Talk:Cosmology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Today's articles for improvement
WikiProject icon This article was selected as Today's article for improvement on 15 July 2013 for a period of one week. WikiProject icon
 

Questionable (and unattributed) list of questions for "Religious, mythological, and metaphysical cosmology"[edit]

The section "Religious, mythological, and metaphysical cosmology" contains a list of questions. Where do these questions come from? Observation of what scholars working in religion and metaphysics ask themselves? Or is it somebody's idea of what these fields involve? I ask because some of the questions seem overly general, so as not to be specific to cosmology. Consider: "What are the ultimate material components of the Universe? (see mechanism, dynamism, hylomorphism, atomism)." Mechanism and atomism seem like issues in core metaphysics, not in cosmology specifically. (Granted, sometimes people use "cosmology" to refer to everything in metaphysics that isn't ontology, but this article is using the term in a much narrower sense.)

Compare this list of concerns with the list given at "Cosmology and Theology" in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "[M]any of the theologically relevant questions related to current cosmology are old. Has the universe come into existence a finite time ago? Will it come to an end? Why are the cosmic evolution and the laws of nature of just such a kind that they permit intelligent life to exist? These and other questions of obvious relevance to theism are currently being discussed in the light of the most recent cosmological theories and observations, but the questions themselves (and, indeed, many of the answers) were familiar to medieval philosophers and theologians. This is also the case with the question that is sometimes considered the ultimate one: Why is there a cosmos?" These seem more specifically related to cosmology as it's understood as a sub-field in metaphysics and theology.2601:47:4001:7056:CAF7:33FF:FE77:D800 (talk) 11:39, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Protection? & Merge?[edit]

Please have a someone do a

?

Possibility merge both Cyclic Modals together as well?

73.47.37.131 (talk) 23:47, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done requests for page protection must be made at WP:Requests for page protection.
If you are trying to seek consensus for a merge please expound your argument as to why this would be beneficial. - Arjayay (talk) 11:11, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Bias[edit]

As is all too frequent on Wikipedia, this page seems subject to Pro-materialistic bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.131.166.111 (talk) 22:29, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

The meaning of your concern is not at all clear. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 22:31, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Further reading[edit]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.168.13.98 (talkcontribs) 12:39, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

As I asked on my talk page ([1]), please sign all your talk page messages with four tildes (~~~~).
See wp:FURTHER and thus wp:ELNO. I can't find any wp:secondary sources combining this work with "cosmology" — see Google Scholar, Google Books. Looks like book promotion with, coming from your location, a wp:Conflict of interest, i. o. w. spammy. - DVdm (talk) 13:07, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Astrophysics?[edit]

I suggest that astrophysics be included in the list of science topics that are interested in cosmology in the fourth paragraph. Astrophysics is mentioned in prominent places below, but should be introduced early Furthermore, astronomy may or may not be limited to specific celestial objects as suggested, since observational astronomy provides the experimental data used to support much of physical cosmology's basis.

Additionally, gravitational waves detected by the LIGO observations should be included in the appropriate place.

24.199.211.139 (talk) 11:53, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

24.199.211.139 (talk) 12:04, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

The article, as far as I can tell, is not protected. Since you know exactly what changes should be made, it is probably most efficient if you make them yourself. Just be sure to cite any information which does not already have a reference. Zaereth (talk) 19:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC)