y agoHonestly, I find that unacceptable. It's National Geographic. Could at least have some higher standards considering the above average audience. It's not technical lingo using the actually correct wording for the effects of the expanding universe. Galaxies do not fly apart, the space in between grows. The difference is significant, even though the observer wouldn't notice any. I know it seems like a non-issue, but in the end it's misleading all the people who would blindly believe NG to be accurate.