3 ms·

But what did you expect?

DoreenMichele 4y ago
I thought it might be a question about light pollution. Like "Given the spread of light pollution, how many people can still see the stars and where are they?" Something like that.
- throwbadubadu 4y ago
  Oh, interesting... thanks!
- detrites 4y ago
  Right, that makes sense - thanks for explaining.
chongli 4y ago
Demographics implies a study about people. The word comes from Greek: “demos” meaning “ordinary citizens or common people” and “graphia” meaning “writing, drawing, description.” None of this relates whatsoever to populations of stars, which would more aptly be described as having a distribution. So a better way to write the title would’ve been: “What is the distribution of stars visible to the naked eye?”
- throwbadubadu 4y ago
  Don't need to explain me what demographics means, but even after studying your exlanation in detail I think it 100% fits what can be understood as star demographics, transferring your explanation of a "study about stars".. maybe it is because I have read too many things in this area but "What is the distribution of stars visible" feels off, and I also find the nit picking on how to do titles right off. Anyway, the question was, to understand the other side better: What did you expect? (Not please explain me demographics in its original meaning :( ) Btw, "population of stars" is what it is exactly about and the term since almost a century: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_population https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_population
- waning_moon 4y ago
  Does "population of stars" sound okay to you? Because it also derives from Latin "populus" which means more or less the same as "demos".
  - chongli 4y ago
    Yes, because population has lost the implication of people due to its usage as a technical term in statistics [1]. Demographics does not have a similar usage history. If it had, there would not be any cause for confusion. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_population
    - adhesive_wombat 4y ago
      There's no "cause for confusion" here either: the meaning is more than clear enough unless you're trying to be willfully confused by technicalities. The only way it might be confusing (or rather amusingly ambiguous) is if there was also uncertainty about the word "star". I don't think Physics StackExchange talks about film celebrities more often than astronomical objects, or that some film stars are invisible to the naked eye.
  - stametseater 4y ago
    [dead]
zokier 4y ago
Not OP, but I was thinking of question I was pondering few days ago: what is the distribution of people vs bortle scale, i.e. what percentage of population live in area where they can see X stars

I thought it might be a question about light pollution. Like "Given the spread of light pollution, how many people can still see the stars and where are they?" Something like that.

throwbadubadu 4y ago
Oh, interesting... thanks!
detrites 4y ago
Right, that makes sense - thanks for explaining.

chongli 4y ago

Demographics implies a study about people. The word comes from Greek: “demos” meaning “ordinary citizens or common people” and “graphia” meaning “writing, drawing, description.” None of this relates whatsoever to populations of stars, which would more aptly be described as having a distribution. So a better way to write the title would’ve been: “What is the distribution of stars visible to the naked eye?”

throwbadubadu 4y ago
Don't need to explain me what demographics means, but even after studying your exlanation in detail I think it 100% fits what can be understood as star demographics, transferring your explanation of a "study about stars".. maybe it is because I have read too many things in this area but "What is the distribution of stars visible" feels off, and I also find the nit picking on how to do titles right off. Anyway, the question was, to understand the other side better: What did you expect? (Not please explain me demographics in its original meaning :( ) Btw, "population of stars" is what it is exactly about and the term since almost a century: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_population https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_population
waning_moon 4y ago
Does "population of stars" sound okay to you? Because it also derives from Latin "populus" which means more or less the same as "demos".
- chongli 4y ago
  Yes, because population has lost the implication of people due to its usage as a technical term in statistics [1]. Demographics does not have a similar usage history. If it had, there would not be any cause for confusion. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_population
  - adhesive_wombat 4y ago
    There's no "cause for confusion" here either: the meaning is more than clear enough unless you're trying to be willfully confused by technicalities. The only way it might be confusing (or rather amusingly ambiguous) is if there was also uncertainty about the word "star". I don't think Physics StackExchange talks about film celebrities more often than astronomical objects, or that some film stars are invisible to the naked eye.
- stametseater 4y ago
  [dead]

zokier 4y ago

Not OP, but I was thinking of question I was pondering few days ago: what is the distribution of people vs bortle scale, i.e. what percentage of population live in area where they can see X stars